Why does UC need 6* shards to begin with? I don't like using the argument "Back in my day we used lower stars...", but at what point is it appropriate to be focusing on 6*? Focus on learning the skills needed with what roster you have, progress in story content, then come back to PvP competition. Hopefully by then matchmaking will be improved that at least a majority of people can get behind
My neighbor has different needs and probably has a different job and different income, so no, its not the same. We all earn what we work for and we all choose different ways to spend that income.
Imagine this, you earn 100 CAD from your job. Your neighbor also earns 100 CAD from their job. You have only one store in your area. Your neighbor can purchase anything they want from the store for 1 CAD/item. However, you can only buy water and bread at a cost of 10 CAD/item.
Do you think your spending is a choice in this case? Do you think you and your neighbor are earning the same in this case?
Then u go to a different store .. (You push the progression that suits u)... Being a lower progression is a choice ... As a UC u should not be focusing on BGs... Its your choice to do so.. UC is the 4th progression lvl earning the same ammount of elder marks, relics, alliance milestones, solo milestones, and yes TROPHIES as the top progression lvl... Doesnt make sense
The same amount of trophy tokens dosent = the same rewards or the same amount of rewards Being a lower progression level isnt a choice unless you're a whale and has a perfect counter to everything or are we just gonna forget how specific act 6 is
I cant' wait till Kabam installs a BG Tier system for different progression levels with vastly different rewards. There will be post of I can compete with the big accounts for the better rewards and you are blocking me from doing it. Please Kabam remove the progression base gate it's not fair. We are playing the same game so why won't you allow me to test my might. Can't wait till this happen. It's going to happen with all these complaints non stop. This is the only fair way so uncollected will only play against uncollected (this of course won't stop the whining) and so on.
My neighbor has different needs and probably has a different job and different income, so no, its not the same. We all earn what we work for and we all choose different ways to spend that income.
Imagine this, you earn 100 CAD from your job. Your neighbor also earns 100 CAD from their job. You have only one store in your area. Your neighbor can purchase anything they want from the store for 1 CAD/item. However, you can only buy water and bread at a cost of 10 CAD/item.
Do you think your spending is a choice in this case? Do you think you and your neighbor are earning the same in this case?
Then u go to a different store .. (You push the progression that suits u)... Being a lower progression is a choice ... As a UC u should not be focusing on BGs... Its your choice to do so.. UC is the 4th progression lvl earning the same ammount of elder marks, relics, alliance milestones, solo milestones, and yes TROPHIES as the top progression lvl... Doesnt make sense
This is a circular argument, what is the point of BG rewards if they are not to be used for progression? There is only one store, it just sorts rewards by progression, just like matchmaking sorts by strength.
You are against matching discriminating based on strength, but are ok that store discriminates on strength. You can't have it both ways. Not in a game format that requires a large number of players to participate. BG will end up like incursions in that case.
To be clear, I don't like the current matchmaking. I think everyone should have a chance to play everyone within their tier in VT or GC. But this should come with equal rewards. No solo mode differentiates rewards by progression, UCs earn the same rewards in Arena, same rewards in all quests they can complete. I don't see why they shouldn't get the same trophies in BG. UCs don't get half the battlechips or lesser gold or fewer catalysts for clearing content.
My neighbor has different needs and probably has a different job and different income, so no, its not the same. We all earn what we work for and we all choose different ways to spend that income.
Imagine this, you earn 100 CAD from your job. Your neighbor also earns 100 CAD from their job. You have only one store in your area. Your neighbor can purchase anything they want from the store for 1 CAD/item. However, you can only buy water and bread at a cost of 10 CAD/item.
Do you think your spending is a choice in this case? Do you think you and your neighbor are earning the same in this case?
