Applaud the effort to bring any fresh idea to the forum, especially one related to BGs. This environment is generally hostile to such things.
Crashed said at one point that they are planning to experiment with formats and events. Something like what you’re envisioning would be a killer 3-day event, IMO. Whether or not it’s a perfect idea, it’s good for people to consider possibilities.
As a one off bespoke event, I think it would be fun. However, as a suggestion to replace battlegrounds itself I think it’s horrible.
Taking a break from normal BG to do something weird, no matter how weird, is a fun novelty for the players and has a minimal impact on the game. But what this idea fundamentally says is, it’s unfair if your roster is stronger than mine so I’m going to take it away from you, but out of the goodness of my heart I’ll give you a little something for it so you can’t complain about it.
Not being able to use your full roster is a temporary restriction that even the game does to us in the non-competitive parts of the game. But any game mode that says eh, you can collect and rank champs if you want but you don’t have to on any kind of permanent basis, is dead on arrival. Deck matching was starting to do that to BG, and that’s why it was taken out behind the shed and put down. To me, this is basically that: an on-paper roster advantage designed to be there in theory but completely ignorable in practice.
People talk about boycotts all the time, but boycotts are silly nonsense that has never amounted to anything ever. No boycott is ever going to kill this game. In practice boycotts are both spotty and temporary. But if the right 1% of the players to decide to spend a bit less, consistently and permanently, it’s all over. Taking away incentives to chase champions misses the point to Battlegrounds. It was put there to create *another* incentive to chase and rank champs, because the day you notice there’s not enough incentive to do that, it will probably be too late to do anything about it.
The roster advantage in BG is not there accidentally, it is there deliberately and by design. When Kabam accidentally weakened it with deck matching, they *publicly* admitted their mistake when they changed it. It is there because it is supposed to be there, and any suggestion that treats it like a problem to be solved is not likely to go anywhere.
Show us your battlegrounds deck so we know what's your true intentions
I'm a Valiant player, my deck is what you expect it to be. Some disgusting champs and some likeable ones.
No photo no talk
Ngl, the screenshots make it easy to see why you're struggling in BGs.
Also as context for this, my main reasoning is you dont have anyone who is a strong defensive threat ranked up. Ironman IW is a fun choice I approve of, but he isn't the worst to counter amongst the meta attackers in the game. Really your only strong defender I see in any of your screenshots is just enchantress who isn't even super difficult amongst the skilled players. You got a large chunk of good attackers, but I find having a healthy mix of tough defenders also goes a long way. I personally like inflicting maximum emotional damage to my opponents, so I got a fair amount of annoying defenders ranked up for that purpose alone.
Applaud the effort to bring any fresh idea to the forum, especially one related to BGs. This environment is generally hostile to such things.
Crashed said at one point that they are planning to experiment with formats and events. Something like what you’re envisioning would be a killer 3-day event, IMO. Whether or not it’s a perfect idea, it’s good for people to consider possibilities.
As a one off bespoke event, I think it would be fun. However, as a suggestion to replace battlegrounds itself I think it’s horrible.
Taking a break from normal BG to do something weird, no matter how weird, is a fun novelty for the players and has a minimal impact on the game. But what this idea fundamentally says is, it’s unfair if your roster is stronger than mine so I’m going to take it away from you, but out of the goodness of my heart I’ll give you a little something for it so you can’t complain about it.
Not being able to use your full roster is a temporary restriction that even the game does to us in the non-competitive parts of the game. But any game mode that says eh, you can collect and rank champs if you want but you don’t have to on any kind of permanent basis, is dead on arrival. Deck matching was starting to do that to BG, and that’s why it was taken out behind the shed and put down. To me, this is basically that: an on-paper roster advantage designed to be there in theory but completely ignorable in practice.
People talk about boycotts all the time, but boycotts are silly nonsense that has never amounted to anything ever. No boycott is ever going to kill this game. In practice boycotts are both spotty and temporary. But if the right 1% of the players to decide to spend a bit less, consistently and permanently, it’s all over. Taking away incentives to chase champions misses the point to Battlegrounds. It was put there to create *another* incentive to chase and rank champs, because the day you notice there’s not enough incentive to do that, it will probably be too late to do anything about it.
The roster advantage in BG is not there accidentally, it is there deliberately and by design. When Kabam accidentally weakened it with deck matching, they *publicly* admitted their mistake when they changed it. It is there because it is supposed to be there, and any suggestion that treats it like a problem to be solved is not likely to go anywhere.
