Where it at first was outright suicidal I now suddenly have a FAIR chance of getting lucky
Next thing, I'll have to specify that I don't mean that you'll actually
die from this type of "suicide"? The statement was a deliberate exaggeration; there's no risk of death, nor certainty of always loosing. There's "just" certainty of loosing some percentage of battles (ignoring the exception mentioned by Test Ament). To me, a strategy with a certainty of loosing, at any frequency, is a "suicidal" strategy.
In the context of the statement of mine that we're discussing, the frequency would also have been very high, since I made it in the context of a 7 rogue line up.
Apparently, we have different definitions of what is an acceptable success rate. That's fair enough. You're happy with winning on occasion, and would have to loose every battle before you'd consider it "suicide". To me, leaving the outcome to luck is unacceptable, as is predictably loosing at some frequency. I prefer my defeats to be non-predictable. "Predictably loosing at some frequency", of course, is synonymous with "accumulating defeats".
sually comes down to a lot of words with very little content
I know. I could never pack in as many insults and ad hominem attacks in a sentence or two, as you can. You're a master of maximum content, with a minimum of words. It's just unfortunate that the content is always so thoroughly unhelpful.
8 eels. enough boost. autobattle. won
Would that be the case for 7 Rogue line ups, as well?
The phrase "enough boost" makes that statement completely safe. By definition, "enough" guaranties the outcome. If you're "fast enough", you not only can win any race, you will, with certainty, win all races. I won't doubt that you're right that you can identify some players in each neighborhood that will loose on the boost discrepancy alone. Maybe even without any risk of losses of your own, though I'd be very surprised.
Based on your statement, I concede that it's not "suicidal" for everyone, with all line ups. I suspect that it's not very relevant for the majority of players, though. For me, in the neighborhoods I've been in, it has been to risky, and I'm quite certain I'd be defeated more often than I'll accept.
there are also only one or two who change their defense after defeat
write them down and you know them
I don't keep such lists any longer. It's a lot of work, in order to gain little certainty. Simply having a look at the battle map is much less work, and gives complete certainty.
Looking away from the "enough boost" situation, which I doubt that many are in, there's considerable uncertainty, even with non-Rogue line ups. The AI is very poor at exploiting the terrain, and whether it benefits from the terrain is mainly based on coincidence. Combine that with other fairly random behaviors from the AI, and you have a significant element of randomness. You may win most of the time, but not reliably, and not without losses. Unless you have "enough boost", of course.
and ? everybody know that
It's old news to me, to you, and to many others, perhaps even to Pyro Psycho, who's statement I replied yo. However, the statement was a bit tentative, so I specified, and added my agreement. It's a fairly important fact for n00bs, who may drop in on a thread like this, to find advice.