"BG is a competition" & other forum charades

TL;DR - Forum regulars simply use "BG is a competition" when it serves their purpose of easy rewards and easy opponents. Otherwise they are happy to take any buggy advantage, integrity of the competition be damned.

Context - Throughout this season, there have been multiple threads by people highlighting that they are locked into picking their deck first and placing defense first in battlegrounds. Personally, I am one of the affected players, having picked second only once in close to 100 matches. Some of the threads are here:
Thread 1
Thread 2
Thread 3
These threads have either moved to the purgatory of bugs section and have received no real interest from anyone on the forums. One of the threads includes the response from the game support that the order of picking first is purely random. It is almost impossible for this to be true and players to have sequences like mine and others.

Why now - I have cleared all solo milestones and am almost at GC, which I'll probably get to despite this handicap. I thought it best to wait till now before posting, from a view of minimising accusations of bias. I don't expect any fix for this or compensation for all the wasted elder marks.

Irrespective of one's view on how much of a disadvantage picking first is, there is little argument that it is a clear disadvantage since the person picking second gets to select counters for the opposite deck and then also gets to place the defense second in direct response to their opponents moves. For closely matched players, this can be a decisive advantage, especially in matches which go to the third round.

I get the devs interest to simply bury this issue. I doubt they have a lot of freedom to respond with transparency given that elder marks can be purchased. I didn't really expect much from them other than may be a comment that they are looking into it or that this isn't intended but they don't know what is causing it. It is a bit disappointing that they failed to clear this fairly low bar.

What is really disheartening is that there was almost no reaction from the forums this. Every time someone complains about matchmaking on the forums, a bunch of regulars chip in to remind those players that "BG is a competition", "everyone is playing for the same rewards" and no one is entitled to preferential treatment apart from the advantages they can build in terms of roster and skill. Every other aspect of BG gets a lot of reactions, a hypothetical to roll back BG scoring got tons of responses, another forum user created a mathematical model to prove weaker players should be grateful to stronger players who farm in lower tiers.

So, when there was actual evidence of systematic advantages being provided to select players and permanent disadvantages for others, I assumed these players would be up in arms. There was absolutely nothing, only notable comments were one user suggesting these players accept their fate, couple of other equating this to other seemingly improbable events (these sequences are orders of magnitude more improbable) and someone else pulling out the wikipedia page for frequency illusion. Not one of the "BG is a competition" warriors stepped in to ask why there are elements of match fixing in a competitive PVP mode. I don't know if they were happy to benefit either directly from better ordering odds for them or indirectly from a few accounts ranking lower in ranked rewards, or just didn't care. I'm not suggesting any of this is wrong, people are always expected to do what is best for their account. I just hope they remember their behaviour next time they want to pile on a relatively new player struggling with progression in BG.

Comments

ahmynuts

BringPopcorn

You are a regular "chip in" too

Greekhit

“I just hope they remember their behaviour next time they want to pile on a relative new player struggling with progression in BG”
That’s the root of the problem that fuels those matchmaking complain posts.
A relative new player is expected to struggle with progression in BGs, and realistically shouldn’t expect to make it very far, since it’s intended design to be that way.
Why?
Because, as annoying as it sounds BGs is a competition, and as any other competition that exists, the stronger participants will place higher than the weaker ones.
As for the placing first observation many people have reported, It’s seems to be a bug that affects all players, not only weaker but stronger too.
Placing first is a disadvantage.
Very strong players will overcome that obstacle and win the match despite placing first.
But, because this affect all players it needs to be solved.
In my opinion, blindly selecting defenders simultaneously is a good approach on solving the problem.
No advantage or disadvantage for anyone.
Kabam should fix this on upcoming seasons 🙂

BringPopcorn

I just find it funny that everyone who wrote in the forums about the pick first issue claim a 90-95% rate in which they had to pick first..
Yes i believe the system could be broken, that maybe it is slanted go figure for what reason, but EVERYONE who agreed or wrote on those post have a really high percentage, it takes 2 people for a match, where are the people who have picked 2nd 90-95% of the time?
It could be an issue but I believe the numbers are over inflated to make it more dramatic and some are even claiming high numbers due to mass hysteria.

Terra

If you can't succeed in BGs, it's a skill issue.

Is matchmaking sometimes borked? Yes. But does that mean you have to be handheld all the way? No.

Stature

I've picked second once. I'm over 450K in solo points. You do the math. It's not 90-95%, it's being locked in to pick first. There is no probability attached here. It is likely that the only time I got second was with someone else who is also locked in.