At some point in the past, I think we exchanged comments about restrictor plate racing in NASCAR. I see an idea like this in much the same way. The overall BG structure / seasons can stay in place, you just drop in some unusual events here and there for novelty.
Applaud the effort to bring any fresh idea to the forum, especially one related to BGs. This environment is generally hostile to such things.
Crashed said at one point that they are planning to experiment with formats and events. Something like what you’re envisioning would be a killer 3-day event, IMO. Whether or not it’s a perfect idea, it’s good for people to consider possibilities.
As a one off bespoke event, I think it would be fun. However, as a suggestion to replace battlegrounds itself I think it’s horrible.
Taking a break from normal BG to do something weird, no matter how weird, is a fun novelty for the players and has a minimal impact on the game. But what this idea fundamentally says is, it’s unfair if your roster is stronger than mine so I’m going to take it away from you, but out of the goodness of my heart I’ll give you a little something for it so you can’t complain about it.
Not being able to use your full roster is a temporary restriction that even the game does to us in the non-competitive parts of the game. But any game mode that says eh, you can collect and rank champs if you want but you don’t have to on any kind of permanent basis, is dead on arrival. Deck matching was starting to do that to BG, and that’s why it was taken out behind the shed and put down. To me, this is basically that: an on-paper roster advantage designed to be there in theory but completely ignorable in practice.
People talk about boycotts all the time, but boycotts are silly nonsense that has never amounted to anything ever. No boycott is ever going to kill this game. In practice boycotts are both spotty and temporary. But if the right 1% of the players to decide to spend a bit less, consistently and permanently, it’s all over. Taking away incentives to chase champions misses the point to Battlegrounds. It was put there to create *another* incentive to chase and rank champs, because the day you notice there’s not enough incentive to do that, it will probably be too late to do anything about it.
The roster advantage in BG is not there accidentally, it is there deliberately and by design. When Kabam accidentally weakened it with deck matching, they *publicly* admitted their mistake when they changed it. It is there because it is supposed to be there, and any suggestion that treats it like a problem to be solved is not likely to go anywhere.
At some point in the past, I think we exchanged comments about restrictor plate racing in NASCAR. I see an idea like this in much the same way. The overall BG structure / seasons can stay in place, you just drop in some unusual events here and there for novelty.
Anything that gives us a break from the grind, I’m open to. Anything that negates the grind the devs are going to veto, so it’s not worth spending a lot of time on.
Once upon a time, I would have said expensive gameplay experiments were also highly unlikely to happen. But my stance on that one has softened recently. I think *if* there’s a clear payoff in terms of player engagement, Kabam is more willing to experiment with bespoke gameplay novelties. Whether that includes experimental BG seasons resembling what is being described here, I couldn’t say.
Applaud the effort to bring any fresh idea to the forum, especially one related to BGs. This environment is generally hostile to such things.
Crashed said at one point that they are planning to experiment with formats and events. Something like what you’re envisioning would be a killer 3-day event, IMO. Whether or not it’s a perfect idea, it’s good for people to consider possibilities.
As a one off bespoke event, I think it would be fun. However, as a suggestion to replace battlegrounds itself I think it’s horrible.
Taking a break from normal BG to do something weird, no matter how weird, is a fun novelty for the players and has a minimal impact on the game. But what this idea fundamentally says is, it’s unfair if your roster is stronger than mine so I’m going to take it away from you, but out of the goodness of my heart I’ll give you a little something for it so you can’t complain about it.
Not being able to use your full roster is a temporary restriction that even the game does to us in the non-competitive parts of the game. But any game mode that says eh, you can collect and rank champs if you want but you don’t have to on any kind of permanent basis, is dead on arrival. Deck matching was starting to do that to BG, and that’s why it was taken out behind the shed and put down. To me, this is basically that: an on-paper roster advantage designed to be there in theory but completely ignorable in practice.
People talk about boycotts all the time, but boycotts are silly nonsense that has never amounted to anything ever. No boycott is ever going to kill this game. In practice boycotts are both spotty and temporary. But if the right 1% of the players to decide to spend a bit less, consistently and permanently, it’s all over. Taking away incentives to chase champions misses the point to Battlegrounds. It was put there to create *another* incentive to chase and rank champs, because the day you notice there’s not enough incentive to do that, it will probably be too late to do anything about it.
The roster advantage in BG is not there accidentally, it is there deliberately and by design. When Kabam accidentally weakened it with deck matching, they *publicly* admitted their mistake when they changed it. It is there because it is supposed to be there, and any suggestion that treats it like a problem to be solved is not likely to go anywhere.