Then u go to a different store .. (You push the progression that suits u)... Being a lower progression is a choice ... As a UC u should not be focusing on BGs... Its your choice to do so.. UC is the 4th progression lvl earning the same ammount of elder marks, relics, alliance milestones, solo milestones, and yes TROPHIES as the top progression lvl... Doesnt make sense
This is a circular argument, what is the point of BG rewards if they are not to be used for progression? There is only one store, it just sorts rewards by progression, just like matchmaking sorts by strength.
You are against matching discriminating based on strength, but are ok that store discriminates on strength. You can't have it both ways. Not in a game format that requires a large number of players to participate. BG will end up like incursions in that case.
To be clear, I don't like the current matchmaking. I think everyone should have a chance to play everyone within their tier in VT or GC. But this should come with equal rewards. No solo mode differentiates rewards by progression, UCs earn the same rewards in Arena, same rewards in all quests they can complete. I don't see why they shouldn't get the same trophies in BG. UCs don't get half the battlechips or lesser gold or fewer catalysts for clearing content.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
Why does UC need 6* shards to begin with? I don't like using the argument "Back in my day we used lower stars...", but at what point is it appropriate to be focusing on 6*? Focus on learning the skills needed with what roster you have, progress in story content, then come back to PvP competition. Hopefully by then matchmaking will be improved that at least a majority of people can get behind
What do you mean why do UC need 6*? The more story content they add, the easier older content has to be so new players can progress faster. Do you have any idea how long it would take players to 100% explore Act 5 if they couldn't use 5* or 6*?
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster.
I'd really love the matchmaking you seem to complain about, as my Paragon accounts faces only Paragon (with a few TB here and there). I am stuck in Gold 3, but if I was able to face UC accounts, like people on this forum keep saying is the case with matchmaking, then I would make to the GC.
Although UC vs UC and Paragon vs Paragon is "even", the level of competition and margin for error is much higher at the Paragon level. A few seconds difference in fight time makes all the difference in a Paragon vs Paragon level match, while a UC vs UC match is typically solely dependent on health. Thus, it is easier for an UC player to progress along VT if they only face UC competition.
Forum posts complaining about UC vs Paragon seem to only equate unfair with uneven matchups in the GC or higher levels of VT. What that doesn't take into account, is that it is potentially 'unfair' that a lower level player has progressed that far if they only faced non-Paragons.
Everyone earns the same currency. Everyone has different store resources depending on their progression level. Although a Paragon can theoretically buy Paragon rewards, if they are stuck in Silver/Gold, it doesn't matter what is in the store. If a UC can progress further than that same Paragon, then they earn more rewards/tokens, for having weaker competition.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
Yeah I am pretty sure a 10k roster vs a 10k roster is the same as a 17k roster vs a 17K roster... Rofl... Undup champs vs max sig ones is the same... Just numbers... Threat levels really?.. they have been around what? 3 or 4 months? The the first ones if I'm wrong they were gated depending on progression... Which should be ALWAYS...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster.
I'd really love the matchmaking you seem to complain about, as my Paragon accounts faces only Paragon (with a few TB here and there). I am stuck in Gold 3, but if I was able to face UC accounts, like people on this forum keep saying is the case with matchmaking, then I would make to the GC.
I'm not complaining about matchmaking. I am not a fan of the current system, I've made those views pretty clear.
To be clear, I don't like the current matchmaking. I think everyone should have a chance to play everyone within their tier in VT or GC. But this should come with equal rewards. No solo mode differentiates rewards by progression, UCs earn the same rewards in Arena, same rewards in all quests they can complete. I don't see why they shouldn't get the same trophies in BG. UCs don't get half the battlechips or lesser gold or fewer catalysts for clearing content.
I have more of an issue with the second part of your comment.
What that doesn't take into account, is that it is potentially 'unfair' that a lower level player has progressed that far if they only faced non-Paragons...If a UC can progress further than that same Paragon, then they earn more rewards/tokens, for having weaker competition.
