What Determines Battlegrounds Matchmaking?

So I’m trying to rise through the victory track and I’m currently fighting it out of Diamond V. I just finished a match with someone who had 28 rank 3 7 stars and the vast majority of which were awakened and at decently high sig levels (the other 2 champs were maxed out Dr doom and Hercules). In my case I have 8 rank 3 7 stars, so a decent amount but not nearly enough to keep up with a deck like that (the hazard shift meta also definitely doesn’t help). Given that, I was wondering on what basis matches are determined? Is it purely on your current rank and who is actively matching at the time but ignoring potential roster mismatches?

Comments

Squammo

All just pure RNG. Sometimes you will match with someone at your level, sometimes below, sometimes above, but especially at the start of a new season chances that you will match a player with a big roster are quite high.

Demonzfyre

Your current bracket. If you're in Gold 1, you can match with anyone in Gold 1. There are no other qualifiers.

DNA3000

Is it purely on your current rank and who is actively matching at the time but ignoring potential roster mismatches?

Yes. And yes, this is deliberate. And yes, this is fair. And yes, Kabam tried it other ways, including trying to match players according to roster strength. We do it the way we do it now because all those other ways generated horribly unfair results.

How can finding “fair matches” generate unfair results? Because the goal of BG is not to give players fair matches, it is to create a fair competition. A fair match is one where both sides have an even chance to win. A fair competition is one where the stronger players win more often and the weaker ones win less often, because the goal is to reward the strongest competitors.

Imagine a race where the top ten fastest competitors face each other, and the slowest ten competitors face each other, and then the winners of each round face each other. The second place competitor will always be one of the worst runners, because he will always come from the bottom half of the entire race pool. That’s what happens when the weakest players only face each other in BG. *Someone* has to win, every time. You’re guaranteeing that many of the strongest players have to lose, and many of the weakest players have to win, when you match them up that way. BG matches people based on how high they climb and how fast they climb that high. The higher you are, the earlier you get there, the more likely it is you’re one of the stronger players, and you therefore have to face the stronger players. If you can’t beat them, you get slowed down until they all promote upward, and leave behind weaker competitors that eventually you will be able to beat.

TotemCorruption

During my first season of BG, I once lost like 16 matches in a row, while trying. The matches did not get progressively easier. Don't believe anyone who says forfeiting creates easier matches. It's all just based on who's randomly available in your bracket when you sign up to play.

Xander_1_1

Is it purely on your current rank and who is actively matching at the time but ignoring potential roster mismatches?
Yes. And yes, this is deliberate. And yes, this is fair. And yes, Kabam tried it other ways, including trying to match players according to roster strength. We do it the way we do it now because all those other ways generated horribly unfair results.

How can finding “fair matches” generate unfair results? Because the goal of BG is not to give players fair matches, it is to create a fair competition. A fair match is one where both sides have an even chance to win. A fair competition is one where the stronger players win more often and the weaker ones win less often, because the goal is to reward the strongest competitors.

Imagine a race where the top ten fastest competitors face each other, and the slowest ten competitors face each other, and then the winners of each round face each other. The second place competitor will always be one of the worst runners, because he will always come from the bottom half of the entire race pool. That’s what happens when the weakest players only face each other in BG. *Someone* has to win, every time. You’re guaranteeing that many of the strongest players have to lose, and many of the weakest players have to win, when you match them up that way. BG matches people based on how high they climb and how fast they climb that high. The higher you are, the earlier you get there, the more likely it is you’re one of the stronger players, and you therefore have to face the stronger players. If you can’t beat them, you get slowed down until they all promote upward, and leave behind weaker competitors that eventually you will be able to beat.

Ooh gotcha, thanks for the insight. Might wait a week or so and then start grinding up the ranks.

DNA3000

Is it purely on your current rank and who is actively matching at the time but ignoring potential roster mismatches?
Yes. And yes, this is deliberate. And yes, this is fair. And yes, Kabam tried it other ways, including trying to match players according to roster strength. We do it the way we do it now because all those other ways generated horribly unfair results.

How can finding “fair matches” generate unfair results? Because the goal of BG is not to give players fair matches, it is to create a fair competition. A fair match is one where both sides have an even chance to win. A fair competition is one where the stronger players win more often and the weaker ones win less often, because the goal is to reward the strongest competitors.

Imagine a race where the top ten fastest competitors face each other, and the slowest ten competitors face each other, and then the winners of each round face each other. The second place competitor will always be one of the worst runners, because he will always come from the bottom half of the entire race pool. That’s what happens when the weakest players only face each other in BG. *Someone* has to win, every time. You’re guaranteeing that many of the strongest players have to lose, and many of the weakest players have to win, when you match them up that way. BG matches people based on how high they climb and how fast they climb that high. The higher you are, the earlier you get there, the more likely it is you’re one of the stronger players, and you therefore have to face the stronger players. If you can’t beat them, you get slowed down until they all promote upward, and leave behind weaker competitors that eventually you will be able to beat.
Ooh gotcha, thanks for the insight. Might wait a week or so and then start grinding up the ranks.

Different tiers get easier as time goes on. Vibranium tends to have fairly strong players until the last week, because until the last week there are always tons of Valiants and strong Paragons dragging their lazy butts into GC (I resemble that remark sometimes). But the lower tiers tend to get easier earlier, as stronger players promote up. It is a noticeable trend if you play BG long enough.

The best strategy is to climb until you run into a significant roadblock, lots of very strong players, then take a break for a few days and then come back. Test the waters and see where the competition is. If the strong players have passed you by, it will be easier to beat whoever is left. But you can run into the pack ahead of you as you promote, so when you do, let them go. Using that sort of strategy I've gotten Cav and TB accounts into GC by managing my time and progress right up to the last day, when there's a mad dash to get into GC and everyone who can tries, leaving Vibranium depleted of GC-caliber players.