One thing I'm noticing about all of the comments about flawed matchmaking is that people seem to always make a comment that they're facing a Paragon when they shouldn't or that the person has so many more R4's than them so they shouldn't match. At no point does anyone ever seem to mention that both skill and strategy are massive components in the mode and have a very significant effect on your success within the mode. Someone out there is the worst Paragon player. To have the game mode be fair to them, they need to face players with smaller rosters. And on the other side of the spectrum, there are elite players who may or may not be using baby/alt accounts who could mop the floor with anyone of even deck strength. If running all 4 Stars (or Sandbagging) can allow people to face people with smaller deck ratings, everyone will end up doing it and the result will be that people who have genuinely smaller decks will win even less than they do now. If you can intentionally manipulate your matchups to have "more" success, why do you now think that the people who are still better than you won't be doing the same thing?
I don't want to try and build a better house than a Carpenter just because neither of us get power tools. I don't want try to outdraw a graphic designer just because we both only have pencils.
An independent game mode rating just makes it so you are far more likely to face someone who is having the same level of success as you. Stop advocating for Deck Rating to be the driving criteria because that can be easily manipulated.
Wauuu a lot of comments to my post. I made this post 11 days ago and since then I have been tracking my wins and loses using a sandbag team with 50/50 good champs. I have lost 1/3 of all the fight solely due to the fact that I had to use 1s and 2s champs in two of the three fights, so the match was lost before it started. Also I lost some of the remaining fights, so I ended up with a win of close to 50 pct. Is this an unfair advantage?
If Kabam wants to keep match making based on deck strength then maybe keep it until gold or platinum. After that tier, match making is completely random. It will give UC and Cav players reasonable matches for a bit.
I’ve seen people bring up how much of a slog it is for them to make it through the Victory Track without sandbagging and that’s why it should be okay. I would argue that it is only a slog if you are trying to push past an appropriate tier for you.
I am a veteran, endgame player. I’ve put more hours into this game than I’d care to ever think about, and I’d like to think I’m pretty decent at it. I crafted the best deck that I could for the content using exclusively my 6* r3 and r4 champions. I made it through the entirety of the Victory Track with only three matches lost.
This is not meant to be a brag, as I’m sure there are many players who cleared VT long before I did with the same number or even fewer losses, and they also did so without sandbagging because they are skilled, knowledgeable players.
I don’t fault anybody for trying to push higher in the VT as clearing each threshold gives a substantial reward, but I do fault them for using a tactic that prevents other players from being appropriately matched and being able to enjoy the game. I’ve seen players argue that it doesn’t matter if a sandbagging Paragon matches with and bullies an Uncollected or Cavalier because they’re all going for the same rewards and they’re fair game. This is not correct.
It *feels* correct because both players are getting the same number of tokens for clearing the tier. But the Paragon player can buy far more valuable material with their tokens than the Uncollected or Cavalier player can. They are different economies, and therefore should not be competing with each other.
I’ve seen people bring up how much of a slog it is for them to make it through the Victory Track without sandbagging and that’s why it should be okay. I would argue that it is only a slog if you are trying to push past an appropriate tier for you.
I am a veteran, endgame player. I’ve put more hours into this game than I’d care to ever think about, and I’d like to think I’m pretty decent at it. I crafted the best deck that I could for the content using exclusively my 6* r3 and r4 champions. I made it through the entirety of the Victory Track with only three matches lost.
This is not meant to be a brag, as I’m sure there are many players who cleared VT long before I did with the same number or even fewer losses, and they also did so without sandbagging because they are skilled, knowledgeable players.
I don’t fault anybody for trying to push higher in the VT as clearing each threshold gives a substantial reward, but I do fault them for using a tactic that prevents other players from being appropriately matched and being able to enjoy the game. I’ve seen players argue that it doesn’t matter if a sandbagging Paragon matches with and bullies an Uncollected or Cavalier because they’re all going for the same rewards and they’re fair game. This is not correct.
It *feels* correct because both players are getting the same number of tokens for clearing the tier. But the Paragon player can buy far more valuable material with their tokens than the Uncollected or Cavalier player can. They are different economies, and therefore should not be competing with each other.
I will just respond to your last paragraph. You are right about the economy but how long does an uncollected or cavalier player stay uncollected or cavalier? They advance and pretty quickly as well. And is there a 5k or 10k limit to trophy tokens? No..the limit is something in the range of 125k. People can save the tokens and spend when they reach thronebreaker. And an additional point you are forgetting is the solo event rewards which are the same whether you are uncollected or paragon. By winning enough matches an uncollected can easily get a very high placement in that.
