Anything that disincentivizes rankups and roster growth/improvement is objectively wrong and bad game design. Period.
I would prefer staggered starts based on progression (bronze UC, silver Cav, and gold TB/P) with lower level rank rewards being mailed at season kickoff. That means if you’re paragon and start right away, it’s all TB/P players. If you wait or start slow, some cavs or UCs might sneak in.
Alternatively, matchmaking should be truly random strictly by tier (bronze etc). Just like war, roster and skill determine the outcome. Great skill CAN overcome a weaker roster.
Finally, as I keep begging, reduce the loss penalty. Double the medals needed to advance (or 2->3, 3->5) and do two for a win, minus one for a loss.
A corral start (or wave start) is an interesting concept to try with BGs—if that’s what you mean. But I’m unsure how the automatic prize grants to larger accounts would be received by some of the players who want *equitable* chances at prizes.
Dr. Zola
For anyone that's getting to GC within the first week or even two weeks every season, those early Bronze-Gold tokens are basically auto grants already. All starting those people at the beginning each season does is make it even harder for people that struggle in the beginning or even all season.
I think OP is saying basically that—clear out the lower levels so smaller accounts can have a go at each other in Bronze/Silver from the outset since Bronze/Silver are almost auto-wins for larger accounts in the first place. It certainly isn’t unheard of—for example, marathons often don’t make world class runners start behind the packs of grandma running clubs and first-timers.
But, as you can see from the responses, I wasn’t far off with how I expected the @TyEdge suggestion to be received. In a word: hysteria.
Parsing through all the posturing and evolving arguments, the people who claim to represent the *MCoC Little Guy* want a separate track in BGs up to a certain point or for a certain time period each season so they (a) don’t feel demoralized, (b) get good prizes or (c) some combination of (a) and (b).
I would suspect most are receptive to this concept to a limited extent. Call it *fairness*, *equity* or outright charity—it doesn’t matter to me.
If weaker players want a week or two to scramble against each other before they face open competition, I doubt it will make a significant difference in how things ultimately wind up. It may even be a boon to larger accounts who wait/can’t start immediately to catch those weaker players on the way up.
It's not hysteria. It's hypocrisy. "We already have an advantage, so let's add an advantage, and another advantage because they might get an advantage." Dear Lord.
It's not hysteria. It's hypocrisy. "We already have an advantage, so let's add an advantage, and another advantage because they might get an advantage." Dear Lord.
Don't really think you're the one that should be throwing hypocrisy around with your absolutely laughable definition of "fairness"
It's not hysteria. It's hypocrisy. "We already have an advantage, so let's add an advantage, and another advantage because they might get an advantage." Dear Lord.
Don't really think you're the one that should be throwing hypocrisy around with your absolutely laughable definition of "fairness"
Giving people a reasonable variation in Matches at the beginning of the competition is not laughable. What's laughable is pitting a Paragon against an UC Player at the starting line and calling it fair. I don't care who feels entitled to do it.
It's not hysteria. It's hypocrisy. "We already have an advantage, so let's add an advantage, and another advantage because they might get an advantage." Dear Lord.
Don't really think you're the one that should be throwing hypocrisy around with your absolutely laughable definition of "fairness"
There is a point at which (a) “don’t crush the little guy” takes a turn into “give me free stuff” territory and (b) relevant points devolve into unintentional satire.
Let this argument CEASE. I am tired of seeing the same disagreements over the same topic. It is getting old. I have been noticing this every single season of what you call "BGs". How the creators of this game made BGs is how it is going to be. A saying I found on this alien device is "It is what it is". There may not be anything you could do to change that. So stop it with these witless arguments over the same thing. It will get you nowhere.
Excuse me @GroundedWisdom, I don't have the time or patience to find the numerous times you've commented to the effect of "It's not about rewards" & "I'm happy with the few thousand shards I get"....
Why, oh why, are you opposed to this? It gives you what you want, which is your comical definition of fairness and the other side gets rewards that, let's be honest, we would have gotten anyway, this system just proposes giving them immediately in exchange for clearing the paths for the lower accounts for a bit.