At some point in the past, I think we exchanged comments about restrictor plate racing in NASCAR. I see an idea like this in much the same way. The overall BG structure / seasons can stay in place, you just drop in some unusual events here and there for novelty.
Anything that gives us a break from the grind, I’m open to. Anything that negates the grind the devs are going to veto, so it’s not worth spending a lot of time on.
Once upon a time, I would have said expensive gameplay experiments were also highly unlikely to happen. But my stance on that one has softened recently. I think *if* there’s a clear payoff in terms of player engagement, Kabam is more willing to experiment with bespoke gameplay novelties. Whether that includes experimental BG seasons resembling what is being described here, I couldn’t say.
A willingness to experiment is only way something like the new AW comes to pass. I have mixed feelings about the actual experience of the new format but I applaud the effort to try something unexpected.
Show us your battlegrounds deck so we know what's your true intentions
I'm a Valiant player, my deck is what you expect it to be. Some disgusting champs and some likeable ones.
No photo no talk
Ngl, the screenshots make it easy to see why you're struggling in BGs.
Also as context for this, my main reasoning is you dont have anyone who is a strong defensive threat ranked up. Ironman IW is a fun choice I approve of, but he isn't the worst to counter amongst the meta attackers in the game. Really your only strong defender I see in any of your screenshots is just enchantress who isn't even super difficult amongst the skilled players. You got a large chunk of good attackers, but I find having a healthy mix of tough defenders also goes a long way. I personally like inflicting maximum emotional damage to my opponents, so I got a fair amount of annoying defenders ranked up for that purpose alone.
He's my favorite Champion, also he's actually banned 9/10 times lmao. And believe it or not, he always survives In Bgs (at least he did in this meta) and gets me a win.
Having players get access to champions they don't own is a huge technical difficulty for the game developers to overcome given the way the game is built
It's easier said than done honestly
Honestly, I don’t believe you (nor I) know a damn thing about whether or not something like that is technically difficult.
Firstly Kabam won't implement such a poor suggestion
Secondly there is huge technical difficulty in implementing such a suggestion, expect lots of bugs, it won't be worth it for Kabam
Say you own 1,000 champions and all that data is stored in the main server that we all play in
Content creators get access to champions they don't own and they have to login to a different server to test the new champions
So you can't really implement this suggestion in the main server, you have your own set of champions you own, giving players access to champions they don't own will end up requiring setting up a separate set of champions data that Kabam have to ensure doesn't corrupt the existing data on the champions you already own
That is why content creators have to login to a different server to test the champions they don't own, any new champions or rewards they get on the test server doesn't interfere with the data on the main servers
Many wild suggestions from players are actually easier said than done, players without coding expertise can say all kinds of suggestions without thinking how it can be implemented within the main server
Many wild suggestions from players are actually easier said than done, players without coding expertise can say all kinds of suggestions without thinking how it can be implemented within the main server
The only thing I’m saying is that I have zero confidence you know what you’re talking about when it comes to technical feasibility of a new idea.
Many wild suggestions from players are actually easier said than done, players without coding expertise can say all kinds of suggestions without thinking how it can be implemented within the main server
The only thing I’m saying is that I have zero confidence you know what you’re talking about when it comes to technical feasibility of a new idea.
Back when there wasn't a CCP, new champs were given to the main accounts with a "Please don't use them for other things" clause.
Show us your battlegrounds deck so we know what's your true intentions
I'm a Valiant player, my deck is what you expect it to be. Some disgusting champs and some likeable ones.
No photo no talk
Ngl, the screenshots make it easy to see why you're struggling in BGs.
Also as context for this, my main reasoning is you dont have anyone who is a strong defensive threat ranked up. Ironman IW is a fun choice I approve of, but he isn't the worst to counter amongst the meta attackers in the game. Really your only strong defender I see in any of your screenshots is just enchantress who isn't even super difficult amongst the skilled players. You got a large chunk of good attackers, but I find having a healthy mix of tough defenders also goes a long way. I personally like inflicting maximum emotional damage to my opponents, so I got a fair amount of annoying defenders ranked up for that purpose alone.
He's my favorite Champion, also he's actually banned 9/10 times lmao. And believe it or not, he always survives In Bgs (at least he did in this meta) and gets me a win.
He's banned because he's your highest champ, not because he's worth the ban. When I face an opponent that doesn't have anything that bothers me, I just get rid of their top champs that I don't have. I'm not banning him because he's IMIW, I'm banning him because you have a weak deck so I'm going to weaken it further.
