Yeah, but at the same time you are giving the lower ranking players more. It’s a lot harder than just doing it.
You’d need to give them more rewards via another Avenue, but then the ones below us would double dip. It’s a lot to do and kabam will break the game as usual by this method.
Although I don't see "sand bagging" as some unfair thing I couldn't care less either way . Saying it is used because the matching system isn't fair because you have to face bigger accounts . Those bigger accounts earned them by ranking up said champions by grinding out the content they have it "easier" because they put in the time an that's what smaller accounts need to take in an just grind out content do your ranknups an you'll get there feels like forever but it will happen
You didn't earn anything other than better rewards. Having a big account doesn't give you the right to ruin the gaming experience for other people by sandbagging, hence it's being removed.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I agree that sandbagging should be removed as well as match making done based on prestige should be removed. Matchmaking should be based on what tier the players are in and nothing else.
Meaning someone in gold 3 should be eligible to face absolutely anyone in gold 3 regardless of prestige based on everyone fighting for same rewards. This thereby eliminates sandbagging as it would be irrelevant.
@Chatterofforums This would be fine if they if the point system wasnt win 3-5 matches in a row if anyone faces anyone in their bracket then UC and Cav will go up against Paragon which obviously isnt fair you shouldnt be hard stuck because of your progression level this idea would work if you could get points based on how well you did in a match so even if you lose you have the chance to gain points
We are all competing for same rank rewards. What a low player considers "fair" is very unfair for higher players and vice versa.
As a comparison example, my alliance is a 85 million alliance. We are mostly retired players and run one optional BG group which keeps us in silver AW most the time. This caused us to face alliances with 20-30 million rating fairly often. Is it fair in AW? Kabam seems to think so as it's been like this for years and we are all fighting for same rank aw rewards. If it's fair in AW when everyone fighting for same rank rewards in season why in world wouldn't it be fair in BG season?
On a side note, bigger isn't always better. I noted how much stronger we are that. Many alliances we face, funny thing is, it's not that uncommon for us to lose to them at times as we put zero effort into BG (no diversity, no set defenders, no set paths, usually don't even fill a full BG). The little guy can and does (happens in BG too) beat the big guy at times.
@Chatterofforums I dont think my comment posted so ill type it again so if you see double ignore it
You arent competing against uc and cav for rewards you are still competing against paragons for rewards because theres no way a uc or cav would place anywhere near you assuming you are putting in the work uc and cav would simpily get less rewards than you would
Yes the "little guy" Can win if the big guy dosent put in any effort but i think its safe to say most people in bg's are trying to win their matches and it would be impossible for a smaller account to rank up if they're constantly matching bigger accounts and the only way to rank is to win 3-5 matches in a row
I think a Better system would be certain point thresholds is a new rank so between 300 points would get you gold 3 and once you get to like 400 you would rank to gold 2 and you have the chance to gain point even if you lost when you enter a match you start with negative points and if you win 1 round maybe you get enough points so that you are now at 0 and if you win the next match you's get like 40 points or something if you win 1 lose 2 then you'd end at like 15-20 points depending on how well you did and if you lose 2 then your either still in the negatives or a very low positive points.
Although I don't see "sand bagging" as some unfair thing I couldn't care less either way . Saying it is used because the matching system isn't fair because you have to face bigger accounts . Those bigger accounts earned them by ranking up said champions by grinding out the content they have it "easier" because they put in the time an that's what smaller accounts need to take in an just grind out content do your ranknups an you'll get there feels like forever but it will happen
What type of logic is this you think because you played the game longer you get to have easy matches and get good rewards and ruin the experience for everyone else
Yeah, but at the same time you are giving the lower ranking players more. It’s a lot harder than just doing it.
You’d need to give them more rewards via another Avenue, but then the ones below us would double dip. It’s a lot to do and kabam will break the game as usual by this method.
