U have 2options 😂 1. Get destroyed by bigger account & complain 2. Complete the story quest push further .grind Arena buy anything offers to make the next progressive title.
Even paragon are complaining they are matching valiant . I am valiant I am facing min 6- r3 7* with onslaught ,serpant max as 6*
I mean I'm stuck at act 6.1.1 the no retreat node kinda sucks had To take the first option😂 (also got any god tips about act 6.1.1)
Hulk Ragnarok, Mr.Negative, Spider Ham, Captain Marvel movie is very good for no retreat
U have 2options 😂 1. Get destroyed by bigger account & complain 2. Complete the story quest push further .grind Arena buy anything offers to make the next progressive title.
Even paragon are complaining they are matching valiant . I am valiant I am facing min 6- r3 7* with onslaught ,serpant max as 6*
I mean I'm stuck at act 6.1.1 the no retreat node kinda sucks had To take the first option😂 (also got any god tips about act 6.1.1)
Hulk Ragnarok, Mr.Negative, Spider Ham, Captain Marvel movie is very good for no retreat
Matchmaking isn't broken. There's a lot more people playing right now because of the deathless piece. Because there are less rosters your size to match with, you're being matched with these opponents. You're in silver 2 so you weren't really affected by the seeding bug.
Fair enough but the matchmaking it still could be better like making your opponent the same progression level that you're in
But what happens if you were to lose 5 or 10 straight vs opponents in your same progression level? Would you be ok with that?
yes
So if you got matched with people with the same progression title as you, no matter where they were at the progression stage, and you consistently lost, you would not make a single complaint and accept it as is since it's what you wanted?
Reread DNA's post right above this. You just became TB and you're matched with TBs that are moments away from becoming Paragon. I'm kind of thinking if you had a good sized losing streak, you'd complain about something not being fair.
It sucks losing. I get it. It does and I understand how you feel. But in a PvP setting there is one winner and one loser. You can't win every match.
I mean if I lose 5 to 10 in battlegrounds when the opponent is the same progression level as me it would be a skill issue not bad matchmaking and I wouldn't complain about skill issue
Matchmaking isn't broken. There's a lot more people playing right now because of the deathless piece. Because there are less rosters your size to match with, you're being matched with these opponents. You're in silver 2 so you weren't really affected by the seeding bug.
Fair enough but the matchmaking it still could be better like making your opponent the same progression level that you're in
But what happens if you were to lose 5 or 10 straight vs opponents in your same progression level? Would you be ok with that?
yes
So if you got matched with people with the same progression title as you, no matter where they were at the progression stage, and you consistently lost, you would not make a single complaint and accept it as is since it's what you wanted?
Reread DNA's post right above this. You just became TB and you're matched with TBs that are moments away from becoming Paragon. I'm kind of thinking if you had a good sized losing streak, you'd complain about something not being fair.
It sucks losing. I get it. It does and I understand how you feel. But in a PvP setting there is one winner and one loser. You can't win every match.
I mean if I lose 5 to 10 in battlegrounds when the opponent is the same progression level as me it would be a skill issue not bad matchmaking and I wouldn't complain about skill issue
Moving forward, account strength has been removed as a matchmaking parameter. The transition to this new system will require a few seasons for ranks to begin to normalize. We are aware this will result in growing pains for a short period of time. However, long-term, this will allow a more consistent and balanced experience during your Victory Track climb.
This is from the MCOC team in the latest BG update thread in News and Annoucemnts.
You will be matched up against accounts that are much better than yours, and also some that are worse than yours. This will continue until the system normalizes after a few seasons.
Moving forward, account strength has been removed as a matchmaking parameter. The transition to this new system will require a few seasons for ranks to begin to normalize. We are aware this will result in growing pains for a short period of time. However, long-term, this will allow a more consistent and balanced experience during your Victory Track climb.
This is from the MCOC team in the latest BG update thread in News and Annoucemnts.
You will be matched up against accounts that are much better than yours, and also some that are worse than yours. This will continue until the system normalizes after a few seasons.
You're in Gold V fighting someone else who is also in Gold V. Tbh, there's no point in complaining. Things will be like this going forward until the players even out across the tiers.
These are not the profiles I’m matching against—they are already in GC. In fact, they make up the majority of the top 100 in Arcane 2 right now. That’s as far as I looked.
Cursory search done pre-coffee—but very disappointing given the slog the game team put honest accounts through this season.
