GAME DOESN'T SEEM FAIR AND EQUAL FOR ALL

i just want to know how game decides who places defender first in 1 and 3rd round of battleground match.
i believed it was RNG but seems like there is more to it.
i m not taking without testing it, i did 16 matches yesterday, in which 12 matches i had to place first and 4 matches opponent placed first,
today i did 5 matches and all 5 in a row i had to place my defender first.
i also talked this about my alliance members and seems like some have consistently placing 2nd and some are consistently placing first,

overall it doesn't seem like 50/50 RNG

since battleground is based strategy i think consistently placing defender first in 1st and 3rd round is just not fair. @Kabam Miike @Kabam Jax .

Comments

Terra

Boo hoo.

BeastDad

I wouldn’t get too hung up on “fair” if I were you.

GroundedWisdom

Sorry, I had to.

ErmanHarith0802

Well you probably will get the same replies as all the other threads talking about placing 1st

Crossy76

Well you probably will get the same replies as all the other threads talking about placing 1st

i m not expecting good response from those who haven't faced the problem, those who have faced this issue understands it.

PT_99

"The first person to ban the enemy heroes gets an advantage to pick last."
Very easy vanilla method to solve but looks like Kabam don't want to turn ban phase competitive.

crossshatter

Well you probably will get the same replies as all the other threads talking about placing 1st
i m not expecting good response from those who haven't faced the problem, those who have faced this issue understands it.

I get it but it's pretty cool tbh,whenever I get an okayish champ in my deck I can jus throw the first match and cook them in the second

Armageddøn

I was wondering what happens if both players place their defender at the same time which isn't visible to the other player until the timer runs out and then they have to pick an attacker at the same time.
That will not only cut down the time to finish a match in half but also make it more fair for both players.

phillgreen

Sorry, I had to.

Ironic.

ahmynuts

i just want to know how game decides who places defender first in 1 and 3rd round of battleground match.
i believed it was RNG but seems like there is more to it.
i m not taking without testing it, i did 16 matches yesterday, in which 12 matches i had to place first and 4 matches opponent placed first,
today i did 5 matches and all 5 in a row i had to place my defender first.
i also talked this about my alliance members and seems like some have consistently placing 2nd and some are consistently placing first,

overall it doesn't seem like 50/50 RNG

since battleground is based strategy i think consistently placing defender first in 1st and 3rd round is just not fair. @Kabam Miike @Kabam Jax .

None of what you said has anything to do with the game being fair or equal for all.
It's all random. Sometimes you get extremely lucky and sometimes you don't. Which it seems like you understand from the rest of the content of your post. So I'm confused as to what your point is here
I've had strings of matches where i had to place first but then i had strings where i was placing second.

Dirty_Dozz

First, your comment about it "not being 50/50 RNG" isn't how RNG works. Your odds of flipping a coin and getting heads or tails is 50/50, but if you were to flip a coin 16 times, there's no way to guarantee you would get heads 8 times and tails 8 times.

Second, sometimes that's just how it goes. I played like 10 matches yesterday, and I'm pretty sure I picked 1st and 3rd for all of them. I just don't get what the big issue is with it. Is it an advantage? Probably. But I've never lost a match and said "Wow, if I didn't have to pick first, I definitely would have won this one"

Crossy76

i didnt concluded that its not fair or equal, i did mentioned word "SEEMS". i wanted to know if there is something else which causing it, like faster connection or something.

Crossy76

@Dirty_Dozz even when flipping coin, back to back heads for 80% time is bit rare imo. since tails has Equal probability

Sundance_2099

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

*wheeze*

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Stature

i just want to know how game decides who places defender first in 1 and 3rd round of battleground match.
i believed it was RNG but seems like there is more to it.
i m not taking without testing it, i did 16 matches yesterday, in which 12 matches i had to place first and 4 matches opponent placed first,
today i did 5 matches and all 5 in a row i had to place my defender first.
i also talked this about my alliance members and seems like some have consistently placing 2nd and some are consistently placing first,

overall it doesn't seem like 50/50 RNG

since battleground is based strategy i think consistently placing defender first in 1st and 3rd round is just not fair. @Kabam Miike @Kabam Jax .

None of what you said has anything to do with the game being fair or equal for all.
It's all random. Sometimes you get extremely lucky and sometimes you don't. Which it seems like you understand from the rest of the content of your post. So I'm confused as to what your point is here
I've had strings of matches where i had to place first but then i had strings where i was placing second.