My only point is a view like this is very biased. The lower account does not get the same rewards for the higher progression. It isn't even equivalent, given what is available in the rest of the game. BG store for UC is pretty much rubbish. Expecting them to beat Paragons to access those items is delusional.
The UCs are not blocking Paragons from progressing. Paragons are blocking Paragons from progressing. For every UC/Cav/TB that is progressing there is a corresponding UC/Cav/TB that isn't progressing. Same is true for Paragons, its not like there are zero Paragons in GC. That is what the Paragon complaints are - that the lower accounts who have progressed should give up their positions to the Paragons who have been left behind (by playing and losing to them). Paragons who are losing every game still get much better rewards than UCs who are winning all their games (upto plat or whatever tier they get even matches for).
But the same Paragons who would be happy to face the UCs are loathe to even allow the lower accounts to access the same store as them (even with lower tokens). I don't see how that works. Why would a UC bother with being Paragon fodder for a some 5-star shards and T4B? Eventually you'll end up with the same thing, all lower accounts will move out and we will have additional complaints about how long it takes to find a match. There won't be more Paragons progressing into GC once UC/Cavs are out, there will just be far fewer players playing BG.
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster.
I'd really love the matchmaking you seem to complain about, as my Paragon accounts faces only Paragon (with a few TB here and there). I am stuck in Gold 3, but if I was able to face UC accounts, like people on this forum keep saying is the case with matchmaking, then I would make to the GC.
I'm not complaining about matchmaking. I am not a fan of the current system, I've made those views pretty clear.
To be clear, I don't like the current matchmaking. I think everyone should have a chance to play everyone within their tier in VT or GC. But this should come with equal rewards. No solo mode differentiates rewards by progression, UCs earn the same rewards in Arena, same rewards in all quests they can complete. I don't see why they shouldn't get the same trophies in BG. UCs don't get half the battlechips or lesser gold or fewer catalysts for clearing content.
I have more of an issue with the second part of your comment.
What that doesn't take into account, is that it is potentially 'unfair' that a lower level player has progressed that far if they only faced non-Paragons...If a UC can progress further than that same Paragon, then they earn more rewards/tokens, for having weaker competition.
My only point is a view like this is very biased. The lower account does not get the same rewards for the higher progression. It isn't even equivalent, given what is available in the rest of the game. BG store for UC is pretty much rubbish. Expecting them to beat Paragons to access those items is delusional.
The UCs are not blocking Paragons from progressing. Paragons are blocking Paragons from progressing. For every UC/Cav/TB that is progressing there is a corresponding UC/Cav/TB that isn't progressing. Same is true for Paragons, its not like there are zero Paragons in GC. That is what the Paragon complaints are - that the lower accounts who have progressed should give up their positions to the Paragons who have been left behind (by playing and losing to them). Paragons who are losing every game still get much better rewards than UCs who are winning all their games (upto plat or whatever tier they get even matches for).
But the same Paragons who would be happy to face the UCs are loathe to even allow the lower accounts to access the same store as them (even with lower tokens). I don't see how that works. Why would a UC bother with being Paragon fodder for a some 5-star shards and T4B? Eventually you'll end up with the same thing, all lower accounts will move out and we will have additional complaints about how long it takes to find a match. There won't be more Paragons progressing into GC once UC/Cavs are out, there will just be far fewer players playing BG.
Yeah I guess u right and everyone else who argues your point is wrong.. that's why Kabam took this decision
But the same Paragons who would be happy to face the UCs are loathe to even allow the lower accounts to access the same store as them (even with lower tokens). I don't see how that works. Why would a UC bother with being Paragon fodder for a some 5-star shards and T4B? Eventually you'll end up with the same thing, all lower accounts will move out and we will have additional complaints about how long it takes to find a match. There won't be more Paragons progressing into GC once UC/Cavs are out, there will just be far fewer players playing BG.
It is perfectly fine that your POV is the rewards are not the same, and that the rewards are what is accessible in the store. We will just have to disagree on that, as I think the rewards are the same.