@Panchulon21 im confused how would this give lower ranking players more everybody gets the same amount of rewards except the rewsrds are located elsewhere for the players that were ranked higher and they wouldnt be any harder to get
Because for every player who is struggling like you. There are small accounts who are making it high without cheating. When I got to Gladiator circuit my first 6-7 matches were against accounts smaller than mine without sandbagging.
Because for every player who is struggling like you. There are small accounts who are making it high without cheating. When I got to Gladiator circuit my first 6-7 matches were against accounts smaller than mine without sandbagging.
@Panchulon21 Im still confused at what your saying the system would allow players (for a certain period of time) to play against players at their same rank when the season starts, so if you ended in celestial and you get placed in d2 when the next season starts all the other players in d2 would have been in celestial last season so everyone would be playing against players at their rank and the rewards you didnt get from all the previous ranks would be transfered to the solo obj battlegrounds tab.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
Me personally, I set up my deck with no higher than r3 5* and r5 4*. My goal was to target sandbagging fools. I made it to the circuit beating people like you and 9 times out of 10, I just needed to win one of the 1st 2 matches and it was my win because they were stuck with 2 *. Added benefit is it didn't make me feel bad if I got matched against lower accounts as they had a legitimate chance because my roster was the same size as theirs.
I could drop so many of these picks and each one makes me happy.
But the ones that made me happier is when my 4* can't be taken with the 6* they had left.
Not sure why targeting sandbagging people made it more fun for me but it just did.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
You still don't see the difference between using a 4* deck to dodge sandbaggers such as yourself and using half 2* half r4 6*? You really don't see the difference between getting a fair match against someone else with a 4* deck and facing someone who won't be able to ko a single champ out of those 15 6*? The only thing you've made clear is that you aren't very smart and don't know the meaning of the word sandbagging.
Me personally, I set up my deck with no higher than r3 5* and r5 4*. My goal was to target sandbagging fools. I made it to the circuit beating people like you and 9 times out of 10, I just needed to win one of the 1st 2 matches and it was my win because they were stuck with 2 *. Added benefit is it didn't make me feel bad if I got matched against lower accounts as they had a legitimate chance because my roster was the same size as theirs.
I could drop so many of these picks and each one makes me happy.
But the ones that made me happier is when my 4* can't be taken with the 6* they had left.
Not sure why targeting sandbagging people made it more fun for me but it just did.
Me personally, I set up my deck with no higher than r3 5* and r5 4*. My goal was to target sandbagging fools. I made it to the circuit beating people like you and 9 times out of 10, I just needed to win one of the 1st 2 matches and it was my win because they were stuck with 2 *. Added benefit is it didn't make me feel bad if I got matched against lower accounts as they had a legitimate chance because my roster was the same size as theirs.
I could drop so many of these picks and each one makes me happy.
But the ones that made me happier is when my 4* can't be taken with the 6* they had left.
Not sure why targeting sandbagging people made it more fun for me but it just did.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
You still don't see the difference between using a 4* deck to dodge sandbaggers such as yourself and using half 2* half r4 6*? You really don't see the difference between getting a fair match against someone else with a 4* deck and facing someone who won't be able to ko a single champ out of those 15 6*? The only thing you've made clear is that you aren't very smart and don't know the meaning of the word sandbagging.
Deck manipulation is deck manipulation. You can call it sandbagging or strategy or whatever makes you feel better about yourself. Personally, I used a 5*/4* deck, just like you, to get to Gold then my top deck the rest of the way. I don't have a problem with that but I'm not going to say I didn't manipulate my deck the get easier early matches.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I agree that sandbagging should be removed as well as match making done based on prestige should be removed. Matchmaking should be based on what tier the players are in and nothing else.
Meaning someone in gold 3 should be eligible to face absolutely anyone in gold 3 regardless of prestige based on everyone fighting for same rewards. This thereby eliminates sandbagging as it would be irrelevant.
