Why we dont go back to the old matchmaking system?

JefechutaJefechuta Member Posts: 1,228 ★★★★★
in General Discussion
After thinking a bit after playing some BGs just because, as always, I noticed that the first matchmaking we had was the most fair; I explain:

We had the sandbaggin thing, right, people would take between 50% to 33% low level champs so they have easier fights, BUT, right now, we have a worse issue, since we are playing versus the same players, that have better and bigger rosters, but this time they dont have those low level champs, they have 30 jacked champs, where the worse champ they have is stronger than your Top 3 champs.

So my question is, why dont go back to the old system?

I just played 4 matches in a row, in Silver, all my opponents had between 4k to 8k strongers champs that I had, forfeited 2 of 3 games because I just wanted to do one objective I had left, and I said, you know what? Free wins for everybody, but I played the third one because I didnt want to lose more time, won that game, and felt like I dont wanna play more matches, kinda felt bad, I was like dude, I can understand 2k to 4k stronger champs overall, but 27 out of 30 champs they had were as strong as top 5 champs, and I dont really care since after all it takes skill to win, but still feels bad.

Then I remember that 2 days ago I played vs another player like this, way stronger roster, but he had 4 2* in his roster, I dont know why, and I noticed that actual matchmaking gives a lot more disadvantage that sandbaggin gave before.

So I ask a question, wouldnt be better to go back to the old system?

Weaker players wouldnt reach GC as happened this last seasons, Paragon players wouldnt be stuck at low tiers due to this strongly unbalanced matchmaking, everybody would be happy again.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I think that system was better than this one by far.

Comments

  • iDestroyerZiDestroyerZ Member Posts: 760 ★★★★
    ''Paragon players wouldnt be stuck at low tiers due to this strongly unbalanced matchmaking'' is there something above paragon? A paragon vs paragon seems balanced to me o.O
    Btw the second week is always complicated because most people wait the first week goes by before starts climbing

  • JefechutaJefechuta Member Posts: 1,228 ★★★★★
    iDestroyerZ said:

    ''Paragon players wouldnt be stuck at low tiers due to this strongly unbalanced matchmaking'' is there something above paragon? A paragon vs paragon seems balanced to me o.O
    Btw the second week is always complicated because most people wait the first week goes by before starts climbing


    There are Paragons with 4 R5s and all R4s, and there are Paragons with 3 R4s and all R3s, and they get matched between them, It was way more fair when they were matched together but the first one had 2* as half of his roster
  • JefechutaJefechuta Member Posts: 1,228 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Jefechuta said:

    So my question is, why dont go back to the old system?

    This is a good question actually, and it also has a surprisingly simple answer that also explains why we are never, ever, ever going back to roster matching.

    We don't do deck matching because the devs don't like it, because it disincentivizes roster growth. This game is ultimately about collecting, ranking, and using champions. It is about growing roster. Disincentivizing roster growth is simply seen as nonsensical, full stop (why they used deck matching at all is just one of life's mysteries).

    This is also why they won't allow low roster players to keep matching against other low roster players and leapfrog past strong roster players who get stuck playing against much stronger players. This also disincentives roster growth, it actually *penalizes* roster growth, so they aren't going to allow that to persist either.

    This is not a guess.
    Completely forgot about that, my bad
Sign In or Register to comment.