And to follow up on my previous post—there’s no amount of “oh we clear that up at season’s end if we find misconduct” that makes this okay.
That, in my opinion, makes it all seem like a farce—especially given the dynamics of this BG season.
I would hypothesize that many of the small accounts newly making GC are either beneficiaries of a matchmaking I’m not seeing or there is something else going on.
Either way, there’s no way we should see this kind of shenanigans during a bungled BG season that requires players to pound their heads against doppelgänger accounts across far more tiers than ever to get a valuable Deathless piece.
Matchmaking isn't broken. There's a lot more people playing right now because of the deathless piece. Because there are less rosters your size to match with, you're being matched with these opponents. You're in silver 2 so you weren't really affected by the seeding bug.
Fair enough but the matchmaking it still could be better like making your opponent the same progression level that you're in
Imagine the devs did that. Imagine that all the low Uncollecteds match only against each other. Someone has to be the best out of all of those players. They are going to win and win and win until they make it to GC. Fair? That one of the weakest players in the game that can even play the game mode gets to GC without having to face *anyone* stronger than them, even though 95% of all players in the game mode are stronger than them?
Some people think "fair" is when we look for and find someone they can beat and only match them against those people. However, for the competition as a whole that is incredibly unfair, because it means weak players get to progress faster than stronger players, and stronger players are punished for being stronger players by being forced to compete against much stronger competition. Most competitive players, and the devs themselves, do not believe this is fair.
Here's the acid test for fairness. When you match the way you describe, we know what happens because the devs did it in the past, and until recently did it for lower VT tiers. Take any strong player and have them play two different rosters. First, their normal very strong roster. Then have then step down and play a much weaker roster. If they have a second account, this is an experiment you can do. This player will essentially *always* promote faster with the weak account than the strong account, all other things kept equal. And that's because the competition is weaker in lower roster strength groups. People say UC vs UC is the same as Val vs Val. Its not. When I play my Val account against other Val accounts the experience is completely different than when I play a Cav account against other Cav accounts. It is undeniably easier playing the Cav account against other Cav accounts. So the Vals are being punished when Vals match against all other Vals and UCs match against all other UCs.
That's unfair, no matter how fair some people think equal roster matching is. It simply isn't because it punishes players for advancing their rosters. And in a game that is all about advancing roster, that is a ludicrous situation to place in a competitive game mode.
You're literally saying that it is unfair that you have to play against stronger champions and that they should have to be the ones to do that. That it would be a "punishment" to you to not be able to have easy victories and that it is fair for others to not stand a chance of winning. If you're going to argue don't do it for the sake of arguing.
Matchmaking isn't broken. There's a lot more people playing right now because of the deathless piece. Because there are less rosters your size to match with, you're being matched with these opponents. You're in silver 2 so you weren't really affected by the seeding bug.
Fair enough but the matchmaking it still could be better like making your opponent the same progression level that you're in
Imagine the devs did that. Imagine that all the low Uncollecteds match only against each other. Someone has to be the best out of all of those players. They are going to win and win and win until they make it to GC. Fair? That one of the weakest players in the game that can even play the game mode gets to GC without having to face *anyone* stronger than them, even though 95% of all players in the game mode are stronger than them?
Some people think "fair" is when we look for and find someone they can beat and only match them against those people. However, for the competition as a whole that is incredibly unfair, because it means weak players get to progress faster than stronger players, and stronger players are punished for being stronger players by being forced to compete against much stronger competition. Most competitive players, and the devs themselves, do not believe this is fair.
Here's the acid test for fairness. When you match the way you describe, we know what happens because the devs did it in the past, and until recently did it for lower VT tiers. Take any strong player and have them play two different rosters. First, their normal very strong roster. Then have then step down and play a much weaker roster. If they have a second account, this is an experiment you can do. This player will essentially *always* promote faster with the weak account than the strong account, all other things kept equal. And that's because the competition is weaker in lower roster strength groups. People say UC vs UC is the same as Val vs Val. Its not. When I play my Val account against other Val accounts the experience is completely different than when I play a Cav account against other Cav accounts. It is undeniably easier playing the Cav account against other Cav accounts. So the Vals are being punished when Vals match against all other Vals and UCs match against all other UCs.
That's unfair, no matter how fair some people think equal roster matching is. It simply isn't because it punishes players for advancing their rosters. And in a game that is all about advancing roster, that is a ludicrous situation to place in a competitive game mode.