But, relative to the progression level, the store offerings are pretty similar. Paragons are focused on 6-stars, and ranking up their 6-stars (and now 7-stars). The available materials (6-star shards, T3a frags, T6b frags) are geared towards that. UC/Cavs (should) be focused on 4-stars and 5-stars. The available materials are geared towards that.
If a player correctly focuses on what champions they should be ranking, then that T4b and 5-star shards should have the same relative value as T3a/T6b and 6-star shards does to a Paragon.
I will admit, that in a world where 6-stars and 7-stars exist, it is hard to focus on 5-star materials. I get that T3a/T6b is intrinsically more valuable to every player, but the relative value of T4b to a UC is similar as T5b or T6b frag is to a Paragon.
So let's wait till the new system is implemented before telling people who played fair under current rules that their winnings are undeserved?
Also, no one knows how participation will play out in a revised system. Depending on how stringent the seeding system is, we might have a AW like setup where everyone is playing season after season to stay in place and there will be limited mobility but some sort of threshold on participation. I have no idea if that is enough to sustain the mode, this is not like every other piece of content, you need another willing participant at the same time to make matches happen.
You are against matching discriminating based on strength, but are ok that store discriminates on strength. You can't have it both ways. Not in a game format that requires a large number of players to participate. BG will end up like incursions in that case.
The BG store does not discriminate based on strength. The BG store is tiered by game progression. That's not the same thing.
From a game design perspective, this is actually backwards. The need for a wide level of participation in the mode is precisely what *mandates* progression tiered stores. If the BG store was not progression tiered, the difficulty of earning them would have to be absolutely normalized and not relatively normalized. To put it another way, anyone Cavalier and higher can enter and do the Abyss. There isn't a Paragon-tuned version and a Cavalier tuned version. It is obviously much harder to do for a new Cav player than a veteran Paragon. However, since both would get the same rewards, the *absolute* difficulty must be the same for both, regardless of whether the Cav is much weaker or not.
If the BG store was not progression tiered, then all of its rewards would have to be gated behind the same absolute difficulty. That means no participation milestones, no bonuses for the occasional win or two. The only rewards would be rank rewards on the leaderboards, and the UC players would mostly be at the bottom earning little or nothing. The rewards would have to be balanced to ensure that no UC player could just keep entering over and over and getting jackpot rewards just by blind luck. In practice, if UC players had access to the Paragon store, they would earn basically no currency to spend in it.
We don't do that, because that would crush participation. But that's what would be required if the BG store was not progression-based. This is not an opinion. This is not a guess.
You are against matching discriminating based on strength, but are ok that store discriminates on strength. You can't have it both ways. Not in a game format that requires a large number of players to participate. BG will end up like incursions in that case.
In practice, if UC players had access to the Paragon store, they would earn basically no currency to spend in it.
In a random matchmaking set up, UC players cannot expect much progress, they would basically earn very little currency. The current BG store for UCs is not worth spending time on in that situation.
Only reason Paragons still play BG while being stuck in Bronze and Silver tiers is because Paragon store is good enough to justify those time/energy investments.
If you opened up matchmaking without adjusting the store, you would anyway crush participation.
EDIT: We were using strength/progression interchangeably, since most of the complaints seem to be that lower progression accounts are somehow usurping rewards that should have legitimately gone to Paragons.
You are against matching discriminating based on strength, but are ok that store discriminates on strength. You can't have it both ways. Not in a game format that requires a large number of players to participate. BG will end up like incursions in that case.
In practice, if UC players had access to the Paragon store, they would earn basically no currency to spend in it.
In a random matchmaking set up, UC players cannot expect much progress, they would basically earn very little currency. The current BG store for UCs is not worth spending time on in that situation.
In random match making they would still occasionally match against each other.
So it's not the same rewards for everyone? Can we please stop using that as a line to drag people down?
