Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
Asking for a fix (and acknowledgement) to a bug which gives permanent disadvantage to some players is charity?
Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
So, when you get to pick first more often than you should, giving you an in-game advantage, that is just a challenge I should deal with?
But someone else gets an advantage you don't get, that is charity?
This is what I mean when I say you don't want a competition, you just want an easy path to rewards - be it preferential first picks, a tailored store or weak teams to pile on.
Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
Asking for a fix (and acknowledgement) to a bug which gives permanent disadvantage to some players is charity?
Do tell us what "bug" you want "fixed" to your "disadvantage." The competition bug? Or the bug where everyone is fighting for same rewards?
Easy solution make separate tier rewards for Uncollected and Cav players in BG, that'll solve every "My account have low rated champions but I want top rank rewards" posts.
Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
Asking for a fix (and acknowledgement) to a bug which gives permanent disadvantage to some players is charity?
Do tell us what "bug" you want "fixed" to your "disadvantage." The competition bug? Or the bug where everyone is fighting for same rewards?
Easy solution make separate tier rewards for Uncollected and Cav players in BG, that'll solve every "My account have low rated champions but I want top rank rewards" posts.
Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
So, when you get to pick first more often than you should, giving you an in-game advantage, that is just a challenge I should deal with?
But someone else gets an advantage you don't get, that is charity?
This is what I mean when I say you don't want a competition, you just want an easy path to rewards - be it preferential first picks, a tailored store or weak teams to pile on.
What are you even talking about? You're not making any sense.
It's a competition so winners adapt to the challenge. Losers do not adapt and complain on the forums about picking first and matchmaking. It's not hard to follow.
Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
Asking for a fix (and acknowledgement) to a bug which gives permanent disadvantage to some players is charity?
Do tell us what "bug" you want "fixed" to your "disadvantage." The competition bug? Or the bug where everyone is fighting for same rewards?
Easy solution make separate tier rewards for Uncollected and Cav players in BG, that'll solve every "My account have low rated champions but I want top rank rewards" posts.
The bug where the order of picks is not random.
That's never getting fixed for unknown reasons, many have asked Kabam to just make it like, whoever bans the heroes fastest in start of match gets to pick 2nd.
It's a competition so winners adapt to the challenge. Losers do not adapt and complain on the forums about picking first and matchmaking. It's not hard to follow.
You get to pick second more often than you should, because I am picking first all the time. Consequently, you are being handed free wins to an extent. You are perfectly fine when you are handed that advantage. If it was a fair competition, I would get to pick second 50% of the time. Since it benefits you, you don't classify it as a charity and are happy to play with that unfair advantage.
If you are ok with one type of advantage in the match-up, you have little right to complain about other types of advantages just because they don't benefit you.
I will never ever, I mean NEVER will understand the entitlement from lower accounts that they deserve the vibranium and GC rewards with their low/medium hero deck, just think for a good second.
Let's imagine, higher accounts have deck rating of 92 out of 100, so why do YOU (70 rating deck) think you DESERVE to win or not face that high deck? Even tho you are competing for SAME rewards?
Rewards are same, so matchmaking will be same. If yall want to face equal matches every single time then Kabam should introduce the rewards appropriate designed for each progression level. (Just like monthly and event rewards are designed for each progression level and put this thing to rest)
Tldr :- want to progress in BG? Start ranking up champs or attain skills higher than MSD/Karate/your favourite youtuber.
It's not about winning certain awards or entering the Gladiator Circuit. Battlegrounds is my favorite game mode. I really enjoy the fierce and evenly matched encounters, where the fate of victory is weighed until the last seconds. It is sad to hit much stronger rivals all the time. I'm not interested in rewards, just a fair opportunity to skirmish with other players. Prizes are absolutely a secondary issue for me
Good news! They have a mode designed just for you!
Account size is deceiving if a summoner only ranks up the champions they play at top level. Some have every 2, 3 and most 4* and many 5* maxed out. Some left champs not leveled.
