Add KO bonus... add KO bonus... You cannot seem realize that adding KO bonus will just make BGs a ripoff version of AW... Where two players go against each other and one who got all the one shots will win. And clearly no one in interested in that. In any other game mode you have the freedom of taking some damage and finishing the fight. But that is what make BGs different than any other game mode. Here you don't have that freedom. You can't just use Herc's immortality or Fury's LMD and nuke the opponent. This is what levels the playing field for both the players. They can be judged and get points on how they play and not who KOed and who did not.
If you cannot grasp this simple idea then I don't know what to say anymore.
This is annoying me i had the more health and yet he still won never gonna be able to move up with this rubbish happening i dont care what anyone says kabam bg is rigged and always will be
... You have 0 health left so does the opponent, the opponent did more damage, what are you even talking about? I am extremely satisfied that this type of players are the ones who support this thread.
Lmao I deadass think that they looked the HP remaining and because their side was higher...they thought they should win?
The system is not better if someone can win and not even take the Champ down versus someone that has. People can pat themselves on the back all they want about how fancy their footwork is, but they still didn't win the Fight. For all the complaining about participation trophies people do, it seems they pick and choose that argument.
What do you mean they didn't win the fight?
If someone got a K.O. and still lost the match that means the opponent at least got the defender down to 49% and maintained 100% of the attacker health (only way you'll get more than 30K points. For every % of additional health they lost they have to take at least 2% off the defender health. That's before considering the points from attacker health to the player who got a K.O. BG has the shortest time for a fight, in almost any other game mode, that player would have got a comfortable K.O.
If someone lost on points after getting a K.O. they played very aggressively and made a bunch of mistakes. It is very unlikely that they were the better player in that match. Current scoring system accurately captures that.
That's precisely what I'm saying. For the record, I'd be satisfied if Time Bonus was reverted to what it was before the most recent reduction, but while we're on the subject, it's a fighting competition. To K.O. is to win the Fight. When both sides have done that, then the metrics should be used to determine the Winner. Not this "You won the Match but how good?" nonsense that allows one side to win the Match and still lose.
A solo K.O. is not the only way to win a match. No other game mode demands this. Every other mode in the game gives you multiple attempts to bring down a defender. It allows you to chip down an opponent and revive your champ multiple times. If solo K.O. was the only way to win a fight, most of us here wouldn't have got to TB, let alone Paragon.
Anyone who wins on points without K.O. would have comfortably K.O.ed the defender in a longer fight. In almost every case, they are likely to be the better player in that match-up. Why should BG reward careless fighting over a smarter option?
This isn't the same as everest content or higher-end Stroy. There's a finite amount of time and a limited variation of strengths, coupled with Global Nodes that are shared by both sides. It's 2 minutes to best the other Player. Any Fight within the game has the ultimate objective of taking down the opponent. We're not playing to do a little Damage and avoid getting hit. We're playing to take the other Champ down, or get as close to it as possible. When one side accomplishes that and the other wins based on an external measurement, that's counterintuitive to anything else in the game. Health, Damage, Time, these should all be tie-breakers, honestly. If both sides take down the opponent, or if both K.O., then yes. The Stats should determine the Winner. If one takes down their side and the other doesn't, that's a clear Winner as far as I'm concerned. That's not really my major point. That would likely involve a K.O. Bonus. I wouldn't have any issue with that, but that wasn't my suggestion. My suggestion was to revert it back to what it was before they halved Time Bonus. When you're talking about fighting, the ultimate measure of skill is taking down the opponent. That's what fighting games are all about. Quite literally any I can think of. It's not just one measure of skill. It's the whole point of fighting.
What are you talking about? I'm not referring to any everest content. Even Act 1 doesn't need you to K.O. a defender on first attempt, neither does map 1 on AQ or any other mode. AW gives you a small bonus for a solo, just like BG does with the time bonus.
Why should BG reward a K.O. more than any other mode? No one has lost a BG match after getting a K.O., on points, unless they played very poorly.
I said the objective is to K.O. the opponent. You time out in War and AQ, and you lose half life. The Arena requires you to do it in one shot. No idea why you're focusing on not needing to one-shot on permanent content, but you're also not being compared to other Players there. Arguing that no one loses and K.O.s unless they played poorly is just an outside opinion. It's also subjective. I consider it less poor than not taking the other Champ down. In ANY content, the goal is to take the Champ down. You can't deny that. That's the point of fighting. This whole "played better played worse" is just a shift to Win for people who can't take the Champ down in 2 minutes. Point blank, period.
Arguing K.O. should award a win even if the other player scores more points is also just an outside opinion. One with very little support.
Yes, in solo content the goal is to take the champ down. But one gets unlimited shots at doing so. Only place you can say where you have to solo is arena, where there are no nodes.
In BG the goal is to score more points than the opponent. That's what decides who wins. There are benefits of getting a K.O. which are substantial, but not enough to overcome very poor execution. It's pretty well balanced as it is.