I’ve seen people bring up how much of a slog it is for them to make it through the Victory Track without sandbagging and that’s why it should be okay. I would argue that it is only a slog if you are trying to push past an appropriate tier for you.
I am a veteran, endgame player. I’ve put more hours into this game than I’d care to ever think about, and I’d like to think I’m pretty decent at it. I crafted the best deck that I could for the content using exclusively my 6* r3 and r4 champions. I made it through the entirety of the Victory Track with only three matches lost.
This is not meant to be a brag, as I’m sure there are many players who cleared VT long before I did with the same number or even fewer losses, and they also did so without sandbagging because they are skilled, knowledgeable players.
I don’t fault anybody for trying to push higher in the VT as clearing each threshold gives a substantial reward, but I do fault them for using a tactic that prevents other players from being appropriately matched and being able to enjoy the game. I’ve seen players argue that it doesn’t matter if a sandbagging Paragon matches with and bullies an Uncollected or Cavalier because they’re all going for the same rewards and they’re fair game. This is not correct.
It *feels* correct because both players are getting the same number of tokens for clearing the tier. But the Paragon player can buy far more valuable material with their tokens than the Uncollected or Cavalier player can. They are different economies, and therefore should not be competing with each other.
I will just respond to your last paragraph. You are right about the economy but how long does an uncollected or cavalier player stay uncollected or cavalier? They advance and pretty quickly as well. And is there a 5k or 10k limit to trophy tokens? No..the limit is something in the range of 125k. People can save the tokens and spend when they reach thronebreaker. And an additional point you are forgetting is the solo event rewards which are the same whether you are uncollected or paragon. By winning enough matches an uncollected can easily get a very high placement in that.
I considered the idea of an Uncollected player stockpiling their tokens until they reach Paragon, but that seems like a bad approach overall. That means spending energy and time grinding BGs for no immediate reward. That player would be far better served spending the tokens to help expand and rank up their roster in the present so that they can reach those higher progression titles sooner than they would be hoarding the tokens for some unknowable time in the future. And even if they did hoard, there are purchase limits in the store. They will still be subject to those limits. I see no benefit to hoarding over the long term rather than spending them as they come in on the resources you need.
As for the question of the Solo event, that has less to do with winning matches than it does the use of Elder’s Marks. Nothing is stopping some Uncollected player from whaling out and playing countless matches using Elder’s Marks and taking the top spot in the solo event. They don’t even have to win a single one. You get more points for a win than a loss, sure, but if you play and lose 101, you’re gonna place higher than a player who played and won 50. The solo event is a competition of who can sink the most time and resources into the mode, not a measure of anybody’s skill.
Ok, just trying to see where the line is in what is acceptable sandbagging vs unacceptable:
After the draft you each end up with two top tier defenders with no great counters.
You select first and pick your best defender and so does he. You end up squeaking out a win in Rd1.
In Rd2 he puts his other top defender first. You know that if you hold onto your 2nd best defender for Rd 3 and throw Rd 2 you can win so you put a random defender down. You lose Rd 2.
You put your top remaining defender down for Rd 3 and win easily giving you a 2-1 match victory.
Now my questions to the "sandbagging is wrong" group: Is purposely placing a lower defender to lose a round to increase your chance of winning the match cheating or just good strategy? And if your answer is "good strategy" please explain how that form of sandbagging is ok but putting some 1* champs in your deck is cheating.
Ok, just trying to see where the line is in what is acceptable sandbagging vs unacceptable:
After the draft you each end up with two top tier defenders with no great counters.
You select first and pick your best defender and so does he. You end up squeaking out a win in Rd1.
In Rd2 he puts his other top defender first. You know that if you hold onto your 2nd best defender for Rd 3 and throw Rd 2 you can win so you put a random defender down. You lose Rd 2.
You put your top remaining defender down for Rd 3 and win easily giving you a 2-1 match victory.
Now my questions to the "sandbagging is wrong" group: Is purposely placing a lower defender to lose a round to increase your chance of winning the match cheating or just good strategy? And if your answer is "good strategy" please explain how that form of sandbagging is ok but putting some 1* champs in your deck is cheating.
Because what you just described is not sandbagging at all.
