I have played this game for a while and I am no where close to being good, but I get absolutely destroyed in BG’s in fights I should win. If this is the product that Kabam wants to put out I can not see myself continuing to join in fights I have no hope of winning.
I have played this game for a while and I am no where close to being good, but I get absolutely destroyed in BG’s in fights I should win. If this is the product that Kabam wants to put out I can not see myself continuing to join in fights I have no hope of winning.
Unfortunately, they bent to the will of the vocal low-end players complaining abotu sandbagging and completely screwed-up matchmaking (which end-game players predicted would happen). The top players are stuck facing each other, which guarantees that a Paragon is losing every round and artificially keeps them down. It's a slog and a frustrating waste of time now for many of the best players in the game (and a breeze for many of the mid to low-tier players). They did this in AW and it was a complete disaster. I have no idea why they thought the same thing wouldn't happen in BGs.
The frustration is made worse, at least for me, because in no way should a player of my level be struggling this much in the lowest tiers of the VT. That's not me being an entitled A-hole, that's just a fact. I have spent 8 years playing this game, many of which were in a top 10-20 ally, beating all content as soon as it was released and building a roster that is globally in the top 1000 (my lowest was ~100 a few years ago). In literally any other game, that amount of time, money, and effort would be rewarded and I'd quickly ascend and be fighting in the top few tiers of BGs vs others who have similar journies as me. Instead of seeing those fithgts vs seasoned vets in the top tiers, I'm seeing them in Bronze and Silver when I know for a fact that low accounts are getting a free pass to higher tiers because they can't face me.
Also, because I should be winning Bronze and Silver fights, losses feel so much worse than wins feel good. That leads to more anger and frustration, which leads to not wanting to play the mode.
The current BG matchmaking is completely backward and has to be changed. If they won't change the matchmaking they have to implement my proposed win multiplier system from a last week, which is basically how they do AW:
3 tokens for beating a Paragon 2 tokens for beating a TB 1 token for beating a UC or CAV All losses are -1 token
None of "the best players in the game" are struggling.
Only if you don't consider the top ~1000 players of the millions that play the game the best, then I guess you're right. The best is only the .0001% noth the .001%!
I doubt there are millions of active players. I don't know only kabam does. If you think your competition is gold 2 and above you are looking at that's 90k of players right. I know in my ally p4 only half run battle grounds. I believe this is a logical number to be basing from for Paragon players
Imagine a world in which Lagacy and Fintech only ever faced each other in the Victory Track, and they just road-blocked each other from getting the necessary win-streaks. You wouldn't say they're not skilled enough to make it out, right? Git gud!
This is a great way to illustrate the problem. This is what many people are experiencing. I am surprised how many people can't see why this isn't a problem. Arguing why this type of matchmaking is okay doesn't help the overall health of the game, it is just accelerating the decreased participation in BGs.
For me, I finished EOP as soon as it came out, as well as Abyss and all the other content. I love this game. But I would rather play old gameboy games on a Nintendo Switch then BGs, because it's not fair and not worth the time.
@DNA3000 in regards to your comment, I think part of the problem is everyone has to slog through VT from the bottom each time and go thorough each rank. Maybe starting people in different tiers in relation to where they finished the season prion could help.
I think this is an independent problem. Which is to say, even if you implement a way to start people higher based on their prior achieved tiers, there’s still the question of how frustrating and/or time consuming it is to get there on the first place. So it would still think there was value in reviewing the trophy scoring system.
Conversely, starting people at higher start points creates other problems that need solving, namely how to award players the rewards they would have had the opportunity to get had they started lower and would now miss out on. Simply giving the players those rewards is unlikely to be acceptable, so another mechanism would have to be implemented.
All theoretically solvable to be sure, but the more things you have to do, the less likely the devs would have the time and resources to implement such a solution.
Currently 6 wins and 8 losses in my tier but haven't got close to winning 3 in a row.
Looking like objectives only from here on out unless my sucky streak changes.
As a side note, anyone else notice how much worse your own gameplay gets after you crack the mega S&^%s or is it just me haha!
Has anyone ever danced a random jig at a strange time of day and had their partner look at them as though you are some sort of crazy person?
Go 12w/10l before finally stringing 3 together and find out.
Apparently, I have also agreed to something I wasn't listening to, given my enthusiasm when she asked a random question...about 3 seconds after I realised I had 3 victory tokens.