The Points are exactly what I'm discussing, and it was well balanced before the Time Remaining was lowered. I really dislike when people try to use my own points as if they're telling me something I haven't already said to others. I'm fully aware that the objective is to win more Points than the other Player. Where those Points are coming from is what I'm expressing my view on. This whole idea of poor execution is moot unless the other Player takes down a K.O. as well. Honestly, it's like saying "I didn't take my Champ down but I have more Health. You lost half and took it down. You suck.". See how ridiculous that sounds? I sure do. Which is fine if people want to pass judgment, but that has no business being the standard metric in BGs.
The system is not better if someone can win and not even take the Champ down versus someone that has. People can pat themselves on the back all they want about how fancy their footwork is, but they still didn't win the Fight. For all the complaining about participation trophies people do, it seems they pick and choose that argument.
What do you mean they didn't win the fight?
If someone got a K.O. and still lost the match that means the opponent at least got the defender down to 49% and maintained 100% of the attacker health (only way you'll get more than 30K points. For every % of additional health they lost they have to take at least 2% off the defender health. That's before considering the points from attacker health to the player who got a K.O. BG has the shortest time for a fight, in almost any other game mode, that player would have got a comfortable K.O.
If someone lost on points after getting a K.O. they played very aggressively and made a bunch of mistakes. It is very unlikely that they were the better player in that match. Current scoring system accurately captures that.
That's precisely what I'm saying. For the record, I'd be satisfied if Time Bonus was reverted to what it was before the most recent reduction, but while we're on the subject, it's a fighting competition. To K.O. is to win the Fight. When both sides have done that, then the metrics should be used to determine the Winner. Not this "You won the Match but how good?" nonsense that allows one side to win the Match and still lose.
A solo K.O. is not the only way to win a match. No other game mode demands this. Every other mode in the game gives you multiple attempts to bring down a defender. It allows you to chip down an opponent and revive your champ multiple times. If solo K.O. was the only way to win a fight, most of us here wouldn't have got to TB, let alone Paragon.
Anyone who wins on points without K.O. would have comfortably K.O.ed the defender in a longer fight. In almost every case, they are likely to be the better player in that match-up. Why should BG reward careless fighting over a smarter option?
This isn't the same as everest content or higher-end Stroy. There's a finite amount of time and a limited variation of strengths, coupled with Global Nodes that are shared by both sides. It's 2 minutes to best the other Player. Any Fight within the game has the ultimate objective of taking down the opponent. We're not playing to do a little Damage and avoid getting hit. We're playing to take the other Champ down, or get as close to it as possible. When one side accomplishes that and the other wins based on an external measurement, that's counterintuitive to anything else in the game. Health, Damage, Time, these should all be tie-breakers, honestly. If both sides take down the opponent, or if both K.O., then yes. The Stats should determine the Winner. If one takes down their side and the other doesn't, that's a clear Winner as far as I'm concerned. That's not really my major point. That would likely involve a K.O. Bonus. I wouldn't have any issue with that, but that wasn't my suggestion. My suggestion was to revert it back to what it was before they halved Time Bonus. When you're talking about fighting, the ultimate measure of skill is taking down the opponent. That's what fighting games are all about. Quite literally any I can think of. It's not just one measure of skill. It's the whole point of fighting.
What are you talking about? I'm not referring to any everest content. Even Act 1 doesn't need you to K.O. a defender on first attempt, neither does map 1 on AQ or any other mode. AW gives you a small bonus for a solo, just like BG does with the time bonus.
Why should BG reward a K.O. more than any other mode? No one has lost a BG match after getting a K.O., on points, unless they played very poorly.
I said the objective is to K.O. the opponent. You time out in War and AQ, and you lose half life. The Arena requires you to do it in one shot. No idea why you're focusing on not needing to one-shot on permanent content, but you're also not being compared to other Players there. Arguing that no one loses and K.O.s unless they played poorly is just an outside opinion. It's also subjective. I consider it less poor than not taking the other Champ down. In ANY content, the goal is to take the Champ down. You can't deny that. That's the point of fighting. This whole "played better played worse" is just a shift to Win for people who can't take the Champ down in 2 minutes. Point blank, period.
Arguing K.O. should award a win even if the other player scores more points is also just an outside opinion. One with very little support.
Yes, in solo content the goal is to take the champ down. But one gets unlimited shots at doing so. Only place you can say where you have to solo is arena, where there are no nodes.
In BG the goal is to score more points than the opponent. That's what decides who wins. There are benefits of getting a K.O. which are substantial, but not enough to overcome very poor execution. It's pretty well balanced as it is.
The Points are exactly what I'm discussing, and it was well balanced before the Time Remaining was lowered. I really dislike when people try to use my own points as if they're telling me something I haven't already said to others. I'm fully aware that the objective is to win more Points than the other Player. Where those Points are coming from is what I'm expressing my view on. This whole idea of poor execution is moot unless the other Player takes down a K.O. as well. Honestly, it's like saying "I didn't take my Champ down but I have more Health. You lost half and took it down. You suck.". See how ridiculous that sounds? I sure do. Which is fine if people want to pass judgment, but that has no business being the standard metric in BGs.
