3 points: 1) I think the "Sandbagging" makes for better game design 2) there is a better way to end sandbagging than what is listed in the poll 3) most players who are sandbagging are not optimizing their sandbagging
1) I think the Sandbagging makes for better game design =============================================
Players can just focus on developing and bringing their top Champions, and then fill out extra slots with the 1-3 stars filler Champs.
This lets players develop and bring a much smaller roster to compete. They don't have to worry about developing 30+ Champions to player and enjoy Battlegrounds.
2) there is a better way to end sandbagging than what is listed in the poll ==========================================================
I don't really want to comment on this. Because I am not interested in Sandbagging being removed.
There are a ton of you people in the community. Surely you can figure this out yourselves.
3) most players who are sandbagging are not optimizing their sandbagging ============================================================
I don't really want to comment on this.
There are a ton of you people in the community. Surely you can figure this out yourselves. People can start just by making a thread on this for people to suggest their strategies and thoughts.
If you are going to do a poll on this, There should really be an option for matchmaking based on BG tier/league only. It's one of the end results a lot of people want even if you dont
So you're telling me matchmaking should should be based ONLY on the rank you are at? Well then good luck with your biggest champ a 4star r4 iron patriot against my r4 sig200 Weapon X . Should be fair right? since we both are at bronze 3
My opinion doesn't really matter, it's one of the main proposals people have been suggesting on all these matchmaking posts, if you are doing a poll it should have all the possible outcomes and not be biased to your wishes.
I didnt include that option because it makes no sense. Think about bro, if matchmaking was based on rank only that would mean all the bigger accounts instantly have a HUGH advantage. No matter how skilled you are if the opponents roster is 10x better than yours you cant win. Its going to be shitshow and only whales will be playing bgs at that point
I’d disagree and say it makes perfect sense. If you want (as an example) gold 1 rewards, you should be potentially coming across anyone else wanting gold 1 rewards.
If you are going to do a poll on this, There should really be an option for matchmaking based on BG tier/league only. It's one of the end results a lot of people want even if you dont
So you're telling me matchmaking should should be based ONLY on the rank you are at? Well then good luck with your biggest champ a 4star r4 iron patriot against my r4 sig200 Weapon X . Should be fair right? since we both are at bronze 3
My opinion doesn't really matter, it's one of the main proposals people have been suggesting on all these matchmaking posts, if you are doing a poll it should have all the possible outcomes and not be biased to your wishes.
I didnt include that option because it makes no sense. Think about bro, if matchmaking was based on rank only that would mean all the bigger accounts instantly have a HUGH advantage. No matter how skilled you are if the opponents roster is 10x better than yours you cant win. Its going to be shitshow and only whales will be playing bgs at that point
I’d disagree and say it makes perfect sense. If you want (as an example) gold 1 rewards, you should be potentially coming across anyone else wanting gold 1 rewards.
If you are going to do a poll on this, There should really be an option for matchmaking based on BG tier/league only. It's one of the end results a lot of people want even if you dont
So you're telling me matchmaking should should be based ONLY on the rank you are at? Well then good luck with your biggest champ a 4star r4 iron patriot against my r4 sig200 Weapon X . Should be fair right? since we both are at bronze 3
Sometimes you’ve got to wait a week before grinding sandbaggers should be banned but it should also be rank based matchmaking we can’t always have fair matches I’ve faced multiple people with double my roster but rank based would be pretty fair since it be like aw I face people in my tier till I’m ready to move up a tier that puts you at the rank you deserve not prestige or deck based matchmaking
I trust players realise sandbagging can also work against you. It’s funny when the opponent has to choose 1/2 champs from nothing but 2*
In my experience, this is extremely rare. When I face Sandbaggers, the majority of the time they never have to pick a 1/2*, and a few times they have to pick just one 1/2*, and once I saw them have to pick two 1/2* champions.
Sure, Sandbagging can work against you, but clearly, it works the majority of the time otherwise people wouldn't be doing it.
Sandbagging is only a viable option if the weakest champs aren't likely to be used. Take away that assurance, and people might think twice about trying it.
I wouldn't mind seeing us be required to actually use some of the lowest rated champs in our deck. Off the cuff, maybe two could come from the bottom 5, and one more from the bottom 10. The rest would still come from anywhere in the deck, including what remains of the bottom, just as it is now.
There should be shorter seasons with divisions with the reward distribution changes to reflect positions. Top 10% get promoted, bottom 10% relegated. This would be remove the majority of the newer players being scared of facing whales and the paragons from facing the very skilled/stacked players.
The best rewards would go to the best rosters and players and everyone else would get rewarded based on their placement
None of those is what they should do. There should be no “matchmaking”. Everyone is competing for the same rewards, so you should only be matched against those in your tier. That is the fairest way. The people with the most skill or best roster will be at the top and then everyone else will fall somewhere in between.
What did kabam did for those picking 2 star champs in their rosters together with 6* rank4 champs. Perhaps they can shred a light on what punishment they will get for picking 2stars in their existing deck.
I have suggestion on those picking lower star champs to "lower" their prestige deck. However this will need some thought about it in term of implementation. By picking 1 lower star champ, the whole deck of champ power will be lowered by 10%. Picking 2nd star = 20%. Etc etc.
Comments
You pick 2*/3*s... you play with 2*s and 3*s. Have fun! 🤪
1) I think the "Sandbagging" makes for better game design
2) there is a better way to end sandbagging than what is listed in the poll
3) most players who are sandbagging are not optimizing their sandbagging
1) I think the Sandbagging makes for better game design
=============================================
Players can just focus on developing and bringing their top Champions, and then fill out extra slots with the 1-3 stars filler Champs.
This lets players develop and bring a much smaller roster to compete. They don't have to worry about developing 30+ Champions to player and enjoy Battlegrounds.
2) there is a better way to end sandbagging than what is listed in the poll
==========================================================
I don't really want to comment on this. Because I am not interested in Sandbagging being removed.
There are a ton of you people in the community. Surely you can figure this out yourselves.
3) most players who are sandbagging are not optimizing their sandbagging
============================================================
I don't really want to comment on this.
There are a ton of you people in the community. Surely you can figure this out yourselves. People can start just by making a thread on this for people to suggest their strategies and thoughts.
If you want (as an example) gold 1 rewards, you should be potentially coming across anyone else wanting gold 1 rewards.
It’s funny when the opponent has to choose 1/2 champs from nothing but 2*
Sure, Sandbagging can work against you, but clearly, it works the majority of the time otherwise people wouldn't be doing it.
I wouldn't mind seeing us be required to actually use some of the lowest rated champs in our deck. Off the cuff, maybe two could come from the bottom 5, and one more from the bottom 10. The rest would still come from anywhere in the deck, including what remains of the bottom, just as it is now.
There should be shorter seasons with divisions with the reward distribution changes to reflect positions. Top 10% get promoted, bottom 10% relegated. This would be remove the majority of the newer players being scared of facing whales and the paragons from facing the very skilled/stacked players.
The best rewards would go to the best rosters and players and everyone else would get rewarded based on their placement
Perhaps they can shred a light on what punishment they will get for picking 2stars in their existing deck.
I have suggestion on those picking lower star champs to "lower" their prestige deck.
However this will need some thought about it in term of implementation.
By picking 1 lower star champ, the whole deck of champ power will be lowered by 10%.
Picking 2nd star = 20%. Etc etc.