BG Matchmaking.... did something change this season from last season?

Last season, matchmaking was pretty much right on point up until i reached Platinum tiers. However, this season right from the get go (right now in silver tier), i'm facing off 14k, 15k and 16k prestige accounts 7-8 times out of 10 matches. My account prestige is only 12k. I only have 2 rank 4 champs and facing accounts with 15+ rank4s. Not complaining because this is possible a good way to sharpen your skills and stuff, but with so many losses in a row, this puts a huge burden on one's mentality and mojo. I would like Kabam to take a look at their BG matchamking system, because something seems way off this season.

Thank you

Comments

unknown

This content has been removed.

Ceder

Last season, matchmaking was pretty much right on point up until i reached Platinum tiers. However, this season right from the get go (right now in silver tier), i'm facing off 14k, 15k and 16k prestige accounts 7-8 times out of 10 matches. My account prestige is only 12k. I only have 2 rank 4 champs and facing accounts with 15+ rank4s. Not complaining because this is possible a good way to sharpen your skills and stuff, but with so many losses in a row, this puts a huge burden on one's mentality and mojo. I would like Kabam to take a look at their BG matchamking system, because something seems way off this season.

Thank you

I'm pretty sure they're doing matchmaking based on prestige now which is a terrible idea because now I'm facing people with way better accounts then me just because my prestige is almost 14k

Nameless_IW

Once again, the matchmaking was right on point last season, i was matching people around my prestige 12.5k up until i reached platinum tier, which at that point i was constantly facing 15k+ prestige accounts. This season is way off, since I'm constantly 80% of the time facing people with 14-16k prestige accounts, and I don't think that's feasible since i'm only 12.5k. So if matchmaking is based off prestige, then why am i facing these high end accounts? i have no idea, a little perplexed to be quite honest.

Banhammer_ste

What's your total hero rating? I think it might be based more off that than prestige although it might take more into account than just that

Nameless_IW

What's your total hero rating? I think it might be based more off that than prestige although it might take more into account than just that

My total hero rating is only 1.6 mill and my actual prestige is 12196 including the 155 from relics. i thought it was 12.5 LOL. It is actually lower only 12.1k

DNA3000

As far as I am aware, they are not now nor have they ever matched players based on prestige. They were matching based on deck strength, and now I think they are matching based on some calculated total roster strength, but that isn't prestige. As they were matching based on all thirty champions in the deck previously, I believe it is logical to assume when they changed it a season ago they changed it to be some calculated strength of players' top thirty champs instead. It could be thirty-champ prestige, or it could be something else, but I'm pretty sure it is not (nor ever was) five-champ prestige.

Pikok

As far as I am aware, they are not now nor have they ever matched players based on prestige. They were matching based on deck strength, and now I think they are matching based on some calculated total roster strength, but that isn't prestige. As they were matching based on all thirty champions in the deck previously, I believe it is logical to assume when they changed it a season ago they changed it to be some calculated strength of players' top thirty champs instead. It could be thirty-champ prestige, or it could be something else, but I'm pretty sure it is not (nor ever was) five-champ prestige.

You are sure based on your feeling. I am doing my private stats. And avarage opponents which I face is 16155 prestige and 3440000 hero rating.
My prestige is 16132 and hero rating 2800000. So based on my stats it is just a prestige.

What smaller accounts did not understand is that prestige is only 5 top champs. So you can have top5 prestige champs in game and rest of your roster could be 1stars and you will be matched against „stacked” paragons. It is same „fair” game as cavalier matched against paragon. It is same „fair” game as 2mil paragon account matched against 3mil paragon account.

Only fair match is when it is random. I understand that I can play agains cav player and I get it that sometimes I can be matched against 4mil account with 30r4s.

Mr_Platypus

Crazy thing is I was having those types of matches with a similar prestige to you 2-3 seasons ago

unknown

This content has been removed.

A_Fungi

I think the reality is, everyone should fight every for equal rewards. A lower account should not be able to get same rewards as a high account, simply because they played against other inferior accounts.