What you are describing is two evenly matched players who both brought their best to the table, tried their hardest, made strategic choices, and one player won. All strategy was done within the match itself. You matched up with an equal strength opponent and outplayed them. That’s what’s supposed to happen.
Sandbagging takes the even match out of the equation. You aren’t strategizing against your opponent, you’re strategizing against the game mode itself in order to get weaker opponents. You are then bullying them and keeping them arbitrarily low because they can’t get matches with people of their own tier, and you are climbing artificially high because you’re using a bunch of ranked up 6* champs to punt some 4* and 5* champions.
The key difference is that in the first match, you are paired up with somebody on your level. They have access to all the same tools and information you do. It is a fundamentally fair matchup. In the sandbag match, you are manipulating the process to be paired up with somebody weaker than you. They do not have the same tools and likely have far less game experience than you do. It is fundamentally unfair.
Ok, just trying to see where the line is in what is acceptable sandbagging vs unacceptable:
After the draft you each end up with two top tier defenders with no great counters.
You select first and pick your best defender and so does he. You end up squeaking out a win in Rd1.
In Rd2 he puts his other top defender first. You know that if you hold onto your 2nd best defender for Rd 3 and throw Rd 2 you can win so you put a random defender down. You lose Rd 2.
You put your top remaining defender down for Rd 3 and win easily giving you a 2-1 match victory.
Now my questions to the "sandbagging is wrong" group: Is purposely placing a lower defender to lose a round to increase your chance of winning the match cheating or just good strategy? And if your answer is "good strategy" please explain how that form of sandbagging is ok but putting some 1* champs in your deck is cheating.
What you described is an actual strategy with planning out what defenders vs attackers you have vs what they have and trying to have them use defenders that work for you. There is nothing wrong with that and not sandbagging.
Sandbagging sad we have already discussed is lowering the rating of your deck by putting in 15 of your strong champs and then putting in a pinch of 2 stars in as well so that you fight weaker opponents in order to climb the ranks. I’m not sure why you keep trying to twist the definition of sandbagging.
Ok, just trying to see where the line is in what is acceptable sandbagging vs unacceptable:
After the draft you each end up with two top tier defenders with no great counters.
You select first and pick your best defender and so does he. You end up squeaking out a win in Rd1.
In Rd2 he puts his other top defender first. You know that if you hold onto your 2nd best defender for Rd 3 and throw Rd 2 you can win so you put a random defender down. You lose Rd 2.
You put your top remaining defender down for Rd 3 and win easily giving you a 2-1 match victory.
Now my questions to the "sandbagging is wrong" group: Is purposely placing a lower defender to lose a round to increase your chance of winning the match cheating or just good strategy? And if your answer is "good strategy" please explain how that form of sandbagging is ok but putting some 1* champs in your deck is cheating.
The fact that you actually thought this was a fair comparison is ridiculous. Sandbagging ends up being unethical for these two basic reasons.
- All Champs in your deck are not selected equally - All Champs have an equal effect on your deck rating or deck prestige (1/30th).
Imagine a Baseball Team with 9 MLB Players and 16 Little Kids vs a team with 25 high school kids. The average age of each team may be the same but we all know that these teams aren't equal because those 16 little kids (1/2 Star Champs) likely won't actually play (get drafted). The best players (champions) are far more important than the rest.
We're not saying you can't sandbag. We're just saying the quality of your opponent should not be weaker because of it. You should just continue to fight stronger opponents until you have a roughly 50% win rate.
Ok, so sandbagging within a match is OK but not before a match. Got it.
Me, when Ironman3000 talks about sandbagging:
I’m sure you already know this and are just trying to twist it, but sandbagging is a term that specifically refers to methods used to artificially lower how the game reads your account’s strength. It has nothing to do with in-match behavior in a match that you are trying to win.
No, I get it. Purposely not using your best champs within a match to gain a win id good and purposely not using your best champs before a match is bad. You guys are totally not contradicting yourselves.
No, I get it. Purposely not using your best champs within a match to gain a win id good and purposely not using your best champs before a match is bad. You guys are totally not contradicting yourselves.
I don’t think you know what sand bagging or being contradictory actually is.
No, I get it. Purposely not using your best champs within a match to gain a win id good and purposely not using your best champs before a match is bad. You guys are totally not contradicting yourselves.
