**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options

Kabam...AW match making frustrations boiling over

1…5681011…15

Comments

  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    Which means it's then a measure of true skill in War. If both sides are of equal strength, that's a fair fight. It then boils down to strategy and playing ability in War.
  • Options
    GreywardenGreywarden Posts: 843 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Greywarden said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just because tanking is the reason we’re here now doesn’t make it right.

    I agree that tanking to game war rating was wacky but this is not much better if at all. Prestige matchups do make sense but then multipliers need to reflect that.
    Wacky? No. It's ruining the system and the whole point of running the game mode to begin with. It's not a conpetition if you take away the possibility of progress.
    This season has been solely prestige based matched wars....whoever tanked did nothing other than miss out on potential win rewards.

    Talking about tanking makes no sense now that it’s over and done with. Groups can tank all they want but if wars are no longer being matched on war rating then they’re wasting their time.

    Rewards currently are lackluster and all I want to get to is a point where match making makes sense when rewards are beefed up. I think increasing multiplier or giving a prestige match bonus of some sort makes the most sense.

    If we get to a point where a group that has people that aren’t even level 60 placing 4* on defense winning top 20 rewards I can guarantee you some people are quitting....
  • Options
    Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 1,003 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    That depends on what you define as chill. Having a reasonable range to Match with is pretty much as it should be. If you're calling chill Wars just taking out weaker people because it's easier, then I'm going to have to say sorry about chill. Lol.

    I don’t usually agree with you but u, but this seems like the best solution. If we use a prestige based rating system to determine AQ map difficulty, I see no problem with matching similar prestige alliances. This also gets rid of alliances that heavily sandbag
    This has been covered, you’re then forcing alliances who rank champs for prestige in AQ to compete at the same level in AW which is ridiculous. Plus prestige doesn’t determine strength of an alliance seeing as it only incorporates top 5 champions meaning in that scenario every player that has 5 r5’s is equal to players that potentially have 10+ r5’s.
    Yes. God forbid they play at an equal level instead of overpowering. Lol.
    You’re contradicting yourself, yes they should play at equal level which these two alliances simply wouldn’t be, the alliance with 10+ would be over powering the other alliances which is exactly what your fighting against.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    Greywarden said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Greywarden said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just because tanking is the reason we’re here now doesn’t make it right.

    I agree that tanking to game war rating was wacky but this is not much better if at all. Prestige matchups do make sense but then multipliers need to reflect that.
    Wacky? No. It's ruining the system and the whole point of running the game mode to begin with. It's not a conpetition if you take away the possibility of progress.
    This season has been solely prestige based matched wars....whoever tanked did nothing other than miss out on potential win rewards.

    Talking about tanking makes no sense now that it’s over and done with. Groups can tank all they want but if wars are no longer being matched on war rating then they’re wasting their time.

    Rewards currently are lackluster and all I want to get to is a point where match making makes sense when rewards are beefed up. I think increasing multiplier or giving a prestige match bonus of some sort makes the most sense.

    If we get to a point where a group that has people that aren’t even level 60 placing 4* on defense winning top 20 rewards I can guarantee you some people are quitting....
    It hasn't been solely Prestige-based at all. We haven't had one Match that wasn't within range of our War Rating.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    Markjv81 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    That depends on what you define as chill. Having a reasonable range to Match with is pretty much as it should be. If you're calling chill Wars just taking out weaker people because it's easier, then I'm going to have to say sorry about chill. Lol.