In the modern world, that's called a compromise. Seems like a pretty reasonable one to me.
Let this argument CEASE. I am tired of seeing the same disagreements over the same topic. It is getting old. I have been noticing this every single season of what you call "BGs". How the creators of this game made BGs is how it is going to be. A saying I found on this alien device is "It is what it is". There may not be anything you could do to change that. So stop it with these witless arguments over the same thing. It will get you nowhere.
Thus speaks, The Watcher!
This new silly little skit where your pretending to be someone your not that you recently started is getting old very quickly. Based on your recent dialog, I can't help but assume your an experienced forums user with a different account, which I'll assume was banned or you just randomly decided it would be funny for your recent nonsense responses of pretending to be an alien.
I don't see how anyone can find it even remotely entertaining.
Let this argument CEASE. I am tired of seeing the same disagreements over the same topic. It is getting old. I have been noticing this every single season of what you call "BGs". How the creators of this game made BGs is how it is going to be. A saying I found on this alien device is "It is what it is". There may not be anything you could do to change that. So stop it with these witless arguments over the same thing. It will get you nowhere.
Thus speaks, The Watcher!
This new silly little skit where your pretending to be someone your not that you recently started is getting old very quickly. Based on your recent dialog, I can't help but assume your an experienced forums user with a different account, which I'll assume was banned or you just randomly decided it would be funny for your recent nonsense responses of pretending to be an alien.
I don't see how anyone can find it even remotely entertaining.
Why can't I have a little fun. The watcher is my favorite being in the marvel universe. I may not be him but that does not mater. I just enjoy his character and the wise words that he says. Plus who said I am experienced with forums or had my forums account banned. This is new to me and i just made this account. Also why do you always have this negative energy towards people on forums. I have seen you in some on forum discussions.
Let this argument CEASE. I am tired of seeing the same disagreements over the same topic. It is getting old. I have been noticing this every single season of what you call "BGs". How the creators of this game made BGs is how it is going to be. A saying I found on this alien device is "It is what it is". There may not be anything you could do to change that. So stop it with these witless arguments over the same thing. It will get you nowhere.
Thus speaks, The Watcher!
This new silly little skit where your pretending to be someone your not that you recently started is getting old very quickly. Based on your recent dialog, I can't help but assume your an experienced forums user with a different account, which I'll assume was banned or you just randomly decided it would be funny for your recent nonsense responses of pretending to be an alien.
I don't see how anyone can find it even remotely entertaining.
If you didn't take things so seriously for once you'd be happier person, stop being so grumpy 🤣
Excuse me @GroundedWisdom, I don't have the time or patience to find the numerous times you've commented to the effect of "It's not about rewards" & "I'm happy with the few thousand shards I get"....
Why, oh why, are you opposed to this? It gives you what you want, which is your comical definition of fairness and the other side gets rewards that, let's be honest, we would have gotten anyway, this system just proposes giving them immediately in exchange for clearing the paths for the lower accounts for a bit.
In the modern world, that's called a compromise. Seems like a pretty reasonable one to me.
What I want has nothing to do with my own Account. I know it's a novel concept for someone to care about an issue without getting something out of it, but that's the stance.
Let this argument CEASE. I am tired of seeing the same disagreements over the same topic. It is getting old. I have been noticing this every single season of what you call "BGs". How the creators of this game made BGs is how it is going to be. A saying I found on this alien device is "It is what it is". There may not be anything you could do to change that. So stop it with these witless arguments over the same thing. It will get you nowhere.
Thus speaks, The Watcher!
This new silly little skit where your pretending to be someone your not that you recently started is getting old very quickly. Based on your recent dialog, I can't help but assume your an experienced forums user with a different account, which I'll assume was banned or you just randomly decided it would be funny for your recent nonsense responses of pretending to be an alien.
I don't see how anyone can find it even remotely entertaining.