No, because you're wrong. There is nothing stopping someone from earning chips from the garbage matchmaking and holding them till they raise a title. Choosing to spend them has nothing to do with the fact that everyone earns the same rewards. There is no argument against that fact.
The argument that the rewards are the same if people who need them the most never actually use it, is not as compelling as you think it is.
The holding argument can be made for everyone. You can hold your tokens too until the next title comes along. You can simply hold it till the BG store gets inevitably upgraded at some point. Why use units to clear content, if you hold it till 2030, you can get 10-stars for the same units and BG tokens.
In your world, since everyone is just holding their tokens, BG is immaterial to anyone's progress, right? In the real world, rewards are what is available for the given currency at any point in time. They are not the same for everyone.
Please show me in-game numbers and how the REWARDS are different from title to title. Thanks.
UC doesn't have access to most of the rewards Paragons get from BG.
Those are store prices, not rewards.
Store contents are the rewards. Unless you have a special game will allows you to acquire champs and rank them up, without converting your tokens to shards, catalysts.
Why don't you show in-game numbers for a UC to get 6-star champs and rank them up using BG tokens? Do you have a special tab where you can boost champs and revive/heal them in quests using BG tokens? Exactly how does anyone use those tokens worth without the store?
Wrong. The store is not the reward, it is just a place where a single piece of the rewards can be spent. All players earn the same REWARDS from BGs. That is a fact.
What your "argument" also ignores is the plethora of other rewards from BGs that are earned outside of trophy tokens. You conveniently leave out are : Elder's Marks, 3* Relic shards, 4* Relic shards, 5* Relic shards, 6* Relic shards, Ally milestones, Ally rank rewards, Solo milestones, Solo Rank rewards, Alloy and Relic cats.
But, please go on about the store prices.
I'm sure UCs who are banned from accessing 6-star shards in the store, are swimming in 6-star relics. All of this is rewards talk is just a smokescreen for wanting easier matchups while trying to block progress of those accounts.
Entire solo milestones give ~10K 6-star shards? That's 4500 tokens for a Paragon (5-6 days of repeating objects, of 3 matches each?) Open up matchmaking and make the same store available to everyone, UCs will progress much faster than they do with the current BG.
I'm sure you will not want that. You think UCs should face off against Paragons but not get anything to make their roster stronger. Lose to Paragons and buy more 5-stars from the store, but can't rank them up beyond r4.
Stop talking about the store. The store doesn't matter. That same UC player you're talking about is raking in the 6* shards from the solo and ally milestone rewards because his wins vs other UC players earn the same amount of points as a 17k Paragon beating another 17k Paragon.
I have zero desire to fight a UC player, no one is saying that. What I want is to fight other Paragons at the appropriate tier.
Store is the bulk of the rewards. Without the store the entire BG game mode is irrelevant.
Wrong.
You realize that Paragon is just an in-game title, it doesn't make you an arbiter of truth.
My title has nothing to do with the facts I've posted in this thread. Anyone should be able to understand them and agree.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
But, relative to the progression level, the store offerings are pretty similar. Paragons are focused on 6-stars, and ranking up their 6-stars (and now 7-stars). The available materials (6-star shards, T3a frags, T6b frags) are geared towards that. UC/Cavs (should) be focused on 4-stars and 5-stars. The available materials are geared towards that.
If a player correctly focuses on what champions they should be ranking, then that T4b and 5-star shards should have the same relative value as T3a/T6b and 6-star shards does to a Paragon.
I will admit, that in a world where 6-stars and 7-stars exist, it is hard to focus on 5-star materials. I get that T3a/T6b is intrinsically more valuable to every player, but the relative value of T4b to a UC is similar as T5b or T6b frag is to a Paragon.
Relative to the progression level or roster strength, the BG matches played by different players are also pretty similar. But the forum stance seems to be that players progressing by playing relatively even matches are almost cheating.
