People **** on others too much when they have an issue with the level of disparage between Rosters in BGs, and it's the equivalent of telling people to "Git gud.". It's a competition. That's redundant. The Rewards are meant to be appropriate to the effort someone puts in. That's also redundant. The issue people are facing is the range of Rosters is too vast to throw everyone in the mix. That's not an unreasonable statement to make. We're all aware of that. We don't have to shut down every Thread that people communicate that issue. They're going to keep making that point either way, unless there's some kind of solution. No one on the other side is going to say, "You know, you're right. I don't deserve a fair completion. I should feel lucky to be used as easy prey for your progress.". Just saying.
The problem starts when people propose changes with parameters that only benefits them. Sure OP said why cant roster be capped at R4.. why not R3 will say a TB later... Then will come a Cav saying why not R1...
Which is all fair. If it's a bad suggestion, then that's arguable. My point is for the overall dismissal.
People **** on others too much when they have an issue with the level of disparage between Rosters in BGs, and it's the equivalent of telling people to "Git gud.". It's a competition. That's redundant. The Rewards are meant to be appropriate to the effort someone puts in. That's also redundant. The issue people are facing is the range of Rosters is too vast to throw everyone in the mix. That's not an unreasonable statement to make. We're all aware of that. We don't have to shut down every Thread that people communicate that issue. They're going to keep making that point either way, unless there's some kind of solution. No one on the other side is going to say, "You know, you're right. I don't deserve a fair completion. I should feel lucky to be used as easy prey for your progress.". Just saying.
The problem starts when people propose changes with parameters that only benefits them. Sure OP said why cant roster be capped at R4.. why not R3 will say a TB later... Then will come a Cav saying why not R1...
Which is all fair. If it's a bad suggestion, then that's arguable. My point is for the overall dismissal.
It has to be dismissed though, its a global game, not tailored for 1 or a small group. If most people are ranking up champs to make them stronger, asking for a cap has to be dismissed. Why r4s? Cause he has plenty? And he wants to beat people with r4s?.. Things like that have to be ignored.
I'm not saying I have all the answers. I'm just saying if you look at the difference in Rosters from Plat and up and the limitations of the competition such as time, Nodes, increased Attack and Health....then there are bound to be people who have an issue with it.
I agree. To this day, I swear my high school football team would have won the super bowl over the Chiefs in a fair game. The just had a better roster but we were 100% better and only lost because of unfair matchmaking.
They don't get put in a Superbowl game, then told to suck it up.
People **** on others too much when they have an issue with the level of disparage between Rosters in BGs, and it's the equivalent of telling people to "Git gud.". It's a competition. That's redundant. The Rewards are meant to be appropriate to the effort someone puts in. That's also redundant. The issue people are facing is the range of Rosters is too vast to throw everyone in the mix. That's not an unreasonable statement to make. We're all aware of that. We don't have to shut down every Thread that people communicate that issue. They're going to keep making that point either way, unless there's some kind of solution. No one on the other side is going to say, "You know, you're right. I don't deserve a fair completion. I should feel lucky to be used as easy prey for your progress.". Just saying.
The problem starts when people propose changes with parameters that only benefits them. Sure OP said why cant roster be capped at R4.. why not R3 will say a TB later... Then will come a Cav saying why not R1...
Which is all fair. If it's a bad suggestion, then that's arguable. My point is for the overall dismissal.
It has to be dismissed though, its a global game, not tailored for 1 or a small group. If most people are ranking up champs to make them stronger, asking for a cap has to be dismissed. Why r4s? Cause he has plenty? And he wants to beat people with r4s?.. Things like that have to be ignored.
Again, I didn't say the suggestion wasn't debatable, I'm talking about the overall issue.
People **** on others too much when they have an issue with the level of disparage between Rosters in BGs, and it's the equivalent of telling people to "Git gud.". It's a competition. That's redundant. The Rewards are meant to be appropriate to the effort someone puts in. That's also redundant. The issue people are facing is the range of Rosters is too vast to throw everyone in the mix. That's not an unreasonable statement to make. We're all aware of that. We don't have to shut down every Thread that people communicate that issue. They're going to keep making that point either way, unless there's some kind of solution. No one on the other side is going to say, "You know, you're right. I don't deserve a fair completion. I should feel lucky to be used as easy prey for your progress.". Just saying.