If you didn't take things so seriously for once you'd be happier person, stop being so grumpy 🤣
Anything that disincentivizes rankups and roster growth/improvement is objectively wrong and bad game design. Period.
I would prefer staggered starts based on progression (bronze UC, silver Cav, and gold TB/P) with lower level rank rewards being mailed at season kickoff. That means if you’re paragon and start right away, it’s all TB/P players. If you wait or start slow, some cavs or UCs might sneak in.
Alternatively, matchmaking should be truly random strictly by tier (bronze etc). Just like war, roster and skill determine the outcome. Great skill CAN overcome a weaker roster.
Finally, as I keep begging, reduce the loss penalty. Double the medals needed to advance (or 2->3, 3->5) and do two for a win, minus one for a loss.
A corral start (or wave start) is an interesting concept to try with BGs—if that’s what you mean. But I’m unsure how the automatic prize grants to larger accounts would be received by some of the players who want *equitable* chances at prizes.
Dr. Zola
I have a few thoughts here.
1) bronze and silver award just under 10,000 total tokens iirc. Even at paragon, that’s not earth shattering. Most of these accounts bank that quickly anyway. If that doesn’t feel right, incorporate these rewards into solo milestones or something.
2) it incentivizes story progression for newer players. They shouldn’t be charging into battlegrounds repeatedly until they hit a talent/roster wall. They should be getting cavalier and building their roster.
3) removing paragon and TB players from the bronze and silver pools will make it easier for uncollected players to fight their way out. And again, if that’s too much, start TB/P in silver 3 and UC/Cav in bronze. Many players sit out early days of the season because of the number of grinders rushing to GC dealing out beatdowns.
My understanding is that although an uncollected player and me as a Paragon player may get the same amount of Trophy Tokens, what’s available in the BG store and at what cost is very different. So they aren’t exactly the same rewards. I have a degree of sympathy that the first few rounds of Victory Track should keep us separate. But by the time we’re in gold it should just a be pool of all players and a random assignment. My happen Kabam. It’s the will of the people. Or at the very least the will or Me. The will of One. That’s enough feedback for a change isn’t it???
Conveniently giving people an automatic boost up the ladder with Rewards just for starting. How altruistic.
You do realize that smaller accounts would then only be fighting smaller accounts and have more fairness in their early matches. Do you prefer the current system where a Cav or UC could match a paragon in bronze?
A staggered start would be much more fair so the biggest accounts aren't being matched against smaller accounts right at the beginning of every season crushing the morale of the smaller accounts.
Conveniently giving people an automatic boost up the ladder with Rewards just for starting. How altruistic.
You do realize that smaller accounts would then only be fighting smaller accounts and have more fairness in their early matches. Do you prefer the current system where a Cav or UC could match a paragon in bronze?
A staggered start would be much more fair so the biggest accounts aren't being matched against smaller accounts right at the beginning of every season crushing the morale of the smaller accounts.
What I prefer is what I suggested. They're also not gaining any more advantage than anyone else in those first few Tiers because people are matching the same way. What you're saying is, the only alternatives are to decimate them in Bronze, or give a boost to everyone else from the get-go. It honestly astounds me how people will try and justify any advantage they can. They are not getting an advantage from having relatively-even Matches starting out. No one is. That's the point.
Anything that disincentivizes rankups and roster growth/improvement is objectively wrong and bad game design. Period.
I would prefer staggered starts based on progression (bronze UC, silver Cav, and gold TB/P) with lower level rank rewards being mailed at season kickoff. That means if you’re paragon and start right away, it’s all TB/P players. If you wait or start slow, some cavs or UCs might sneak in.
Alternatively, matchmaking should be truly random strictly by tier (bronze etc). Just like war, roster and skill determine the outcome. Great skill CAN overcome a weaker roster.
Finally, as I keep begging, reduce the loss penalty. Double the medals needed to advance (or 2->3, 3->5) and do two for a win, minus one for a loss.