Just the opposite when you look at 2 similar prestiges. They could be very different accounts, but have similar prestige only looking at 5 champs.
It's a competition so winners adapt to the challenge. Losers do not adapt and complain on the forums about picking first and matchmaking. It's not hard to follow.
You get to pick second more often than you should, because I am picking first all the time. Consequently, you are being handed free wins to an extent. You are perfectly fine when you are handed that advantage. If it was a fair competition, I would get to pick second 50% of the time. Since it benefits you, you don't classify it as a charity and are happy to play with that unfair advantage.
If you are ok with one type of advantage in the match-up, you have little right to complain about other types of advantages just because they don't benefit you.
You have no idea how often I pick first so stop that nonsense. TBH I don't pay attention because it's not a big deal. I'm 12-0 so far this season with only 2 matches going to round 3 so picking 1st or 2nd doesn't have any effect on me at all.
It's such a strawman to accuse everyone who is good at BGs of being good because of gaining an advantage that you don't get. That's just a loser's excuse to avoid accepting their own personal shortcomings. I'll reiterate my comment from the previous thread. You can either adapt and overcome or cry on the forums.
That's never getting fixed for unknown reasons, many have asked Kabam to just make it like, whoever bans the heroes fastest in start of match gets to pick 2nd.
Thank you. But we haven't even had an acknowledgement that the bug exists so far. If it is true that that will never get fixed, it pretty much nullifies any claim of BG being a competition. No competition randomly punishes one group of players and gives free wins to another.
Imagine being the Oakland Athletics- You have the worst record in baseball and you played in the division with the team that won the World Series. But you're in the same league as them and you play them many times throughout the season.
Last year the Washington Nationals had the worst record in the MLB-
They made improvements and while still in last place in 2023 they are 21 games better than the Athletics in 2023-
This is an example of what we're all referring to here. At some point, you're going to be the Athletics. You'll compete with smaller rosters (The Athletics traditionally pay very little in salary to their players) and you'll win some and lose some (probably more often), but you'll get things along the way to help you improve.
You have to understand that you are in a pool with everyone and you're all competing for the same rewards and everything else. You will have limits, and you'll just have to keep improving in order to win more matches in BGs. It's how the mode is meant to be played.
“The whales have spoken” I have had the same problem as Echeon and i would like the players with 3 mil rating and 5 rank 2s to try and even win a match with our accounts. It’s like every champ we have, they have the perfect counter. Don’t even get me started on the stubborn AI and countless impossible matchups won by whale paragons who have allready done necro twice.
The problem is that you think you're in a separate league than everyone else. For some reason, you think you shouldn't have to face any opponent that has a bigger account than you. Can you tell me any competitive sport out there that does this?
And before you say "well little league teams don't have to play major league teams", that's not a fair comparison because they aren't playing in the same leagues. BG's has one league and that's it.
This is how professional sports are designed. Inferior teams, with smaller budgets, can compete against each other and go on to enjoy victories and progression, or even win their own league. Imagine the morale of a team that loses 23 games and wins only 3 of them. They can't fall lower, they can't advance further. All that's left is figuring out how to do is to hit the weakest possible opponent in each draw. And then many players complain, about deliberately losing matches and being stuck in lower divisions
Imagine being the Oakland Athletics- You have the worst record in baseball and you played in the division with the team that won the World Series. But you're in the same league as them and you play them many times throughout the season.
Last year the Washington Nationals had the worst record in the MLB-
They made improvements and while still in last place in 2023 they are 21 games better than the Athletics in 2023-
This is an example of what we're all referring to here. At some point, you're going to be the Athletics. You'll compete with smaller rosters (The Athletics traditionally pay very little in salary to their players) and you'll win some and lose some (probably more often), but you'll get things along the way to help you improve.
You have to understand that you are in a pool with everyone and you're all competing for the same rewards and everything else. You will have limits, and you'll just have to keep improving in order to win more matches in BGs. It's how the mode is meant to be played.
Speaking strictly from a baseball stand point... no one should ever imagine themselves as the Oakland A's.