The people who are picking second are probably already in decent tiers in GC and are hoping this doesn't get any attention. This is what I mean by "BG is a competition" only being relevant when it serves them.

ahmynuts

Some of the worst words to be strung together in the english language iykyk

Stature

Picking first all the time is a skill issue? I am open to suggestions on how to manipulate the ordering systems without breaching ToS.

BringPopcorn

It is an advantage? Yes it a slight one, now to claim that the people in GC are there because they were benefitted by this advantage?... See this is why some people then come with a bad attitude to tell people things like git gud, or its a competition.
Picking first has a disadvantage but its not a match decider. The fact that you were able to get 450k points and close to GC is proof that picking first is not an instant loss either. Not saying you said that; but there are some people that will blame EVERYTHING, on everything else before their shortcomings. They will blame matchmaking, f2p vs P2P, input issues, AI, point scoring system, picking first 12 out of 10 matches before they accept where they are in the game.

WinterFields

I wondered the same thing so I recorded it this season. In 85 matches, I placed first 75 times and second 10 times, which is an 88% rate.

Out of those 75 matches, there were only two times where placing first actually seemed to make it harder, one of which I barely won in the end. I also noticed that my win percentage when I placed second mirrors when I picked first. Some people may feel the impact more, but my own experience indicates it's not a big deal for my performance

BringPopcorn

I don't keep track, and the reason is simple. I am not gonna use picking first as an excuse for a lost match. Not directing this to you, I just won't keep track cause I dont believe is a deciding factor on match results.

Colinwhitworth69

Re: picking first. If you can get some usable data representing some sort of statistical significance, not just your own self-reported experience, then maybe people will take you seriously. You say thee are "multiple threads", but how many players does that actually represent? A dozen? Out of how many players? Well in GC alone there are 11K+ people, and if there was aq bug causing players to always pick first, the forum would be flooded with complaints. What we have instead is a trickle.

As to your complaint that people remind you that BG is a competition when you complain about matchmaking -- sorry if that message has been delivered in a non-supportive way, but the forum is constantly littered by people posting the same exact thing that someone else posted, and it is frustrating that so many people choose to create repetitive posts rather than comment on existing ones. I mean, here we are again, nothing new, just the same old complaints of which Kabam is clearly aware.

LilMaddogHT

I don’t recall how many times I got to draft/place first… in the end it doesn’t matter too much IMO but there is a simple and interesting solution:

Make the 3rd round blind. What does that mean? You cannot see who the opponent is picking for offense or defense & you just take the chance at placing defender and picking an appropriate attacker out of the 3 champs left.

Spices up that 3rd match bit 🤘🏼

BringPopcorn

It stops being "Data" the moment a "conspiracy theory" pops up.

Stature

Slight or not is subjective. The point is there is a systemic disadvantage applied to a group of players. The corollary is there is a systemic advantage applied to another group of players. With impact on final ranking of players and alliances. That is against the ethos of any competition anywhere.

I'm in Vibranium, picking first all the time this entire season. Would I have had 5 more wins if I had picked first all the time, of course. I would easily be in GC then. So yeah, if anyone who has a comparable roster and game skills as me, they would easily get into GC if they were picking second all the time. I'll get to GC even with this handicap, it'll cost me 1,000-2,000 elder marks more, in fact now that I'm beyond 450K, I'll probably just do it with energy.

That said, this has still set me back. Every extra loss I've had, I needed two more matches to make up that progress. I've played more matches than I should have, consumed my EM stash and ceded the opportunity cost of doing arenas or something else. It will cost me points in the rank rewards, since for the same amount of matches I would have more points even with one more win. It will cost my alliance points in the event. This also means some other player and alliance has benefited from free points on the other side of this issue. Eventually, this will also impact your solo rank rewards and alliance rank rewards.

The issue is not if I am skillful enough to get past this disadvantage. The question is why is it ok for the game to apply this disadvantage selectively, if BG is meant to be a competition.

BringPopcorn

Well, not sure what to tell you; but this is straight up the alley of claiming that people who spend in the game have better results in crystal openings.
Its hard to sympathize with a post that claims that everyone else who picked second is already in GC and hoping that this doesn't get revealed.
I dunno open a ticket with a screenshot of every match you pick first, it will raise a flag if its a bug. Doubt they tag your account as a 1st picker for the season though.

Stature

I said people with similar rosters and similar skills would get into GC if they were picking second all the time. I won ~60 matches out of ~100 and am in Vibranium today. Picking first all the time. Do you seriously think I wouldn't have won 65 matches out of 100 if I was picking second all the time? That's all it take to be in GC from where I am.

