I think that the human player whith you have fought killed all the bots first. It happened to me also, I was in a CPC match with an opponent who killed all bots by using rank 4 Lacewing with rank 5 Storm Rack 10 and Storm Rack 6. Due to insufficient mechs, we got defeated easily. I think you might have noticed your opponent in this match was so "keen" on killing bots with an overpowered mech.  

I think the devs already strted fixing the problems, because on some of my matches, the bots would "time" their abilities, do camping and flank my mechs if they could see if I'm engaged with an enemy. The bot AI has become much "smarter" than it was previously but the AI is not fully developed I guess, so sometimes such problems arise. Hope this helps

And I was doing the same thing and got one more kill then they did, yet their bots got more kills.

Yes! The AI is smarter. The bots now run in my way and  can block my shots much longer.

In Tournament FFA I was stunned. Almost killed a bot and another bot put up a panther fence to save the bot from kill. For me loosing the kill and my mech. Perfect AI!

The example by the OP is not really a great one to show one-sided bot dominance. Bots in both teams got the same number of control points. The OP captured only one vs. the opponent human's 3, and that appears to be the deciding factor of this game which the OP lost because of lower influence.

I didn't deny such facts, because some bot allies are really crazy. I meant that opponent bots are somehow coordinating with each other so I can be killed. Another example where in a CPC match, I was an Aegis and a bot Zephyr helped me destroy a Surge bot from the opponent team. I saved that bot using my done to block incoming damage for both of us. The bot was good but still it's not perfect (because it wasted its ability twice when it was inside my dome) and an opponent Zephyr did exactly the same, suddenly the only human from opponent killed my Aegis and I respawned as surge and got my revenge. But somehow there were 3 Zephyr bots (probably the opponent Zephyr bot I mentioned earlier was alive) All three attacked while my Surge got a 6s EMP from two Zephyrs and I was killed on the 4th second.

Due to such crazy incidents I have a silght belief on the MA Devs who might "actually" has started to improve the Bot AI. I say it's LITERALLY THE STARTING (no major improvements) POINT. I can't say when it will become perfect. But on several of my CPC matches, some opponent bots performed much better than the ally bots 

Or there might be different bot experiences to ifferent players, IDK whether or not it's true but it can be said that something strange is happening

I agree 100% that this one is a very bad example of bots differences/dominance. You picked a very equal and smooth example to show. 

I 100% admit that bots matchmaking is not fair, neither in normal games nor in hangar showdown.. Enemy can get Aegis bot with charge rocket and my team will get Aegis with revokers, what the f is point of that? 

Going to this particular example:

1) Thats a solid one. First of all enemy team killed 25 mechs (your whole team) and yours only 17 mechs, so there is no way you can get a better numbers on your side if you are 8 kills short. Its just impossible.

2) Thats a possibility. You only captured one control point, so either your enemy team was really dominating or you were hiding away sneaking instead of actively killing enemy bots. So your four bots were in front lines at disadvantage. Considering you done many kills its unlikely theory but i still wonder how you managed to capture twice less control points than 2 of your bots? Could you explain? You need to be more active in control point match. I often see people in 3 control points match who sit on the roof with gemini or strike rockets and does a lot of kills, but that does not help to ensure that middle point is yours, and so these players often end up fighting alone against full enemy squad as all teammates died trying to recapture that middle point.

3) a possibility. You controlled bad positions. As example when enemy managed to break through to your last spawn place and surrounded it there is not much you can do to turn the tides, you just appear and full squad is destroying you from all sides straight away so you sort of kill/die ratio becomes 0/5. That is just an example.. Another example would be again the roof and middle point, if you took good positions and captured middle point then all you need to do is wait and snipe enemies trying to recapture it or they lose, at that point they are in great disadvantage, they need to go to open field unprotected while receiving shots from covered hideouts so kill/die ratio is again around 1/5.. its like a suicide mission to recapture it. So if you are one of those roof guys, please make sure your team captures middle point and only then go on the roof. Your low control point capture just shows that there was probably something very wrong in your strategy.

4) the bad matchmaking which surely exists would only make previous points worse. 

But its really a very bad example to try to prove something. And we really need an option to save replays :) But nobody really cares about it all so i understand your frustration i have a lot too :) but you just have to live with it, they not going to fix it im afraid.

Whenever I play capture points, I am the main one going for captures when I am able to. When you play against over powered bots(or players), you have to pick when you are able to go. It's stupid to try and capture a point if you know you are going to die during it, or right after it. And that proves more that the other team was more OP since the real player on that team was able to capture 3 points. 

It's easy to look at a pic and assume things by the outcome. But you never know what actually happened. This is one of the biggest things wrong with the game. On just about any post that someone has criticizing the game for something, someone comes on and says somthing to the effect of, you are wrong, and this is why. Our player base doesn't always understand what is wrong and is quick to jump at someone, more so if they are taking advantage of the situation. I know we all take advantage when we have the superior bots and complain when we don't. But the fan base needs to come together to express the frustrations with the game.

All that both Papa and I are saying is it's a bad example, precisely for the reason that the result is ambiguous and, as you said, "you never know what actually happened". You can't make a strong case for something with a weak example, and in fact I would argue that it has the opposite effect - it gives the impression that the player base is crying about nothing.

Honestly I think if in some games bots on one team dominate and in other games bots on the other team dominate, it's not in itself a problem. The same thing can happen with random human opponents. The first fundamental problem is when bots aren't evenly balanced in their loadouts (storm racks vs. pulse cannons :-) ). There may be other problems but this is the very first that can both be easily shown and addressed (if Plarium is inclined to do so). 

Everything else is IMO difficult to prove without substantial evidence such as recordings of multiple continuous games. And I don't think it's so bad that somebody needs to do that. If you or somebody thinks so, then that kind of evidence is what is really needed.