JHVS123

No reason for any of this nonsense. Make two BG units, one for folks that want to exclusively match with similar accounts and one that is a free for all and the strongest account wins. Separate the rewards and rankings. Keep the event rewards the same no matter which you choose. You are not going to please everyone with any other matchmaking scenario. There are too big of holes for some folks to have an easier path than others that do not change in frequency, they just shift to who they made upset with every tweak. . We have square holes and round holes and we have made battlegrounds a triangle.

If they ever did balance the matchmaking perfectly it would be the boring slog PVP is in most every other game. You quickly get to the point where your luck of the draw or crits decide matches because they are too even so you go into RNG rage and it becomes the worst version for everyone.

Ironman3000

Sorry, you moved up into the next BG band and are now at the bottom. The matchmaking by bands is garbage and unfair to everyone except those at the bottom who get to avoid top accounts. BGs is now a frustrating slog instead of a fun challenge for many people. It is truly awful.

GroundedWisdom

As far as I am aware, they are not now nor have they ever matched players based on prestige. They were matching based on deck strength, and now I think they are matching based on some calculated total roster strength, but that isn't prestige. As they were matching based on all thirty champions in the deck previously, I believe it is logical to assume when they changed it a season ago they changed it to be some calculated strength of players' top thirty champs instead. It could be thirty-champ prestige, or it could be something else, but I'm pretty sure it is not (nor ever was) five-champ prestige.
You are sure based on your feeling. I am doing my private stats. And avarage opponents which I face is 16155 prestige and 3440000 hero rating.
My prestige is 16132 and hero rating 2800000. So based on my stats it is just a prestige.

What smaller accounts did not understand is that prestige is only 5 top champs. So you can have top5 prestige champs in game and rest of your roster could be 1stars and you will be matched against „stacked” paragons. It is same „fair” game as cavalier matched against paragon. It is same „fair” game as 2mil paragon account matched against 3mil paragon account.

Only fair match is when it is random. I understand that I can play agains cav player and I get it that sometimes I can be matched against 4mil account with 30r4s.

I believe that might be the first time someone has ever claimed DNA is going on feeling. Lol.
There's nothing fair about an UC Account coming up against a Paragon at the gate.

Pikolu

I think matchmaking is much looser this season than last one, at least once you get to gold. Here is my profile

And here are 3 matches I had in gold 2 and gold 1.

My roster strength was way above theirs and I honestly felt bad for them.

DNA3000

As far as I am aware, they are not now nor have they ever matched players based on prestige. They were matching based on deck strength, and now I think they are matching based on some calculated total roster strength, but that isn't prestige. As they were matching based on all thirty champions in the deck previously, I believe it is logical to assume when they changed it a season ago they changed it to be some calculated strength of players' top thirty champs instead. It could be thirty-champ prestige, or it could be something else, but I'm pretty sure it is not (nor ever was) five-champ prestige.
You are sure based on your feeling. I am doing my private stats. And avarage opponents which I face is 16155 prestige and 3440000 hero rating.
My prestige is 16132 and hero rating 2800000. So based on my stats it is just a prestige.

Well, besides my "feeling"

1. My own match data doesn't support prestige matching. I am actually a good corner case for prestige testing, because I don't rank for prestige. So my account has an atypical prestige compared to other statistics. If the BG match maker was using prestige, then my matches would center on my prestige. However, my current prestige is 14975, and the average prestige of my last 16 matches is 15694. If we include relics, then my own prestige rises to 15420 and my competition's average rises to 16118.

That's high compared to me, but it could just be that the matcher looks in a wide range of prestige. More significantly is that out of sixteen matches, only *one* was lower than my prestige (14820/15182) while my highest match was 16460/17329.

To help visualize just exactly how my prestige compares to my recent competition, here it is graphically, both for standard prestige and also relic prestige (I'm circled in red):

While this is not a statistically conclusive sample size, it is highly unlikely that I am being matched against players of comparable prestige, standard or relic.

2. When the devs said they would respond to deck matching concerns, I (and others) specifically told them that prestige matching would not be a good idea. We were told it would not be prestige matching specifically at that time. That's not an official declaration of how the match maker was going to work, but I take it as strongly suggestive.