    I don’t usually agree with you but u, but this seems like the best solution. If we use a prestige based rating system to determine AQ map difficulty, I see no problem with matching similar prestige alliances. This also gets rid of alliances that heavily sandbag
    This has been covered, you’re then forcing alliances who rank champs for prestige in AQ to compete at the same level in AW which is ridiculous. Plus prestige doesn’t determine strength of an alliance seeing as it only incorporates top 5 champions meaning in that scenario every player that has 5 r5’s is equal to players that potentially have 10+ r5’s.
    Yes. God forbid they play at an equal level instead of overpowering. Lol.
    You’re contradicting yourself, yes they should play at equal level which these two alliances simply wouldn’t be, the alliance with 10+ would be over powering the other alliances which is exactly what your fighting against.
    No, I'm not contradicting myself. What you aren't acknowledging is how Prestige is an actual measure of strength, and there's no sense in trying to explain it if you disagree on that.
  • Options
    Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 1,003 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Greywarden said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Greywarden said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just because tanking is the reason we’re here now doesn’t make it right.

    I agree that tanking to game war rating was wacky but this is not much better if at all. Prestige matchups do make sense but then multipliers need to reflect that.
    Wacky? No. It's ruining the system and the whole point of running the game mode to begin with. It's not a conpetition if you take away the possibility of progress.
    This season has been solely prestige based matched wars....whoever tanked did nothing other than miss out on potential win rewards.

    Talking about tanking makes no sense now that it’s over and done with. Groups can tank all they want but if wars are no longer being matched on war rating then they’re wasting their time.

    Rewards currently are lackluster and all I want to get to is a point where match making makes sense when rewards are beefed up. I think increasing multiplier or giving a prestige match bonus of some sort makes the most sense.

    If we get to a point where a group that has people that aren’t even level 60 placing 4* on defense winning top 20 rewards I can guarantee you some people are quitting....
    It hasn't been solely Prestige-based at all. We haven't had one Match that wasn't within range of our War Rating.
    Because you’re at a lower level where there’s more scope for matches.
  • Options
    Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 1,003 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    That depends on what you define as chill. Having a reasonable range to Match with is pretty much as it should be. If you're calling chill Wars just taking out weaker people because it's easier, then I'm going to have to say sorry about chill. Lol.

    I don’t usually agree with you but u, but this seems like the best solution. If we use a prestige based rating system to determine AQ map difficulty, I see no problem with matching similar prestige alliances. This also gets rid of alliances that heavily sandbag
    This has been covered, you’re then forcing alliances who rank champs for prestige in AQ to compete at the same level in AW which is ridiculous. Plus prestige doesn’t determine strength of an alliance seeing as it only incorporates top 5 champions meaning in that scenario every player that has 5 r5’s is equal to players that potentially have 10+ r5’s.
    Yes. God forbid they play at an equal level instead of overpowering. Lol.
    You’re contradicting yourself, yes they should play at equal level which these two alliances simply wouldn’t be, the alliance with 10+ would be over powering the other alliances which is exactly what your fighting against.
    No, I'm not contradicting myself. What you aren't acknowledging is how Prestige is an actual measure of strength, and there's no sense in trying to explain it if you disagree on that.
    Prestige isn’t a measure of strength it’s that simple, nor is it a measure of skill.
  • Options
    GreywardenGreywarden Posts: 843 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Greywarden said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Greywarden said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Just because tanking is the reason we’re here now doesn’t make it right.

    I agree that tanking to game war rating was wacky but this is not much better if at all. Prestige matchups do make sense but then multipliers need to reflect that.
    Wacky? No. It's ruining the system and the whole point of running the game mode to begin with. It's not a conpetition if you take away the possibility of progress.
    This season has been solely prestige based matched wars....whoever tanked did nothing other than miss out on potential win rewards.

    Talking about tanking makes no sense now that it’s over and done with. Groups can tank all they want but if wars are no longer being matched on war rating then they’re wasting their time.

    Rewards currently are lackluster and all I want to get to is a point where match making makes sense when rewards are beefed up. I think increasing multiplier or giving a prestige match bonus of some sort makes the most sense.

    If we get to a point where a group that has people that aren’t even level 60 placing 4* on defense winning top 20 rewards I can guarantee you some people are quitting....
    It hasn't been solely Prestige-based at all. We haven't had one Match that wasn't within range of our War Rating.
    I’m not sure what tier you’re in but I can guarantee you in tier 1 all wars are prestige based. How do you think some of the groups in master and platinum 1 are there right now lol? You think they’re matching the other groups their same rating.