The problem starts when people propose changes with parameters that only benefits them. Sure OP said why cant roster be capped at R4.. why not R3 will say a TB later... Then will come a Cav saying why not R1...
Which is all fair. If it's a bad suggestion, then that's arguable. My point is for the overall dismissal.
It has to be dismissed though, its a global game, not tailored for 1 or a small group. If most people are ranking up champs to make them stronger, asking for a cap has to be dismissed. Why r4s? Cause he has plenty? And he wants to beat people with r4s?.. Things like that have to be ignored.
Again, I didn't say the suggestion wasn't debatable, I'm talking about the overall issue.
I know I get it, there is a common way of treating people who complaing about matchmaking in BGs and I have done it and do it a lot. Some suggestions are not even suggestions though. They are lame arguments to make their game play easier. And on this issue, of course there is gonna be plenty of people disagrejng. People do content, farm, work hard to improve roster and rank up champs, people spend money for someone to propose a cap on 6r4s... What am i working on my 7r2s for?.. This proposal is terrible .
I feel like they could reduce the gap between high ranked and low ranked champs by use a diminishing scale for attack/health multipliers. There would still be an advantage, just less of one.
BG would still be a tedious grins thou, that requires some other fix
I'm not saying I have all the answers. I'm just saying if you look at the difference in Rosters from Plat and up and the limitations of the competition such as time, Nodes, increased Attack and Health....then there are bound to be people who have an issue with it.
I agree. To this day, I swear my high school football team would have won the super bowl over the Chiefs in a fair game. The just had a better roster but we were 100% better and only lost because of unfair matchmaking.
They don't get put in a Superbowl game, then told to suck it up.
Neither are the complainers you are defending. Last I checked they aren't playing bero or Andy the ruff with 10 minutes left in the season playing for the championship. THEY ARE however playing for the same rewards. My high school team will take a but kicking from the Chiefs if we are also making around 200 million a year in rewards for playing.
Do tell. Yall should be glad that there's fair fight policy till platinum. Everyone Getting bronze silver gold rewards is good thing, so if players want more rewards then they must have skills and ranked up heroes to BATTLE for those rewards.
Plus, gahh, 6* is OLD NEWS (some exceptios are there) So get on with time and get those 7* big boy champs.
Best example of a crappy response ..get those 7* champs lol. You do not understand the psychology of the players, they don't even want to play this game mode because of the whales. Kabam created a competitive mode where instead of being fair on both sides its always tipped towards the person with the better roster and resources which cannot be attained at all with FTP.
I'm not saying I have all the answers. I'm just saying if you look at the difference in Rosters from Plat and up and the limitations of the competition such as time, Nodes, increased Attack and Health....then there are bound to be people who have an issue with it.
I agree. To this day, I swear my high school football team would have won the super bowl over the Chiefs in a fair game. The just had a better roster but we were 100% better and only lost because of unfair matchmaking.
They don't get put in a Superbowl game, then told to suck it up.
Neither are the complainers you are defending. Last I checked they aren't playing bero or Andy the ruff with 10 minutes left in the season playing for the championship. THEY ARE however playing for the same rewards. My high school team will take a but kicking from the Chiefs if we are also making around 200 million a year in rewards for playing.
Wait a minute. You can't move the goal post. You gave an example and I pointed out how they're being placed in the same league. Someone that has a problem with 6* R4s can come up against 7* R3s. The argument stands.
I'm not saying I have all the answers. I'm just saying if you look at the difference in Rosters from Plat and up and the limitations of the competition such as time, Nodes, increased Attack and Health....then there are bound to be people who have an issue with it.
I agree. To this day, I swear my high school football team would have won the super bowl over the Chiefs in a fair game. The just had a better roster but we were 100% better and only lost because of unfair matchmaking.
They don't get put in a Superbowl game, then told to suck it up.
Neither are the complainers you are defending. Last I checked they aren't playing bero or Andy the ruff with 10 minutes left in the season playing for the championship. THEY ARE however playing for the same rewards. My high school team will take a but kicking from the Chiefs if we are also making around 200 million a year in rewards for playing.