That's the only point I have an issue with. Either everyone plays everyone and gets the same rewards or everyone plays at their level and gets relatively appropriate rewards. It's funny that Paragons want to beat UCs to get T5b or T6b frag but UCs need to beat Paragons to get some T4B.
Any player who has been through banquet or can complete threat level 2/3 in SQ (if you can progress in BG, you are probably doing better than that) has long since stopped ranking up 5-stars. Those items have very little value to most UCs.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
Why is it wrong? The result of a BG round is based on the relative results of the two fights in the round. A 6r4 has ~50% more attack and HP as compared to a 5r5 of the same champ.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
Why is it wrong? The result of a BG round is based on the relative results of the two fights in the round. A 6r4 has ~50% more attack and HP as compared to a 5r5 of the same champ.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Is winning a high school football game just as difficult as winning an NFL game?
The only thing i can say is get good tbh . I am a multi-season GC climber here (yeah , i'm paragon) , and let me tell you , i have faced account that is much bigger than mine basically every match. A good drafting strategy will help you a lot from the roster gap . Anyway , good luck on your climb
People underestimate the value of changing decks every season. Can't just pick up the top champs and expect to win.
Look at the nodes, select relevant roster, change up if you see you're not using someone at all.
I was at 14k and still matching up with 18k accounts and defeated them occasionally. In the end matchmaking balances out, I faced 11.5k accounts too and progressed.
There is a matchmaking problem but it comes down to drafting and skill.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
Why is it wrong? The result of a BG round is based on the relative results of the two fights in the round. A 6r4 has ~50% more attack and HP as compared to a 5r5 of the same champ.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Is winning a high school football game just as difficult as winning an NFL game?
For the teams involved yes.
Also, do NFL teams get rewarded based on their budget if they win the season?
If you gate rewards, you have to expect to gate competition as well.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
Why is it wrong? The result of a BG round is based on the relative results of the two fights in the round. A 6r4 has ~50% more attack and HP as compared to a 5r5 of the same champ.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Is winning a high school football game just as difficult as winning an NFL game?
For the teams involved yes.
Also, do NFL teams get rewarded based on their budget if they win the season?
If you gate rewards, you have to expect to gate competition as well.
This just proves that you have no idea what you're talking about. Did you ever play competitive sports? You honestly think that winning a HI game is the same as an NFL game for the teams invoiced? How is that even possible?
As for your second part, the NFL bars HIS teams from competing in their league so HS teams could never earn those rewards.
You are against matching discriminating based on strength, but are ok that store discriminates on strength. You can't have it both ways. Not in a game format that requires a large number of players to participate. BG will end up like incursions in that case.
In practice, if UC players had access to the Paragon store, they would earn basically no currency to spend in it.
In a random matchmaking set up, UC players cannot expect much progress, they would basically earn very little currency. The current BG store for UCs is not worth spending time on in that situation.
In random match making they would still occasionally match against each other.
Unfortunately the amount of times they would is small enough to discourage them from wanting to play the game mode.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
Why is it wrong? The result of a BG round is based on the relative results of the two fights in the round. A 6r4 has ~50% more attack and HP as compared to a 5r5 of the same champ.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Is winning a high school football game just as difficult as winning an NFL game?
For the teams involved yes.
Also, do NFL teams get rewarded based on their budget if they win the season?
If you gate rewards, you have to expect to gate competition as well.
This just proves that you have no idea what you're talking about. Did you ever play competitive sports? You honestly think that winning a HI game is the same as an NFL game for the teams invoiced? How is that even possible?
As for your second part, the NFL bars HIS teams from competing in their league so HS teams could never earn those rewards.
So it's not a relevant comparison right? Why bring up absurd equivalencies.
If BG is a single competition, everyone should get the same rewards. Otherwise, it is what it is now, everyone plays at their level and then gets rewards for their level. The UCs/Cavs moving up VT are not blocking your progress. You don't get to tell them their progress is undeserved.
