IT IS waste of time here, cause he can't understand any completion has rules And rules here Are correct. He played terrible fight, almost died against 5* And his oponent played probably best as anyone can. Better player win, good Luck next time.
Op is right. Scoring is terrible. Don’t listen to the sheeple that dog pile you on here.
If you win the fight and the other person doesn’t. It should LITERALLY be impossible to win the round.
And remove the pause button. It just lets people cheat. If you can’t make 10 minutes to play battlegrounds then maybe just don’t que up. Play another game mode.
IF YoU BeAt tHe OpPonEnts BoSs In AW It shOuLD bE LITERALLY imPoSsiBlE FoR tHeM tO WiN
Gotta love when people call others Sheeple, it’s almost a sign that says “I don’t know how to accept that other people have different opinions”
You got your opponent down 100%, he got his opponent down 95%.
The health difference is 75 percentage points in his favour, the defender is 5 percentage points in your favour.
Looks like he did better overall to me.
Thank you Captain Obvious!...clearly you don't know how to see the bigger picture
Isn't the point to win the match?
Not in this case, Lt. Lostamatch. We all play by the same rules, which include scoring that accounts for lost and remaining health. This has been true in every Beta.
Adapt.
Instead of us “adapting” maybe “FIX” the scoring system.
I’m curious. Hypothetical world where somebody goes in using all 3*, and someone else comes in using all 6*. Then you have a situation exactly like this one where the person playing with 3* takes a 6* defender down by 95% with no health loss, and the 6* player screws up and gets clapped by a 3* defender, winning by a slim margin.
Does that win still result in an overwhelming point advantage?
More valuable Is Slower fight without mistakes than panic quick fight full of mistakes. Atleast from my view. Also he had harder match up i Wondera He win ONLY by few points more...
Well you actually lose points for the longer the fight is...so your statement actually contradicts itself.
you sound like Dwight K. Schrute, you're wrong, i know that might be hard for you to understand, but you are, get over it
You got your opponent down 100%, he got his opponent down 95%.
The health difference is 75 percentage points in his favour, the defender is 5 percentage points in your favour.
Looks like he did better overall to me.
Thank you Captain Obvious!...clearly you don't know how to see the bigger picture
Isn't the point to win the match?
Not in this case, Lt. Lostamatch. We all play by the same rules, which include scoring that accounts for lost and remaining health. This has been true in every Beta.
Adapt.
Instead of us “adapting” maybe “FIX” the scoring system.
I think Kabam has done great work with the Battlegrounds scoring system, which in my opinion is spot on. No fix is needed at all, it’s nearly perfect. Kudos to the game team 👍
I just quit the fight straight away, the guy actually tries to fight loses.
That’s something that definitely does need changing. Quitting out should be an automatic loss in that round. There’s no reason to do it except if you’re accepting a loss in that round, you’re frustrated and rage quit, or you’re exploiting. Either way, automatic loss in that round.
I just quit the fight straight away, the guy actually tries to fight loses.
Well mate, this is going to get fixed. Anyone who quit will be awarded 0 points for attacker health.
You gotta realise this is beta and these exploits won't remain in the real one.
If some one runs out of time or uses the Pause button? It might be unfair to some who legit ran out of time but still get zero pts. for attacker health & at the same time , Pause button can be used to time out.
For the solution that you are talking about to work , Kabam needs to even remove the Pause button.
You got your opponent down 100%, he got his opponent down 95%.
The health difference is 75 percentage points in his favour, the defender is 5 percentage points in your favour.
Looks like he did better overall to me.
Thank you Captain Obvious!...clearly you don't know how to see the bigger picture
Isn't the point to win the match?
No, it's to be the better player. With unlimited time the other guy probably could've won a match against that opponent with another 10 times more health. If your opponent had had 50% more you apparently would've died. I think it's pretty clear who played a better match.
While I do agree the OP lost based on current scoring system, you are just going off on hypotheticals. There is no scope for ifs and buts. The time is limited and so is the healthpool. So just saying if he had more time or if your opponent had more health is just pure speculation. If opponent had more time he may have missed an input and got combo’d to death in 5more seconds and lost.
You're right, the extrapolation isn't that easily possible (no way the other guy could actually solo the 20+ minute fight I suggested). But we're just judging the performance in those 2 minutes, any potential missed inputs that might've happened after aren't relevant. Extrapolating the performance can show more easily why it was better.
