**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options
Comments
Again, I can make no guarantees this will work. However, we have lots of anecdotal evidence of very weak rosters getting very good match ups, so not all weak rosters are getting bad match ups. Changing *something* could help. Changing nothing is likely to keep things as they are. If things as they are are not good for you, shaking things up could make things better. They probably can't make things worse.
Till now it's mostly come down to some selection badluck and my own bad decisions.
Sure, accounts are stacked and I do have opponents with 15-15.5k pi but it's fine, there's no ideal solution to matchmaking
Any way you look at it, a game mode that incentivizes NOT ranking or opening relics/crystals is just awful.
Even though i agree with the points the OP makes, i cannot help but point out how idiotic and stupid of making matchmaking "fair" by allowing tb or uncollected or cavaliers fight against Paragons, you know what that does? makes it practically whale wars where the game mode is only enjoyed by a select few aka so called highly praised alliance wars. In the quest of fairness for the top 5% the OP asks to take away the chance for players of lower progression or lower spending to play and enjoy the gamemode.
There have been so many times, so so many times that i instantly quit the match because i matched against someone with 10-15 ranks 4 with me having no rank 4s at all. It feels unfair and since you only get points for the solo and alliance events when you complete a match in BGs you have to sit there and watch as they destroy your 5 star defender with a rank 4 champ over and over again. You know how frustrating that is? matching against someone you know you almost have no chance against? even if i "outdraft" them, there defenders have more health and than mine do.
If this becomes the norm, matching against paragons, then i as a part of 95% of the player base would just have to leave the game mode much like i have left alliance wars for the so called mighty 5% to cruise through and crush any from the remaining 95% that still choose to play the game mode.
Then I opened two 6-star crystals - one new, and one dupe.
I also used 10 5-star sig stones that were going to expire.
Cut to today: Matched up against 5 accounts that had pretty much entirely 6R3/6R4 in their deck. I also got matched against 1 account that was mostly 5-stars in their deck.
Sure, the difference could be that I went up a Victory Track tier, and so there are less possible players to be matchup against. But that fear of opening crystals, and adding sigs to characters, feels irrational but also maybe logical?
The matchmaking tries to mimic AW to a degree... having stacked rosters face stacked rosters similar to how similar ranked alliance are matched in war... but the big difference is that in AW... those stacked alliances in Tier 1 wars / Masters are getting way better rewards than those in Silver. Its litteraly a different game being played with different nodes, globals, bans etc.
but in BG... we are all the same. there is no "well you are stacked... we'll put you against other stacked players, but will compete for higher rewards" like might e done if Paragon players started in say Platinum or Diamond tier... but if we all start in bronze... and are all playing for a small pile of artifacts... then we should all have an equal chance of matching up.
Kabam should realize Prestige matchmaking on a shared pool of rewards is unfair, no matter how you twist it.
Battlegrounds matchmaking should be totally random, within the same Victory Track bracket (gold1 vs gold1 etc.).
A stacked Paragon account should be able to face and demolish a newly Uncollected player, as long as they are at the same bracket, and send the UC player to story questing, where he should be, instead of overachieving rewards due to a broken matchmaking, on a competitive mode.
It’s annoying seeing UC players bragging for their achievement on reaching GC, while there are many Paragons still sweating each other at VT.
Matchmaking is worse than even sandbagging.
Kabam tried to fast patch a problem, by creating a bigger one.
Matchmaking should be RANDOM, anything else is unfair.
I have a pretty diverse set of attackers at high ranks, but as others have pointed out, the true all-stars for this meta are immediately banned by your opponent if they don't have the same champ (I'm looking at you Galan).
To my point though, I just looked at my deck, and I have 17 attackers I can use. That said, many of them are situational, like Venompool against tech, Magneto against metal, Archangel against anyone who can feel get his toxin, etc. My point is, there are only a handful of champs that can truly be viable options against any defender, and when they get banned, now the mode is largely RNG based.
It wasn't until this meta, but it's kinda made me wish they would just let you draft from your full deck. Keep bans if you want to.
To be specific, you get matched with someone, go through their deck and place your three bans. After that though, I can pick the 7 champs I want from what remains after bans. The opponent and I don't see each others draft until we've both selected.
Maybe it's a stupid idea. Like I said, I never felt that way until this meta that is very niche in the attackers you can use.
How is it "fair" that people who put in effort or spend only get matched in harder matchups with those who also put in more effort tor money while weaker players who put in less effort and money get an easy path to GC?
Pi and prestige have absolutely nothing to do with aw matchmaking, it all has to do with what tier they are in, which is why I 100% agree that BG matchmaking should be similar to AW matchmaking which goes by tier and everyone in that tier is eligible to face each other with pi and prestige having no account into it.
The main difference is that AW matchmaking doesn't reset everyone to the same starting point every season. They have done that in the past and the result was way worse that what we see in BG at starts of new seasons.
If they come up with a better system, it will work itself out much like it did in AW. AW alliance gets into a groove on where they belong, heavily based on strength of rosters and fight others in that tier.
Same happens at AW. As long as you have similar rating you are eligible to match a very weaker or a very stronger opponent, in terms of Prestige or Total Base Hero Rating.