A corral start (or wave start) is an interesting concept to try with BGs—if that’s what you mean. But I’m unsure how the automatic prize grants to larger accounts would be received by some of the players who want *equitable* chances at prizes.
Dr. Zola
I have a few thoughts here.
1) bronze and silver award just under 10,000 total tokens iirc. Even at paragon, that’s not earth shattering. Most of these accounts bank that quickly anyway. If that doesn’t feel right, incorporate these rewards into solo milestones or something.
2) it incentivizes story progression for newer players. They shouldn’t be charging into battlegrounds repeatedly until they hit a talent/roster wall. They should be getting cavalier and building their roster.
3) removing paragon and TB players from the bronze and silver pools will make it easier for uncollected players to fight their way out. And again, if that’s too much, start TB/P in silver 3 and UC/Cav in bronze. Many players sit out early days of the season because of the number of grinders rushing to GC dealing out beatdowns.
Now this is something I can agree with and I believe would be one of the best solutions. Start each player on a different league based on their progression and of course random matchmaking from the get go, the lower accounts don't have to face big accounts from the get go and everyone can enjoy battlegrounds. That was really my only concern with random matchmaking for everyone regardless of league.
Anything that disincentivizes rankups and roster growth/improvement is objectively wrong and bad game design. Period.
I would prefer staggered starts based on progression (bronze UC, silver Cav, and gold TB/P) with lower level rank rewards being mailed at season kickoff. That means if you’re paragon and start right away, it’s all TB/P players. If you wait or start slow, some cavs or UCs might sneak in.
Alternatively, matchmaking should be truly random strictly by tier (bronze etc). Just like war, roster and skill determine the outcome. Great skill CAN overcome a weaker roster.
Finally, as I keep begging, reduce the loss penalty. Double the medals needed to advance (or 2->3, 3->5) and do two for a win, minus one for a loss.
A corral start (or wave start) is an interesting concept to try with BGs—if that’s what you mean. But I’m unsure how the automatic prize grants to larger accounts would be received by some of the players who want *equitable* chances at prizes.
Dr. Zola
I have a few thoughts here.
1) bronze and silver award just under 10,000 total tokens iirc. Even at paragon, that’s not earth shattering. Most of these accounts bank that quickly anyway. If that doesn’t feel right, incorporate these rewards into solo milestones or something.
2) it incentivizes story progression for newer players. They shouldn’t be charging into battlegrounds repeatedly until they hit a talent/roster wall. They should be getting cavalier and building their roster.
3) removing paragon and TB players from the bronze and silver pools will make it easier for uncollected players to fight their way out. And again, if that’s too much, start TB/P in silver 3 and UC/Cav in bronze. Many players sit out early days of the season because of the number of grinders rushing to GC dealing out beatdowns.
Now this is something I can agree with and I believe would be one of the best solutions. Start each player on a different league based on their progression and of course random matchmaking from the get go, the lower accounts don't have to face big accounts from the get go and everyone can enjoy battlegrounds. That was really my only concern with random matchmaking for everyone regardless of league.
Anything that disincentivizes rankups and roster growth/improvement is objectively wrong and bad game design. Period.
I would prefer staggered starts based on progression (bronze UC, silver Cav, and gold TB/P) with lower level rank rewards being mailed at season kickoff. That means if you’re paragon and start right away, it’s all TB/P players. If you wait or start slow, some cavs or UCs might sneak in.
Alternatively, matchmaking should be truly random strictly by tier (bronze etc). Just like war, roster and skill determine the outcome. Great skill CAN overcome a weaker roster.
Finally, as I keep begging, reduce the loss penalty. Double the medals needed to advance (or 2->3, 3->5) and do two for a win, minus one for a loss.
A corral start (or wave start) is an interesting concept to try with BGs—if that’s what you mean. But I’m unsure how the automatic prize grants to larger accounts would be received by some of the players who want *equitable* chances at prizes.
Dr. Zola
I have a few thoughts here.