It sounds ridiculous because you phrase it ridiculously. If you said "I got your champ down and was one hit away from dying while you had 80% of your health remaining while taking 80% of my champs health" then it's obvious who should win that match-up. That is the difference between 31K points (K.O. and no attacker health) and 36K points (12K from 80% attacker health & 24K from getting the defender down to 20%).
It is extremely ridiculous to say that the player getting 31K points should have won because they got 5 more hits in before the 2 min timer expired. They obviously had the worse of the match-up.
You can call it sloppy all you want, but if there was no K.O. on the other side, there's no room to criticize. It's Contest of Champions. Not Dancing with the Stars.
Aye. And contest of champions doesn't have one hard and fast rule to every single game mode. BG is a different game mode that doesn't want everyone to just go nuke in every fight.
It's a different game mode, within a fighting game. If you're trying to convince me someone should be rewarded for not winning the Fight over someone who has, you're not going to succeed.
There really isnt much point to argue with someone who hasn't adjusted his playstyle in 3 seasons (4 months at least) and thinks taking damage is not relevant as long as you manage a faster KO.
GW has been the “voice of the weaker people” but fails to realise that the current scoring system benefits the smaller player more because they are almost always punching up and the current scoring system awards more skilled gameplay rather than reckless nuking. Even if the weaker player cant KO a beefy defender(say a 7*r2 sassy with a r4 or r3 6* champ) but plays well and doesnt get hit, that person still has a chance to get a win even if the opponent with the stronger champ got the KO but got hit in the process. Moreover the current scoring system makes it so that u can use champ who require some build up and still have a fighting chance against nuke champs but yea lets switch back to the scoring system where a handful of champs dominate the scoring.
GW has been the “voice of the weaker people” but fails to realise that the current scoring system benefits the smaller player more because they are almost always punching up and the current scoring system awards more skilled gameplay rather than reckless nuking. Even if the weaker player cant KO a beefy defender(say a 7*r2 sassy with a r4 or r3 6* champ) but plays well and doesnt get hit, that person still has a chance to get a win even if the opponent with the stronger champ got the KO but got hit in the process. Moreover the current scoring system makes it so that u can use champ who require some build up and still have a fighting chance against nuke champs but yea lets switch back to the scoring system where a handful of champs dominate the scoring.
I am giving you a standing applause, didn't even think of that aspect. You are 100% right, this system gives skilled players with lower roster a great chance to win. 👏👏👏
I agree in part with several things in your explainer. In general I hate battle grounds because I think it's a game of luck. As a reasonable player I have ment fierce opposition more often than not with this advanced start point I think I was at gold 1. One person with suicides on beat my terrax sig 180 r3 in 25 seconds without any health taken. This seems impossible yet I wonder. I think the reason why people persist is the rewards are so much better, I mean so much better than war, alliance quest which I find devastating. The final thing which adds to pain particularly where many good alliances have now 450k minimum is how stainable is it with elders marks needed, of the last 20 fights my win rate is ~40%. Once people's elders marks are depleted which recovery rate is very low with this advanced start will make people enraged.
The system is not better if someone can win and not even take the Champ down versus someone that has. People can pat themselves on the back all they want about how fancy their footwork is, but they still didn't win the Fight. For all the complaining about participation trophies people do, it seems they pick and choose that argument.
What do you mean they didn't win the fight?
If someone got a K.O. and still lost the match that means the opponent at least got the defender down to 49% and maintained 100% of the attacker health (only way you'll get more than 30K points. For every % of additional health they lost they have to take at least 2% off the defender health. That's before considering the points from attacker health to the player who got a K.O. BG has the shortest time for a fight, in almost any other game mode, that player would have got a comfortable K.O.
If someone lost on points after getting a K.O. they played very aggressively and made a bunch of mistakes. It is very unlikely that they were the better player in that match. Current scoring system accurately captures that.
That's precisely what I'm saying. For the record, I'd be satisfied if Time Bonus was reverted to what it was before the most recent reduction, but while we're on the subject, it's a fighting competition. To K.O. is to win the Fight. When both sides have done that, then the metrics should be used to determine the Winner. Not this "You won the Match but how good?" nonsense that allows one side to win the Match and still lose.
A solo K.O. is not the only way to win a match. No other game mode demands this. Every other mode in the game gives you multiple attempts to bring down a defender. It allows you to chip down an opponent and revive your champ multiple times. If solo K.O. was the only way to win a fight, most of us here wouldn't have got to TB, let alone Paragon.
Anyone who wins on points without K.O. would have comfortably K.O.ed the defender in a longer fight. In almost every case, they are likely to be the better player in that match-up. Why should BG reward careless fighting over a smarter option?