In BG, the nodes are the same at all levels of VT. What exactly is different when you face a 6r4 champ with a 6r4 champ vs. facing a 5r5 with a 5r5? Only things that are scored is Attacker HP, Defender HP and time taken for the fight.
Everybody gets it that you can beat the UCs/Cavs in BG on roster strength alone. Because roster strength gets magnified in a game mode that measures relative outcomes. Your roster rewards you in every other game mode, you don't have to dump on a few people moving up the tiers to display strength.
If you truly don't understand the differences between high-level fights and mid to low-level fights no, you're just not going to get it. You simply don't know what you don't know.
Mid-high level Fights, yes. With more fire power to do it with. That's the aspect that seems to be overlooked in these discussions. If you're going to ascertain that they're higher-level Fights, you also have to consider what the other side is using as well.
Comments
Being a lower progression level isnt a choice unless you're a whale and has a perfect counter to everything or are we just gonna forget how specific act 6 is
You are against matching discriminating based on strength, but are ok that store discriminates on strength. You can't have it both ways. Not in a game format that requires a large number of players to participate. BG will end up like incursions in that case.
To be clear, I don't like the current matchmaking. I think everyone should have a chance to play everyone within their tier in VT or GC. But this should come with equal rewards. No solo mode differentiates rewards by progression, UCs earn the same rewards in Arena, same rewards in all quests they can complete. I don't see why they shouldn't get the same trophies in BG. UCs don't get half the battlechips or lesser gold or fewer catalysts for clearing content.
Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG...
Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store...
If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
Although UC vs UC and Paragon vs Paragon is "even", the level of competition and margin for error is much higher at the Paragon level. A few seconds difference in fight time makes all the difference in a Paragon vs Paragon level match, while a UC vs UC match is typically solely dependent on health. Thus, it is easier for an UC player to progress along VT if they only face UC competition.
Forum posts complaining about UC vs Paragon seem to only equate unfair with uneven matchups in the GC or higher levels of VT. What that doesn't take into account, is that it is potentially 'unfair' that a lower level player has progressed that far if they only faced non-Paragons.
Everyone earns the same currency. Everyone has different store resources depending on their progression level.
Although a Paragon can theoretically buy Paragon rewards, if they are stuck in Silver/Gold, it doesn't matter what is in the store. If a UC can progress further than that same Paragon, then they earn more rewards/tokens, for having weaker competition.
Undup champs vs max sig ones is the same... Just numbers...
Threat levels really?.. they have been around what? 3 or 4 months? The the first ones if I'm wrong they were gated depending on progression... Which should be ALWAYS...
The UCs are not blocking Paragons from progressing. Paragons are blocking Paragons from progressing. For every UC/Cav/TB that is progressing there is a corresponding UC/Cav/TB that isn't progressing. Same is true for Paragons, its not like there are zero Paragons in GC. That is what the Paragon complaints are - that the lower accounts who have progressed should give up their positions to the Paragons who have been left behind (by playing and losing to them). Paragons who are losing every game still get much better rewards than UCs who are winning all their games (upto plat or whatever tier they get even matches for).
But the same Paragons who would be happy to face the UCs are loathe to even allow the lower accounts to access the same store as them (even with lower tokens). I don't see how that works. Why would a UC bother with being Paragon fodder for a some 5-star shards and T4B? Eventually you'll end up with the same thing, all lower accounts will move out and we will have additional complaints about how long it takes to find a match. There won't be more Paragons progressing into GC once UC/Cavs are out, there will just be far fewer players playing BG.
But, relative to the progression level, the store offerings are pretty similar.
Paragons are focused on 6-stars, and ranking up their 6-stars (and now 7-stars). The available materials (6-star shards, T3a frags, T6b frags) are geared towards that.
UC/Cavs (should) be focused on 4-stars and 5-stars. The available materials are geared towards that.
