Does the level of highlights make any difference?

[adil]

I had a season of terrible One Day matches and finished G9 after all 14 were done. The next season I finished second in the group and went on to be runner up in the final, with pretty much the same group of players, and my scores were much higher.

All 31 matches were on medium highlights, but the second 17 were drastically different from the first 14.

A sample size of 2 seasons is pretty much meaningless when you have no control over all the other factors (your player form, AI player form, injuries, weather, wicket conditions, randomness).

If you have a save at the start of the season where you can run it 100 times on Medium and 100 times on None that might be more meaningful, but there would still be all the other factors you have no control over that would make the end results inconclusive.

You might be right but has anyone here ever got 400 in odi or 220 in t20 playing on medium highlights?

[Chris_]

I had a season of terrible One Day matches and finished G9 after all 14 were done. The next season I finished second in the group and went on to be runner up in the final, with pretty much the same group of players, and my scores were much higher.

All 31 matches were on medium highlights, but the second 17 were drastically different from the first 14.

A sample size of 2 seasons is pretty much meaningless when you have no control over all the other factors (your player form, AI player form, injuries, weather, wicket conditions, randomness).

If you have a save at the start of the season where you can run it 100 times on Medium and 100 times on None that might be more meaningful, but there would still be all the other factors you have no control over that would make the end results inconclusive.

[adil]

If you want that to be a statistically strong enough sample you will need to run the same experiment at least 10 times both with and without highlights. Far too many variables to do it once.

Again, the game generates the graphical representation for every ball regardless of whether you watch highlights or not. Watching is irrelevant.

I think 15 ipl games is a good enough sample size( Actually it is 31; 15 on medium and 16 on none highlights)

[cde]

I generally play on medium highlights, I find that I both get more out of the game and get better results.

I don’t think I get better results because there is something inherent in the game but because I pay a bit more attention to what is happening. I notice sooner if a bowler is getting smacked about or how many near-misses a batsman is having and react quicker, changing fields or bowlers to reduce their run rate or leaving a batsman at a lower aggression because to move him up will cost his wicket.

I also find it easier to see where a batsman or bowler needs technique improvement.

I have found that if I bowl first and keep the opposition to an easy total in LO matches then switching to wickets only saves watching my batsmen knock off an easy total in a boringly uncompetitive run chase.

[Lynx54321]

Easy to bash me but I have tested it over many matches actually. I played a whole IPL season with medium highlights and and average score was around 163. On none highlights it was 188

If you want that to be a statistically strong enough sample you will need to run the same experiment at least 10 times both with and without highlights. Far too many variables to do it once.

Again, the game generates the graphical representation for every ball regardless of whether you watch highlights or not. Watching is irrelevant.

[adil]

Easy to bash me but I have tested it over many matches actually. I played a whole IPL season with medium highlights and and average score was around 163. On none highlights it was 188

[Lynx54321]

This is absolute nonsense bordering on tin foil hat stuff.

The game generates the highlight for every single ball. Whether you watch it is irrelevant.

Also if you want to prove this then you need to do more than the examples above which all basically equate to 'I played one game without highlights and scored a high total'.

[frustratedofnewport]

The level of highlights can't possibly make a difference! The game would be completely broken.

[adil]

I think the issue of low scores when highlights are on( medium specifically) is exclusive to mobiles. As I was playing on pc the other day and I scored 209 playing as nottingam in the 100 ball trophy. And also scored 389 playing as england vs australia
Sureshot please look into this issue as kills the fun when you know that you could have scored more if you were playing on no highlights

[Yorkie]

I always play every format with Medium highlights when I’m batting and Wickets only highlights when I’m bowling, I can’t bear to see the opposition whacking me around! Wickets only on T20 but I bat every ball on T20 that’s the secret to success! Up and down with the aggression..

I like the 1Day 50 over format which I’m quite good at. I’ve managed to get Eng to No.1 in the rankings and held them there for 3 years now. I also like T20 although everyone moans about this format. I must admit some of it is based on chance but it’s great to watch

[adil]

adil I’m really glad you’re playing some of the game with highlights on! There really is 2 parts to this game ????

Getting back to your question about higher scores with highlights off....I purposely played a 1day series with no highlights on ???? to check it out and I must admit I posted 3 cracking scores which were slightly higher than my normal score. So you might be on to something?

Yeah mate its lovely playing with highlights on. Playing on text commentary now feels like having coffee without milk. BTW what level of highlights do you play on each format and whats your favourite format?

[Yorkie]

adil I’m really glad you’re playing some of the game with highlights on! There really is 2 parts to this game ????

Getting back to your question about higher scores with highlights off....I purposely played a 1day series with no highlights on ???? to check it out and I must admit I posted 3 cracking scores which were slightly higher than my normal score. So you might be on to something?

[adil]

Yorkie I am now starting to understand why people play with highlights on. First the highlights distinguishes between stadiums and team kits and secondly its lovely to see boundaries in the death overs. Now am I am playing every game on medium highlights and its pretty fun but the only gripe I have with highlights is that spinners bowl slower than fast bowlers. Spinners and medium bowlers should be mid way through their action when highlights are shown just like fast bowler

[adil]

Highlights are a distraction from the main game. Every time I have them on accidently they make me pull my hair out. Every management game in my opinion should avoid using match engine as simulations are more into stats and intracites of sports than into graphics and gameplay. Highlights just prolong the game for no reason

Thought you didn’t like/play with the highlights on??

You made me chuckle. I had them on as I was feeling bored

[Alrounder80]

I was playing the wc with aus and in the whole tournament I scored around 150-175 per game when playing on medium highlights but in that one game I played on none highlights I suddenly scored 224 on a average bounce pitch vs w.i
Have you guys noticed this?

I've actually noticed this exact phenomenon and brought it up on the forum for a previous version of the game. Though the devs responded saying highlight level do no affect anything.