Too many people complained about last months BG node, now they replaced it with something more simple and it created an even playing field. Whether as last month required a bit more skill & quality. Now, it's complete RNG.
Gold 3 atm after achieving an /easy/ Plat 3 last month. All I did was the objectives and played occasionally to waste the marks to achieve Plat 3; now I'm struggling to win. Currently on a 1W:6L ratio.
I know a lot like to point out when they get paired vs strong people. But today I had both sides of the coin happen back to back fights. I’m Para 14k 1.6M w/ 4 R4, good amount of R3, and a couple R2.
my first match was vs an R4 heavy 16.4k 4M Para. Tried my best but couldn’t best this person’s clear speed on me.
Second match I was paired against a TB player only 11k prestige and a deck filled to the brim with 5* champs and a couple 6*, about as many R3 as I had R4. They played well but could not beat my clear speed killing their 5* defenders. Needless to say I’m sure they felt pretty crappy losing progress that way.
I used to get this but the other way round. Build up one or 2 wins against similar account or a lower end paragon, then get 2 beast mode paragon accounts in a row and I go from being 1 win away from promotion to back down to a streak of zero. When that scenario plays out for 5 or so cycles and you just can’t get promoted 1 level, the thought of getting to Gladiators circuit feels like an impossibility.
Now it could be that I’m just not good enough. It’s not the games fault, it’s mine and I need to accept it. But after playing for years, amassing my roster, constant BG losses is depressing and leads to giving up and putting the game down. BTW I have zero problem in losing in Gladiators Circuit. That’s disappointing but it is what is it. To not be able to get anywhere near it, is the kicker.
OP here with an update. Last night I won 5 straight fights and jumped from silver 3 to silver 1 in a single sessions. The matchmaking was fairly even in comparison to my account. The main difference was, I was playing well made good choices of my champs, selections and outplayed my opponent. Obviously, this won’t always be the case but it does give me some. Hope that I may be able to progress more throughout the remaining two weeks. I still would like to see some action taken, and discussions had about ways to improve the experience and battlegrounds but it was nice to finally have a quality session and make some progress with wins.
@DNA3000 in regards to your comment, I think part of the problem is everyone has to slog through VT from the bottom each time and go thorough each rank. Maybe starting people in different tiers in relation to where they finished the season prion could help.
I think this is an independent problem. Which is to say, even if you implement a way to start people higher based on their prior achieved tiers, there’s still the question of how frustrating and/or time consuming it is to get there on the first place. So it would still think there was value in reviewing the trophy scoring system.
Conversely, starting people at higher start points creates other problems that need solving, namely how to award players the rewards they would have had the opportunity to get had they started lower and would now miss out on. Simply giving the players those rewards is unlikely to be acceptable, so another mechanism would have to be implemented.
All theoretically solvable to be sure, but the more things you have to do, the less likely the devs would have the time and resources to implement such a solution.
I'm not sure why "giving" the previous milestone rewards from a staggered start is considered such a taboo thing personally.
This is also why I'd rather the stagger be based on how quickly one completes VT or their ending point within VT from the previous season as opposed to staggering just based on title though. I see that as more of earning those rewards in the previous season as them being handed out in the following. That also incentivizes people capable of getting through VT quickly to actually do so as opposed to taking their time and letting stronger accounts finish first so as to dilute the matchmaking pool on the way up.
Unfortunately, they bent to the will of the vocal low-end players complaining abotu sandbagging and completely screwed-up matchmaking (which end-game players predicted would happen). The top players are stuck facing each other, which guarantees that a Paragon is losing every round and artificially keeps them down. It's a slog and a frustrating waste of time now for many of the best players in the game (and a breeze for many of the mid to low-tier players). They did this in AW and it was a complete disaster. I have no idea why they thought the same thing wouldn't happen in BGs.
The frustration is made worse, at least for me, because in no way should a player of my level be struggling this much in the lowest tiers of the VT. That's not me being an entitled A-hole, that's just a fact. I have spent 8 years playing this game, many of which were in a top 10-20 ally, beating all content as soon as it was released and building a roster that is globally in the top 1000 (my lowest was ~100 a few years ago). In literally any other game, that amount of time, money, and effort would be rewarded and I'd quickly ascend and be fighting in the top few tiers of BGs vs others who have similar journies as me. Instead of seeing those fithgts vs seasoned vets in the top tiers, I'm seeing them in Bronze and Silver when I know for a fact that low accounts are getting a free pass to higher tiers because they can't face me.