No we're not. Using a strategy to avoid playing the best people in the game mode vs using a strategy to defeat the best people at the game mode are different things
No, I get it. Purposely not using your best champs within a match to gain a win id good and purposely not using your best champs before a match is bad. You guys are totally not contradicting yourselves.
Either you have a truly uncanny condition which renders you able to only read some of the words on your screen or, more likely…
Either way, there’s nothing further to be gained from this conversation.
No, I get it. Purposely not using your best champs within a match to gain a win id good and purposely not using your best champs before a match is bad. You guys are totally not contradicting yourselves.
You’re trying to equate an actual in-match strategy to a method used to manipulate matchmaking, but they are far from being the same thing. Choosing when to use particular defenders is all part of the strategy used when facing off against players at an equal or higher rating than you, and is not sandbagging. Why use your top defender right away when you could potentially play it in a later round when the opponent may no longer have a viable counter?
Sandbagging specifically refers to loading your deck with low tier champs to manipulate the matchmaking into giving you a lower tiered opponent. It doesn’t involve any actual strategy as you’re basically just tricking the software into giving you a weaker opponent that doesn’t stand a chance against the champs at the top of your deck. While I understand that there will be the occasional match where a lower tier player will randomly match with a higher tier player, sandbagging takes advantage of the matchmaking system to force these fights. Why should sandbaggers be rewarded for punching down on lower tier players to rise through the ranks, when other players are willing to fight evenly matched players (or even higher tier players) to advance?
No, I get it. Purposely not using your best champs within a match to gain a win id good and purposely not using your best champs before a match is bad. You guys are totally not contradicting yourselves.
Can you just go Google sandbagging please? You clearly don't know the meaning yet you're over here arguing acting like you do
What they should do is have different tiers like in Incursions, if you have certain amount of 6 star rank 4s, you enter into the top tier only, if you 6 star rank 3s, you can enter into a tier below and so on. This way the all the players in each tier's account will be somewhat similar and will face each other. If you want to Sandbag, it will only hinder you since everyone in your tier will have a similar account. So everyone in each tier will face similar accounts only, so this way the smaller accounts can enjoy BG without worrying about facing the stacked Paragon accounts. There's a catch and it's rewards, just like Incursions, the lower tiers will have less reward. If you want to face accounts of similar strength then you will have to expect rewards based on your tier. I guarantee you that there are going to be an uproar about the lower tiers getting such crappy rewards. Just like Incursions and war, if you want the top rewards you need to play the top tiers. Good luck in finding a solution that everyone will agree to. There's always going to be angry Summoner who won't like the system no matter what it is.
This is me getting all the benefits from sandbagging and “cheating” everyone else.
Ended up with four 2s champs in my fighting deck. Pretty sure my opponent was ok with me “cheating” 🤷🏻♂️
You get rewarded for losses from Kabam right now if you only play three matches. Your opponent's choice was take the easy win or forfeit and give you the win you're gaming the system to get. I'd have taken the easy fight and reported you after. Kabam should ban you from the game. Full stop.
Sigh, this is why reporting modders is so hard when they have to look at so many reports from people on things they don’t like versus actual cheating.
Sandbagging is cheating. Period. They belong in the same basket as modders. Both are a blight to the game mode and experience.
This is so wrong. If you're in the same tier as someone you should be fair game. If you can't beat someone with half a roster you don't deserve to be in a tier with them. Kabam artificially propelling low accounts into higher tiers that they don't belong in hurts everyone.
If you need to purposefully put half a roster to be in the tier you are in, you don’t deserve to be in a tier with those people
This post doesn't make any sense.
How so? If you have to purposely lower you deck rating to verse opponents way weaker than you and climb up the ladder, you definitely don't deserve to be in whatever tier your in because you're essentially cheating your way in when most people had to verse people just as strong as them and didn't get the wins handed to them just like that
You make no sense. If you can beat someone in your tier with half a deck, how is it that you don't belong in that tier? Low players not getting matched with bigger accounts in their same tier just artificially promotes those low players and stagnates the bigger players. Eventually, you get low players in tiers where they have to play big accounts and get stuck.
Everyone should be fair game within each tier.
You're the one that makes no sense dude. How on Earth are you even asking a question like that do you have any critical thinking skills whatsoever? Let me spell it out for you, if you have 15 rank 3 6* and 15 1* and you get matched with someone who doesn't even have a maxed out 5* yet how exactly do you expect them to win? It's a free win for you no matter what (unless you draft all 1* which is highly unlikely). Reason: their champs will be so low they won't be able to ko any of your defenders while you on the other hand will be able to ko all of his defenders with easy because your champs' stats will be miles above theirs.