1) bronze and silver award just under 10,000 total tokens iirc. Even at paragon, that’s not earth shattering. Most of these accounts bank that quickly anyway. If that doesn’t feel right, incorporate these rewards into solo milestones or something.
2) it incentivizes story progression for newer players. They shouldn’t be charging into battlegrounds repeatedly until they hit a talent/roster wall. They should be getting cavalier and building their roster.
3) removing paragon and TB players from the bronze and silver pools will make it easier for uncollected players to fight their way out. And again, if that’s too much, start TB/P in silver 3 and UC/Cav in bronze. Many players sit out early days of the season because of the number of grinders rushing to GC dealing out beatdowns.
Now this is something I can agree with and I believe would be one of the best solutions. Start each player on a different league based on their progression and of course random matchmaking from the get go, the lower accounts don't have to face big accounts from the get go and everyone can enjoy battlegrounds. That was really my only concern with random matchmaking for everyone regardless of league.
There are issues with that suggestion.
Yeah but I can get behind those issues personally. Not that it would be 100% fair but I would be able to play the game mode and get my rewards while the rest can climb up quicker so I can too, the faster Paragons and TB move up the faster I will move up too (assuming matchmaking was random). So no, I don't mind personally.
On paper, I can see how that could be considered a solution. In practical terms, it skews the results before the competition even starts. The suggestion was also accompanied by the suggestion that the Rewards for previous Brackets be included at the start. Which is preposterous to me. Essentially, it's the same as letting people pick them apart in Bronze. Same results. I would benefit myself at TB. However, I'm not looking to benefit at someone else's expense unless I beat them and earn my way up. If we were going to even go that route, you could just keep UC and Cav in the VT, and TB and Para in the GC. That unfortunately prevents people from playing smart and advancing. So why is that a problem? In practical terms, it stops anyone from advancing past a certain point. Naturally this happens when someone fights their way up and can't get past their limitations. Separating the Brackets based on Titles almost certainly predestines it. That makes it less of a competition and more of a combination of War and AQ.
Anything that disincentivizes rankups and roster growth/improvement is objectively wrong and bad game design. Period.
I would prefer staggered starts based on progression (bronze UC, silver Cav, and gold TB/P) with lower level rank rewards being mailed at season kickoff. That means if you’re paragon and start right away, it’s all TB/P players. If you wait or start slow, some cavs or UCs might sneak in.
Alternatively, matchmaking should be truly random strictly by tier (bronze etc). Just like war, roster and skill determine the outcome. Great skill CAN overcome a weaker roster.
Finally, as I keep begging, reduce the loss penalty. Double the medals needed to advance (or 2->3, 3->5) and do two for a win, minus one for a loss.
A corral start (or wave start) is an interesting concept to try with BGs—if that’s what you mean. But I’m unsure how the automatic prize grants to larger accounts would be received by some of the players who want *equitable* chances at prizes.
Dr. Zola
I have a few thoughts here.
1) bronze and silver award just under 10,000 total tokens iirc. Even at paragon, that’s not earth shattering. Most of these accounts bank that quickly anyway. If that doesn’t feel right, incorporate these rewards into solo milestones or something.
2) it incentivizes story progression for newer players. They shouldn’t be charging into battlegrounds repeatedly until they hit a talent/roster wall. They should be getting cavalier and building their roster.
3) removing paragon and TB players from the bronze and silver pools will make it easier for uncollected players to fight their way out. And again, if that’s too much, start TB/P in silver 3 and UC/Cav in bronze. Many players sit out early days of the season because of the number of grinders rushing to GC dealing out beatdowns.
Now this is something I can agree with and I believe would be one of the best solutions. Start each player on a different league based on their progression and of course random matchmaking from the get go, the lower accounts don't have to face big accounts from the get go and everyone can enjoy battlegrounds. That was really my only concern with random matchmaking for everyone regardless of league.
There are issues with that suggestion.