The logical thing for the devs to have done was to change from deck strength to top 30 champion strength. This specifically follows from the notion that the devs wanted players to "use their best champions" and get no advantage from using weaker ones. Matching based on what your top 30 champions are would essentially pretend like everyone was just placing their top 30 champs into their deck. While this is imperfect - it ignores meta advantages for example - it is a reasonable thing to believe they would attempt. This is also a number we can't trivially guess or calculate from our opponents.

However, it *does* make sense that someone like me would be matching against higher prestige accounts. Because I don't rank for prestige, and instead tend to rank much wider (I have more R3s than R2s, for example) my roster is "stronger" than its prestige would suggest, because the strength of the champs just outside of prestige calculations are stronger for my account than they are for other accounts on average on a relative basis. Which matches my experience that I tend to get matched against accounts with a few strong champs, but not a supper-strong deck full of R4s.

A deck full of R4s would still have the same prestige as one with only a few, but would be vastly stronger if you were looking at top 30. The fact that I match against accounts with several R4s but not a lot of R4s also suggests that the match criteria looks at more than just top five prestige champs. This would be hard to see on an account that tended to rank up in a manner similar to the average (high roster) player. But it would be noticeable on an account that did not rank typically, like mine.

Greekhit

As far as I am aware, they are not now nor have they ever matched players based on prestige. They were matching based on deck strength, and now I think they are matching based on some calculated total roster strength, but that isn't prestige. As they were matching based on all thirty champions in the deck previously, I believe it is logical to assume when they changed it a season ago they changed it to be some calculated strength of players' top thirty champs instead. It could be thirty-champ prestige, or it could be something else, but I'm pretty sure it is not (nor ever was) five-champ prestige.
You are sure based on your feeling. I am doing my private stats. And avarage opponents which I face is 16155 prestige and 3440000 hero rating.
My prestige is 16132 and hero rating 2800000. So based on my stats it is just a prestige.
Well, besides my "feeling"

1. My own match data doesn't support prestige matching. I am actually a good corner case for prestige testing, because I don't rank for prestige. So my account has an atypical prestige compared to other statistics. If the BG match maker was using prestige, then my matches would center on my prestige. However, my current prestige is 14975, and the average prestige of my last 16 matches is 15694. If we include relics, then my own prestige rises to 15420 and my competition's average rises to 16118.

That's high compared to me, but it could just be that the matcher looks in a wide range of prestige. More significantly is that out of sixteen matches, only *one* was lower than my prestige (14820/15182) while my highest match was 16460/17329.

To help visualize just exactly how my prestige compares to my recent competition, here it is graphically, both for standard prestige and also relic prestige (I'm circled in red):

While this is not a statistically conclusive sample size, it is highly unlikely that I am being matched against players of comparable prestige, standard or relic.

2. When the devs said they would respond to deck matching concerns, I (and others) specifically told them that prestige matching would not be a good idea. We were told it would not be prestige matching specifically at that time. That's not an official declaration of how the match maker was going to work, but I take it as strongly suggestive.

The logical thing for the devs to have done was to change from deck strength to top 30 champion strength. This specifically follows from the notion that the devs wanted players to "use their best champions" and get no advantage from using weaker ones. Matching based on what your top 30 champions are would essentially pretend like everyone was just placing their top 30 champs into their deck. While this is imperfect - it ignores meta advantages for example - it is a reasonable thing to believe they would attempt. This is also a number we can't trivially guess or calculate from our opponents.

However, it *does* make sense that someone like me would be matching against higher prestige accounts. Because I don't rank for prestige, and instead tend to rank much wider (I have more R3s than R2s, for example) my roster is "stronger" than its prestige would suggest, because the strength of the champs just outside of prestige calculations are stronger for my account than they are for other accounts on average on a relative basis. Which matches my experience that I tend to get matched against accounts with a few strong champs, but not a supper-strong deck full of R4s.

A deck full of R4s would still have the same prestige as one with only a few, but would be vastly stronger if you were looking at top 30. The fact that I match against accounts with several R4s but not a lot of R4s also suggests that the match criteria looks at more than just top five prestige champs. This would be hard to see on an account that tended to rank up in a manner similar to the average (high roster) player. But it would be noticeable on an account that did not rank typically, like mine.