I honestly don't get why this isn't/ wasn't the case to begin with. Besides greed from kabam in that they want newer accounts to do well so they stay in the game. The other option would be have a paragon/TB/Cav group and everyone else group, or kind of like the initial arenas based on accounts age. That way everyone can fairly match in their current level and awards structured for that.
Actually, the "you can't progress further than your level" point, is false. (Not talking for GC). The first days of the season, when everyone starts from scratch, you can get matched with someone way more "upgraded" than you way often than during the last week of the season, when all the "good" players have already reached GC. So, if you are cavalier for example, you have the chance to reach let s say platinum, at the end of the season.
But, either way, no one can read my posts, so I don't know why I even bother writting my opinion here. @Kabam Jax
You still don't see the difference between using a 4* deck to dodge sandbaggers such as yourself and using half 2* half r4 6*? You really don't see the difference between getting a fair match against someone else with a 4* deck and facing someone who won't be able to ko a single champ out of those 15 6*? The only thing you've made clear is that you aren't very smart and don't know the meaning of the word sandbagging.
You think a person that is Paragon with likely a large 4* roster facing a newer summoner with 4* roster is fair. Not only is 4* roster likely significantly better for champs on offense and defense but the skill level / experience of a paragon is likely much higher. This is not much better than sandbagging with 2* mixed with 6*. Both are dubious at best.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
@Ironman3000 There should always be fair matches in the sense that a player should always have a chance to win against another player
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
@Ironman3000 There should always be fair matches in the sense that a player should always have a chance to win against another player
This. Fair is a loose term, since there will always be some kind of variation in size. When that becomes extreme to the point that it's an ambush Loss, that's not a fair system.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
@Ironman3000 There should always be fair matches in the sense that a player should always have a chance to win against another player
Where did I say that people shouldn't have a chance to win matches?
You still don't see the difference between using a 4* deck to dodge sandbaggers such as yourself and using half 2* half r4 6*? You really don't see the difference between getting a fair match against someone else with a 4* deck and facing someone who won't be able to ko a single champ out of those 15 6*? The only thing you've made clear is that you aren't very smart and don't know the meaning of the word sandbagging.
You think a person that is Paragon with likely a large 4* roster facing a newer summoner with 4* roster is fair. Not only is 4* roster likely significantly better for champs on offense and defense but the skill level / experience of a paragon is likely much higher. This is not much better than sandbagging with 2* mixed with 6*. Both are dubious at best.
Never said that, however this guy is claiming I "sandbag" people by using only my 4* when I became uncollected two weeks ago. It's one thing to have a Paragon do this cause they would get a skill advantage but a person who just became uncollected won't get any advantages which is my case. Read the whole conversation before getting involved and assuming yes?
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
You still don't see the difference between using a 4* deck to dodge sandbaggers such as yourself and using half 2* half r4 6*? You really don't see the difference between getting a fair match against someone else with a 4* deck and facing someone who won't be able to ko a single champ out of those 15 6*? The only thing you've made clear is that you aren't very smart and don't know the meaning of the word sandbagging.
Deck manipulation is deck manipulation. You can call it sandbagging or strategy or whatever makes you feel better about yourself. Personally, I used a 5*/4* deck, just like you, to get to Gold then my top deck the rest of the way. I don't have a problem with that but I'm not going to say I didn't manipulate my deck the get easier early matches.
Deck manipulation isn't the same as sandbagging dude lmao it's been three weeks and you still don't know the difference? I'm not getting easier matches though. I became uncollected two weeks ago (that's like the fifth time I've mentioned this to you) so I don't really get any skill or roster advantages by using only my 4*
You still don't see the difference between using a 4* deck to dodge sandbaggers such as yourself and using half 2* half r4 6*? You really don't see the difference between getting a fair match against someone else with a 4* deck and facing someone who won't be able to ko a single champ out of those 15 6*? The only thing you've made clear is that you aren't very smart and don't know the meaning of the word sandbagging.
