Is BG matchmaking encouraging you to avoid increasing prestige?

GroundedWisdom

No, doing rankups and sig as normal

DNA3000 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Define easier.

If I had to guess, I would guess I fought at least 200 matches. Maybe more. I ended up in P2. There are Uncollected players that reached GT in about a hundred matches.

That's easier.

GroundedWisdom said:

Ideally, you should have progress accelerate at the beginning, level out and slow down at the top. Best example I can give for this is Diablo 3. The higher you go, the more Exp it takes to level up.

That comparison does not work here. In Diablo, and in the typical MMO, and even here, *progress* is managed that way. The higher you go, the harder it is to get higher. But *rewards* are not. In no game do you get the best rewards at the beginning, and worse rewards at the end. Nobody gets the top raid gear for killing a million rats in World of Warcraft, even if killing a million rats is just as hard for a new player as defeating the top raid boss is for veteran players. It literally doesn't matter.

Although we call moving through the tracks "progress" that's not really the same thing. Here, track progress is really just unlocking more rewards. It is no more progress than getting tomorrows rewards in the calendar is progress. It isn't game account progress. Stronger roster accounts get to do higher tier AQ maps and as a result get more rewards. This is entirely non-controversial. Stronger roster accounts generally win more wars and end up in higher war tiers, where they match against stronger opponents but also get more season points. This is also considered entirely normal. But when Paragon accounts have to fight the equivalent of tier 1 battleground matches and end up with Bronze caliber season rewards, and that isn't because of a catastrophic failure of participation or lack of skill, that's not the same thing as a progress ladder effect.

I believe any professional game designer would be embarrassed to claim before an audience of their peers that their veteran players were falling behind their lower progress players in a straight up competitive game mode because that's how game progress worked in their game. That's just not supposed to happen. And I dare any professional game designer of any game to claim it should.

We also have the issue of people so locked in their placement and Rewards that they feel entitled to them, and barely anyone advances past a certain point. So I would argue it's not as productive as you think. Just satiating to those who are at the top.

Chatterofforums

Yes, am now avoiding ranking up or using sig on on prestige champs

QuikPik said:

Let's say it takes a paragon players twice as many matches as a UC player to make it to GC. How is it fair that paragon players have to spend twice as much time and energy/elder marks to get to the same destination?

This right here. Well said and this is exactly a point to be made. Personally it took me probably close to three as much energy/elder marks to make to to GC this season compared to the previous ones. Meanwhile, I join GC just to see a ton of 5k-9k prestige players just hanging out in GC for weeks (meaning way less energy and elder marks than me) before me.

DNA3000

GroundedWisdom said:

DNA3000 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Define easier.

If I had to guess, I would guess I fought at least 200 matches. Maybe more. I ended up in P2. There are Uncollected players that reached GT in about a hundred matches.

That's easier.

GroundedWisdom said:

Ideally, you should have progress accelerate at the beginning, level out and slow down at the top. Best example I can give for this is Diablo 3. The higher you go, the more Exp it takes to level up.

That comparison does not work here. In Diablo, and in the typical MMO, and even here, *progress* is managed that way. The higher you go, the harder it is to get higher. But *rewards* are not. In no game do you get the best rewards at the beginning, and worse rewards at the end. Nobody gets the top raid gear for killing a million rats in World of Warcraft, even if killing a million rats is just as hard for a new player as defeating the top raid boss is for veteran players. It literally doesn't matter.

Although we call moving through the tracks "progress" that's not really the same thing. Here, track progress is really just unlocking more rewards. It is no more progress than getting tomorrows rewards in the calendar is progress. It isn't game account progress. Stronger roster accounts get to do higher tier AQ maps and as a result get more rewards. This is entirely non-controversial. Stronger roster accounts generally win more wars and end up in higher war tiers, where they match against stronger opponents but also get more season points. This is also considered entirely normal. But when Paragon accounts have to fight the equivalent of tier 1 battleground matches and end up with Bronze caliber season rewards, and that isn't because of a catastrophic failure of participation or lack of skill, that's not the same thing as a progress ladder effect.

I believe any professional game designer would be embarrassed to claim before an audience of their peers that their veteran players were falling behind their lower progress players in a straight up competitive game mode because that's how game progress worked in their game. That's just not supposed to happen. And I dare any professional game designer of any game to claim it should.

We also have the issue of people so locked in their placement and Rewards that they feel entitled to them, and barely anyone advances past a certain point. So I would argue it's not as productive as you think. Just satiating to those who are at the top.

How ironic.