Sachhyam257

I don't pay attention to it either tbh. I feel like the victory track meta is more reliant on picking counters, while the gc meta is more about having the right champs for the node (having counters still helps though). I can see how having to pick first everytime might be frustrating for OP (who is still in vt). Is this actually a thing, or are ppl just spilling out their frustration on confirmation bias? Can anyone enlighten me here?

LordSmasher

I went from Plat II to GC and only picked second once.
These are the other factors
* I won 80%+ of my matches
* My match making time is generally 10-12 seconds
* I'm in Australia
* When I picked second my wait time was ~5 seconds

I don't know what determines the pick order but
* I've seen it claimed the longer you wait the more likely you are to pick first
* It is NOT random

I don't think there are any conspiracy theories or the like.
I think their is a weighting algorithm involved and its bugged.

BringPopcorn

I dont think the percentage of win matches would have changed that much if you had picked 2nd.

GroundedWisdom

I'm actually with Popcorn on this one. Surprising, I know. Not that I'm disputing whether or not there's an issue. There may be, but for every Player picking first, there's a Player picking second.
In any event, I don't agree that it's such a disadvantage. The point in drafting is to choose Attack and Defense, and to be as prepared as possible. Which means keeping in mind having counters to as much as possible. Either way, first or second, we still have to counter what they choose to use.

Stature

There is no conspiracy theory. If the ordering is not random, then there are advantages being handed to some player group. How does that make sense in a ranked competitive mode?

Stature

If the order was random, then the odds of 99 first picks out 100 is so astronomical as to not even being relevant. In this particular case, just one sequence is enough to prove it isn't random. And there are more than one sequences showing this. You could run the game for centuries and never have that pattern even once if it was truly random.

The problem is if you are picking first 80% of the time, there is no good way for you to track this. No one plays 100's of BG matches in a day to notice it. A streak of 5-10 first picks will be deemed as bad luck as long as there is 1-2 second picks occasionally. I only started paying attention after I realised I was only picking first. Even if I had 10 matches where I picked second in the 100, I would have ignored the pattern, because I wouldn't have a long enough stretch of picking first.

Stature

Ideally, the person picking champs first should get to place defense second. Unfortunately, the current system just compounds the disadvantages by making the same player pick and place first.

WinterFields

There are so many different factors that it's hard to confidently say you would have won if you picked first. Not being able to draft specific champs, being outplayed, facing a roster that is just superior to yours, etc. all play a larger role, in my opinion. I don't believe you would have won 5 more matches purely because of placing first

Stature

Sure. But I had a disadvantage in all my matches, the expectation that there would be no improvement in my win rate if I had an advantage in all my matches is fairly erroneous. It is an advantage after all, eventually it does affect outcomes. Even if it is 1 out of 100, that's still 4500 more solo points and 180 elder marks saved.

Aecyn

I was in the same boat, picking first every game until about 425000 points into the event where I picked second twice in one day. Shortly after that I made GC and I'm still picking first more than second but I have been getting second picks. So maybe it's a victory track issue?

On the flip side, I have an alliance mate who always picks second... So those exists as well.

BringPopcorn

It is conspiracy theory if you believe your account is defaulted to pick 1st and everyone else in GC benefitted from this and are staying quiet, specially if the only Data that you can compare it to is yours.
I dont believe in comparing similar rosters or skill is redundant at all, unless you can watch everyone play next to you. Similarity of roster? Based on what? Prestige? Rating? You only get to see 4 champs out of someone else's profile. 10 out of my 30 champs in deck are decay, I won matched just by banning the opponents. I will be as skeptical as I can be when you use skill and roster as a comparing factor, specially when you claim 60~ wins out of 100~ matches, most people that get to GC earlier don't even play 100+ matches to get there.

obsidiman

@Stature how is Kabam, or the powers that be, selecting which accounts are "locked" into playing first? And if they are truly "locking" in accounts to pick first, why would they pit two against each other like in the single instance where you happened to pick second?

Can you provide screenshot evidence that you have picked 1st in BGs 99 out of 100 times? And if you have over 450k points picking first 99% of the time you can't be at that much of a disadvantage. I mean, I alternate between picking first and second with notable streaks in each and I'm only over half way to 450k and have maybe a 55-60% winning percentage.

Stature

How much would it change? Is 61 ok? That's 4500 more points in the solo event, 2 less matches I would had to play and 180 EMs saved. That's about 80 units. Just from one extra loss.

That said, I think 5% is a conservative estimate of how much win rates differ for people picking first over second. All that means is people picking second win 52.5% of the matches overall.