This isn't the same as everest content or higher-end Stroy. There's a finite amount of time and a limited variation of strengths, coupled with Global Nodes that are shared by both sides. It's 2 minutes to best the other Player. Any Fight within the game has the ultimate objective of taking down the opponent. We're not playing to do a little Damage and avoid getting hit. We're playing to take the other Champ down, or get as close to it as possible. When one side accomplishes that and the other wins based on an external measurement, that's counterintuitive to anything else in the game. Health, Damage, Time, these should all be tie-breakers, honestly. If both sides take down the opponent, or if both K.O., then yes. The Stats should determine the Winner. If one takes down their side and the other doesn't, that's a clear Winner as far as I'm concerned. That's not really my major point. That would likely involve a K.O. Bonus. I wouldn't have any issue with that, but that wasn't my suggestion. My suggestion was to revert it back to what it was before they halved Time Bonus. When you're talking about fighting, the ultimate measure of skill is taking down the opponent. That's what fighting games are all about. Quite literally any I can think of. It's not just one measure of skill. It's the whole point of fighting.
What are you talking about? I'm not referring to any everest content. Even Act 1 doesn't need you to K.O. a defender on first attempt, neither does map 1 on AQ or any other mode. AW gives you a small bonus for a solo, just like BG does with the time bonus.
Why should BG reward a K.O. more than any other mode? No one has lost a BG match after getting a K.O., on points, unless they played very poorly.
I said the objective is to K.O. the opponent. You time out in War and AQ, and you lose half life. The Arena requires you to do it in one shot. No idea why you're focusing on not needing to one-shot on permanent content, but you're also not being compared to other Players there. Arguing that no one loses and K.O.s unless they played poorly is just an outside opinion. It's also subjective. I consider it less poor than not taking the other Champ down. In ANY content, the goal is to take the Champ down. You can't deny that. That's the point of fighting. This whole "played better played worse" is just a shift to Win for people who can't take the Champ down in 2 minutes. Point blank, period.
Arguing K.O. should award a win even if the other player scores more points is also just an outside opinion. One with very little support.
Yes, in solo content the goal is to take the champ down. But one gets unlimited shots at doing so. Only place you can say where you have to solo is arena, where there are no nodes.
In BG the goal is to score more points than the opponent. That's what decides who wins. There are benefits of getting a K.O. which are substantial, but not enough to overcome very poor execution. It's pretty well balanced as it is.
The Points are exactly what I'm discussing, and it was well balanced before the Time Remaining was lowered. I really dislike when people try to use my own points as if they're telling me something I haven't already said to others. I'm fully aware that the objective is to win more Points than the other Player. Where those Points are coming from is what I'm expressing my view on. This whole idea of poor execution is moot unless the other Player takes down a K.O. as well. Honestly, it's like saying "I didn't take my Champ down but I have more Health. You lost half and took it down. You suck.". See how ridiculous that sounds? I sure do. Which is fine if people want to pass judgment, but that has no business being the standard metric in BGs.
I mean yeah,if you omit details and present a strawman, it will seem absurd
The +2/-1 point system worked well for the earlier tiers. Removing that + keeping 5 victories in a row makes Vibranium unbearable because you keep bouncing up and down.
It often feels like you’re at the mercy of RNG for a lot of matches. Placing defenders first, unlucky champion draws, and passive AI can make or break a match. At that point it doesn’t feel like it comes down to skill, even if you are evenly matched with the opponent.
Toning down the point system for higher tiers and tweaking AI would be a great start, but even then I often find BGs to feel more like a chore rather than a fun game mode simple because progress slows to a halt near Diamond/Vibranium and it’s quite disparaging.
This is the only problem I see with the current system. The +2/-1 gives a sense of progression amidst death matches, dropped inputs and other issues.
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Yeah, when I take an R2 Champ down in less than 2 minutes, and the other guy wins because he had more Health and a longer Fight, something is not right.
The system is not better if someone can win and not even take the Champ down versus someone that has. People can pat themselves on the back all they want about how fancy their footwork is, but they still didn't win the Fight. For all the complaining about participation trophies people do, it seems they pick and choose that argument.
What do you mean they didn't win the fight?
If someone got a K.O. and still lost the match that means the opponent at least got the defender down to 49% and maintained 100% of the attacker health (only way you'll get more than 30K points. For every % of additional health they lost they have to take at least 2% off the defender health. That's before considering the points from attacker health to the player who got a K.O. BG has the shortest time for a fight, in almost any other game mode, that player would have got a comfortable K.O.
If someone lost on points after getting a K.O. they played very aggressively and made a bunch of mistakes. It is very unlikely that they were the better player in that match. Current scoring system accurately captures that.
That's precisely what I'm saying. For the record, I'd be satisfied if Time Bonus was reverted to what it was before the most recent reduction, but while we're on the subject, it's a fighting competition. To K.O. is to win the Fight. When both sides have done that, then the metrics should be used to determine the Winner. Not this "You won the Match but how good?" nonsense that allows one side to win the Match and still lose.