What issues there are? Many other games that I have played, use “kick starts” on competitive modes also, with huge success. But all the games I have played, have random matchmaking on competitive modes. Only tier or mode rating determines the matches. I’m personally not aware of any game, that manipulates matchmaking in competitive modes, in order to favour specific players/accounts. Kabam is more likely to be pioneering on this. Prestige matchmaking is unfair and opposed to any definition of competition. You can’t have a matchmaking that favours some competitors, and call it a competition, because it’s not.
What you call manipulating to favor Accounts is actually people starting out at the same start line. In fact, all the suggestions otherwise I've heard are favoritism.
What you call manipulating to favor Accounts is actually people starting out at the same start line. In fact, all the suggestions otherwise I've heard are favoritism.
So all the suggestions you’ve heard are favouritism, despite so many other games use them (including MCOC at AW), but Prestige matchmaking ain’t? 🤯🤯🤯
What you call manipulating to favor Accounts is actually people starting out at the same start line. In fact, all the suggestions otherwise I've heard are favoritism.
So all the suggestions you’ve heard are favouritism, despite so many other games use them (including MCOC at AW), but Prestige matchmaking ain’t? 🤯🤯🤯
Pretty sure I aired my grievances about War already. Have you been following?
What you call manipulating to favor Accounts is actually people starting out at the same start line. In fact, all the suggestions otherwise I've heard are favoritism.
So all the suggestions you’ve heard are favouritism, despite so many other games use them (including MCOC at AW), but Prestige matchmaking ain’t? 🤯🤯🤯
Pretty sure I aired my grievances about War already. Have you been following?
I can’t follow and read all posts from all users, I don’t have the time. Also, what’s wrong with AW? As it is set up, anyone gets what he is trying and is worth of. AW is nearly as fair as it gets. I give that to Kabam. It doesn’t favour anyone, in contrast with BGs 😠
What you call manipulating to favor Accounts is actually people starting out at the same start line. In fact, all the suggestions otherwise I've heard are favoritism.
So all the suggestions you’ve heard are favouritism, despite so many other games use them (including MCOC at AW), but Prestige matchmaking ain’t? 🤯🤯🤯
Pretty sure I aired my grievances about War already. Have you been following?
I can’t follow and read all posts from all users, I don’t have the time. Also, what’s wrong with AW? As it is set up, anyone gets what he is trying and is worth of. AW is nearly as fair as it gets. I give that to Kabam. It doesn’t favour anyone, in contrast with BGs 😠
I'm not reiterating here. You're free to use the Search Function with my name associated with War.
On paper, I can see how that could be considered a solution. In practical terms, it skews the results before the competition even starts. The suggestion was also accompanied by the suggestion that the Rewards for previous Brackets be included at the start. Which is preposterous to me. Essentially, it's the same as letting people pick them apart in Bronze. Same results. I would benefit myself at TB. However, I'm not looking to benefit at someone else's expense unless I beat them and earn my way up. If we were going to even go that route, you could just keep UC and Cav in the VT, and TB and Para in the GC. That unfortunately prevents people from playing smart and advancing. So why is that a problem? In practical terms, it stops anyone from advancing past a certain point. Naturally this happens when someone fights their way up and can't get past their limitations. Separating the Brackets based on Titles almost certainly predestines it. That makes it less of a competition and more of a combination of War and AQ.
I don't think it would skew any results, Paragons and TB should be at the top no matter what anyways. Eh not quite the same, one would make the first weeks of BGs a nightmare for lower accounts the other one is fixing that issue at the cost of well giving bigger accounts some rewards for free. I don't have an issue with that, like I said I just think anyone should be able to play BGs from the get go regardless of their progression level or title. Yes, and what's the argument there that there should be no limitations? Cause there should be, everyone should eventually hit a brick wall that's how competitive game modes work.
Anything that disincentivizes rankups and roster growth/improvement is objectively wrong and bad game design. Period.
I would prefer staggered starts based on progression (bronze UC, silver Cav, and gold TB/P) with lower level rank rewards being mailed at season kickoff. That means if you’re paragon and start right away, it’s all TB/P players. If you wait or start slow, some cavs or UCs might sneak in.