Also, because I should be winning Bronze and Silver fights, losses feel so much worse than wins feel good. That leads to more anger and frustration, which leads to not wanting to play the mode.
The current BG matchmaking is completely backward and has to be changed. If they won't change the matchmaking they have to implement my proposed win multiplier system from a last week, which is basically how they do AW:
3 tokens for beating a Paragon 2 tokens for beating a TB 1 token for beating a UC or CAV All losses are -1 token
None of "the best players in the game" are struggling.
Only if you don't consider the top ~1000 players of the millions that play the game the best, then I guess you're right. The best is only the .0001% noth the .001%!
I doubt there are millions of active players. I don't know only kabam does. If you think your competition is gold 2 and above you are looking at that's 90k of players right. I know in my ally p4 only half run battle grounds. I believe this is a logical number to be basing from for Paragon players
You can use whatever numbers you want but the point still stands. The top 1% or .1% should still be cruising through VT in any good game mode.
As a heavy grinder of the game. I'm not grinding BGs. Missed half of the objectives this season.
I have played less than 20 matches this season. Gold 3. Not struggling. 1 loss somewhere in bronze but rest wins.
The game feels like a job these days and I'm not doing it. I can reach GC when I want, but I don't want to concentrate... The conundrum lol.
Matches are intense, it's not that I dont like a challange, it's draining my mental health, so I don't want to persu mysterium which I shoot for every season.
Unrelated side note: Also hate the fact I cannot autoplay low level eqs. Absolutely despise it.
Maybe I get some time off from the daily life, I may push GC but not a big deal if i can't.
@DNA3000 in regards to your comment, I think part of the problem is everyone has to slog through VT from the bottom each time and go thorough each rank. Maybe starting people in different tiers in relation to where they finished the season prion could help.
I think this is an independent problem. Which is to say, even if you implement a way to start people higher based on their prior achieved tiers, there’s still the question of how frustrating and/or time consuming it is to get there on the first place. So it would still think there was value in reviewing the trophy scoring system.
Conversely, starting people at higher start points creates other problems that need solving, namely how to award players the rewards they would have had the opportunity to get had they started lower and would now miss out on. Simply giving the players those rewards is unlikely to be acceptable, so another mechanism would have to be implemented.
All theoretically solvable to be sure, but the more things you have to do, the less likely the devs would have the time and resources to implement such a solution.
I'm not sure why "giving" the previous milestone rewards from a staggered start is considered such a taboo thing personally.
This is also why I'd rather the stagger be based on how quickly one completes VT or their ending point within VT from the previous season as opposed to staggering just based on title though. I see that as more of earning those rewards in the previous season as them being handed out in the following. That also incentivizes people capable of getting through VT quickly to actually do so as opposed to taking their time and letting stronger accounts finish first so as to dilute the matchmaking pool on the way up.
The problem is, you're giving people Rewards in a competition that they haven't actually earned. I mean literally. The results are based on how you perform in BGs. Not to mention you're talking about compounding benefits..a higher start PLUS all previous Rewards, PLUS an accelerated climb. That's essentially expectation running wild. For people to say they should climb higher because they're the largest is one thing. For them to say they should have benefit upon benefit is another.
Unfortunately, they bent to the will of the vocal low-end players complaining abotu sandbagging and completely screwed-up matchmaking (which end-game players predicted would happen). The top players are stuck facing each other, which guarantees that a Paragon is losing every round and artificially keeps them down. It's a slog and a frustrating waste of time now for many of the best players in the game (and a breeze for many of the mid to low-tier players). They did this in AW and it was a complete disaster. I have no idea why they thought the same thing wouldn't happen in BGs.
The frustration is made worse, at least for me, because in no way should a player of my level be struggling this much in the lowest tiers of the VT. That's not me being an entitled A-hole, that's just a fact. I have spent 8 years playing this game, many of which were in a top 10-20 ally, beating all content as soon as it was released and building a roster that is globally in the top 1000 (my lowest was ~100 a few years ago). In literally any other game, that amount of time, money, and effort would be rewarded and I'd quickly ascend and be fighting in the top few tiers of BGs vs others who have similar journies as me. Instead of seeing those fithgts vs seasoned vets in the top tiers, I'm seeing them in Bronze and Silver when I know for a fact that low accounts are getting a free pass to higher tiers because they can't face me.