Many wild suggestions from players are actually easier said than done, players without coding expertise can say all kinds of suggestions without thinking how it can be implemented within the main server
The only thing I’m saying is that I have zero confidence you know what you’re talking about when it comes to technical feasibility of a new idea.
Well I studied java programming and I know what I'm talking about
You don't need to have any confidence in what I say in the forums, I'm not here to convince anyone either
That way it wouldn't be useless to rank up x champion. Also if you don´t have a specific champion that was probaby just released you both would still get it, but in a small chance,
Why are you playing BGs? Some small part is for fun/competitive drive, but the overwhelming reason is to get rewards (because otherwise, you could just play friendly matches for no rewards and not want to change the mode at all). And why do you want rewards? To be able to obtain champions and the rank them up, so that you can use them.... in modes like BGs.
I applaud making a little effort in your suggestion to reward people's time/money in building a roster (with the part about boosts), but obtaining champions, and ranking champions are a huge part of the game. You are essentially asking to remove that just to make things feel fair in a competitive mode? That would be an entirely different spin-off game.
Many wild suggestions from players are actually easier said than done, players without coding expertise can say all kinds of suggestions without thinking how it can be implemented within the main server
The only thing I’m saying is that I have zero confidence you know what you’re talking about when it comes to technical feasibility of a new idea.
Well I studied java programming and I know what I'm talking about
Please don't go there. There’s so much wrong with this statement I strain not to point all of it out.
Many wild suggestions from players are actually easier said than done, players without coding expertise can say all kinds of suggestions without thinking how it can be implemented within the main server
The only thing I’m saying is that I have zero confidence you know what you’re talking about when it comes to technical feasibility of a new idea.
Well I studied java programming and I know what I'm talking about
Please don't go there. There’s so much wrong with this statement I strain not to point all of it out.
I'm also an AI professional specialising in intelligence gathering
I don't know what you specialise in or what you study but you fail to point out anything wrong with what I said
Many wild suggestions from players are actually easier said than done, players without coding expertise can say all kinds of suggestions without thinking how it can be implemented within the main server
The only thing I’m saying is that I have zero confidence you know what you’re talking about when it comes to technical feasibility of a new idea.
Well I studied java programming and I know what I'm talking about
Please don't go there. There’s so much wrong with this statement I strain not to point all of it out.
I'm also an AI professional specialising in intelligence gathering
I don't know what you specialise in or what you study but you fail to point out anything wrong with what I said
Many wild suggestions from players are actually easier said than done, players without coding expertise can say all kinds of suggestions without thinking how it can be implemented within the main server
The only thing I’m saying is that I have zero confidence you know what you’re talking about when it comes to technical feasibility of a new idea.
Well I studied java programming and I know what I'm talking about
Please don't go there. There’s so much wrong with this statement I strain not to point all of it out.
I'm also an AI professional specialising in intelligence gathering
I don't know what you specialise in or what you study but you fail to point out anything wrong with what I said
AI tech bro ? Yikes
AI is currently doing 30% of coding work in big tech companies so many software engineers are retrenched right now
AI is pretty scary in the speed it replaces human work and the good paying jobs destroyed in the process
Why equalize everyone to 6 stars if owning a ranked up 7 star version adds stats to the champ anyway? Why not just leave them as 7 stars then?? It’s the same thing…
For instance, a 7*R3 has 23% better stats than a 6R5A. Adding a 30% boost to the 6 star to compensate effectively just puts them back to a 7*R3.
The only thing i agreed with is the lack of creativity with the nodes they come up with specialy for VT this season is the same sort of powergain BS as last season just with a saga twist its getting boring af. These different same nodes that benefit defenders with powergain.
The only thing i agreed with is the lack of creativity with the nodes they come up with specialy for VT this season is the same sort of powergain BS as last season just with a saga twist its getting boring af. These different same nodes that benefit defenders with powergain.
Lack of node creativity in repeat content has been Kabam's m.o. since Cav EQ launched.