Alternatively, matchmaking should be truly random strictly by tier (bronze etc). Just like war, roster and skill determine the outcome. Great skill CAN overcome a weaker roster.
Finally, as I keep begging, reduce the loss penalty. Double the medals needed to advance (or 2->3, 3->5) and do two for a win, minus one for a loss.
That's even worse on the entitlement scale. Start everyone at a lower point, and automatic Rewards? Now THAT is wanting something for less.
I don't get how you can be against this. If this was implemented lower accounts wouldn't get demotivated or halted to progress (like you argued earlier in the thread) because there simply wouldn't be bigger accounts in bronze. They would only meet them at silver/gold.
Btw not start everyone at a lower point, start lower accounts at a lower point. As it is for me and I guess most paragons I never struggle in bronze/silver anyway.
Let me get this straight. The argument is that a system that provides even Matches at the start of the competition is unfair because they're getting "easy Rewards". Yet the suggestion is to a) make them work 3 times as hard because they not only have to fight their way up but also start lower than anyone else, and b) the people above them get free Rewards just for starting the competition. I'm against it because that's even more unreasonable than pecking them off in Bronze.
That's unfortunate, because your dogged pursuit of "fair matches" for lower progress players inevitably leads to solutions like this. You won't accept that your criteria for fairness is intrinsically unfair to a sizeable percentage of the players. And we are not talking about the 1% vs the 99% either. The match system is not just trivially offering benefits to UC players while hurting the top Paragons. In fact, the current match system is doing nothing to the top players. They are breezing through VT now, specifically *because* they are the top 1% and can defeat all the other Paragons and TBs.
The problems with the match system affect players across *all* progress tiers, just in more complex ways. For *any* prestige, there will be players near the top of that particular bracket of prestige and those at the bottom. Even for Cavs and TBs, there are players getting stuck because the match system doesn't factor actual match performance into its matches.
I think you think you're representing the silent majority against the elite 1%. But that's completely false. The 1% cannot be hurt in VT by any match making rules, because they can beat everyone at a high percentage rate. That means it doesn't matter who you match them against, they will win 70-90% of their matches and be in the Gladiator circuit by lunch. This problem trickles down from Paragons getting stuck to TBs getting stuck to even Cavs getting stuck. There is no silent majority that benefits from the system and would quit if it changed.
Although this is often portrayed and discussed as if this was Paragons against Uncollecteds, it isn't. That's just the most obvious and easy poster child of the problem. It actually potentially affects *anyone* at *any* progress tier, just to differing degrees. And that's why I'm not a big fan of prestige-focused remedies. Not all Paragons are being hurt and not all UCs are being helped. But the net effect is to punish one group of players over another. It just isn't trivially easy to describe that first group of players. Average skill Pargons with large rosters is one obvious subset of them. But they aren't the only ones.
Comments
But, as you can see from the responses, I wasn’t far off with how I expected the @TyEdge suggestion to be received. In a word: hysteria.
Parsing through all the posturing and evolving arguments, the people who claim to represent the *MCoC Little Guy* want a separate track in BGs up to a certain point or for a certain time period each season so they (a) don’t feel demoralized, (b) get good prizes or (c) some combination of (a) and (b).
I would suspect most are receptive to this concept to a limited extent. Call it *fairness*, *equity* or outright charity—it doesn’t matter to me.
If weaker players want a week or two to scramble against each other before they face open competition, I doubt it will make a significant difference in how things ultimately wind up. It may even be a boon to larger accounts who wait/can’t start immediately to catch those weaker players on the way up.
Dr. Zola
Dear Lord.
Dr. Zola
Thus speaks, The Watcher!
Why, oh why, are you opposed to this? It gives you what you want, which is your comical definition of fairness and the other side gets rewards that, let's be honest, we would have gotten anyway, this system just proposes giving them immediately in exchange for clearing the paths for the lower accounts for a bit.
In the modern world, that's called a compromise. Seems like a pretty reasonable one to me.