If a player correctly focuses on what champions they should be ranking, then that T4b and 5-star shards should have the same relative value as T3a/T6b and 6-star shards does to a Paragon.
I will admit, that in a world where 6-stars and 7-stars exist, it is hard to focus on 5-star materials. I get that T3a/T6b is intrinsically more valuable to every player, but the relative value of T4b to a UC is similar as T5b or T6b frag is to a Paragon.
Also, no one knows how participation will play out in a revised system. Depending on how stringent the seeding system is, we might have a AW like setup where everyone is playing season after season to stay in place and there will be limited mobility but some sort of threshold on participation. I have no idea if that is enough to sustain the mode, this is not like every other piece of content, you need another willing participant at the same time to make matches happen.
From a game design perspective, this is actually backwards. The need for a wide level of participation in the mode is precisely what *mandates* progression tiered stores. If the BG store was not progression tiered, the difficulty of earning them would have to be absolutely normalized and not relatively normalized. To put it another way, anyone Cavalier and higher can enter and do the Abyss. There isn't a Paragon-tuned version and a Cavalier tuned version. It is obviously much harder to do for a new Cav player than a veteran Paragon. However, since both would get the same rewards, the *absolute* difficulty must be the same for both, regardless of whether the Cav is much weaker or not.
If the BG store was not progression tiered, then all of its rewards would have to be gated behind the same absolute difficulty. That means no participation milestones, no bonuses for the occasional win or two. The only rewards would be rank rewards on the leaderboards, and the UC players would mostly be at the bottom earning little or nothing. The rewards would have to be balanced to ensure that no UC player could just keep entering over and over and getting jackpot rewards just by blind luck. In practice, if UC players had access to the Paragon store, they would earn basically no currency to spend in it.
We don't do that, because that would crush participation. But that's what would be required if the BG store was not progression-based. This is not an opinion. This is not a guess.
Only reason Paragons still play BG while being stuck in Bronze and Silver tiers is because Paragon store is good enough to justify those time/energy investments.
If you opened up matchmaking without adjusting the store, you would anyway crush participation.
EDIT: We were using strength/progression interchangeably, since most of the complaints seem to be that lower progression accounts are somehow usurping rewards that should have legitimately gone to Paragons.
That's the only point I have an issue with. Either everyone plays everyone and gets the same rewards or everyone plays at their level and gets relatively appropriate rewards. It's funny that Paragons want to beat UCs to get T5b or T6b frag but UCs need to beat Paragons to get some T4B.
Any player who has been through banquet or can complete threat level 2/3 in SQ (if you can progress in BG, you are probably doing better than that) has long since stopped ranking up 5-stars. Those items have very little value to most UCs.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Look at the nodes, select relevant roster, change up if you see you're not using someone at all.
I was at 14k and still matching up with 18k accounts and defeated them occasionally. In the end matchmaking balances out, I faced 11.5k accounts too and progressed.
There is a matchmaking problem but it comes down to drafting and skill.
Also, do NFL teams get rewarded based on their budget if they win the season?
If you gate rewards, you have to expect to gate competition as well.
As for your second part, the NFL bars HIS teams from competing in their league so HS teams could never earn those rewards.
If BG is a single competition, everyone should get the same rewards. Otherwise, it is what it is now, everyone plays at their level and then gets rewards for their level. The UCs/Cavs moving up VT are not blocking your progress. You don't get to tell them their progress is undeserved.
In BG, the nodes are the same at all levels of VT. What exactly is different when you face a 6r4 champ with a 6r4 champ vs. facing a 5r5 with a 5r5? Only things that are scored is Attacker HP, Defender HP and time taken for the fight.
Everybody gets it that you can beat the UCs/Cavs in BG on roster strength alone. Because roster strength gets magnified in a game mode that measures relative outcomes. Your roster rewards you in every other game mode, you don't have to dump on a few people moving up the tiers to display strength.