Also, because I should be winning Bronze and Silver fights, losses feel so much worse than wins feel good. That leads to more anger and frustration, which leads to not wanting to play the mode.
The current BG matchmaking is completely backward and has to be changed. If they won't change the matchmaking they have to implement my proposed win multiplier system from a last week, which is basically how they do AW:
3 tokens for beating a Paragon 2 tokens for beating a TB 1 token for beating a UC or CAV All losses are -1 token
None of "the best players in the game" are struggling.
Only if you don't consider the top ~1000 players of the millions that play the game the best, then I guess you're right. The best is only the .0001% noth the .001%!
I doubt there are millions of active players. I don't know only kabam does. If you think your competition is gold 2 and above you are looking at that's 90k of players right. I know in my ally p4 only half run battle grounds. I believe this is a logical number to be basing from for Paragon players
You can use whatever numbers you want but the point still stands. The top 1% or .1% should still be cruising through VT in any good game mode.
The top 1% (.1%) is only relative to the game mode itself. They ARE. The top percentile of BGs is cruising through BGs. Dominating other game modes doesn't mean free Wins in another.
BGs is a competition. One that's based on results within itself. It's not a statement to who is entitled to be on top because they're on top in every other aspect. What's the sense of even having a competition if that's the case? Take the Leaderboards from other game modes, copy and paste them, dole the Rewards out. You progress based on how you perform in the game mode. You lose, you don't go up. You win, you go up. Not "I'm the top in everything else, I deserve to be the top here.". You earn it.
@DNA3000 in regards to your comment, I think part of the problem is everyone has to slog through VT from the bottom each time and go thorough each rank. Maybe starting people in different tiers in relation to where they finished the season prion could help.
I think this is an independent problem. Which is to say, even if you implement a way to start people higher based on their prior achieved tiers, there’s still the question of how frustrating and/or time consuming it is to get there on the first place. So it would still think there was value in reviewing the trophy scoring system.
Conversely, starting people at higher start points creates other problems that need solving, namely how to award players the rewards they would have had the opportunity to get had they started lower and would now miss out on. Simply giving the players those rewards is unlikely to be acceptable, so another mechanism would have to be implemented.
All theoretically solvable to be sure, but the more things you have to do, the less likely the devs would have the time and resources to implement such a solution.
I'm not sure why "giving" the previous milestone rewards from a staggered start is considered such a taboo thing personally.
This is also why I'd rather the stagger be based on how quickly one completes VT or their ending point within VT from the previous season as opposed to staggering just based on title though. I see that as more of earning those rewards in the previous season as them being handed out in the following. That also incentivizes people capable of getting through VT quickly to actually do so as opposed to taking their time and letting stronger accounts finish first so as to dilute the matchmaking pool on the way up.
The problem is, you're giving people Rewards in a competition that they haven't actually earned. I mean literally. The results are based on how you perform in BGs. Not to mention you're talking about compounding benefits..a higher start PLUS all previous Rewards, PLUS an accelerated climb. That's essentially expectation running wild. For people to say they should climb higher because they're the largest is one thing. For them to say they should have benefit upon benefit is another.
Unfortunately, they bent to the will of the vocal low-end players complaining abotu sandbagging and completely screwed-up matchmaking (which end-game players predicted would happen). The top players are stuck facing each other, which guarantees that a Paragon is losing every round and artificially keeps them down. It's a slog and a frustrating waste of time now for many of the best players in the game (and a breeze for many of the mid to low-tier players). They did this in AW and it was a complete disaster. I have no idea why they thought the same thing wouldn't happen in BGs.
The frustration is made worse, at least for me, because in no way should a player of my level be struggling this much in the lowest tiers of the VT. That's not me being an entitled A-hole, that's just a fact. I have spent 8 years playing this game, many of which were in a top 10-20 ally, beating all content as soon as it was released and building a roster that is globally in the top 1000 (my lowest was ~100 a few years ago). In literally any other game, that amount of time, money, and effort would be rewarded and I'd quickly ascend and be fighting in the top few tiers of BGs vs others who have similar journies as me. Instead of seeing those fithgts vs seasoned vets in the top tiers, I'm seeing them in Bronze and Silver when I know for a fact that low accounts are getting a free pass to higher tiers because they can't face me.
Also, because I should be winning Bronze and Silver fights, losses feel so much worse than wins feel good. That leads to more anger and frustration, which leads to not wanting to play the mode.