Wait a minute. You can't move the goal post. You gave an example and I pointed out how they're being placed in the same league. Someone that has a problem with 6* R4s can come up against 7* R3s. The argument stands.
False. You said they aren't put in the superbowl. Neither are the complainers.
I’m a valiant player. I did all contents on this game. But I’m not a sherperd dog. If only 5% of players enjoy a mode it’s a failure. We need all progression levels . ( you can dislike but it’s an évidence) 😆
Whats a "sherperd" dog and how does it apply in situation?
Must be some new slang which makes no sense, again.
Been moderating the new discord and dealing with all the kids slang there has aged me over 20 years now. Even then, I haven't heard anyone use "sherperd" dog yet.
No cap 😎, bussing 😋, fr fr 😲, skrrrt 🫨 NO YEET 😞, shboink 🤧
Sigma, rizz, ohio, skibidi toilet, bro☠️, who asked?, Chad, 🗿
This izz the nue trend.
Bruh no way, shboink is literally latest than sigma rizz, who axed, chad 😤
Do tell. Yall should be glad that there's fair fight policy till platinum. Everyone Getting bronze silver gold rewards is good thing, so if players want more rewards then they must have skills and ranked up heroes to BATTLE for those rewards.
Plus, gahh, 6* is OLD NEWS (some exceptios are there) So get on with time and get those 7* big boy champs.
Best example of a crappy response ..get those 7* champs lol. You do not understand the psychology of the players, they don't even want to play this game mode because of the whales. Kabam created a competitive mode where instead of being fair on both sides its always tipped towards the person with the better roster and resources which cannot be attained at all with FTP.
If you cannot have better roster, why do you must have entitlement to win?
Not every account can reach Vibranium GC. Reaching platinum diamond is OKAY.
I'm not saying I have all the answers. I'm just saying if you look at the difference in Rosters from Plat and up and the limitations of the competition such as time, Nodes, increased Attack and Health....then there are bound to be people who have an issue with it.
I agree. To this day, I swear my high school football team would have won the super bowl over the Chiefs in a fair game. The just had a better roster but we were 100% better and only lost because of unfair matchmaking.
They don't get put in a Superbowl game, then told to suck it up.
Neither are the complainers you are defending. Last I checked they aren't playing bero or Andy the ruff with 10 minutes left in the season playing for the championship. THEY ARE however playing for the same rewards. My high school team will take a but kicking from the Chiefs if we are also making around 200 million a year in rewards for playing.
Wait a minute. You can't move the goal post. You gave an example and I pointed out how they're being placed in the same league. Someone that has a problem with 6* R4s can come up against 7* R3s. The argument stands.
False. You said they aren't put in the superbowl. Neither are the complainers.
False. From about Plat 2 and up, it's random among everyone. The "Superbowl" is among them.
If you’ve played "Clash Royale"’s ultimate challenge, you probably know what kind of fairness I’m talking about
If you played Clash Royales main ladder gamemode, then you'd understand the fairness that BGs is. There will always be mid-ladder menaces, nothing you can do about it if you want to climb the ladder.
Rather then caping at a certain rarity, how about a "salary cap"? Your deck can only have a total value of a certain combined score, maybe put in a limit that all champs have to be within so many star ratings of each other so that you can't toss 1 and 2 stars in to then pack your deck with 6r5 and 7r3. Probably a bad idea, but better then arbitrary rank limits.
Other potentially bad ideas
Every time the bg objectives refresh, everyone advances a tier that has finished all 4 objectives. Let's people that end up gaining and then losing medals over and over advance rather then stagnate.
Every time the objectives refresh, the top 50% of players in each tier by total hero rating that have played at least 3 matches advance to the next tier. Progresses the big rosters to gc faster so they don't form an insurmountable roadblock for smaller accounts.
Just get rid of losing medallions on a loss, leave the loss of progress for GC, change victory shields to prevent loss of rating in GC instead.
Like I said, probably all bad ideas but maybe could lead other people to better ones.