A solo K.O. is not the only way to win a match. No other game mode demands this. Every other mode in the game gives you multiple attempts to bring down a defender. It allows you to chip down an opponent and revive your champ multiple times. If solo K.O. was the only way to win a fight, most of us here wouldn't have got to TB, let alone Paragon.
Anyone who wins on points without K.O. would have comfortably K.O.ed the defender in a longer fight. In almost every case, they are likely to be the better player in that match-up. Why should BG reward careless fighting over a smarter option?
This isn't the same as everest content or higher-end Stroy. There's a finite amount of time and a limited variation of strengths, coupled with Global Nodes that are shared by both sides. It's 2 minutes to best the other Player. Any Fight within the game has the ultimate objective of taking down the opponent. We're not playing to do a little Damage and avoid getting hit. We're playing to take the other Champ down, or get as close to it as possible. When one side accomplishes that and the other wins based on an external measurement, that's counterintuitive to anything else in the game. Health, Damage, Time, these should all be tie-breakers, honestly. If both sides take down the opponent, or if both K.O., then yes. The Stats should determine the Winner. If one takes down their side and the other doesn't, that's a clear Winner as far as I'm concerned. That's not really my major point. That would likely involve a K.O. Bonus. I wouldn't have any issue with that, but that wasn't my suggestion. My suggestion was to revert it back to what it was before they halved Time Bonus. When you're talking about fighting, the ultimate measure of skill is taking down the opponent. That's what fighting games are all about. Quite literally any I can think of. It's not just one measure of skill. It's the whole point of fighting.
What are you talking about? I'm not referring to any everest content. Even Act 1 doesn't need you to K.O. a defender on first attempt, neither does map 1 on AQ or any other mode. AW gives you a small bonus for a solo, just like BG does with the time bonus.
Why should BG reward a K.O. more than any other mode? No one has lost a BG match after getting a K.O., on points, unless they played very poorly.
I said the objective is to K.O. the opponent. You time out in War and AQ, and you lose half life. The Arena requires you to do it in one shot. No idea why you're focusing on not needing to one-shot on permanent content, but you're also not being compared to other Players there. Arguing that no one loses and K.O.s unless they played poorly is just an outside opinion. It's also subjective. I consider it less poor than not taking the other Champ down. In ANY content, the goal is to take the Champ down. You can't deny that. That's the point of fighting. This whole "played better played worse" is just a shift to Win for people who can't take the Champ down in 2 minutes. Point blank, period.
Arguing K.O. should award a win even if the other player scores more points is also just an outside opinion. One with very little support.
Yes, in solo content the goal is to take the champ down. But one gets unlimited shots at doing so. Only place you can say where you have to solo is arena, where there are no nodes.
In BG the goal is to score more points than the opponent. That's what decides who wins. There are benefits of getting a K.O. which are substantial, but not enough to overcome very poor execution. It's pretty well balanced as it is.
The Points are exactly what I'm discussing, and it was well balanced before the Time Remaining was lowered. I really dislike when people try to use my own points as if they're telling me something I haven't already said to others. I'm fully aware that the objective is to win more Points than the other Player. Where those Points are coming from is what I'm expressing my view on. This whole idea of poor execution is moot unless the other Player takes down a K.O. as well. Honestly, it's like saying "I didn't take my Champ down but I have more Health. You lost half and took it down. You suck.". See how ridiculous that sounds? I sure do. Which is fine if people want to pass judgment, but that has no business being the standard metric in BGs.
It sounds ridiculous because you phrase it ridiculously. If you said "I got your champ down and was one hit away from dying while you had 80% of your health remaining while taking 80% of my champs health" then it's obvious who should win that match-up. That is the difference between 31K points (K.O. and no attacker health) and 36K points (12K from 80% attacker health & 24K from getting the defender down to 20%).
It is extremely ridiculous to say that the player getting 31K points should have won because they got 5 more hits in before the 2 min timer expired. They obviously had the worse of the match-up.
If they actually take down the Champ, then yes. They should win. It's a fighting competition. The fact that this escapes people is almost beyond me, except the fact that I know it's because it serves their own personal play style. Which is fine for longer Fights. In a 2-minute format, that's nonsensical.
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Yeah, when I take an R2 Champ down in less than 2 minutes, and the other guy wins because he had more Health and a longer Fight, something is not right.
Yes, your math. There are 3 ways to acquire points. Hp, defender hp, and time. You add those up. Whoever has the most wins
At the risk of fervent opposition, I'd like to talk about a couple of pain points still bothering me about BGs.