The current BG matchmaking is completely backward and has to be changed. If they won't change the matchmaking they have to implement my proposed win multiplier system from a last week, which is basically how they do AW:
3 tokens for beating a Paragon 2 tokens for beating a TB 1 token for beating a UC or CAV All losses are -1 token
None of "the best players in the game" are struggling.
Only if you don't consider the top ~1000 players of the millions that play the game the best, then I guess you're right. The best is only the .0001% noth the .001%!
I doubt there are millions of active players. I don't know only kabam does. If you think your competition is gold 2 and above you are looking at that's 90k of players right. I know in my ally p4 only half run battle grounds. I believe this is a logical number to be basing from for Paragon players
You can use whatever numbers you want but the point still stands. The top 1% or .1% should still be cruising through VT in any good game mode.
The top 1% (.1%) is only relative to the game mode itself. They ARE. The top percentile of BGs is cruising through BGs. Dominating other game modes doesn't mean free Wins in another.
They did earn them in this situation though. They were earned by completing the previous season's VT faster than everyone else. For people finishing VT in the first week or even two weeks, it's just a formality. It's a question of when they'll finish based on how much they want to play as opposed to whether they'll string enough wins together to finish in the first place.
Removing those groups from the majority of the VT to begin with just makes it easier for the remaining people to finish in general or finish faster than if the first group was in the pool while having basically zero impact on the group given a headstart other than they have to waste less of their and the opponent's they'd have matched time.
@DNA3000 in regards to your comment, I think part of the problem is everyone has to slog through VT from the bottom each time and go thorough each rank. Maybe starting people in different tiers in relation to where they finished the season prion could help.
I think this is an independent problem. Which is to say, even if you implement a way to start people higher based on their prior achieved tiers, there’s still the question of how frustrating and/or time consuming it is to get there on the first place. So it would still think there was value in reviewing the trophy scoring system.
Conversely, starting people at higher start points creates other problems that need solving, namely how to award players the rewards they would have had the opportunity to get had they started lower and would now miss out on. Simply giving the players those rewards is unlikely to be acceptable, so another mechanism would have to be implemented.
All theoretically solvable to be sure, but the more things you have to do, the less likely the devs would have the time and resources to implement such a solution.
I'm not sure why "giving" the previous milestone rewards from a staggered start is considered such a taboo thing personally.
This is also why I'd rather the stagger be based on how quickly one completes VT or their ending point within VT from the previous season as opposed to staggering just based on title though. I see that as more of earning those rewards in the previous season as them being handed out in the following. That also incentivizes people capable of getting through VT quickly to actually do so as opposed to taking their time and letting stronger accounts finish first so as to dilute the matchmaking pool on the way up.
The problem is, you're giving people Rewards in a competition that they haven't actually earned. I mean literally. The results are based on how you perform in BGs. Not to mention you're talking about compounding benefits..a higher start PLUS all previous Rewards, PLUS an accelerated climb. That's essentially expectation running wild. For people to say they should climb higher because they're the largest is one thing. For them to say they should have benefit upon benefit is another.
Unfortunately, they bent to the will of the vocal low-end players complaining abotu sandbagging and completely screwed-up matchmaking (which end-game players predicted would happen). The top players are stuck facing each other, which guarantees that a Paragon is losing every round and artificially keeps them down. It's a slog and a frustrating waste of time now for many of the best players in the game (and a breeze for many of the mid to low-tier players). They did this in AW and it was a complete disaster. I have no idea why they thought the same thing wouldn't happen in BGs.
The frustration is made worse, at least for me, because in no way should a player of my level be struggling this much in the lowest tiers of the VT. That's not me being an entitled A-hole, that's just a fact. I have spent 8 years playing this game, many of which were in a top 10-20 ally, beating all content as soon as it was released and building a roster that is globally in the top 1000 (my lowest was ~100 a few years ago). In literally any other game, that amount of time, money, and effort would be rewarded and I'd quickly ascend and be fighting in the top few tiers of BGs vs others who have similar journies as me. Instead of seeing those fithgts vs seasoned vets in the top tiers, I'm seeing them in Bronze and Silver when I know for a fact that low accounts are getting a free pass to higher tiers because they can't face me.
Also, because I should be winning Bronze and Silver fights, losses feel so much worse than wins feel good. That leads to more anger and frustration, which leads to not wanting to play the mode.