You think a person that is Paragon with likely a large 4* roster facing a newer summoner with 4* roster is fair. Not only is 4* roster likely significantly better for champs on offense and defense but the skill level / experience of a paragon is likely much higher. This is not much better than sandbagging with 2* mixed with 6*. Both are dubious at best.
If you believe that the only fair matches would be between players with equal roster and equal skill level and equal experience, there is no fair match system possible.
The reason why probably the vast majority of people find 6/2 deck stacking to be unfair is not because it is unfair to use 6s and 2s. The reason it is considered unfair is because such a player has no intention of using the 2s. If they actually had to consistently use them, I think people wouldn't find the practice to be as unfair as most do. The 2s are there to manipulate the match system into seeing the deck as weaker, while they actually only use the stronger champs. Statistically speaking, if they do it right they can make the odds of actually pulling and using those champs acceptably low (you only need four out of seven champs to be top champs to have a huge advantage, because if you win the first two fights you don't need to use the rest).
Using a deck of all 4s is debatable. I used two decks in season two: a full strength deck and an all 5/50 deck. In my opinion, an all 5/50 deck is a fair deck, because all of those champs are intended to be used. The deck isn't presenting an artificial strength. It matches against other decks of equal or higher strength.
The idea that the deck is fair but the *player* behind it is unfair, because I have more experience and skill than most players using such decks, seems nonsensical to me. Of course there are many players I would have a lot more skill and experience than. But there are a lot of players that have far more skill than me. Is it unfair when I match against them? To me, this is all or nothing. If I have an unfair advantage when I match against a player of lesser skill, I have an unfair disadvantage when I match against a player of superior skill.
In any case, this is also a completely moot complaint. In season two if you used a 4* 5/50 deck, the probability of running into an inexperienced player with a weak roster of 4* champs was practically zero. In all the matches I ran with the 5/50 deck, I ran into maybe two of those in Bronze 3. Outside of B3, I ran into no such player. Some of the players were 2* decks. Some of the players were likely weaker players, but they were not using decks of 4* champs. Because of how rosters get built, they were using decks with a mix of 4* and 5* champs, and the 5/50 deck was always at a disadvantage. I do not recall ever running into another deck of all 5/50s or weaker.
Essentially, no one actually has a roster full of 5/50s and zero 5* r3s and r4s. That just never happens in reality. Anyone with a lot of 5/50s also has at least a few 5* r3 or higher. And those higher champs tend, on average, to offer a slight to significant material advantage. In fact, my Cavalier alt that is *forced* to use a deck with a mix of 6* and 5* and 4* champs (because that's what it actually has as its strongest possible deck configuration) actually had a much easier time winning in season two. I had a 70% win percentage with that account, because that account *did* often match against weaker decks. That sort of "organic" mix of champions was far stronger than an artificially constructed deck of 4* only champs by a significant margin.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
@Ironman3000 There should always be fair matches in the sense that a player should always have a chance to win against another player
I mean, if we're all competing for same rewards not really. I'm not saying we should face Paragons and Thronebreakers every match but if we're in let's say gold 1 or above it should be completely random so we should face a really strong opponent every once in a while. Otherwise we (uncollected and cavalier) would be in Gladiator's Circuit and that'd just be ridiculous.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
Mixed feelings on this as a strategy vs calling it sandbagging. I think an easy solution would be to rank cap the use of lower level stars (is only an option at certain rank) and increase the ban system to 5 each. I think it is abusable up until a certain point and then a lot becomes people seeing a different idea, losing to it, and then being salty and blaming something other than their play.
From what I've seen on it when tested, it's use at lower ranks of the ladder causes the most level disparity and it evens out at higher ranks for pool strength. As you pointed out, higher up its common for thronebreakers with like 0-1 r4 6s to match with paragons with 5 or 6 of them. Add to the fact that nearly everyone who can play the mode is inundated with the same champs that a ban has to be used on, and the mode diversity and strategy suffers. The accuracy of champ power entering the match ends up being even.