This discussion will probably get left in the dark but i still want to say some of my thoughts about the game mode. We all know Battlegrounds have been getting pretty stale lately, all i hear are valid and rational complaints like the bad RNG, terrible matchmaking, boring metas, hideous Champions choices etc. I'm gonna make this post short and straight to the point. I'm not here to change the rewards, change the different ranks, or whatever, just the game mode itself. Battlegrounds revamp: -Every season Kabam would pick 80 out of the 300 available champions; -Both players would get 30 random champions out of those 80 but equally distributed (You get Iron Man, the opponent gets Iron Man and etc.); -Both players still can ban 3 champions they dislike; -You get a pool of 9 random champs every round (instead of 3 or 5); -Every champ is locked at 6* sig 200; -The rank ups are still effective. For example, you have a rank 4 Spiral it wouldn't be fair getting her only as a 6*, that's why the "new boost" system would be implemented here. For each 7* rank the player would get a bonus % boost depending on the rank. A 7* rank 1 would get +10% attack and hp, rank 2 +20% and so on, but both on defense and attack (defender and attacker get more 10% health and attack, +20% etc.). Of course the bonus percentages could be reduced. That way it wouldn't be useless to rank up x champion. Also if you don´t have a specific champion that was probaby just released you both would still get it, but in a small chance, Kabam has to profit off of those new champions. I know it still has some flaws and some RNG involved but still i think the mode would be then more replayable, fair and unique. Tell me what are your thoughts on this.
This discussion will probably get left in the dark but i still want to say some of my thoughts about the game mode. We all know Battlegrounds have been getting pretty stale lately, all i hear are valid and rational complaints like the bad RNG, terrible matchmaking, boring metas, hideous Champions choices etc. I'm gonna make this post short and straight to the point. I'm not here to change the rewards, change the different ranks, or whatever, just the game mode itself. Battlegrounds revamp: -Every season Kabam would pick 80 out of the 300 available champions; -Both players would get 30 random champions out of those 80 but equally distributed (You get Iron Man, the opponent gets Iron Man and etc.); -Both players still can ban 3 champions they dislike; -You get a pool of 9 random champs every round (instead of 3 or 5); -Every champ is locked at 6* sig 200; -The rank ups are still effective. For example, you have a rank 4 Spiral it wouldn't be fair getting her only as a 6*, that's why the "new boost" system would be implemented here. For each 7* rank the player would get a bonus % boost depending on the rank. A 7* rank 1 would get +10% attack and hp, rank 2 +20% and so on, but both on defense and attack (defender and attacker get more 10% health and attack, +20% etc.). Of course the bonus percentages could be reduced. That way it wouldn't be useless to rank up x champion. Also if you don´t have a specific champion that was probaby just released you both would still get it, but in a small chance, Kabam has to profit off of those new champions. I know it still has some flaws and some RNG involved but still i think the mode would be then more replayable, fair and unique. Tell me what are your thoughts on this.
This discussion will probably get left in the dark but i still want to say some of my thoughts about the game mode. We all know Battlegrounds have been getting pretty stale lately, all i hear are valid and rational complaints like the bad RNG, terrible matchmaking, boring metas, hideous Champions choices etc. I'm gonna make this post short and straight to the point. I'm not here to change the rewards, change the different ranks, or whatever, just the game mode itself. Battlegrounds revamp: -Every season Kabam would pick 80 out of the 300 available champions; -Both players would get 30 random champions out of those 80 but equally distributed (You get Iron Man, the opponent gets Iron Man and etc.); -Both players still can ban 3 champions they dislike; -You get a pool of 9 random champs every round (instead of 3 or 5); -Every champ is locked at 6* sig 200; -The rank ups are still effective. For example, you have a rank 4 Spiral it wouldn't be fair getting her only as a 6*, that's why the "new boost" system would be implemented here. For each 7* rank the player would get a bonus % boost depending on the rank. A 7* rank 1 would get +10% attack and hp, rank 2 +20% and so on, but both on defense and attack (defender and attacker get more 10% health and attack, +20% etc.). Of course the bonus percentages could be reduced. That way it wouldn't be useless to rank up x champion. Also if you don´t have a specific champion that was probaby just released you both would still get it, but in a small chance, Kabam has to profit off of those new champions. I know it still has some flaws and some RNG involved but still i think the mode would be then more replayable, fair and unique. Tell me what are your thoughts on this.