The current BG matchmaking is completely backward and has to be changed. If they won't change the matchmaking they have to implement my proposed win multiplier system from a last week, which is basically how they do AW:
3 tokens for beating a Paragon 2 tokens for beating a TB 1 token for beating a UC or CAV All losses are -1 token
None of "the best players in the game" are struggling.
Only if you don't consider the top ~1000 players of the millions that play the game the best, then I guess you're right. The best is only the .0001% noth the .001%!
I doubt there are millions of active players. I don't know only kabam does. If you think your competition is gold 2 and above you are looking at that's 90k of players right. I know in my ally p4 only half run battle grounds. I believe this is a logical number to be basing from for Paragon players
You can use whatever numbers you want but the point still stands. The top 1% or .1% should still be cruising through VT in any good game mode.
The top 1% (.1%) is only relative to the game mode itself. They ARE. The top percentile of BGs is cruising through BGs. Dominating other game modes doesn't mean free Wins in another.
They did earn them in this situation though. They were earned by completing the previous season's VT faster than everyone else. For people finishing VT in the first week or even two weeks, it's just a formality. It's a question of when they'll finish based on how much they want to play as opposed to whether they'll string enough wins together to finish in the first place.
Removing those groups from the majority of the VT to begin with just makes it easier for the remaining people to finish in general or finish faster than if the first group was in the pool while having basically zero impact on the group given a headstart other than they have to waste less of their and the opponent's they'd have matched time.
The purpose of having a Season is to measure progress from point A to point B, and award people based on that. What you're describing is giving Rewards automatically. That's where the conflict lies. You can't give people Rewards in a competition that they never earned within that competition.
The purpose of having a Season is to measure progress from point A to point B, and award people based on that. What you're describing is giving Rewards automatically. That's where the conflict lies. You can't give people Rewards in a competition that they never earned within that competition.
Isn't that exactly what's happening with the lower progression accounts? They are getting rewards in a competition that they never actually play in. They get to play in a silo and gain rewards from that, never having to face stronger competition. While the stronger accounts roadblock each other. If everybody was in the same pool the distribution of rewards would be very different. Essentially, this is a transfer of rewards from one group to other.
In a common pool, there would still be higher progression accounts who will not move up and lower accounts who will. This is not different from offering the same rewards for all SQ tiers. It would be fairer in that case than doing so in BG as you can make the argument that you aren't blocking anyone's access to SQ rewards by completing your quest. Everyone can play at their level and get the same rewards.
I'd like to know how they're getting Rewards they never actually play in. They're playing, they're advancing. That's how it goes. Unless someone has devised a new kind of Mod that needs to be addressed.
They aren't facing the same competition. They are advancing because they are provided protection that some are not. If they had to play the entire pool, some wouldn't advance. To help them advance, few others are being prevented from advancing. If by Mod you mean a preferential treatment, then that is the case here.
Disagree. They're playing Matches that are lower, equal, greater (within range) of what they're working with. So are others. This whole self-serving comparison that flip flops needs to go, because no one looks at the larger scale. Only how it seems for them. You're comparing two people in a knife fight with both knives, and saying they're not bringing a knife to a gun fight so they're not really fighting. In essence, that's it. "They're not fighting the same level we are." News flash, they're fighting the same challenges. Same Nodes, same time to do it in, same scoring. I feel like I'm repeating myself but it's still ignored, so here we are. At the risk of being torn by the math aficionados here, I'll use a numerical example. Let's say the strength of the Rosters of Players at the lower end are represented by 3. They're fighting people within the 2, 3, and 4 range. You have people at the higher end, and we'll say they're 8 "power". They're fighting people in the 7, 8, 9 range. You can say "I'm an 8, and they're a 3. I'm fighting harder fights.". The reality is, it's a one point range, or equal, on both sides. You can't say because an 8 could overpower a 3, that the 3 is not fighting as hard. They are fighting just as hard, with different tools, against different tools. What you call preferential treatment is the antithesis of that. What people expect and call fair, is preferential treatment based on the size of their Roster. Which is all fine and well in the GC. I can't believe people are claiming that in the VT. Nevertheless, I've played ball and agreed to a number of suggestions. What I will debate until the end of time, is how people are not earning their way up because they haven't engaged in a hypothetical ego trip.
@DNA3000 in regards to your comment, I think part of the problem is everyone has to slog through VT from the bottom each time and go thorough each rank. Maybe starting people in different tiers in relation to where they finished the season prion could help.