In most deck building card games, being able to increase your draw power is king. So if I match up against someone with 2s in their deck and we both end up with champs at the 11-12 k mark thruout at the end of it, the match still feels even - as long as it's someone who can pinch their upper pool with in bans. That person is taking the risk of hurting their draw power and allowing more counter options; they have to add quite a few for the impact to be meaningful on matchmaking. The matchmaking is still randomized vs true manipulation, like the big dawgs trying to match against specific players by queuing up at the same time.
The solutions addressed above would curb the issue by making much riskier to try to do. Players would have proved they have the skill to belong in their rank before it's use and it increases the risk of trying to use it with a wider ban pool. Heck, while at it, put a cap on the number of reshuffles a person gets and make it so you can only earn more by completing certain objectives or something. Or reduce the number of selection choices a player gets per round. It's supposed to be a strategic tool but if a person can buy and use every match that seems much less fair imo.
Kabam stated they implemented fixes to their matchmaking to make it more balanced. I bet with a smaller pool of users due to a rank cap, they could add deck criteria to match players based on number of stars under certain rank as a condition and match similar decks together more frequently, but alas cannot say for certain without knowing the criteria that goes into it currently.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
You still don't see the difference between using a 4* deck to dodge sandbaggers such as yourself and using half 2* half r4 6*? You really don't see the difference between getting a fair match against someone else with a 4* deck and facing someone who won't be able to ko a single champ out of those 15 6*? The only thing you've made clear is that you aren't very smart and don't know the meaning of the word sandbagging.
Deck manipulation is deck manipulation. You can call it sandbagging or strategy or whatever makes you feel better about yourself. Personally, I used a 5*/4* deck, just like you, to get to Gold then my top deck the rest of the way. I don't have a problem with that but I'm not going to say I didn't manipulate my deck the get easier early matches.
Deck manipulation isn't the same as sandbagging dude lmao it's been three weeks and you still don't know the difference? I'm not getting easier matches though. I became uncollected two weeks ago (that's like the fifth time I've mentioned this to you) so I don't really get any skill or roster advantages by using only my 4*
Wrong. You were losing with you top deck so you manipulated your deck to match lower players to gain more wins. That's sandbagging. Sorry you can't admit it to yourself.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
You still don't see the difference between using a 4* deck to dodge sandbaggers such as yourself and using half 2* half r4 6*? You really don't see the difference between getting a fair match against someone else with a 4* deck and facing someone who won't be able to ko a single champ out of those 15 6*? The only thing you've made clear is that you aren't very smart and don't know the meaning of the word sandbagging.
Deck manipulation is deck manipulation. You can call it sandbagging or strategy or whatever makes you feel better about yourself. Personally, I used a 5*/4* deck, just like you, to get to Gold then my top deck the rest of the way. I don't have a problem with that but I'm not going to say I didn't manipulate my deck the get easier early matches.
Deck manipulation isn't the same as sandbagging dude lmao it's been three weeks and you still don't know the difference? I'm not getting easier matches though. I became uncollected two weeks ago (that's like the fifth time I've mentioned this to you) so I don't really get any skill or roster advantages by using only my 4*
Wrong. You were losing with you top deck so you manipulated your deck to match lower players to gain more wins. That's sandbagging. Sorry you can't admit it to yourself.
1. How can I get lower players than me when I'm one of the lowest players since I became uncollected two weeks ago, you make absolutely no sense lol. 2. Of course I was losing with my top deck (and by top deck I mean throwing in my six rank 4 5* I have which isn't even that much of a difference), I kept getting matched with people like you who actually sandbag, a word you clearly don't know the meaning of.
You think a person that is Paragon with likely a large 4* roster facing a newer summoner with 4* roster is fair. Not only is 4* roster likely significantly better for champs on offense and defense but the skill level / experience of a paragon is likely much higher. This is not much better than sandbagging with 2* mixed with 6*. Both are dubious at best.