There are enough posts on the forum to suggest this is not RNG. I've played ~50 matches and picked second once. If the chances of picking first or second is equal then the likelihood of getting 49 matches picking first is almost one in a quadrillion. Even if we have had millions of matches, then someone ending up with that sequence is a one in a billion chance. Multiple people have had this issue. It is almost definitely not random.

As pathetic the silence from the devs on this is, the response from regular forum users like you is worse. We get that it doesn't affect you, but there is no need to belittle a genuine concern by saying "random" or "that's how it goes" or as one forum gaurdian put it "accept your fate".

It might be a small part of the player base, but they have been given a permanent handicap in what is supposed to be a competition. That is hardly something to be ok with.

ahmynuts

i just want to know how game decides who places defender first in 1 and 3rd round of battleground match.
i believed it was RNG but seems like there is more to it.
i m not taking without testing it, i did 16 matches yesterday, in which 12 matches i had to place first and 4 matches opponent placed first,
today i did 5 matches and all 5 in a row i had to place my defender first.
i also talked this about my alliance members and seems like some have consistently placing 2nd and some are consistently placing first,

overall it doesn't seem like 50/50 RNG

since battleground is based strategy i think consistently placing defender first in 1st and 3rd round is just not fair. @Kabam Miike @Kabam Jax .

None of what you said has anything to do with the game being fair or equal for all.
It's all random. Sometimes you get extremely lucky and sometimes you don't. Which it seems like you understand from the rest of the content of your post. So I'm confused as to what your point is here
I've had strings of matches where i had to place first but then i had strings where i was placing second.
There are enough posts on the forum to suggest this is not RNG. I've played ~50 matches and picked second once. If the chances of picking first or second is equal then the likelihood of getting 49 matches picking first is almost one in a quadrillion. Even if we have had millions of matches, then someone ending up with that sequence is a one in a billion chance. Multiple people have had this issue. It is almost definitely not random.

As pathetic the silence from the devs on this is, the response from regular forum users like you is worse. We get that it doesn't affect you, but there is no need to belittle a genuine concern by saying "random" or "that's how it goes" or as one forum gaurdian put it "accept your fate".

It might be a small part of the player base, but they have been given a permanent handicap in what is supposed to be a competition. That is hardly something to be ok with.

I responded to this with a long paragraph but the forum took it to approval hell so I'll just say, yes it does impact me as I've stated, someone always has to pick first in every bgs match and the game cannot ensure everyone is picking first 50% of the time because then no one would be able to get matches, it's certainly not rigged as kabam doesn't have the tech for it. Kabam also doesn't have to comment on this because like how matchmaking works, it's just how it works and that's that. You are really just assuming a lot of things and overlaying your personal bias and salt onto this "issue"

GroundedWisdom

Sorry, I had to.

Ironic.

Just a joke. Not that deep.

ahmynuts

i just want to know how game decides who places defender first in 1 and 3rd round of battleground match.
i believed it was RNG but seems like there is more to it.
i m not taking without testing it, i did 16 matches yesterday, in which 12 matches i had to place first and 4 matches opponent placed first,
today i did 5 matches and all 5 in a row i had to place my defender first.
i also talked this about my alliance members and seems like some have consistently placing 2nd and some are consistently placing first,

overall it doesn't seem like 50/50 RNG

since battleground is based strategy i think consistently placing defender first in 1st and 3rd round is just not fair. @Kabam Miike @Kabam Jax .

None of what you said has anything to do with the game being fair or equal for all.
It's all random. Sometimes you get extremely lucky and sometimes you don't. Which it seems like you understand from the rest of the content of your post. So I'm confused as to what your point is here
I've had strings of matches where i had to place first but then i had strings where i was placing second.
There are enough posts on the forum to suggest this is not RNG. I've played ~50 matches and picked second once. If the chances of picking first or second is equal then the likelihood of getting 49 matches picking first is almost one in a quadrillion. Even if we have had millions of matches, then someone ending up with that sequence is a one in a billion chance. Multiple people have had this issue. It is almost definitely not random.

As pathetic the silence from the devs on this is, the response from regular forum users like you is worse. We get that it doesn't affect you, but there is no need to belittle a genuine concern by saying "random" or "that's how it goes" or as one forum gaurdian put it "accept your fate".

It might be a small part of the player base, but they have been given a permanent handicap in what is supposed to be a competition. That is hardly something to be ok with.