The first is the scoring. I understand that people consider it more skillful to have less Health taken, but I've lost a number of Matches to Players who never took down the Champs. This is nonsensical to me. There should be no competition that decentivizes taking down the opponent. That's the entire point of the Fight. The rest is secondary. I'm sorry for those who disagree, but there is no way that someone should lose and be the party who actually K.O.'d their Match. The second is the A.I. A bit redundant to discuss because I understand they have plans for looking at it, but it's absolutely different in BGs than any other part of the game. It's insane. I think one of the key areas to look at is in the game mode because it's on overdrive. I've seen some knee-jerk reacting there. I've even had dances with it. (Back-and-forth, jerk jerk.) I'm all for having a challenge, but it's beyond even caring about the strength of the opponent anymore because I go into a Match wondering if the A.I. is going to thunderclap me. Seeding is the last. It's somewhat helpful overall, but it's still a painful grind every Season. You start out among the entire GC, and unless you're among the most success in the game mode, you eke by with trying to string enough momentum together to advance. Again, that's a part of the competition, but to this extent is demotivating. Loss after Loss, with the occasional Win. You get one Win away from advancing, then you lose more. This should be a rarity. Not the entirety of the competition. These are just a few things bothering me that I'd like to discuss. I'm sure some responses will say get used to it, or deal, and for the record I'm dealing. I'm still playing. That doesn't mean I can't discuss my thoughts on where to improve. I enjoy the game mode, but it's becoming way more stress than anything, and I'd hate to see it continue.
1 - Having more health is more skillful than who can nuke the fastest. Having more skill should be the deciding factor in who is better.
2 - AI sucks for everyone.
3 - You can't complain about bigger accounts beating up on lower accounts AND seeding. It's one or the other GW.
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Yeah, when I take an R2 Champ down in less than 2 minutes, and the other guy wins because he had more Health and a longer Fight, something is not right.
Yeah , you got hit. Be a better fighter. Live to see another day, not be a kamikaze
It sounds ridiculous because you phrase it ridiculously. If you said "I got your champ down and was one hit away from dying while you had 80% of your health remaining while taking 80% of my champs health" then it's obvious who should win that match-up. That is the difference between 31K points (K.O. and no attacker health) and 36K points (12K from 80% attacker health & 24K from getting the defender down to 20%).
It is extremely ridiculous to say that the player getting 31K points should have won because they got 5 more hits in before the 2 min timer expired. They obviously had the worse of the match-up.
If they actually take down the Champ, then yes. They should win. It's a fighting competition. The fact that this escapes people is almost beyond me, except the fact that I know it's because it serves their own personal play style. Which is fine for longer Fights. In a 2-minute format, that's nonsensical.
It's precisely because of the 2-minute format there is a need for a scoring system that captures attacker health. If it was a 5-minute fight, every one of those games would end up with the winning party also achieving a K.O., with more health remaining than their opponent.
You are the one who created a thread to serve their personal playstyle. There haven't been any concerns on scoring otherwise.
It's nonsensical to suggest anything to the contrary as being reasonable to me and that's not going to change. So we might as well agree to disagree. If one Player K.O.s the opponent and the other doesn't, that should be the Win. Period. In any case, a K.O. Bonus isn't even what I suggested. I wanted the scoring to go back to the 15k for Time Bonus. You think it's fine the way it is, that's great. Thanks for your feedback. I'm not arguing in circles about it. I don't.
Seriously if you don't like the way BGs work then you don't have to play it. Go play AW or AQ or Arena or Incursion or explore some quest where KOing the opponent means you will win.
BG matches are based on 3 parameters: Defender Health, Attacker Health and Fight Time. This is what makes BG different from every other game mode. If you don't like it then don't play it.
That's an asinine suggestion for a discussion opened to discuss ideas on how to improve it. I don't need to be told to play something else.
As harsh as it may sound. But this is what people get to hear when they cannot stop complaining about a game mode that does not need to change just because they are not happy with it.
It needs to change because it needs to change. No amount of telling people to "Git gud." will make that go away.
Just because you THINK it should change doesn't mean it NEEDS to change. Lots of people with more skill don't have an issue with the scoring system or seeding.
The point of BGs is to KO the opponent, just like football is to score touchdowns. That's why in the NFL if one team scores 1 touchdown and the other scores 0 the first team wins, even if the second team kicks 4 field goals.
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Yeah, when I take an R2 Champ down in less than 2 minutes, and the other guy wins because he had more Health and a longer Fight, something is not right.
How is something wrong? A clean fight and remaining health accounts for 15k point. Knocking out the opponent gives you 30k which is double.
If you knockout the opponent with 3% health and I get the opponent to 1% with 95% health I should win. I clearly played better in my match than you did.
I'm confused by what you don't understand about the scoring system. It rewards skill the most. This is a skill based competition. It makes perfect sense. If only knocking out the opponent mattered no one would want to play this mode. A lot of times you would lose even if you played lights out but didn't get the KO.
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Yeah, when I take an R2 Champ down in less than 2 minutes, and the other guy wins because he had more Health and a longer Fight, something is not right.
How is something wrong? A clean fight and remaining health accounts for 15k point. Knocking out the opponent gives you 30k which is double.
If you knockout the opponent with 3% health and I get the opponent to 1% with 95% health I should win. I clearly played better in my match than you did.