If you believe that the only fair matches would be between players with equal roster and equal skill level and equal experience, there is no fair match system possible.
The reason why probably the vast majority of people find 6/2 deck stacking to be unfair is not because it is unfair to use 6s and 2s. The reason it is considered unfair is because such a player has no intention of using the 2s. If they actually had to consistently use them, I think people wouldn't find the practice to be as unfair as most do. The 2s are there to manipulate the match system into seeing the deck as weaker, while they actually only use the stronger champs. Statistically speaking, if they do it right they can make the odds of actually pulling and using those champs acceptably low (you only need four out of seven champs to be top champs to have a huge advantage, because if you win the first two fights you don't need to use the rest).
Using a deck of all 4s is debatable. I used two decks in season two: a full strength deck and an all 5/50 deck. In my opinion, an all 5/50 deck is a fair deck, because all of those champs are intended to be used. The deck isn't presenting an artificial strength. It matches against other decks of equal or higher strength.
The idea that the deck is fair but the *player* behind it is unfair, because I have more experience and skill than most players using such decks, seems nonsensical to me. Of course there are many players I would have a lot more skill and experience than. But there are a lot of players that have far more skill than me. Is it unfair when I match against them? To me, this is all or nothing. If I have an unfair advantage when I match against a player of lesser skill, I have an unfair disadvantage when I match against a player of superior skill.
In any case, this is also a completely moot complaint. In season two if you used a 4* 5/50 deck, the probability of running into an inexperienced player with a weak roster of 4* champs was practically zero. In all the matches I ran with the 5/50 deck, I ran into maybe two of those in Bronze 3. Outside of B3, I ran into no such player. Some of the players were 2* decks. Some of the players were likely weaker players, but they were not using decks of 4* champs. Because of how rosters get built, they were using decks with a mix of 4* and 5* champs, and the 5/50 deck was always at a disadvantage. I do not recall ever running into another deck of all 5/50s or weaker.
Essentially, no one actually has a roster full of 5/50s and zero 5* r3s and r4s. That just never happens in reality. Anyone with a lot of 5/50s also has at least a few 5* r3 or higher. And those higher champs tend, on average, to offer a slight to significant material advantage. In fact, my Cavalier alt that is *forced* to use a deck with a mix of 6* and 5* and 4* champs (because that's what it actually has as its strongest possible deck configuration) actually had a much easier time winning in season two. I had a 70% win percentage with that account, because that account *did* often match against weaker decks. That sort of "organic" mix of champions was far stronger than an artificially constructed deck of 4* only champs by a significant margin.
My stance all along is you should be matched against anyone in your tier regardless of roster. Over time people will move up the chain and lower rosters will have more opportunity to play against others.
My comments are directed to people saying one form of manipulation is okay while the other isn’t. If there wasn’t an advantage to any form then players wouldn’t do it.
I am a recent Paragon. 3R4 6* total. I realize at start of BGs that I will likely match with people with 10+ 3R4 6*. At later dates these people will have moved up and I will have a better chance. I accept this as how it ahould be.
Me personally, I set up my deck with no higher than r3 5* and r5 4*. My goal was to target sandbagging fools. I made it to the circuit beating people like you and 9 times out of 10, I just needed to win one of the 1st 2 matches and it was my win because they were stuck with 2 *. Added benefit is it didn't make me feel bad if I got matched against lower accounts as they had a legitimate chance because my roster was the same size as theirs.
I could drop so many of these picks and each one makes me happy.
But the ones that made me happier is when my 4* can't be taken with the 6* they had left.
Not sure why targeting sandbagging people made it more fun for me but it just did.
You sandbagged to make it the GC. Garbage.
While I can see that on last fight the 1st 2 fights, I still needed to use my r5 4 and r3 5 vs 6*. So I sandbagged to make it harder for me in the scheme of things for 2 of the 3 fights.