I have ~15,3k Prestige pre relics and ~15,6k Prestige after relics.
My matches are mainly anywhere between +-1k Prestige after relics.
I have 9 r4s and 45 r3s, so my deck consists of minimum r3 champs.
I match people with minimum 4-5 r4s in deck and had couple of match ups that had over 20 r4s one deck.
Whether it’s top5, top30 or topX Prestige, it doesn’t change the fact that it’s still Prestige matchmaking, and it doesn’t change the core problem, which is Prestige matchmaking itself.
You can’t matchmake by a specific parameter, and don’t reward players proportional to that parameter either.
It’s not only unfair, but it’s also an unethical thing to do.
It’s basically rigging results and rewards distribution, since the pool of rewards is shared by all players.
At this point, this is nothing more than an exploit, that small accounts use to their knowledge or not.
But the most annoying is, that Kabam still approves it.
They want data?
Check Mysterium2 bracket at GC.
It’s full of 150k-200k UC accounts that sit there comfortably, from day 8 of BGs.
That’s serious data, considering how many Paragons are still at low VT tiers.
How long do people need to suffer this situation, till things change?

JT_Supreme

My roster:

My bronze 1 matches:

I didn’t think I would run into a rank 5 at my level. But most of the time I’m running into 1k+ prestige opponents.

Coppin

Why does everybody keep on using the Prestige as a calculating factor?..
Kabam NEVER released how matchmaking was calculated in fear of people exploiting it.. stop crying saying omg i got someone with 500 more prestiege its unfair...
Prestiege only calculates the base PI of your top 5 champs before masteries... There is a chance your 6th-10th champs might be stronger than someone with a higher prestiege...

Aleor

Why does everybody keep on using the Prestige as a calculating factor?..
Kabam NEVER released how matchmaking was calculated in fear of people exploiting it.. stop crying saying omg i got someone with 500 more prestiege its unfair...
Prestiege only calculates the base PI of your top 5 champs before masteries... There is a chance your 6th-10th champs might be stronger than someone with a higher prestiege...

Because of reverse engineering being a thing. Same way people found out tanking was an option. Currently even you fill your deck with r5 5*s while having r4/r3 6* in your roster, you'll match with people based on your roster, not your deck. Wich basically means prestige matching. It doesn't even matter if it's based on top 5, top 100 or whatever. At very least your top ranked champs may not fit current meta, wich means you'd be getting disadvantageous matches always during the season

Ironman3000

Obviously, no one knows the actual matchmaking but it's clear that it is based on prestige/total hero rating/top deck strength or some kind of combination so "prestige matchmaking" is just the easiest thing to say.

IMO, they're putting people into bands based on those factors and only matching people within their bands. They might go up or down a band based on wait time but that seems to be it.

Coppin

Obviously, no one knows the actual matchmaking but it's clear that it is based on prestige/total hero rating/top deck strength or some kind of combination so "prestige matchmaking" is just the easiest thing to say.

IMO, they're putting people into bands based on those factors and only matching people within their bands. They might go up or down a band based on wait time but that seems to be it.

I understad that.. but claiming the opponent is stronger cause his profile shows higher Prestiege is wrong... What if its a "Matchmaking Prestiege" based on 30 champs on your deck and your deck ends up being stronger thant the "Profile Prestiege"

Ironman3000

Obviously, no one knows the actual matchmaking but it's clear that it is based on prestige/total hero rating/top deck strength or some kind of combination so "prestige matchmaking" is just the easiest thing to say.

IMO, they're putting people into bands based on those factors and only matching people within their bands. They might go up or down a band based on wait time but that seems to be it.
I understad that.. but claiming the opponent is stronger cause his profile shows higher Prestiege is wrong... What if its a "Matchmaking Prestiege" based on 30 champs on your deck and your deck ends up being stronger thant the "Profile Prestiege"

No, it is not wrong. Increasing prestige (which increases everything else) leads to harder matches. That's a fact, not an opinion.