So then per your logic weaker players should not be in gold on alliance wars, they should only be in bronze! Do you imagine how messed up AWs would be if we used your logic of "everyone should be fair game"? There's a reason this isn't a thing.
Not necessarily, that could easily be fixed by making it so only Thronebreakers and above can get into gladiator's circuit.
No, that's not how competitive modes work my guy.
You're not understanding BGs or AW.
If someone doesn't have a maxed out 5* they shouldn't be in the same tier as someone with a full r3 deck. And if they somehow make it to tier level, they should expect to get matched with that person. That's my whole point. Deck strength should never play a part in matchmaking ever.
In AW, different tiers of allys get different multipliers. They tried the current BG matchmaking in AW for one season and it was a disaster. Low allys finished in Masters because they just kept beating other low allys and top allys ended up in Gold because they only faced other top allys.
Any system where a low account can artificially be propelled above a big account, because they avoid playing those accounts, is wrong. This mode should be about skill not matchmaking.
Okay so per your logic there will now be no divisions in boxing, a lightweight can go up against a heavyweight! Do you not see how flawed that is? That's what you're essentially saying.
So it's unfair for you then but when stronger alliance face weaker alliances who don't stand a chance it's not fair. You're biased and it shows.
Right what skill? The skill of throwing 15 nearly maxed out 6* in your deck, face someone who barely has rank 4 5* and automatically win? You can't be serious
If a lightweight want's to win the heavyweight title he should expect to fight heavyweights.
What you, and may others, won't understand is that we're all in the same league and fighting for the same rewards.
The heavyweight title being gladiator's circuit in which case I agree. However, the fact that we can get matched with paragons who sandbag while we're in bronze is ridiculous.
What you don't understand is that what you think the objective of the game mode is, is not what Kabam have in mind. They don't want Paragon fighting Cavalier, they don't want Thronebreaker fighting Uncollected, hence they're changing the matchmaking system once again very soon. You're wrong
Their intentions don't matter, only their actions do. They put everyone in the same tier and gave everyone the same rewards. Don't be mad a people manipulation their terrible system to get the the level they should be at.
I'm not mad at people for doing it, only replying to the few of you who are defending sandbagging and trying to act like it isn't a scummy thing to do and acting like it's a valid strategy when on every single competition in the world it's literally cheating. Like I said in a previous post, enjoy exploiting this flawed system while you still can cause soon all paragons and thronebreakers who have been getting rewards for free are actually going to have to fight for them.
Actually, to be honest, mostly Uncollected and Cavaliers are having the “free” VT rewards, since they get them without facing the competition. Half of the Paragons can’t make it to GC because they face only other Paragons. My main account of 3.5mil rating struggles to go above Vibranium, while my mini account was in Gladiator Circuit from week 1. Same person, same skills, similar champs just in lower rarities. My main is punished in VT for being developed. And punishing progression, in a game where it should be rewarded in order for business to work, seems like a suicide business tactics. That’s says a lot of how flawed is current matchmaking in VT and gives literally easy rewards to lower accounts. Head start based on prestige and full random matchmaking (within same tier of course) it’s an easy solution, good for all players. People wouldn’t benefit from lowering decks and sandbagging would be eliminated. Current matchmaking is AW prestige matchmaking all over again 😠
Comments
I am a veteran, endgame player. I’ve put more hours into this game than I’d care to ever think about, and I’d like to think I’m pretty decent at it. I crafted the best deck that I could for the content using exclusively my 6* r3 and r4 champions. I made it through the entirety of the Victory Track with only three matches lost.
This is not meant to be a brag, as I’m sure there are many players who cleared VT long before I did with the same number or even fewer losses, and they also did so without sandbagging because they are skilled, knowledgeable players.
I don’t fault anybody for trying to push higher in the VT as clearing each threshold gives a substantial reward, but I do fault them for using a tactic that prevents other players from being appropriately matched and being able to enjoy the game. I’ve seen players argue that it doesn’t matter if a sandbagging Paragon matches with and bullies an Uncollected or Cavalier because they’re all going for the same rewards and they’re fair game. This is not correct.
It *feels* correct because both players are getting the same number of tokens for clearing the tier. But the Paragon player can buy far more valuable material with their tokens than the Uncollected or Cavalier player can. They are different economies, and therefore should not be competing with each other.