    Not trying to big league you here but it’s happening trust me...

    Also, not sure if you read what I posted a few comments ago but we’ve had two matches under a +40/-20 spread. Mostly everything has been against all top 10 aq alliances and around a +50/-10 spread.

    2 out of the 12 wars has an even +\-......basically none of our wars were rating based because if they were we wouldn’t have such large spreads.

  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    Jamiefyffe16 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    That depends on what you define as chill. Having a reasonable range to Match with is pretty much as it should be. If you're calling chill Wars just taking out weaker people because it's easier, then I'm going to have to say sorry about chill. Lol.

    I don’t usually agree with you but u, but this seems like the best solution. If we use a prestige based rating system to determine AQ map difficulty, I see no problem with matching similar prestige alliances. This also gets rid of alliances that heavily sandbag
    This has been covered, you’re then forcing alliances who rank champs for prestige in AQ to compete at the same level in AW which is ridiculous. Plus prestige doesn’t determine strength of an alliance seeing as it only incorporates top 5 champions meaning in that scenario every player that has 5 r5’s is equal to players that potentially have 10+ r5’s.
    Yes. God forbid they play at an equal level instead of overpowering. Lol.
    You’re contradicting yourself, yes they should play at equal level which these two alliances simply wouldn’t be, the alliance with 10+ would be over powering the other alliances which is exactly what your fighting against.
    No, I'm not contradicting myself. What you aren't acknowledging is how Prestige is an actual measure of strength, and there's no sense in trying to explain it if you disagree on that.

    Prestige is a measure of strength in AQ. People running around with their Goldpool and Thor Rags isn’t scaring anyone in war.
    Prestige is a measure of total strength in the entire game. That's why it's a measure in AQ.
  • Options
    Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 1,003 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Jamiefyffe16 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    That depends on what you define as chill. Having a reasonable range to Match with is pretty much as it should be. If you're calling chill Wars just taking out weaker people because it's easier, then I'm going to have to say sorry about chill. Lol.

    I don’t usually agree with you but u, but this seems like the best solution. If we use a prestige based rating system to determine AQ map difficulty, I see no problem with matching similar prestige alliances. This also gets rid of alliances that heavily sandbag
    This has been covered, you’re then forcing alliances who rank champs for prestige in AQ to compete at the same level in AW which is ridiculous. Plus prestige doesn’t determine strength of an alliance seeing as it only incorporates top 5 champions meaning in that scenario every player that has 5 r5’s is equal to players that potentially have 10+ r5’s.
    Yes. God forbid they play at an equal level instead of overpowering. Lol.
    You’re contradicting yourself, yes they should play at equal level which these two alliances simply wouldn’t be, the alliance with 10+ would be over powering the other alliances which is exactly what your fighting against.
    No, I'm not contradicting myself. What you aren't acknowledging is how Prestige is an actual measure of strength, and there's no sense in trying to explain it if you disagree on that.

    Prestige is a measure of strength in AQ. People running around with their Goldpool and Thor Rags isn’t scaring anyone in war.
    Prestige is a measure of total strength in the entire game. That's why it's a measure in AQ.
    Wrong
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    I really don't have the energy to keep going over it and over it. They're not just random numbers that mean nothing.
  • Options
    Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 1,003 ★★★★
    Except you do have the energy because you always need to have the last word, so as long as others continue to post so will you. They might not mean nothing but they don’t mean strength.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    I know exactly what I'm talking about. What I don't have the energy for is to open peoples' minds when they refuse to see something. So I need a break. Lol.
  • Options
    GreywardenGreywarden Posts: 843 ★★★★
    I think we’re all getting off course debating definitions with people who want to argue for the sake of arguing.

    What we need to come together on is pressing mods for a comment on this seasons match making adjustments and if there is any plan to adjust in the future.