What are you even talking about? You're not making any sense.
It's a competition so winners adapt to the challenge. Losers do not adapt and complain on the forums about picking first and matchmaking. It's not hard to follow.
It's a competition so winners adapt to the challenge. Losers do not adapt and complain on the forums about picking first and matchmaking. It's not hard to follow.
You get to pick second more often than you should, because I am picking first all the time. Consequently, you are being handed free wins to an extent. You are perfectly fine when you are handed that advantage. If it was a fair competition, I would get to pick second 50% of the time. Since it benefits you, you don't classify it as a charity and are happy to play with that unfair advantage.
If you are ok with one type of advantage in the match-up, you have little right to complain about other types of advantages just because they don't benefit you.
You have no idea how often I pick first so stop that nonsense. TBH I don't pay attention because it's not a big deal. I'm 12-0 so far this season with only 2 matches going to round 3 so picking 1st or 2nd doesn't have any effect on me at all.
It's such a strawman to accuse everyone who is good at BGs of being good because of gaining an advantage that you don't get. That's just a loser's excuse to avoid accepting their own personal shortcomings. I'll reiterate my comment from the previous thread. You can either adapt and overcome or cry on the forums.
Doesn't matter how often you pick second, you do it more often than you should because I and others are picking first all the time. You are ok with that, because it benefits you. It's a pretty weak position to take that your wins are all skill based when you are being handed a strategic advantage to boost your win rates.
If you believed in competition, you would ask for it to be fixed. Instead of that, you are branding people who are being hobbled in the competition as losers, standard bully behaviour.
That's never getting fixed for unknown reasons, many have asked Kabam to just make it like, whoever bans the heroes fastest in start of match gets to pick 2nd.
Thank you. But we haven't even had an acknowledgement that the bug exists so far. If it is true that that will never get fixed, it pretty much nullifies any claim of BG being a competition. No competition randomly punishes one group of players and gives free wins to another.
There are plenty of other threads about this. This post wasn't about that.
That's never getting fixed for unknown reasons, many have asked Kabam to just make it like, whoever bans the heroes fastest in start of match gets to pick 2nd.
Thank you. But we haven't even had an acknowledgement that the bug exists so far. If it is true that that will never get fixed, it pretty much nullifies any claim of BG being a competition. No competition randomly punishes one group of players and gives free wins to another.
There are plenty of other threads about this. This post wasn't about that.
I was just highlighting the hypocrisy of claiming BG is a competition when it comes to matchmaking while the same people are happy to play with other strategic advantages offered to them.
For some, the competition angle is only relevant when the rules have to be changed to make it easier for them to win. Bugs which benefit them at the cost of other players are just challenges others have to overcome.
What are you even talking about? You're not making any sense.
It's a competition so winners adapt to the challenge. Losers do not adapt and complain on the forums about picking first and matchmaking. It's not hard to follow.
It's a competition so winners adapt to the challenge. Losers do not adapt and complain on the forums about picking first and matchmaking. It's not hard to follow.
You get to pick second more often than you should, because I am picking first all the time. Consequently, you are being handed free wins to an extent. You are perfectly fine when you are handed that advantage. If it was a fair competition, I would get to pick second 50% of the time. Since it benefits you, you don't classify it as a charity and are happy to play with that unfair advantage.
If you are ok with one type of advantage in the match-up, you have little right to complain about other types of advantages just because they don't benefit you.
You have no idea how often I pick first so stop that nonsense. TBH I don't pay attention because it's not a big deal. I'm 12-0 so far this season with only 2 matches going to round 3 so picking 1st or 2nd doesn't have any effect on me at all.
It's such a strawman to accuse everyone who is good at BGs of being good because of gaining an advantage that you don't get. That's just a loser's excuse to avoid accepting their own personal shortcomings. I'll reiterate my comment from the previous thread. You can either adapt and overcome or cry on the forums.