I'm confused by what you don't understand about the scoring system. It rewards skill the most. This is a skill based competition. It makes perfect sense. If only knocking out the opponent mattered no one would want to play this mode. A lot of times you would lose even if you played lights out but didn't get the KO.
He thought he should have won this match, there really isnt much to explain other than the frustration of not being able to win
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Yeah, when I take an R2 Champ down in less than 2 minutes, and the other guy wins because he had more Health and a longer Fight, something is not right.
How is something wrong? A clean fight and remaining health accounts for 15k point. Knocking out the opponent gives you 30k which is double.
If you knockout the opponent with 3% health and I get the opponent to 1% with 95% health I should win. I clearly played better in my match than you did.
I'm confused by what you don't understand about the scoring system. It rewards skill the most. This is a skill based competition. It makes perfect sense. If only knocking out the opponent mattered no one would want to play this mode. A lot of times you would lose even if you played lights out but didn't get the KO.
He thought he should have won this match, there really isnt much to explain other than the frustration of not being able to win
One Match I gave a bad example on and you think that's what I'm talking about? That is not. I'm quite capable of counting Points, thanks.
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Yeah, when I take an R2 Champ down in less than 2 minutes, and the other guy wins because he had more Health and a longer Fight, something is not right.
How is something wrong? A clean fight and remaining health accounts for 15k point. Knocking out the opponent gives you 30k which is double.
If you knockout the opponent with 3% health and I get the opponent to 1% with 95% health I should win. I clearly played better in my match than you did.
I'm confused by what you don't understand about the scoring system. It rewards skill the most. This is a skill based competition. It makes perfect sense. If only knocking out the opponent mattered no one would want to play this mode. A lot of times you would lose even if you played lights out but didn't get the KO.
He thought he should have won this match, there really isnt much to explain other than the frustration of not being able to win
One Match I gave a bad example on and you think that's what I'm talking about? That is not. I'm quite capable of counting Points, thanks.
Your excuse was "I didnt want to kill him in 1 sp2 because i was scared to get reported" ROFL
It sounds ridiculous because you phrase it ridiculously. If you said "I got your champ down and was one hit away from dying while you had 80% of your health remaining while taking 80% of my champs health" then it's obvious who should win that match-up. That is the difference between 31K points (K.O. and no attacker health) and 36K points (12K from 80% attacker health & 24K from getting the defender down to 20%).
It is extremely ridiculous to say that the player getting 31K points should have won because they got 5 more hits in before the 2 min timer expired. They obviously had the worse of the match-up.
If they actually take down the Champ, then yes. They should win. It's a fighting competition. The fact that this escapes people is almost beyond me, except the fact that I know it's because it serves their own personal play style. Which is fine for longer Fights. In a 2-minute format, that's nonsensical.
It's precisely because of the 2-minute format there is a need for a scoring system that captures attacker health. If it was a 5-minute fight, every one of those games would end up with the winning party also achieving a K.O., with more health remaining than their opponent.
You are the one who created a thread to serve their personal playstyle. There haven't been any concerns on scoring otherwise.
Disagree on the "no concerns on scoring". Others have posted it as well, and like any other Thread on BGs, it gets dog piled by the usual suspects. I never implied taking Health away. The only suggestion I made was returning the scoring to full Time Remaining. While we're having a theoretical discussion on it, I'm pointing out thar you're playing a Match to win the Fight. Anything else really should be secondary. That's my view. First, take down the other Champ. Secondly, how well did you do it versus the other Player. My issue is the current scoring means it doesn't matter if you take down the Champ, you can still lose the Match, which is garbage. Any way you look at it. If this was a Tournament, like Battlerealm Brawl, then I would understand that format. Not for the entire Player base.
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Yeah, when I take an R2 Champ down in less than 2 minutes, and the other guy wins because he had more Health and a longer Fight, something is not right.
How is something wrong? A clean fight and remaining health accounts for 15k point. Knocking out the opponent gives you 30k which is double.
If you knockout the opponent with 3% health and I get the opponent to 1% with 95% health I should win. I clearly played better in my match than you did.
I'm confused by what you don't understand about the scoring system. It rewards skill the most. This is a skill based competition. It makes perfect sense. If only knocking out the opponent mattered no one would want to play this mode. A lot of times you would lose even if you played lights out but didn't get the KO.
He thought he should have won this match, there really isnt much to explain other than the frustration of not being able to win
One Match I gave a bad example on and you think that's what I'm talking about? That is not. I'm quite capable of counting Points, thanks.
Your excuse was "I didnt want to kill him in 1 sp2 because i was scared to get reported" ROFL
I don't believe that was the case. I said I lagged out and got dinged because he took 2 L2s.
Sounds like GW is losing constantly to much smaller accounts. The only way his scoring system makes sense is if he is constantly killing 5* with his 6* or 7* but in the process losing the majority of his health. Meanwhile his opponent is fighting a r2 sassy with his 5*invisible woman or og cap and takes no damage but can't quite kill a 300k health pool in 2 minutes. So yeah skill issue.