As for the question of the Solo event, that has less to do with winning matches than it does the use of Elder’s Marks. Nothing is stopping some Uncollected player from whaling out and playing countless matches using Elder’s Marks and taking the top spot in the solo event. They don’t even have to win a single one. You get more points for a win than a loss, sure, but if you play and lose 101, you’re gonna place higher than a player who played and won 50. The solo event is a competition of who can sink the most time and resources into the mode, not a measure of anybody’s skill.
After the draft you each end up with two top tier defenders with no great counters.
You select first and pick your best defender and so does he. You end up squeaking out a win in Rd1.
In Rd2 he puts his other top defender first. You know that if you hold onto your 2nd best defender for Rd 3 and throw Rd 2 you can win so you put a random defender down. You lose Rd 2.
You put your top remaining defender down for Rd 3 and win easily giving you a 2-1 match victory.
Now my questions to the "sandbagging is wrong" group:
Is purposely placing a lower defender to lose a round to increase your chance of winning the match cheating or just good strategy? And if your answer is "good strategy" please explain how that form of sandbagging is ok but putting some 1* champs in your deck is cheating.
What you are describing is two evenly matched players who both brought their best to the table, tried their hardest, made strategic choices, and one player won. All strategy was done within the match itself. You matched up with an equal strength opponent and outplayed them. That’s what’s supposed to happen.
Sandbagging takes the even match out of the equation. You aren’t strategizing against your opponent, you’re strategizing against the game mode itself in order to get weaker opponents. You are then bullying them and keeping them arbitrarily low because they can’t get matches with people of their own tier, and you are climbing artificially high because you’re using a bunch of ranked up 6* champs to punt some 4* and 5* champions.
The key difference is that in the first match, you are paired up with somebody on your level. They have access to all the same tools and information you do. It is a fundamentally fair matchup. In the sandbag match, you are manipulating the process to be paired up with somebody weaker than you. They do not have the same tools and likely have far less game experience than you do. It is fundamentally unfair.
Sandbagging sad we have already discussed is lowering the rating of your deck by putting in 15 of your strong champs and then putting in a pinch of 2 stars in as well so that you fight weaker opponents in order to climb the ranks. I’m not sure why you keep trying to twist the definition of sandbagging.
- All Champs in your deck are not selected equally
- All Champs have an equal effect on your deck rating or deck prestige (1/30th).
Imagine a Baseball Team with 9 MLB Players and 16 Little Kids vs a team with 25 high school kids. The average age of each team may be the same but we all know that these teams aren't equal because those 16 little kids (1/2 Star Champs) likely won't actually play (get drafted). The best players (champions) are far more important than the rest.
We're not saying you can't sandbag. We're just saying the quality of your opponent should not be weaker because of it. You should just continue to fight stronger opponents until you have a roughly 50% win rate.
I’m sure you already know this and are just trying to twist it, but sandbagging is a term that specifically refers to methods used to artificially lower how the game reads your account’s strength. It has nothing to do with in-match behavior in a match that you are trying to win.
Either way, there’s nothing further to be gained from this conversation.
Sandbagging specifically refers to loading your deck with low tier champs to manipulate the matchmaking into giving you a lower tiered opponent. It doesn’t involve any actual strategy as you’re basically just tricking the software into giving you a weaker opponent that doesn’t stand a chance against the champs at the top of your deck. While I understand that there will be the occasional match where a lower tier player will randomly match with a higher tier player, sandbagging takes advantage of the matchmaking system to force these fights. Why should sandbaggers be rewarded for punching down on lower tier players to rise through the ranks, when other players are willing to fight evenly matched players (or even higher tier players) to advance?
Half of the Paragons can’t make it to GC because they face only other Paragons.
My main account of 3.5mil rating struggles to go above Vibranium, while my mini account was in Gladiator Circuit from week 1.
Same person, same skills, similar champs just in lower rarities.
My main is punished in VT for being developed.
And punishing progression, in a game where it should be rewarded in order for business to work, seems like a suicide business tactics.
That’s says a lot of how flawed is current matchmaking in VT and gives literally easy rewards to lower accounts.
Head start based on prestige and full random matchmaking (within same tier of course) it’s an easy solution, good for all players.
People wouldn’t benefit from lowering decks and sandbagging would be eliminated.
Current matchmaking is AW prestige matchmaking all over again 😠