Doesn't matter how often you pick second, you do it more often than you should because I and others are picking first all the time. You are ok with that, because it benefits you. It's a pretty weak position to take that your wins are all skill based when you are being handed a strategic advantage to boost your win rates.
If you believed in competition, you would ask for it to be fixed. Instead of that, you are branding people who are being hobbled in the competition as losers, standard bully behaviour.
lol, It's like you don't even read what you reply to.
lol, It's like you don't even read what you reply to.
That only applies to one of us.
You can couch it however you want. You are either affected by the bug or not. If you are not, your win rate is inflated (or at best flat) because you've been handed an advantage. Your response to that has not been that the bug should be fixed (as it should be if BG was a competition) but that you should continue to keep your advantage and the ones disadvantaged should adapt because you would like to continue to get the free wins and easier matches.
How is your position any different to what the OP wants? They also want easier matches, just through a different mechanism, matchmaking in this case. None of you wants a fair competition.
lol, It's like you don't even read what you reply to.
That only applies to one of us.
You can couch it however you want. You are either affected by the bug or not. If you are not, your win rate is inflated (or at best flat) because you've been handed an advantage. Your response to that has not been that the bug should be fixed (as it should be if BG was a competition) but that you should continue to keep your advantage and the ones disadvantaged should adapt because you would like to continue to get the free wins and easier matches.
How is your position any different to what the OP wants? They also want easier matches, just through a different mechanism, matchmaking in this case. None of you wants a fair competition.
There's no statistical evidence out there that says your win rate is higher if you pick 2nd. I understand what you're trying to do but don't start throwing in unproven claims. It makes what you say invalid.
I hate that this topic of conversation keeps coming up and the fact people keep engaging in it. We need to learn to just ignore these posts because regardless no matter the month or year the same discussion is gonna be brought up like a broken clock.
lol, It's like you don't even read what you reply to.
That only applies to one of us.
You can couch it however you want. You are either affected by the bug or not. If you are not, your win rate is inflated (or at best flat) because you've been handed an advantage. Your response to that has not been that the bug should be fixed (as it should be if BG was a competition) but that you should continue to keep your advantage and the ones disadvantaged should adapt because you would like to continue to get the free wins and easier matches.
How is your position any different to what the OP wants? They also want easier matches, just through a different mechanism, matchmaking in this case. None of you wants a fair competition.
1 - Stop trying to change the topic of the thread. If you want to cry about picking first, post it in that thread.
2 - I showed you how picking 1st has no effect on my ability to win.
Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
So, when you get to pick first more often than you should, giving you an in-game advantage, that is just a challenge I should deal with?
But someone else gets an advantage you don't get, that is charity?
This is what I mean when I say you don't want a competition, you just want an easy path to rewards - be it preferential first picks, a tailored store or weak teams to pile on.
I will never ever, I mean NEVER will understand the entitlement from lower accounts that they deserve the vibranium and GC rewards with their low/medium hero deck, just think for a good second.
Let's imagine, higher accounts have deck rating of 92 out of 100, so why do YOU (70 rating deck) think you DESERVE to win or not face that high deck? Even tho you are competing for SAME rewards?
Rewards are same, so matchmaking will be same. If yall want to face equal matches every single time then Kabam should introduce the rewards appropriate designed for each progression level. (Just like monthly and event rewards are designed for each progression level and put this thing to rest)
Tldr :- want to progress in BG? Start ranking up champs or attain skills higher than MSD/Karate/your favourite youtuber.
It's not about winning certain awards or entering the Gladiator Circuit. Battlegrounds is my favorite game mode. I really enjoy the fierce and evenly matched encounters, where the fate of victory is weighed until the last seconds. It is sad to hit much stronger rivals all the time. I'm not interested in rewards, just a fair opportunity to skirmish with other players. Prizes are absolutely a secondary issue for me
If you dont' care about rewards and would like to just compete in a fair match. Great news, there's a friendly match mode available. Find players of similar level and go nuts.