    I’ve said it a few times but if match making criteria is going to be adjusted and possibly always go off of prestige then points need to reflect that.

    Higher prestige means more points in aq why can’t it mean more in aw?
  • Options
    Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 1,003 ★★★★
    See told you so.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    Drooped2 said:

    Greywarden said:

    I think we’re all getting off course debating definitions with people who want to argue for the sake of arguing.

    What we need to come together on is pressing mods for a comment on this seasons match making adjustments and if there is any plan to adjust in the future.

    I’ve said it a few times but if match making criteria is going to be adjusted and possibly always go off of prestige then points need to reflect that.

    Higher prestige means more points in aq why can’t it mean more in aw?

    Man I'm with you on a solution but prestige isnt it..

    War used to be about skill. Not who ranked goldpool diablo.
    We used to be about skill when people fought honestly. We used to be about skill when the system would naturally fall into where Allies belonged because people won and lost based on their ability. Now, not the case.
  • Options
    GreywardenGreywarden Posts: 843 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Drooped2 said:

    Greywarden said:

    I think we’re all getting off course debating definitions with people who want to argue for the sake of arguing.

    What we need to come together on is pressing mods for a comment on this seasons match making adjustments and if there is any plan to adjust in the future.

    I’ve said it a few times but if match making criteria is going to be adjusted and possibly always go off of prestige then points need to reflect that.

    Higher prestige means more points in aq why can’t it mean more in aw?

    Man I'm with you on a solution but prestige isnt it..

    War used to be about skill. Not who ranked goldpool diablo.
    We used to be about skill when people fought honestly. We used to be about skill when the system would naturally fall into where Allies belonged because people won and lost based on their ability. Now, not the case.
    There is no “now” that you’re referencing....the new “now” is prestige based wars from at least platinum 1 to masters. War tanking can still happen but it won’t do anything if prestige wars remain which isn’t the absolute worst but current iteration isn’t working at all.
  • Options
    Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 1,003 ★★★★
    Greywarden said:

    I think we’re all getting off course debating definitions with people who want to argue for the sake of arguing.

    What we need to come together on is pressing mods for a comment on this seasons match making adjustments and if there is any plan to adjust in the future.

    I’ve said it a few times but if match making criteria is going to be adjusted and possibly always go off of prestige then points need to reflect that.

    Higher prestige means more points in aq why can’t it mean more in aw?

    It shouldn’t mean more points because it shouldn’t be included full stop. It just makes the leaderboard a rank and file leaderboard like AQ. May as wel just bun AW and add the rewards to AQ.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,254 ★★★★★
    Drooped2 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Drooped2 said:

    Greywarden said:

    I think we’re all getting off course debating definitions with people who want to argue for the sake of arguing.

    What we need to come together on is pressing mods for a comment on this seasons match making adjustments and if there is any plan to adjust in the future.

    I’ve said it a few times but if match making criteria is going to be adjusted and possibly always go off of prestige then points need to reflect that.

    Higher prestige means more points in aq why can’t it mean more in aw?

    Man I'm with you on a solution but prestige isnt it..

    War used to be about skill. Not who ranked goldpool diablo.
    We used to be about skill when people fought honestly. We used to be about skill when the system would naturally fall into where Allies belonged because people won and lost based on their ability. Now, not the case.
    Right and prestige doesnt fix that in any way at all..
    It's making war worse for tons of allainces.
    Honestly more so then tanking did.
    Sorry but you dont solve issues by making a new issue bigger then the old one
    No. It's not making things worse than Tanking did.
  • Options
    WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    It does measure the strength of the Alliance because they're using their uppermost Roster. Not the middle of what they have. In War, an Alliance is only as strong as the best they can put up. Numerically, that's a fact.

    But like I said, there's no difference in prestige between an alliance full of 5 R5 or 15 R5 players. It makes a large difference in defense strength though. So prestige just wouldn't work, especially at the top
This discussion has been closed.