And I think hypotheticals are better than just saying "it's the scoring system, deal with it". If the system were flawed that should be pointed out, but I don't think it's flawed and try to explain why not.
It should go by defender Health first. If your fight has lower HP. You win. Automatic. After that, if both got kills. Check time. After that, check attacker HP.
How can you guys not figure this out?
It’s a fighting game. You should win by winning fights.
It should go by defender Health first. If your fight has lower HP. You win. Automatic. After that, if both got kills. Check time. After that, check attacker HP.
How can you guys not figure this out?
It’s a fighting game. You should win by winning fights.
Personally I think if there’s a situation where player A gets the defender to 20% and their attacker is on 100% health, they played much, much better than player B who gets their defender to 19.9% and their attacker got knocked around down to 1% health. Your system would make player B win, even though on the whole they played much worse.
It’s not that we “can’t figure it out”. We know exactly what you’re talking about, it’s just that we don’t agree with you and we have differing opinions. Why can’t you figure that out?
You got your opponent down 100%, he got his opponent down 95%.
The health difference is 75 percentage points in his favour, the defender is 5 percentage points in your favour.
Looks like he did better overall to me.
Thank you Captain Obvious!...clearly you don't know how to see the bigger picture
Isn't the point to win the match?
Not in this case, Lt. Lostamatch. We all play by the same rules, which include scoring that accounts for lost and remaining health. This has been true in every Beta.
Adapt.
Instead of us “adapting” maybe “FIX” the scoring system.
I've argued against the current scoring system quite a bit, but it isn't broken. It is implementing a scoring methodology I personally don't like, and I've given my reasons why I don't like it, but at the end of the day there are players who like the current system or want scoring systems completely different from both what the game currently implements as well as anything I've proposed. The devs can't fix the scoring system to match what the players expect, because we all want different things. No matter what they do, a big chunk of players will have to deal with it and adapt, because there is no scoring system everyone will agree with. I've even talked to players who don't think one single scoring system is even the best idea, and different "seasons" should come with different scoring systems to emphasize different things for variety sake. Some people just want to watch the world burn.
Can there be some more throught into the scoring system - Yes
But here it seems that ur opponent won fair & square In fact I'm surprised the score difference is so low while ur opponent performed significantly better than u It would be very unfair if u somehow won this round
It should go by defender Health first. If your fight has lower HP. You win. Automatic. After that, if both got kills. Check time. After that, check attacker HP.
How can you guys not figure this out?
It’s a fighting game. You should win by winning fights.
But it should reward skill. If one guy charged in, missed intercepts, took heavy blocked hits, and hits to the face, and managed to do more damage, he really shouldn't win. Maybe he just had a better roster or draft picks or something that allowed him to get a really good champ for the matchup and despite low skill get more damage done. Actually scratch that, just in general managed to get the champ down to a lower % but took a boatload of hits.
Meanwhile someone who stays at >90% health and takes the champion down to a percentage just a bit higher than the guy who charged in, arguably he would be more skilled.
Comments
Gotta love when people call others Sheeple, it’s almost a sign that says “I don’t know how to accept that other people have different opinions”
Also - I'm sorry for whatever happened to you.
Does that win still result in an overwhelming point advantage?
No fix is needed at all, it’s nearly perfect.
Kudos to the game team 👍
Yeah, scoring is so good.
I just quit the fight straight away, the guy actually tries to fight loses.
Anyone who quit will be awarded 0 points for attacker health.
You gotta realise this is beta and these exploits won't remain in the real one.
If some one runs out of time or uses the Pause button? It might be unfair to some who legit ran out of time but still get zero pts. for attacker health & at the same time , Pause button can be used to time out.
For the solution that you are talking about to work , Kabam needs to even remove the Pause button.
I personally agree that winning a fight by KO should have some weighted scoring compared to just surviving.
And I think hypotheticals are better than just saying "it's the scoring system, deal with it". If the system were flawed that should be pointed out, but I don't think it's flawed and try to explain why not.
How can you guys not figure this out?
It’s a fighting game. You should win by winning fights.
It’s not that we “can’t figure it out”. We know exactly what you’re talking about, it’s just that we don’t agree with you and we have differing opinions. Why can’t you figure that out?
But here it seems that ur opponent won fair & square
In fact I'm surprised the score difference is so low while ur opponent performed significantly better than u
It would be very unfair if u somehow won this round
Meanwhile someone who stays at >90% health and takes the champion down to a percentage just a bit higher than the guy who charged in, arguably he would be more skilled.