“The whales have spoken” I have had the same problem as Echeon and i would like the players with 3 mil rating and 5 rank 2s to try and even win a match with our accounts. It’s like every champ we have, they have the perfect counter. Don’t even get me started on the stubborn AI and countless impossible matchups won by whale paragons who have allready done necro twice.
The problem is that you think you're in a separate league than everyone else. For some reason, you think you shouldn't have to face any opponent that has a bigger account than you. Can you tell me any competitive sport out there that does this?
And before you say "well little league teams don't have to play major league teams", that's not a fair comparison because they aren't playing in the same leagues. BG's has one league and that's it.
This is how professional sports are designed. Inferior teams, with smaller budgets, can compete against each other and go on to enjoy victories and progression, or even win their own league. Imagine the morale of a team that loses 23 games and wins only 3 of them. They can't fall lower, they can't advance further. All that's left is figuring out how to do is to hit the weakest possible opponent in each draw. And then many players complain, about deliberately losing matches and being stuck in lower divisions
Almost no professional sports are designed that way. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is UK professional football (aka soccer) which is divided into tiers.
lol, It's like you don't even read what you reply to.
That only applies to one of us.
You can couch it however you want. You are either affected by the bug or not. If you are not, your win rate is inflated (or at best flat) because you've been handed an advantage. Your response to that has not been that the bug should be fixed (as it should be if BG was a competition) but that you should continue to keep your advantage and the ones disadvantaged should adapt because you would like to continue to get the free wins and easier matches.
How is your position any different to what the OP wants? They also want easier matches, just through a different mechanism, matchmaking in this case. None of you wants a fair competition.
There's no statistical evidence out there that says your win rate is higher if you pick 2nd. I understand what you're trying to do but don't start throwing in unproven claims. It makes what you say invalid.
Advantages of picking second: 1. You know the composition of the opponents team before you pick your team. When you pick the last champ in your team, you have absolute knowledge of what you need to counter. The person picking first has no such advantage. 2. In round 1, when you place defense you have to consider only 6 champs vs. 7 for the player going first. 3. In round 3, in many cases you can win the the match-up even before the fight has started. By the time you place defense you have to counter only 2 champs, you can dictate which champs are used. 4. Statistically, when you are picking second you have a marginally higher chance of getting a preferred champ (~0.2%).
Disadvantages of picking second: None.
If you ignore all of that then there is no evidence that win rate is better if you pick 2nd. There is zero probability that a cohort matched study will show that picking second does not improve win rates. Unfortunately, only people who can do a cohort matched analysis are the owners of the game.
Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
So, when you get to pick first more often than you should, giving you an in-game advantage, that is just a challenge I should deal with?
But someone else gets an advantage you don't get, that is charity?
This is what I mean when I say you don't want a competition, you just want an easy path to rewards - be it preferential first picks, a tailored store or weak teams to pile on.
lol, It's like you don't even read what you reply to.
That only applies to one of us.
You can couch it however you want. You are either affected by the bug or not. If you are not, your win rate is inflated (or at best flat) because you've been handed an advantage. Your response to that has not been that the bug should be fixed (as it should be if BG was a competition) but that you should continue to keep your advantage and the ones disadvantaged should adapt because you would like to continue to get the free wins and easier matches.
How is your position any different to what the OP wants? They also want easier matches, just through a different mechanism, matchmaking in this case. None of you wants a fair competition.
1 - Stop trying to change the topic of the thread. If you want to cry about picking first, post it in that thread.
2 - I showed you how picking 1st has no effect on my ability to win.
3 - Winners adapt, losers make excuses.
You've never been locked into picking first. So you have proven nothing.
“The whales have spoken” I have had the same problem as Echeon and i would like the players with 3 mil rating and 5 rank 2s to try and even win a match with our accounts. It’s like every champ we have, they have the perfect counter. Don’t even get me started on the stubborn AI and countless impossible matchups won by whale paragons who have allready done necro twice.
The problem is that you think you're in a separate league than everyone else. For some reason, you think you shouldn't have to face any opponent that has a bigger account than you. Can you tell me any competitive sport out there that does this?