I think this is an independent problem. Which is to say, even if you implement a way to start people higher based on their prior achieved tiers, there’s still the question of how frustrating and/or time consuming it is to get there on the first place. So it would still think there was value in reviewing the trophy scoring system.
Conversely, starting people at higher start points creates other problems that need solving, namely how to award players the rewards they would have had the opportunity to get had they started lower and would now miss out on. Simply giving the players those rewards is unlikely to be acceptable, so another mechanism would have to be implemented.
All theoretically solvable to be sure, but the more things you have to do, the less likely the devs would have the time and resources to implement such a solution.
I'm not sure why "giving" the previous milestone rewards from a staggered start is considered such a taboo thing personally.
Because then a player wouldn't have to do anything at all to gain those rewards. In the extreme case you could choose to play every other season and still get basically twice the rewards. Suppose you implement season decay where every season you start one track lower. You could then play all the way up to Vibranium, then in the next season throw a single match and still get all the rewards up to Vibranium and be placed in Diamond, then throw one match next season and get all the rewards up to Diamond and be placed in Platinum, and so on. Fundamentally, it is too exploitable.
And even though I ought not to speak on behalf of the developers, in this case I am 99% certain I know what their reasoning would be. VT rewards are *specifically* there to encourage participation: that's why the Victory track even exists. Without this need to promote participation, BG would just be one big GC. So giving VT rewards out without needing to participate would be a direct contradiction of its reason for existing. That's not just unpalatable, that would be in this specific context nonsensical.
And even though I ought not to speak on behalf of the developers, in this case I am 99% certain I know what their reasoning would be. VT rewards are *specifically* there to encourage participation: that's why the Victory track even exists. Without this need to promote participation, BG would just be one big GC. So giving VT rewards out without needing to participate would be a direct contradiction of its reason for existing. That's not just unpalatable, that would be in this specific context nonsensical.
Agree. The rewards are designed with the current 'dump everyone into Bronze at the same time' model. Change whether people are dumped into Bronze, or start at the same time, then the rewards would change (likely to something less). They definitely would not change to 'dump GC players into Platinum' and give them the same earlier rewards.
OP here, catching up on the chat, lots going back and forth but it’s good discussion and debate.
I do want to focus on something specific, though, and it’s around the wins, needed to advance. Putting aside, matchmaking, and how the player base is split into silos, and who they are competing against in each match, do you believe the system of +1 token for a win and -1 token for a loss is the best way to have somebody progress through the victory track?
To me it’s this aspect of battlegrounds that is the most frustrating part for the player base. You can spend hours playing but if you only average a 50% win streak, chances are you’re not going to be able to advance at all. this to me is what is the drive killer in battle grounds, and if it can somehow be addressed so that people don’t feel like they are just wasting their time it will help everyone to feel like battlegrounds is a fun and enjoyable game mode to play, because in the end they will progress, they will get the tokens to buy items in the store, and feel like they’ve invested their time well related to helping their roster.
So to circle back to my question, is the way battle tokens are gained and lost the most appropriate way to have a fun and enjoyable game mode?
At the risk of being torn by the math aficionados here, I'll use a numerical example. Let's say the strength of the Rosters of Players at the lower end are represented by 3. They're fighting people within the 2, 3, and 4 range. You have people at the higher end, and we'll say they're 8 "power". They're fighting people in the 7, 8, 9 range. You can say "I'm an 8, and they're a 3. I'm fighting harder fights.". The reality is, it's a one point range, or equal, on both sides. You can't say because an 8 could overpower a 3, that the 3 is not fighting as hard. They are fighting just as hard, with different tools, against different tools.
The range isn't 2-9. Almost everyone is between 2 to 4 (a 5r4 has ~2 times HP and attack as a 6r4). So someone with a strength 3 gets largely play against 2.5 to 3.2 but if you are slightly higher you're stuck playing against 3.5-4. Most of the players who are advancing are still the ones with roster advantages and skill rather than some hypothetical amazingly skilled player who can get Cav but hasn't figured out how to rank champs beyond 5r4 or access the crystal shards tab. The ones advancing just get access to play against a wider pool of players skill variance while some are just stuck playing against tougher opponents.
While the ones progressing maybe fighting hard, it is at the expense of progression for other groups who are condemned to long periods of stagnation for excelling at roster development in a game where roster building is a major part of the game.