This discussion will probably get left in the dark but i still want to say some of my thoughts about the game mode. We all know Battlegrounds have been getting pretty stale lately, all i hear are valid and rational complaints like the bad RNG, terrible matchmaking, boring metas, hideous Champions choices etc. I'm gonna make this post short and straight to the point. I'm not here to change the rewards, change the different ranks, or whatever, just the game mode itself. Battlegrounds revamp: -Every season Kabam would pick 80 out of the 300 available champions; -Both players would get 30 random champions out of those 80 but equally distributed (You get Iron Man, the opponent gets Iron Man and etc.); -Both players still can ban 3 champions they dislike; -You get a pool of 9 random champs every round (instead of 3 or 5); -Every champ is locked at 6* sig 200; -The rank ups are still effective. For example, you have a rank 4 Spiral it wouldn't be fair getting her only as a 6*, that's why the "new boost" system would be implemented here. For each 7* rank the player would get a bonus % boost depending on the rank. A 7* rank 1 would get +10% attack and hp, rank 2 +20% and so on, but both on defense and attack (defender and attacker get more 10% health and attack, +20% etc.). Of course the bonus percentages could be reduced. That way it wouldn't be useless to rank up x champion. Also if you don´t have a specific champion that was probaby just released you both would still get it, but in a small chance, Kabam has to profit off of those new champions. I know it still has some flaws and some RNG involved but still i think the mode would be then more replayable, fair and unique. Tell me what are your thoughts on this.
I just would like a non ban option that could potentially nullify a great champ. It would mean that you would need to be very careful in your selections and would bring node knowledge and understanding into play
Comments
Taking a break from normal BG to do something weird, no matter how weird, is a fun novelty for the players and has a minimal impact on the game. But what this idea fundamentally says is, it’s unfair if your roster is stronger than mine so I’m going to take it away from you, but out of the goodness of my heart I’ll give you a little something for it so you can’t complain about it.
Not being able to use your full roster is a temporary restriction that even the game does to us in the non-competitive parts of the game. But any game mode that says eh, you can collect and rank champs if you want but you don’t have to on any kind of permanent basis, is dead on arrival. Deck matching was starting to do that to BG, and that’s why it was taken out behind the shed and put down. To me, this is basically that: an on-paper roster advantage designed to be there in theory but completely ignorable in practice.
People talk about boycotts all the time, but boycotts are silly nonsense that has never amounted to anything ever. No boycott is ever going to kill this game. In practice boycotts are both spotty and temporary. But if the right 1% of the players to decide to spend a bit less, consistently and permanently, it’s all over. Taking away incentives to chase champions misses the point to Battlegrounds. It was put there to create *another* incentive to chase and rank champs, because the day you notice there’s not enough incentive to do that, it will probably be too late to do anything about it.
The roster advantage in BG is not there accidentally, it is there deliberately and by design. When Kabam accidentally weakened it with deck matching, they *publicly* admitted their mistake when they changed it. It is there because it is supposed to be there, and any suggestion that treats it like a problem to be solved is not likely to go anywhere.
Once upon a time, I would have said expensive gameplay experiments were also highly unlikely to happen. But my stance on that one has softened recently. I think *if* there’s a clear payoff in terms of player engagement, Kabam is more willing to experiment with bespoke gameplay novelties. Whether that includes experimental BG seasons resembling what is being described here, I couldn’t say.
A willingness to experiment is only way something like the new AW comes to pass. I have mixed feelings about the actual experience of the new format but I applaud the effort to try something unexpected.
Secondly there is huge technical difficulty in implementing such a suggestion, expect lots of bugs, it won't be worth it for Kabam
Say you own 1,000 champions and all that data is stored in the main server that we all play in
Content creators get access to champions they don't own and they have to login to a different server to test the new champions
So you can't really implement this suggestion in the main server, you have your own set of champions you own, giving players access to champions they don't own will end up requiring setting up a separate set of champions data that Kabam have to ensure doesn't corrupt the existing data on the champions you already own
That is why content creators have to login to a different server to test the champions they don't own, any new champions or rewards they get on the test server doesn't interfere with the data on the main servers
You don't need to have any confidence in what I say in the forums, I'm not here to convince anyone either
Anyone without coding experience will have absolutely no idea what I'm talking about
I applaud making a little effort in your suggestion to reward people's time/money in building a roster (with the part about boosts), but obtaining champions, and ranking champions are a huge part of the game. You are essentially asking to remove that just to make things feel fair in a competitive mode? That would be an entirely different spin-off game.
I don't know what you specialise in or what you study but you fail to point out anything wrong with what I said
AI is pretty scary in the speed it replaces human work and the good paying jobs destroyed in the process
For instance, a 7*R3 has 23% better stats than a 6R5A. Adding a 30% boost to the 6 star to compensate effectively just puts them back to a 7*R3.
Give AI power gain for good measure
I just would like a non ban option that could potentially nullify a great champ. It would mean that you would need to be very careful in your selections and would bring node knowledge and understanding into play