And before you say "well little league teams don't have to play major league teams", that's not a fair comparison because they aren't playing in the same leagues. BG's has one league and that's it.
This is how professional sports are designed. Inferior teams, with smaller budgets, can compete against each other and go on to enjoy victories and progression, or even win their own league. Imagine the morale of a team that loses 23 games and wins only 3 of them. They can't fall lower, they can't advance further. All that's left is figuring out how to do is to hit the weakest possible opponent in each draw. And then many players complain, about deliberately losing matches and being stuck in lower divisions
Exactly and that's why the best sports leagues have salary caps. It evens the playing field, just like deck construction. Except it's even better. The Kansas city Chiefs can't go buy every best player on the league and you have none. Further you can both have the same players. And for instance if you can't afford Patrick Mahomes and the other team can, you can just say he can't play in the game. Along with Travis Kelce and whomever you think is the third best player. It's truly designed for parity.
The NBA has a salary cap, but it is a soft cap. There is a cap, but teams can spend over the cap. There are taxes or other penalties for doing so, but they can do it.
Major League Baseball has no salary cap.
The NFL has a salary cap. However, none of these sports, including the NFL, have a spending cap. Some have limits on what they can spend on team member salaries. But they have no limit on what they can spend on coaching staff, facilities, or any other team beneficial expense.
Important also to note that the NFL has many rules designed to promote long term parity in the league, but the NFL is composed of a small fixed number of competitors and is run in large part as a spectator sport. Many of the rules are not designed for competitive fairness so much as spectator engagement. The pass interference rule is not there to promote competition, it is there to prevent games from being boring to watch. In the same manner, the league does not have a specific interest in seeing that the best teams always win, they have a vested interest in seeing that every team's fans remain engaged. That's why the winner of every division goes to the playoffs, even if they have a losing record.
UK football/soccer has no salary cap, and I don't think most other European soccer leagues have one either. They can, if they choose to, attempt to buy their way to the top.
Now it's a competition. When it benefits you the stance is very different.
Not sure what point you're trying to make, but I'm fairly certain that it is incorrect.
You only use the competition line in cases where it helps you. You don't really care about the competition, only that players at your level get disproportionate share of rewards and others are kept away from it. When the BG order bug was highlighted your stance was people affected should find a way to deal with it instead of the team taking an official stance and fix it. In that case its a bug which gives you an advantage so you are happy to keep it going.
You are not following, at all. Both statements are the same argument. It's a competition so players need to deal with the challenges of the competition.
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
Asking for a fix (and acknowledgement) to a bug which gives permanent disadvantage to some players is charity?
No, but the feature being discussed is not a bug. It is an explicit feature of the game mode deliberately put there. And the fact that players eventually find themselves in lopsided matches is not even an unfortunate side effect either. It is *deliberately* the case that if a low progress player wants to advance in VT above a certain point, they MUST eventually face the average players in those tiers, even if the average player in that tier is twice as strong, ten times a strong, or a trillion times stronger than they are. You get to face hand picked competition in the lower tiers, but eventually you must face everyone BY DESIGN.
If you don't have a strong enough roster to beat Act 5, you're supposed to go get a stronger one. If you don't have a strong enough roster to beat the Abyss, you're supposed to go get a stronger one. If your roster is strong enough for you to beat the players in Gold 2 but not Diamond 1, you're supposed to go get a stronger one. This is by design.
Comments
You seem to want a charity where participation is what matters and not skill.
But someone else gets an advantage you don't get, that is charity?
This is what I mean when I say you don't want a competition, you just want an easy path to rewards - be it preferential first picks, a tailored store or weak teams to pile on.
The competition bug? Or the bug where everyone is fighting for same rewards?
Easy solution make separate tier rewards for Uncollected and Cav players in BG, that'll solve every "My account have low rated champions but I want top rank rewards" posts.
It's a competition so winners adapt to the challenge. Losers do not adapt and complain on the forums about picking first and matchmaking. It's not hard to follow.