Kabam had tried Prestige matchmaking at AW and it failed loudly, creating a massive backlash from stronger allies when they realized that weaker allies were placing higher than them while they shouldn’t.
BGs matchmaking should be totally random, not only at GC but VT too.
Kick start on different VT brackets, could solve any mismatching issues at the season start.
My main 3,5mil 15,5k Prestige account is still at gold3, sweating over other Paragon stacked accounts, while my mini 600k Cavalier account is at Gladiator Circuit from the very first days, waiting already for the ranked rewards, which I doubt my main this season will get.
This speaks volumes of how “Fair” prestige matchmaking is, and exposes the whole situation.
On a progression based game, progression is penalised.
I don’t rank up high prestige champs to r4, not using signature stones on my existing r4s neither open or upgrade relics.
I also ignore any 6* signature offer or any offer that would raise my prestige.
Is that the way Kabam wants us to play the game?
I doubt it. It is opposing to their business model of selling progression through unit or $ offers.
Kabam are you really aware of what’s happening right now at your most important mode, Battlegrounds?
This is serious @Kabam Miike
The company is losing money and players are losing patience 😠
Can that 20 million alliance beat us because we put in less effort than them or because they are just amazing? Absolutely they can. Just like a weaker player can heat a much stronger players if they put in the effort, have stronger game/champ knowledge, etc.
If you think that’s war rating then BG’s has a matchmaking problem since it does not rely on BG rating.
If you think that’s alliance rating or prestige then you are wrong in understanding how matchmaking works in AW.
This is for sure a matchmaking problem. What you are advocating is for a tier based system where lower accounts are fighting for far lower rewards than higher accounts. And that would again penalize the highly skilled lower accounts.
Any chance we can get the topic of this thread forwarded to the devs? You will see that although there are different overall opinions on how matchmaking should be, there is an overwhelming perception that the current setup is undeniably rewarding players for not progressing, avoiding rankups, not adding sig, not using relics (avoiding adding pi or prestige to try to avoid non stop death fights every tier starting in bronze 3).
I strongly believe this is a complete 180 swap from every other aspect of the game and is extremely counter productive to the overall product, which I would assume will eventually show in financials (why are people going to whale out to advance their champs when lower rosters are rewarded with easier path to GC in BG?)
Just something to minimize the effects RNG has on who you ultimately get to draft.
There's just nothing worse that seeing your opponent draft Korg in his first pick and thinking to yourself "I've got Falcon and Namor, it'll be fine", then those champs never appear in your draft.
What do you mean take advantage of weaker players?
Battlegrounds is supposed to be a competitive mode.
Currently it isn’t, since smaller accounts are avoiding competition, yet thay claim better rewards than their competitors.
Is that fair?
In a competitive mode anyone should face anyone within same tier or similar mode rating.
As a player with 9 r4s I should be able to match players with no r4s at all, or full r4 decks, since we are at the same tier and fighting over the same rewards.
Same thing is happening at AW but also at Gladiator Circuit.
Anyone can match anyone.
I don’t know who’s call was Prestige matchmaking at VT to solve sandbagging problem, but this person needs to immediately get fired.
The company should know from their previous AW experience, that Prestige matchmaking is the worst route to go down with.
Prestige matchmaking eliminates the core purpose of the game, which is progression, since progressing your account won’t help you surpass and beat the competition.
Why then rank up champs, if it’s not going to help at BGs, since higher prestige is going to lure you more stacked accounts, and mainly more experienced players?
If people are concerned about whales joining lower tiers, then consider making it like incursions where once you hit a certain number of 5*/6* (or eventually 7*) champs, you're not eligible to join the lowest tiers.
It's simple economics, but what do I know about economics, I only have a doctorate in business administration.
You look at their Accounts and assume they're getting easier Matches because they're being Matched with easier opponents FOR YOU. You don't take into account their own ability to work where they're at, with what they have. You only make the assertion the Matches would be easier for you, with your own skill set, if you were in their position.
That's not accurate. Rewards structure is one thing. That may be cause to look at, although everyone is playing for the same currency, save for Ranking.
The Matches are another subject. Everyone is personally offended because people are being challenged based on their own abilities, which is limited to what they're working with, regardless of what Jerry Longtimer can do with an Alt that isn't as developed as their Main.
There's a whole lack of perspective going on, and the end result is people who have no business coming up against others who are vastly underdeveloped compared to themselves.
But you are also incorrect at the same time, as there is still a difference in the level of competition.
The lower level players at the beginning of the season bragged about being able to win with just 15k points scored. Paragon level players facing Paragon level competition have rarely been able to win with just 15k points.
Lower skilled / smaller roster players facing lower skilled / smaller roster players, typically have to put up less points to win a match since there should be more health loss, and slower play (slower play can result simply by not doing intercepts, which lower skilled players can't do consistently).
Higher skilled / bigger roster play typically requires a certain style of play - keeping your health as close to 100%, and finishing the fights quickly. The difference of KO'ing a champion by a few seconds matters more in higher level play than in lower level play.
Based on how narrow victory vs defeat can be at Paragon level, means that it is harder to string together consecutive victories at the Paragon level compared to low level.