Fixing BGs would require much bigger changes than just tweaking matchups/limiting champion star levels. This would likely mean eliminating VT/GC and objectives and replacing with something new.
We can all agree that the current BGs system is lacking, and can be unfair.
But is it unfair across the board unformly or only in specific edge cases? What is the definition of unfair/fair, and does it apply to the majority of players or just certain player cohorts.
Different players think the rewards are fair/unfair (If a Cav/Valiant reach the same rank in GC, they get the same 'fair' amount of tokens, but access to different items in the store despite having the same rank). Different players think the matchups system in the VT is unfair (a Cav/Valiant may have to face more/less unfair matchups to reach Platinum or Diamond; in Vibranium a Cav/Valiant may say it is fair/unfair to matchup against who they match up).
It's easy enough to say something should be 'fairer', but then you have to define Fair, which isn't the same definition for everybody.
I think something should change, but I don't think your proposal would do it. Maybe for 1 season, Kabam can have a 'every progression level can play BGs and only 1 and 2-stars can be used" is an annual "Taste of Battlegrounds" event. But to roster lock BGs permanently is extremely unfair to players who have put in time to build their roster.
Proposal: Players largely do not complain about GC part of BGs (pure competition), aside from some node combinations. But by and large, the complaints about BGs are usually related to VT.
No VT/GC, instead it is just pure competition like in sports - everyone gets 21 entries in a season (like in real sports, the amount of matches is fixed), and then the best qualifying records get 7 more entries for playoff style matches. Qualifying records could be adjusted based on strength of schedule.
Reality check of why it won't work: Players play at all times of the day/week/month, so Kabam can't really implement a playoff system and mandate the limited pool of 'playoff players' to play.
Additionally, the lack of VT means that a large number of players will be uninterested (just like with AW) in a purely competitive game mode. Lower total participation means that queuing for matches will take longer, which will further discourage more players from playing.
Nobody is calling out the competition people have to face at high GC tiers. Trust me it's way rough at the top. You won't see those guys complaining in forums. They may rant in live streams or 3rd party chat apps, but not in forums. Cus they are just ranting, they are aware of the reasons and they accept the result. Those guys face the same challanges these small roster face in higher VT. People been loosing points back to back jumping down from Mysterium to arcane to gamma then climbing back with snalis pace.
I don't want to face whales with 7 r3s and 15 r5a's and 8 r2s. It's unfair. I'm big sad. I cry. So Is like to suggest that eveyeone's rosters should be limited to 3*s only, once they reach quantum+.
Im sorry but with 19.99k prestige and a pretty decent deck I have slogged my way since day one.
No "easy" matches, platinum+ has not looked after me at all.
It's not just the lazy undeveloped players who have struggled.
Same. I have a valiant account and can’t string 5 wins together to advance. It’s demoralizing to keep losing a medal, gaining one and making no progress. There are a lot of large accounts in this same boat. I’ll take the L and recognize that I won’t get to GC this season, and that’s ok. Not every reward can be gained by every account and there has to be some understanding about that.
Im sorry but with 19.99k prestige and a pretty decent deck I have slogged my way since day one.
No "easy" matches, platinum+ has not looked after me at all.
It's not just the lazy undeveloped players who have struggled.
Same. I have a valiant account and can’t string 5 wins together to advance. It’s demoralizing to keep losing a medal, gaining one and making no progress. There are a lot of large accounts in this same boat. I’ll take the L and recognize that I won’t get to GC this season, and that’s ok. Not every reward can be gained by every account and there has to be some understanding about that.
Same here. 3.7 mil Valiant, and I was in D1 for a week, VIB 3 for a week, and just finally strung some wins together to get to V2 last night.
With only 3 days left, I highly doubt I'll bother even trying to get to GC, I'll likely just do my matches tomorrow for milestones and that'll be that.
I have only ever bothered to push for GC when deathless gully piece was there, and it was a slog itself, it's just gotten even worse now with so many people having the same issues of facing pretty stacked accts that haven't bothered pushing to GC because they just don't care to anymore.
Comments
If most people are ranking up champs to make them stronger, asking for a cap has to be dismissed. Why r4s? Cause he has plenty? And he wants to beat people with r4s?.. Things like that have to be ignored.