If you are ok with one type of advantage in the match-up, you have little right to complain about other types of advantages just because they don't benefit you.
Just the opposite when you look at 2 similar prestiges. They could be very different accounts, but have similar prestige only looking at 5 champs.
Matchmaking should be tier based only.
It's such a strawman to accuse everyone who is good at BGs of being good because of gaining an advantage that you don't get. That's just a loser's excuse to avoid accepting their own personal shortcomings. I'll reiterate my comment from the previous thread. You can either adapt and overcome or cry on the forums.
You have the worst record in baseball and you played in the division with the team that won the World Series. But you're in the same league as them and you play them many times throughout the season.
Last year the Washington Nationals had the worst record in the MLB-
They made improvements and while still in last place in 2023 they are 21 games better than the Athletics in 2023-
This is an example of what we're all referring to here. At some point, you're going to be the Athletics. You'll compete with smaller rosters (The Athletics traditionally pay very little in salary to their players) and you'll win some and lose some (probably more often), but you'll get things along the way to help you improve.
You have to understand that you are in a pool with everyone and you're all competing for the same rewards and everything else. You will have limits, and you'll just have to keep improving in order to win more matches in BGs. It's how the mode is meant to be played.
Holla if you hear me.
If you believed in competition, you would ask for it to be fixed. Instead of that, you are branding people who are being hobbled in the competition as losers, standard bully behaviour.
For some, the competition angle is only relevant when the rules have to be changed to make it easier for them to win. Bugs which benefit them at the cost of other players are just challenges others have to overcome.
You can couch it however you want. You are either affected by the bug or not. If you are not, your win rate is inflated (or at best flat) because you've been handed an advantage. Your response to that has not been that the bug should be fixed (as it should be if BG was a competition) but that you should continue to keep your advantage and the ones disadvantaged should adapt because you would like to continue to get the free wins and easier matches.
How is your position any different to what the OP wants? They also want easier matches, just through a different mechanism, matchmaking in this case. None of you wants a fair competition.
2 - I showed you how picking 1st has no effect on my ability to win.
3 - Winners adapt, losers make excuses.
1. You know the composition of the opponents team before you pick your team. When you pick the last champ in your team, you have absolute knowledge of what you need to counter. The person picking first has no such advantage.
2. In round 1, when you place defense you have to consider only 6 champs vs. 7 for the player going first.
3. In round 3, in many cases you can win the the match-up even before the fight has started. By the time you place defense you have to counter only 2 champs, you can dictate which champs are used.
4. Statistically, when you are picking second you have a marginally higher chance of getting a preferred champ (~0.2%).
Disadvantages of picking second: None.
If you ignore all of that then there is no evidence that win rate is better if you pick 2nd. There is zero probability that a cohort matched study will show that picking second does not improve win rates. Unfortunately, only people who can do a cohort matched analysis are the owners of the game.
Major League Baseball has no salary cap.
The NFL has a salary cap. However, none of these sports, including the NFL, have a spending cap. Some have limits on what they can spend on team member salaries. But they have no limit on what they can spend on coaching staff, facilities, or any other team beneficial expense.
Important also to note that the NFL has many rules designed to promote long term parity in the league, but the NFL is composed of a small fixed number of competitors and is run in large part as a spectator sport. Many of the rules are not designed for competitive fairness so much as spectator engagement. The pass interference rule is not there to promote competition, it is there to prevent games from being boring to watch. In the same manner, the league does not have a specific interest in seeing that the best teams always win, they have a vested interest in seeing that every team's fans remain engaged. That's why the winner of every division goes to the playoffs, even if they have a losing record.
UK football/soccer has no salary cap, and I don't think most other European soccer leagues have one either. They can, if they choose to, attempt to buy their way to the top.
If you don't have a strong enough roster to beat Act 5, you're supposed to go get a stronger one. If you don't have a strong enough roster to beat the Abyss, you're supposed to go get a stronger one. If your roster is strong enough for you to beat the players in Gold 2 but not Diamond 1, you're supposed to go get a stronger one. This is by design.