You're literally saying that it is unfair that you have to play against stronger champions and that they should have to be the ones to do that. That it would be a "punishment" to you to not be able to have easy victories and that it is fair for others to not stand a chance of winning. If you're going to argue don't do it for the sake of arguing.
That's an impressive amount of not understanding the point of a post.
Not sure if that's intentional or not, but well done!
I get kabam doesnt want low accounts to be able to play each other and get to the victory track while whales have to play whales to get the same rewards but come on lol eventually it should come down to skill and speed. Itll be a struggle either way if its evenly matched(similar ranked champs shown as prestige). It's kinda crazy to not have a cap higher AND lower of who youre gonna play.. Yeah they dont want it to be a struggle getting there but how much of a struggle is it when someone with 2k-5k more prestige has to play a lower one lol It's just getting whales to the highly sought after rewards faster so why would they say changes should be made lol It would probably be too much work to have a separate BGs just for higher accounts/prestige almost like incursions needing a certain rating for each level or even that new sector for saga fighters.. with better rewards higher, so lower cant get the same as better progression accounts. And before you say thats what victory track is.. anyone can get there.. I literally mean a second BGs with account requirement. Rewards are locked behind progression in most of the game, why not tweak BGs like that too
Matchmaking isn't broken. There's a lot more people playing right now because of the deathless piece. Because there are less rosters your size to match with, you're being matched with these opponents. You're in silver 2 so you weren't really affected by the seeding bug.
Fair enough but the matchmaking it still could be better like making your opponent the same progression level that you're in
Imagine the devs did that. Imagine that all the low Uncollecteds match only against each other. Someone has to be the best out of all of those players. They are going to win and win and win until they make it to GC. Fair? That one of the weakest players in the game that can even play the game mode gets to GC without having to face *anyone* stronger than them, even though 95% of all players in the game mode are stronger than them?
Some people think "fair" is when we look for and find someone they can beat and only match them against those people. However, for the competition as a whole that is incredibly unfair, because it means weak players get to progress faster than stronger players, and stronger players are punished for being stronger players by being forced to compete against much stronger competition. Most competitive players, and the devs themselves, do not believe this is fair.
Here's the acid test for fairness. When you match the way you describe, we know what happens because the devs did it in the past, and until recently did it for lower VT tiers. Take any strong player and have them play two different rosters. First, their normal very strong roster. Then have then step down and play a much weaker roster. If they have a second account, this is an experiment you can do. This player will essentially *always* promote faster with the weak account than the strong account, all other things kept equal. And that's because the competition is weaker in lower roster strength groups. People say UC vs UC is the same as Val vs Val. Its not. When I play my Val account against other Val accounts the experience is completely different than when I play a Cav account against other Cav accounts. It is undeniably easier playing the Cav account against other Cav accounts. So the Vals are being punished when Vals match against all other Vals and UCs match against all other UCs.
That's unfair, no matter how fair some people think equal roster matching is. It simply isn't because it punishes players for advancing their rosters. And in a game that is all about advancing roster, that is a ludicrous situation to place in a competitive game mode.
Here's better idea make matchmaking where you're opponent has same progression level as you but it would stop at a certain level like platinum or diamond
Matchmaking isn't broken. There's a lot more people playing right now because of the deathless piece. Because there are less rosters your size to match with, you're being matched with these opponents. You're in silver 2 so you weren't really affected by the seeding bug.
Fair enough but the matchmaking it still could be better like making your opponent the same progression level that you're in
Imagine the devs did that. Imagine that all the low Uncollecteds match only against each other. Someone has to be the best out of all of those players. They are going to win and win and win until they make it to GC. Fair? That one of the weakest players in the game that can even play the game mode gets to GC without having to face *anyone* stronger than them, even though 95% of all players in the game mode are stronger than them?
Some people think "fair" is when we look for and find someone they can beat and only match them against those people. However, for the competition as a whole that is incredibly unfair, because it means weak players get to progress faster than stronger players, and stronger players are punished for being stronger players by being forced to compete against much stronger competition. Most competitive players, and the devs themselves, do not believe this is fair.
Here's the acid test for fairness. When you match the way you describe, we know what happens because the devs did it in the past, and until recently did it for lower VT tiers. Take any strong player and have them play two different rosters. First, their normal very strong roster. Then have then step down and play a much weaker roster. If they have a second account, this is an experiment you can do. This player will essentially *always* promote faster with the weak account than the strong account, all other things kept equal. And that's because the competition is weaker in lower roster strength groups. People say UC vs UC is the same as Val vs Val. Its not. When I play my Val account against other Val accounts the experience is completely different than when I play a Cav account against other Cav accounts. It is undeniably easier playing the Cav account against other Cav accounts. So the Vals are being punished when Vals match against all other Vals and UCs match against all other UCs.
