How many Posts are you planning on making about Matchmaking? As many as it takes. Better question is how many responses you going to make to my posts on the topic because at my last count it's several hundred.
How many Posts are you planning on making about Matchmaking?
You say “proof”, I hear “I have questions I cannot answer so I am assuming the worst”.
How many Posts are you planning on making about Matchmaking? As many as it takes. Better question is how many responses you going to make to my posts on the topic because at my last count it's several hundred. I discussed the subject for around a month. Kabam addressed their views and plans, and I pretty much left it at that. Posting over and over isn't helping it change overnight. It's spamming the Forum.
This is said player here, these are the kinds of rosters that are very highly ranked in VT that I have faced on my climb to Uru 3 and none are modders as I have beat or only very narrowly lost to most. If any more proof is needed .
You say “proof”, I hear “I have questions I cannot answer so I am assuming the worst”. Did you watch the vid, my guess is no because I have evidence that goes directly opposite to what they recently put out in public statement, which is what a lie is.
This is said player here, these are the kinds of rosters that are very highly ranked in VT that I have faced on my climb to Uru 3 and none are modders as I have beat or only very narrowly lost to most. If any more proof is needed . And sorry slurp, I meant to give you a verbal shout-out in my vid. But thank you for the evidence proving we are being misled. This is information the high players in the game need to know because it can influence pay and play status dramatically but we are being fed lies by those who want our money.
Hey there, I hate to do this, but... We had already banned those low-level accounts that you showed in your video before you had posted it on the Forums. Before you had even made the video, we had determined those low-level accounts were cheaters, and we had taken action, the same way we do for all cheaters.Now, to this video. We did not lie to you at all; I think that you misunderstand what we have said in the past. You've directly screenshotted and shared information from posts about the subject but are ignoring the important bits of it. This is a confirmation bias and isn't conducive to a healthy conversation about a touchy subject. We never said that all Low-Level accounts in Gladiator Circuit are cheaters, but the ones that you were posting about were and were already banned before you posted. In this post that you are referring to, we said that there are matchmaking issues and that once we put in our seeding system, low-level accounts will not be able to get to GC as they did before. These are quotes in the section about seeding that address this topic: "Once this system is in place, the Victory Track and matchmaker will be structured to ensure any player who climbs the Victory Track and/or reaches the Gladiator’s Circuit deserves to be there and didn’t simply reach those heights because of softer matches." and "For those Uncollected or Cavalier players who in past seasons have climbed high up on the VT, it’s time to focus on growing your accounts if you want to continue to compete at that level."These are referring to a new Seeding System that we are actively working on, and said will take some time to implement.Lastly, yes, this post does break our Forum Rules because you are spreading conspiracy theories and misinformation. We'll leave this thread open, but I am removing your video.
Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?Dr. Zola
Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?Dr. Zola It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up.
Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?Dr. Zola It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up. It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task).
"Additionally, one thing that wasn't explained was how all of the 5k-8k prestige accounts in seasons 5 were deemed clear modders but it is being ignore how a 6k prestige player provides clear evidence of the current issue....I originally did the videos to shed light on the matchmaking issue but my videos were turned into something else by Kabam. I'm not sure how the 6k prestige accounts in season 5 that I showcases when bringing awareness to the issue were so clearly "cheaters" per kabam when a 6k player this season showed pretty clear evidence that's it's very easy for a 6k prestige player to GC."Because your video wasn't the evidence we used to deem them cheaters. The team did their due diligence and investigated the leaderboards, independent of your video. It just happened to line up with the video you made; it was not the result of your video. Thus, the 6k account you're referencing was deemed to not be a modder because our investigation concluded they were not.And, again, we have, many times now, acknowledged that matchmaking is not perfect and have outlined, multiple times, plans for adjusting it over time.
Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?Dr. Zola It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up. It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task). Your a logical guy, so I'm curious on your opinion. In season 5 between 2 videos, I showed approximately 300 5k to 8k prestige accounts in GC. Kabam publicly stated that pretty much all of them got there by cheating.Let's go with that for now, but what I can't understand, now that we have proof of 6k prestige players legit getting to GC and seeing the matchups they did in diamond to get to GC (going against 4* star champs), doesn't it strike you a bit odd that all most of the 6k prestige players in season 5 were deemed cheats by Kabam but no one is blinking an eye about it now being legit with new evidence on the subject?
Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?Dr. Zola It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up. It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task). To clarify: are you suggesting the leaderboards are set in stone even if players subsequently on the leaderboards are found to have violated ToS? To provide an example, are you saying that if Player Z ranked #1000 on the final leaderboards, but there were 100 players found to have cheated ranked ahead of Player Z, that Player Z is stuck with the rewards for Rank 1000?Dr. Zola
Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?Dr. Zola It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up. It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task). To clarify: are you suggesting the leaderboards are set in stone even if players subsequently on the leaderboards are found to have violated ToS? To provide an example, are you saying that if Player Z ranked #1000 on the final leaderboards, but there were 100 players found to have cheated ranked ahead of Player Z, that Player Z is stuck with the rewards for Rank 1000?Dr. Zola They've modified leaderboards in the past, so it isn't impossible. But its often not done in a timely manner if at all, implying that while it might be possible, it isn't always practical.They have said once or twice that when players are banned the rewards are somehow revoked. This suggests that in some cases they are forced to allow the rewards to go out, then immediately claw them back, rather than cancelling their distribution. But I do not have the technical details of how these types of operations are done, I am speculating from the historical information that's been communicated in the past.
Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?Dr. Zola It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up. It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task). To clarify: are you suggesting the leaderboards are set in stone even if players subsequently on the leaderboards are found to have violated ToS? To provide an example, are you saying that if Player Z ranked #1000 on the final leaderboards, but there were 100 players found to have cheated ranked ahead of Player Z, that Player Z is stuck with the rewards for Rank 1000?Dr. Zola They've modified leaderboards in the past, so it isn't impossible. But its often not done in a timely manner if at all, implying that while it might be possible, it isn't always practical.They have said once or twice that when players are banned the rewards are somehow revoked. This suggests that in some cases they are forced to allow the rewards to go out, then immediately claw them back, rather than cancelling their distribution. But I do not have the technical details of how these types of operations are done, I am speculating from the historical information that's been communicated in the past. That kind of clunkiness seems consistent with past rewards issues. I recall having a cow over the T1a arena (yes, it was important in 2015) when prizes and scores got screwed up. It does beg the question, though—if someone is 1000th on the gross leaderboards but in reality 900th among the legitimate leaderboards, why would said player get the 1000th rewards?Dr. Zola
Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?Dr. Zola It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up. It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task). To clarify: are you suggesting the leaderboards are set in stone even if players subsequently on the leaderboards are found to have violated ToS? To provide an example, are you saying that if Player Z ranked #1000 on the final leaderboards, but there were 100 players found to have cheated ranked ahead of Player Z, that Player Z is stuck with the rewards for Rank 1000?Dr. Zola They've modified leaderboards in the past, so it isn't impossible. But its often not done in a timely manner if at all, implying that while it might be possible, it isn't always practical.They have said once or twice that when players are banned the rewards are somehow revoked. This suggests that in some cases they are forced to allow the rewards to go out, then immediately claw them back, rather than cancelling their distribution. But I do not have the technical details of how these types of operations are done, I am speculating from the historical information that's been communicated in the past. That kind of clunkiness seems consistent with past rewards issues. I recall having a cow over the T1a arena (yes, it was important in 2015) when prizes and scores got screwed up. It does beg the question, though—if someone is 1000th on the gross leaderboards but in reality 900th among the legitimate leaderboards, why would said player get the 1000th rewards?Dr. Zola This is exactly what I've been trying to say. If the "bans" happened before my videos or after my videos, it should be completely irrelevant to one big data point, which is why did NO one, not a single know person who was behind those hundreds of cheaters, move up even a single spot? The "cheaters" were still showing on leaderboard on my video right before season ended. Okay, we heard Kabam saying what they said , but those leaderboards still have people lower than them showing and those people lower then them got the same lower rewards that were showing on the leaderboard at that time, leading it hard to believe that if bans were made that anyone actually moved up any spots.