I don't see how anyone can find it even remotely entertaining.
1) bronze and silver award just under 10,000 total tokens iirc. Even at paragon, that’s not earth shattering. Most of these accounts bank that quickly anyway. If that doesn’t feel right, incorporate these rewards into solo milestones or something.
2) it incentivizes story progression for newer players. They shouldn’t be charging into battlegrounds repeatedly until they hit a talent/roster wall. They should be getting cavalier and building their roster.
3) removing paragon and TB players from the bronze and silver pools will make it easier for uncollected players to fight their way out. And again, if that’s too much, start TB/P in silver 3 and UC/Cav in bronze. Many players sit out early days of the season because of the number of grinders rushing to GC dealing out beatdowns.
A staggered start would be much more fair so the biggest accounts aren't being matched against smaller accounts right at the beginning of every season crushing the morale of the smaller accounts.
What you're saying is, the only alternatives are to decimate them in Bronze, or give a boost to everyone else from the get-go. It honestly astounds me how people will try and justify any advantage they can.
They are not getting an advantage from having relatively-even Matches starting out. No one is. That's the point.
Essentially, it's the same as letting people pick them apart in Bronze. Same results. I would benefit myself at TB. However, I'm not looking to benefit at someone else's expense unless I beat them and earn my way up.
If we were going to even go that route, you could just keep UC and Cav in the VT, and TB and Para in the GC. That unfortunately prevents people from playing smart and advancing.
So why is that a problem? In practical terms, it stops anyone from advancing past a certain point. Naturally this happens when someone fights their way up and can't get past their limitations. Separating the Brackets based on Titles almost certainly predestines it.
That makes it less of a competition and more of a combination of War and AQ.
Many other games that I have played, use “kick starts” on competitive modes also, with huge success.
But all the games I have played, have random matchmaking on competitive modes. Only tier or mode rating determines the matches.
I’m personally not aware of any game, that manipulates matchmaking in competitive modes, in order to favour specific players/accounts.
Kabam is more likely to be pioneering on this.
Prestige matchmaking is unfair and opposed to any definition of competition.
You can’t have a matchmaking that favours some competitors, and call it a competition, because it’s not.
🤯🤯🤯
Also, what’s wrong with AW?
As it is set up, anyone gets what he is trying and is worth of.
AW is nearly as fair as it gets. I give that to Kabam.
It doesn’t favour anyone, in contrast with BGs 😠
Eh not quite the same, one would make the first weeks of BGs a nightmare for lower accounts the other one is fixing that issue at the cost of well giving bigger accounts some rewards for free. I don't have an issue with that, like I said I just think anyone should be able to play BGs from the get go regardless of their progression level or title.
Yes, and what's the argument there that there should be no limitations? Cause there should be, everyone should eventually hit a brick wall that's how competitive game modes work.
The problems with the match system affect players across *all* progress tiers, just in more complex ways. For *any* prestige, there will be players near the top of that particular bracket of prestige and those at the bottom. Even for Cavs and TBs, there are players getting stuck because the match system doesn't factor actual match performance into its matches.
I think you think you're representing the silent majority against the elite 1%. But that's completely false. The 1% cannot be hurt in VT by any match making rules, because they can beat everyone at a high percentage rate. That means it doesn't matter who you match them against, they will win 70-90% of their matches and be in the Gladiator circuit by lunch. This problem trickles down from Paragons getting stuck to TBs getting stuck to even Cavs getting stuck. There is no silent majority that benefits from the system and would quit if it changed.
Although this is often portrayed and discussed as if this was Paragons against Uncollecteds, it isn't. That's just the most obvious and easy poster child of the problem. It actually potentially affects *anyone* at *any* progress tier, just to differing degrees. And that's why I'm not a big fan of prestige-focused remedies. Not all Paragons are being hurt and not all UCs are being helped. But the net effect is to punish one group of players over another. It just isn't trivially easy to describe that first group of players. Average skill Pargons with large rosters is one obvious subset of them. But they aren't the only ones.