Yeah, when I take an R2 Champ down in less than 2 minutes, and the other guy wins because he had more Health and a longer Fight, something is not right.
How is something wrong? A clean fight and remaining health accounts for 15k point. Knocking out the opponent gives you 30k which is double.
If you knockout the opponent with 3% health and I get the opponent to 1% with 95% health I should win. I clearly played better in my match than you did.
I'm confused by what you don't understand about the scoring system. It rewards skill the most. This is a skill based competition. It makes perfect sense. If only knocking out the opponent mattered no one would want to play this mode. A lot of times you would lose even if you played lights out but didn't get the KO.
He thought he should have won this match, there really isnt much to explain other than the frustration of not being able to win
One Match I gave a bad example on and you think that's what I'm talking about? That is not. I'm quite capable of counting Points, thanks.
Your excuse was "I didnt want to kill him in 1 sp2 because i was scared to get reported" ROFL
I don't believe that was the case. I said I lagged out and got dinged because he took 2 L2s.
You questiones the other person's "skill" When using Doom against a shock immune and shrugger, claim you should have won because you killed it 20 seconds faster.. Then say you didn't want to get reported for killing him too fast, and said you lag out, now you say it was 1 example you misused... That's like the perfect storm of excuses to lose rofl...
Comments
You cannot seem realize that adding KO bonus will just make BGs a ripoff version of AW... Where two players go against each other and one who got all the one shots will win. And clearly no one in interested in that.
In any other game mode you have the freedom of taking some damage and finishing the fight. But that is what make BGs different than any other game mode. Here you don't have that freedom. You can't just use Herc's immortality or Fury's LMD and nuke the opponent. This is what levels the playing field for both the players.
They can be judged and get points on how they play and not who KOed and who did not.
If you cannot grasp this simple idea then I don't know what to say anymore.
I really dislike when people try to use my own points as if they're telling me something I haven't already said to others. I'm fully aware that the objective is to win more Points than the other Player. Where those Points are coming from is what I'm expressing my view on.
This whole idea of poor execution is moot unless the other Player takes down a K.O. as well. Honestly, it's like saying "I didn't take my Champ down but I have more Health. You lost half and took it down. You suck.".
See how ridiculous that sounds? I sure do. Which is fine if people want to pass judgment, but that has no business being the standard metric in BGs.
It is extremely ridiculous to say that the player getting 31K points should have won because they got 5 more hits in before the 2 min timer expired. They obviously had the worse of the match-up.
Moreover the current scoring system makes it so that u can use champ who require some build up and still have a fighting chance against nuke champs but yea lets switch back to the scoring system where a handful of champs dominate the scoring.
One person with suicides on beat my terrax sig 180 r3 in 25 seconds without any health taken. This seems impossible yet I wonder.
I think the reason why people persist is the rewards are so much better, I mean so much better than war, alliance quest which I find devastating.
The final thing which adds to pain particularly where many good alliances have now 450k minimum is how stainable is it with elders marks needed, of the last 20 fights my win rate is ~40%.
Once people's elders marks are depleted which recovery rate is very low with this advanced start will make people enraged.
2 - AI sucks for everyone.
3 - You can't complain about bigger accounts beating up on lower accounts AND seeding. It's one or the other GW.
You are the one who created a thread to serve their personal playstyle. There haven't been any concerns on scoring otherwise.
The point of BGs is to KO the opponent, just like football is to score touchdowns. That's why in the NFL if one team scores 1 touchdown and the other scores 0 the first team wins, even if the second team kicks 4 field goals.
KO=win
TD=win
It's simple math people.
If you knockout the opponent with 3% health and I get the opponent to 1% with 95% health I should win. I clearly played better in my match than you did.
I'm confused by what you don't understand about the scoring system. It rewards skill the most. This is a skill based competition. It makes perfect sense. If only knocking out the opponent mattered no one would want to play this mode. A lot of times you would lose even if you played lights out but didn't get the KO.
That is not. I'm quite capable of counting Points, thanks.
ROFL
I never implied taking Health away. The only suggestion I made was returning the scoring to full Time Remaining.
While we're having a theoretical discussion on it, I'm pointing out thar you're playing a Match to win the Fight. Anything else really should be secondary. That's my view. First, take down the other Champ. Secondly, how well did you do it versus the other Player.
My issue is the current scoring means it doesn't matter if you take down the Champ, you can still lose the Match, which is garbage. Any way you look at it.
If this was a Tournament, like Battlerealm Brawl, then I would understand that format. Not for the entire Player base.
I kind of agree with both sides.
Simple solution (apologies if someone already suggested this) would be to keep scoring the same but give some bonus points for the KO.
They’d have do some calculations to work out the most sensible number of bonus points.
Then say you didn't want to get reported for killing him too fast, and said you lag out, now you say it was 1 example you misused...
That's like the perfect storm of excuses to lose rofl...