That's unfair, no matter how fair some people think equal roster matching is. It simply isn't because it punishes players for advancing their rosters. And in a game that is all about advancing roster, that is a ludicrous situation to place in a competitive game mode.
Here's better idea make matchmaking where you're opponent has same progression level as you but it would stop at a certain level like platinum or diamond
That’s what used to happen. So who fixes this arbitrary “level”? You must understand that this “level” you’re talking about is the floor for participation.
If anything, this “level” should be set at Bronze. Since participation trophies should be attained by everyone who joins in.
Matchmaking isn't broken. There's a lot more people playing right now because of the deathless piece. Because there are less rosters your size to match with, you're being matched with these opponents. You're in silver 2 so you weren't really affected by the seeding bug.
Fair enough but the matchmaking it still could be better like making your opponent the same progression level that you're in
Imagine the devs did that. Imagine that all the low Uncollecteds match only against each other. Someone has to be the best out of all of those players. They are going to win and win and win until they make it to GC. Fair? That one of the weakest players in the game that can even play the game mode gets to GC without having to face *anyone* stronger than them, even though 95% of all players in the game mode are stronger than them?
Some people think "fair" is when we look for and find someone they can beat and only match them against those people. However, for the competition as a whole that is incredibly unfair, because it means weak players get to progress faster than stronger players, and stronger players are punished for being stronger players by being forced to compete against much stronger competition. Most competitive players, and the devs themselves, do not believe this is fair.
Here's the acid test for fairness. When you match the way you describe, we know what happens because the devs did it in the past, and until recently did it for lower VT tiers. Take any strong player and have them play two different rosters. First, their normal very strong roster. Then have then step down and play a much weaker roster. If they have a second account, this is an experiment you can do. This player will essentially *always* promote faster with the weak account than the strong account, all other things kept equal. And that's because the competition is weaker in lower roster strength groups. People say UC vs UC is the same as Val vs Val. Its not. When I play my Val account against other Val accounts the experience is completely different than when I play a Cav account against other Cav accounts. It is undeniably easier playing the Cav account against other Cav accounts. So the Vals are being punished when Vals match against all other Vals and UCs match against all other UCs.
That's unfair, no matter how fair some people think equal roster matching is. It simply isn't because it punishes players for advancing their rosters. And in a game that is all about advancing roster, that is a ludicrous situation to place in a competitive game mode.
Here's better idea make matchmaking where you're opponent has same progression level as you but it would stop at a certain level like platinum or diamond
That’s what used to happen. So who fixes this arbitrary “level”? You must understand that this “level” you’re talking about is the floor for participation.
If anything, this “level” should be set at Bronze. Since participation trophies should be attained by everyone who joins in.
I don't know what you're saying but I think the level that you're talking about is when I said (where you're opponent has the same progression level as you) correct? I was talking about story progression level
I see this tremd where everyone with a good roster is called a whale and it makes me laugh. They are not all whales you are WAY BEHIND in the game accept it.
Comments
You will be matched up against accounts that are much better than yours, and also some that are worse than yours. This will continue until the system normalizes after a few seasons.
Me neither.
Cursory search done pre-coffee—but very disappointing given the slog the game team put honest accounts through this season.
Dr. Zola
That, in my opinion, makes it all seem like a farce—especially given the dynamics of this BG season.
I would hypothesize that many of the small accounts newly making GC are either beneficiaries of a matchmaking I’m not seeing or there is something else going on.
Either way, there’s no way we should see this kind of shenanigans during a bungled BG season that requires players to pound their heads against doppelgänger accounts across far more tiers than ever to get a valuable Deathless piece.
Dr. Zola
What about you did you improve your roster?
Not sure if that's intentional or not, but well done!
It would probably be too much work to have a separate BGs just for higher accounts/prestige almost like incursions needing a certain rating for each level or even that new sector for saga fighters.. with better rewards higher, so lower cant get the same as better progression accounts. And before you say thats what victory track is.. anyone can get there.. I literally mean a second BGs with account requirement. Rewards are locked behind progression in most of the game, why not tweak BGs like that too
If anything, this “level” should be set at Bronze. Since participation trophies should be attained by everyone who joins in.
They are not all whales you are WAY BEHIND in the game accept it.