I dont think this mechanic works like people think it works, from my experience i would put 2 stars in my deck to find fair matches whenever i would use nothing but my best champs i would always get matched against people with accounts way bigger and better than my own and the same goes for my alliance mates when i did put 2 stars i was able to find fair matches their deck might've been a little better than mine or mine a little better than theirs but for the most part it was fair especially when you factor in the rng to draft champs in your deck. My question now is what am i suppose to do just go on a losing streak because im getting matched against accounts way better than mine? Or just wait till i get lucky win one match then proceed to lose the next 10 matches? If this is gonna be the case for the next season they need to change the point and rank system so that a certain point threshold lets say 0-50 points is stone 51-100 is silver and so on, and you can still gain point if you lose a match and the amount of points you get is based on how well you did that match.
This is exactly what I've been saying for weeks, top players sandbagging causes a domino effect that ruins the experience for everyone else that isn't at the top. It's getting fixed this upcoming season though so don't sweat it.
What many don't understand that the people you should be mad at is Kabam, not the sandbaggers. They are the ones who decided to put everyone in Bronze 3 with a win gaining 1 point.
I'm not mad at any sandbaggers for sandbagging, bad gamed design isn't their fault. However, if you sandbag and you talk as if it was something completely fair that shouldn't be removed from the game then that's a different situation
I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches and everyone should be able to match anyone else in their tier. The reason people, including yourself, sandbag is to manipulate the matchmaking system to gain easier matches. I'd prefer a system where that wasn't possible at all so there would be no advantage to sandbagging.
@Ironman3000 There should always be fair matches in the sense that a player should always have a chance to win against another player
Where did I say that people shouldn't have a chance to win matches?
@Ironman3000 "I've been pretty clear that there should be no "fair" matches"
I’ll say this, I hate the matchmaking. But I find it pretty ironic every says they either matched even accounts or much larger. Where are those large accounts who faced you? Are they bots as not a single summoner acknowledges getting easier matches here and there.
I’ve matched larger, similar and weaker rosters last season, without ever sandbagging. Won my fair share, even against stronger accounts by drafting better or playing better. Actually made it to Glad circuit. And am far from a whale. I can’t be the only one
Comments
You’d need to give them more rewards via another Avenue, but then the ones below us would double dip. It’s a lot to do and kabam will break the game as usual by this method.
You arent competing against uc and cav for rewards you are still competing against paragons for rewards because theres no way a uc or cav would place anywhere near you assuming you are putting in the work uc and cav would simpily get less rewards than you would
Yes the "little guy" Can win if the big guy dosent put in any effort but i think its safe to say most people in bg's are trying to win their matches and it would be impossible for a smaller account to rank up if they're constantly matching bigger accounts and the only way to rank is to win 3-5 matches in a row
I think a Better system would be certain point thresholds is a new rank so between 300 points would get you gold 3 and once you get to like 400 you would rank to gold 2 and you have the chance to gain point even if you lost when you enter a match you start with negative points and if you win 1 round maybe you get enough points so that you are now at 0 and if you win the next match you's get like 40 points or something if you win 1 lose 2 then you'd end at like 15-20 points depending on how well you did and if you lose 2 then your either still in the negatives or a very low positive points.
But, either way, no one can read my posts, so I don't know why I even bother writting my opinion here. @Kabam Jax
I'm not getting easier matches though. I became uncollected two weeks ago (that's like the fifth time I've mentioned this to you) so I don't really get any skill or roster advantages by using only my 4*
The reason why probably the vast majority of people find 6/2 deck stacking to be unfair is not because it is unfair to use 6s and 2s. The reason it is considered unfair is because such a player has no intention of using the 2s. If they actually had to consistently use them, I think people wouldn't find the practice to be as unfair as most do. The 2s are there to manipulate the match system into seeing the deck as weaker, while they actually only use the stronger champs. Statistically speaking, if they do it right they can make the odds of actually pulling and using those champs acceptably low (you only need four out of seven champs to be top champs to have a huge advantage, because if you win the first two fights you don't need to use the rest).