The people actually at "the top" in Battlegrounds are battling it out in GT, and they are doing so using ELO matching. If you're a low progress account and attempting to challenge them, you can't hide behind your roster size. The game ignores roster size in GT. Those players have absolutely nothing to worry about or concern themselves about with regard to VT matching.

The strong roster players that aren't reaching GT but currently near the top of VT also have nothing to worry about. They are getting there through the current competition, which is *harder* than any likely competition pool they would likely face in any altered match system.

There's only one group of Battleground players that can possible feel "entitled" to rewards because of their currently "locked in their placement." And that would be low roster players currently catapulting into Diamond and above. No other group of players a) is placing high and b) would place lower if things changed.

So yeah, maybe we should address those problems you have highlighted.

GroundedWisdom

No, doing rankups and sig as normal

That's not addressing anything I highlighted.
I said people earned the Rewards they did in the current system. Full stop.
I'm not arguing for a continuation of the system as it is, and no one is claiming entitlement to Rewards that are undeserving. The argument is that people who progressed don't deserve their Rewards. This I disagree with. They earned them, they deserve them. I can't argue with that any more than I can argue with a 20 year-old millionaire having more money than myself.
When you're talking about how such a well-balanced and fair system is like War for example, I'd argue that it's not helping anyone progress, besides the upper crust. That's not just opinion. That's experience. So the idea that the higher you go the more Rewards you earn is not always an example of helping progress. That directly relates to my statement about progress slowing down. Yet we have a system that does the opposite. Consequently, the only people who call it a good system are the ones benefitting. The rest range from playing now and then to not caring at all, really. Not because they're not putting enough effort in. Because their BEST effort in that system doesn't progress their Accounts enough to care.

DNA3000

GroundedWisdom said:

That's not addressing anything I highlighted.
I said people earned the Rewards they did in the current system. Full stop.

They only earned those rewards relative to other players if they had the same requirements as other players. You're arguing that they "put in the work." You refuse to acknowledge that they aren't being asked to actually do the same stuff. You close your eyes and say if they fight a match and I fight a match, its all equal. If they are fighting my grandmother and I'm fighting MSD, a match is a match. They won, I lost, fair is fair. Hey, maybe they are only as good as my grandmother, so they should be graded on a curve.

If I beat MSD, I don't care if they beat my grandmother with one hand tied behind their back while juggling bowling pins. They did not earn the same rewards I did, even though they did one match and I did one match. The reason you think I'm not addressing your points is because 90% of my arguments, along with 80% of the game itself, is invisible to you.

L1zardW1zard

Yes, am now avoiding ranking up or using sig on on prestige champs

I agree with mostly everything that's been said here but there's one thing I do want to point out. Yes, we aren't facing Paragons to make it to the high leagues which is obviously unfair and will probably get fixed to some extent before next season starts (I hope) but the "they're getting easy fights and barely putting in the work" argument most people have been using on this thread is not true either.
Yes, we absolutely had it easier than Paragon players which is dumb but me personally, I had to face a ton of TB players with r3 6* to make it to Vibranium (I barely have 7 r5 5*). While a fight like that one would be extremely easy for a Paragon player, it won't be that easy for an UC player.

With that being said though, I really do hope they just give us completely random matchmaking. Don't see why they refuse to do this, it's the healthiest thing for this game mode.

GroundedWisdom

No, doing rankups and sig as normal

DNA3000 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

That's not addressing anything I highlighted.
I said people earned the Rewards they did in the current system. Full stop.

They only earned those rewards relative to other players if they had the same requirements as other players. You're arguing that they "put in the work." You refuse to acknowledge that they aren't being asked to actually do the same stuff. You close your eyes and say if they fight a match and I fight a match, its all equal. If they are fighting my grandmother and I'm fighting MSD, a match is a match. They won, I lost, fair is fair. Hey, maybe they are only as good as my grandmother, so they should be graded on a curve.

If I beat MSD, I don't care if they beat my grandmother with one hand tied behind their back while juggling bowling pins. They did not earn the same rewards I did, even though they did one match and I did one match. The reason you think I'm not addressing your points is because 90% of my arguments, along with 80% of the game itself, is invisible to you.

They had the same requirements. Same Nodes, same time within a Fight, same challenge. Yes, you could argue their opponents are tougher. So is their own Roster. There's a proportion that is missing in that assessment.

GroundedWisdom

No, doing rankups and sig as normal

I'm not saying they're exactly the same. I get what you're saying. At the base, everyone is competing in the same competition, with the same scoring, and doing the best they can to score as many Points as they can. The Nodes are no different for a Paragon, and perhaps that's another aspect. Having everyone in the same classification is leading to issues. I'm not totally irreverent. I'm just speaking matter-of-factly. The competition is the same for anyone.