Some suggestions are not even suggestions though. They are lame arguments to make their game play easier. And on this issue, of course there is gonna be plenty of people disagrejng. People do content, farm, work hard to improve roster and rank up champs, people spend money for someone to propose a cap on 6r4s... What am i working on my 7r2s for?..
This proposal is terrible .
BG would still be a tedious grins thou, that requires some other fix
Someone that has a problem with 6* R4s can come up against 7* R3s. The argument stands.
Not every account can reach Vibranium GC.
Reaching platinum diamond is OKAY.
Of course I'm not talking about solo or alliance rewards.
People keep comparing BG in mcoc with other games. But matchmaking can't be the same when you have a roster based game and skill based
No "easy" matches, platinum+ has not looked after me at all.
It's not just the lazy undeveloped players who have struggled.
Other potentially bad ideas
Every time the bg objectives refresh, everyone advances a tier that has finished all 4 objectives.
Let's people that end up gaining and then losing medals over and over advance rather then stagnate.
Every time the objectives refresh, the top 50% of players in each tier by total hero rating that have played at least 3 matches advance to the next tier.
Progresses the big rosters to gc faster so they don't form an insurmountable roadblock for smaller accounts.
Just get rid of losing medallions on a loss, leave the loss of progress for GC, change victory shields to prevent loss of rating in GC instead.
Like I said, probably all bad ideas but maybe could lead other people to better ones.
We can all agree that the current BGs system is lacking, and can be unfair.
But is it unfair across the board unformly or only in specific edge cases?
What is the definition of unfair/fair, and does it apply to the majority of players or just certain player cohorts.
Different players think the rewards are fair/unfair (If a Cav/Valiant reach the same rank in GC, they get the same 'fair' amount of tokens, but access to different items in the store despite having the same rank). Different players think the matchups system in the VT is unfair (a Cav/Valiant may have to face more/less unfair matchups to reach Platinum or Diamond; in Vibranium a Cav/Valiant may say it is fair/unfair to matchup against who they match up).
It's easy enough to say something should be 'fairer', but then you have to define Fair, which isn't the same definition for everybody.
I think something should change, but I don't think your proposal would do it. Maybe for 1 season, Kabam can have a 'every progression level can play BGs and only 1 and 2-stars can be used" is an annual "Taste of Battlegrounds" event. But to roster lock BGs permanently is extremely unfair to players who have put in time to build their roster.
Proposal:
Players largely do not complain about GC part of BGs (pure competition), aside from some node combinations. But by and large, the complaints about BGs are usually related to VT.
No VT/GC, instead it is just pure competition like in sports - everyone gets 21 entries in a season (like in real sports, the amount of matches is fixed), and then the best qualifying records get 7 more entries for playoff style matches. Qualifying records could be adjusted based on strength of schedule.
Reality check of why it won't work: Players play at all times of the day/week/month, so Kabam can't really implement a playoff system and mandate the limited pool of 'playoff players' to play.
Additionally, the lack of VT means that a large number of players will be uninterested (just like with AW) in a purely competitive game mode. Lower total participation means that queuing for matches will take longer, which will further discourage more players from playing.
Trust me it's way rough at the top.
You won't see those guys complaining in forums.
They may rant in live streams or 3rd party chat apps, but not in forums. Cus they are just ranting, they are aware of the reasons and they accept the result.
Those guys face the same challanges these small roster face in higher VT.
People been loosing points back to back jumping down from Mysterium to arcane to gamma then climbing back with snalis pace.
I don't want to face whales with 7 r3s and 15 r5a's and 8 r2s.
It's unfair. I'm big sad. I cry. So
Is like to suggest that eveyeone's rosters should be limited to 3*s only, once they reach quantum+.
Thank you.✌️&🫰
With only 3 days left, I highly doubt I'll bother even trying to get to GC, I'll likely just do my matches tomorrow for milestones and that'll be that.
I have only ever bothered to push for GC when deathless gully piece was there, and it was a slog itself, it's just gotten even worse now with so many people having the same issues of facing pretty stacked accts that haven't bothered pushing to GC because they just don't care to anymore.