Using a deck of all 4s is debatable. I used two decks in season two: a full strength deck and an all 5/50 deck. In my opinion, an all 5/50 deck is a fair deck, because all of those champs are intended to be used. The deck isn't presenting an artificial strength. It matches against other decks of equal or higher strength.
The idea that the deck is fair but the *player* behind it is unfair, because I have more experience and skill than most players using such decks, seems nonsensical to me. Of course there are many players I would have a lot more skill and experience than. But there are a lot of players that have far more skill than me. Is it unfair when I match against them? To me, this is all or nothing. If I have an unfair advantage when I match against a player of lesser skill, I have an unfair disadvantage when I match against a player of superior skill.
In any case, this is also a completely moot complaint. In season two if you used a 4* 5/50 deck, the probability of running into an inexperienced player with a weak roster of 4* champs was practically zero. In all the matches I ran with the 5/50 deck, I ran into maybe two of those in Bronze 3. Outside of B3, I ran into no such player. Some of the players were 2* decks. Some of the players were likely weaker players, but they were not using decks of 4* champs. Because of how rosters get built, they were using decks with a mix of 4* and 5* champs, and the 5/50 deck was always at a disadvantage. I do not recall ever running into another deck of all 5/50s or weaker.
Essentially, no one actually has a roster full of 5/50s and zero 5* r3s and r4s. That just never happens in reality. Anyone with a lot of 5/50s also has at least a few 5* r3 or higher. And those higher champs tend, on average, to offer a slight to significant material advantage. In fact, my Cavalier alt that is *forced* to use a deck with a mix of 6* and 5* and 4* champs (because that's what it actually has as its strongest possible deck configuration) actually had a much easier time winning in season two. I had a 70% win percentage with that account, because that account *did* often match against weaker decks. That sort of "organic" mix of champions was far stronger than an artificially constructed deck of 4* only champs by a significant margin.
From what I've seen on it when tested, it's use at lower ranks of the ladder causes the most level disparity and it evens out at higher ranks for pool strength. As you pointed out, higher up its common for thronebreakers with like 0-1 r4 6s to match with paragons with 5 or 6 of them. Add to the fact that nearly everyone who can play the mode is inundated with the same champs that a ban has to be used on, and the mode diversity and strategy suffers. The accuracy of champ power entering the match ends up being even.
In most deck building card games, being able to increase your draw power is king. So if I match up against someone with 2s in their deck and we both end up with champs at the 11-12 k mark thruout at the end of it, the match still feels even - as long as it's someone who can pinch their upper pool with in bans. That person is taking the risk of hurting their draw power and allowing more counter options; they have to add quite a few for the impact to be meaningful on matchmaking. The matchmaking is still randomized vs true manipulation, like the big dawgs trying to match against specific players by queuing up at the same time.
The solutions addressed above would curb the issue by making much riskier to try to do. Players would have proved they have the skill to belong in their rank before it's use and it increases the risk of trying to use it with a wider ban pool. Heck, while at it, put a cap on the number of reshuffles a person gets and make it so you can only earn more by completing certain objectives or something. Or reduce the number of selection choices a player gets per round. It's supposed to be a strategic tool but if a person can buy and use every match that seems much less fair imo.
Kabam stated they implemented fixes to their matchmaking to make it more balanced. I bet with a smaller pool of users due to a rank cap, they could add deck criteria to match players based on number of stars under certain rank as a condition and match similar decks together more frequently, but alas cannot say for certain without knowing the criteria that goes into it currently.
2. Of course I was losing with my top deck (and by top deck I mean throwing in my six rank 4 5* I have which isn't even that much of a difference), I kept getting matched with people like you who actually sandbag, a word you clearly don't know the meaning of.
I’ve matched larger, similar and weaker rosters last season, without ever sandbagging. Won my fair share, even against stronger accounts by drafting better or playing better. Actually made it to Glad circuit. And am far from a whale. I can’t be the only one