Also it's not really a handicap. Not once have i felt that i was at a disadvantage picking first because i was able to see the opponents deck beforehand and get an idea of what i want to do regardless of picking first or second

Ironman3000

They should just come out and say what the determining factor for picking was. IMO, it should be the lower prestige picks first and the higher picks second.

Crossy76

@Sundance_2099

fine laugh now, trust me you will be the one doing posts, crying in forum when you will have same thing

HungaryHippo

Sorry, I had to.

You post this when you whine that getting into GC is hard for you?

Sorry I had to.

Crossy76

i just want to know how game decides who places defender first in 1 and 3rd round of battleground match.
i believed it was RNG but seems like there is more to it.
i m not taking without testing it, i did 16 matches yesterday, in which 12 matches i had to place first and 4 matches opponent placed first,
today i did 5 matches and all 5 in a row i had to place my defender first.
i also talked this about my alliance members and seems like some have consistently placing 2nd and some are consistently placing first,

overall it doesn't seem like 50/50 RNG

since battleground is based strategy i think consistently placing defender first in 1st and 3rd round is just not fair. @Kabam Miike @Kabam Jax .

None of what you said has anything to do with the game being fair or equal for all.
It's all random. Sometimes you get extremely lucky and sometimes you don't. Which it seems like you understand from the rest of the content of your post. So I'm confused as to what your point is here
I've had strings of matches where i had to place first but then i had strings where i was placing second.
There are enough posts on the forum to suggest this is not RNG. I've played ~50 matches and picked second once. If the chances of picking first or second is equal then the likelihood of getting 49 matches picking first is almost one in a quadrillion. Even if we have had millions of matches, then someone ending up with that sequence is a one in a billion chance. Multiple people have had this issue. It is almost definitely not random.

As pathetic the silence from the devs on this is, the response from regular forum users like you is worse. We get that it doesn't affect you, but there is no need to belittle a genuine concern by saying "random" or "that's how it goes" or as one forum gaurdian put it "accept your fate".

It might be a small part of the player base, but they have been given a permanent handicap in what is supposed to be a competition. That is hardly something to be ok with.
I responded to this with a long paragraph but the forum took it to approval hell so I'll just say, yes it does impact me as I've stated, someone always has to pick first in every bgs match and the game cannot ensure everyone is picking first 50% of the time because then no one would be able to get matches, it's certainly not rigged as kabam doesn't have the tech for it. Kabam also doesn't have to comment on this because like how matchmaking works, it's just how it works and that's that. You are really just assuming a lot of things and overlaying your personal bias and salt onto this "issue"

why kabam don't need to ?
they just need to say yes its just RNG nothing else (if its just rng).
it could end all those confusions
threads.
I don't think kabam has mentioned how it works anywhere. why?

hi_im_sir

In friendly matches the person who sends the invite first gets to defend last. So my best guess is in normal games its the first person to accept the match

Crossy76

In friendly matches the person who sends the invite first gets to defend last. So my best guess is in normal games its the first person to accept the match

i dont think so
coz i have tested that as well

GroundedWisdom

You post this when you whine that getting into GC is hard for you?

Sorry I had to.

Care to point out where I did that?

GroundedWisdom

I never complained I had a hard time getting into the GC. I said the extra Tiers make it a slog. Which it still is. Still think it's overboard.
My own frustrations aren't something I argue for. I'm going to have a hard time until my Roster fills out as a Paragon. That's understandable.

Shadow_Shooter

Wait until new abyss drops…

MarvelNoob

I was wondering what happens if both players place their defender at the same time which isn't visible to the other player until the timer runs out and then they have to pick an attacker at the same time.
That will not only cut down the time to finish a match in half but also make it more fair for both players.

That seems like a terrible idea. It would take away much of the careful strategy and planning in bgs. Not speaking for everyone but when I see the opponents deck I think if they place him ill place her etc. etc.

Atleast for me it wouldn't work well

obsidiman

I once went to a roulette wheel and saw that the last 25 numbers to hit were all red. Put my money on black because there is no possible way for it to hit red a 26th time in a row.

Bad example?

I once flipped a coin 50 times in a row and it came up tails every time. The 51st flip will be heads right? No way 51 tails in a row is possible...

Golivarez

It’s definitely unfair when you see the opponents loaded with top tier champs you can’t pull cuz RNG says you can’t have them. It’s embarrassing that this hasn’t been fixed yet