@DNA3000 in regards to your comment, I think part of the problem is everyone has to slog through VT from the bottom each time and go thorough each rank. Maybe starting people in different tiers in relation to where they finished the season prion could help.
I think this is an independent problem. Which is to say, even if you implement a way to start people higher based on their prior achieved tiers, there’s still the question of how frustrating and/or time consuming it is to get there on the first place. So it would still think there was value in reviewing the trophy scoring system.
Conversely, starting people at higher start points creates other problems that need solving, namely how to award players the rewards they would have had the opportunity to get had they started lower and would now miss out on. Simply giving the players those rewards is unlikely to be acceptable, so another mechanism would have to be implemented.
All theoretically solvable to be sure, but the more things you have to do, the less likely the devs would have the time and resources to implement such a solution.
I'm not sure why "giving" the previous milestone rewards from a staggered start is considered such a taboo thing personally.
This is also why I'd rather the stagger be based on how quickly one completes VT or their ending point within VT from the previous season as opposed to staggering just based on title though. I see that as more of earning those rewards in the previous season as them being handed out in the following. That also incentivizes people capable of getting through VT quickly to actually do so as opposed to taking their time and letting stronger accounts finish first so as to dilute the matchmaking pool on the way up.
The problem is, you're giving people Rewards in a competition that they haven't actually earned. I mean literally. The results are based on how you perform in BGs. Not to mention you're talking about compounding benefits..a higher start PLUS all previous Rewards, PLUS an accelerated climb. That's essentially expectation running wild. For people to say they should climb higher because they're the largest is one thing. For them to say they should have benefit upon benefit is another.
Unfortunately, they bent to the will of the vocal low-end players complaining abotu sandbagging and completely screwed-up matchmaking (which end-game players predicted would happen). The top players are stuck facing each other, which guarantees that a Paragon is losing every round and artificially keeps them down. It's a slog and a frustrating waste of time now for many of the best players in the game (and a breeze for many of the mid to low-tier players). They did this in AW and it was a complete disaster. I have no idea why they thought the same thing wouldn't happen in BGs.
The frustration is made worse, at least for me, because in no way should a player of my level be struggling this much in the lowest tiers of the VT. That's not me being an entitled A-hole, that's just a fact. I have spent 8 years playing this game, many of which were in a top 10-20 ally, beating all content as soon as it was released and building a roster that is globally in the top 1000 (my lowest was ~100 a few years ago). In literally any other game, that amount of time, money, and effort would be rewarded and I'd quickly ascend and be fighting in the top few tiers of BGs vs others who have similar journies as me. Instead of seeing those fithgts vs seasoned vets in the top tiers, I'm seeing them in Bronze and Silver when I know for a fact that low accounts are getting a free pass to higher tiers because they can't face me.
Also, because I should be winning Bronze and Silver fights, losses feel so much worse than wins feel good. That leads to more anger and frustration, which leads to not wanting to play the mode.
The current BG matchmaking is completely backward and has to be changed. If they won't change the matchmaking they have to implement my proposed win multiplier system from a last week, which is basically how they do AW:
3 tokens for beating a Paragon 2 tokens for beating a TB 1 token for beating a UC or CAV All losses are -1 token
None of "the best players in the game" are struggling.
Only if you don't consider the top ~1000 players of the millions that play the game the best, then I guess you're right. The best is only the .0001% noth the .001%!
I doubt there are millions of active players. I don't know only kabam does. If you think your competition is gold 2 and above you are looking at that's 90k of players right. I know in my ally p4 only half run battle grounds. I believe this is a logical number to be basing from for Paragon players
You can use whatever numbers you want but the point still stands. The top 1% or .1% should still be cruising through VT in any good game mode.
The top 1% (.1%) is only relative to the game mode itself. They ARE. The top percentile of BGs is cruising through BGs. Dominating other game modes doesn't mean free Wins in another.
They did earn them in this situation though. They were earned by completing the previous season's VT faster than everyone else. For people finishing VT in the first week or even two weeks, it's just a formality. It's a question of when they'll finish based on how much they want to play as opposed to whether they'll string enough wins together to finish in the first place.
Removing those groups from the majority of the VT to begin with just makes it easier for the remaining people to finish in general or finish faster than if the first group was in the pool while having basically zero impact on the group given a headstart other than they have to waste less of their and the opponent's they'd have matched time.
The purpose of having a Season is to measure progress from point A to point B, and award people based on that. What you're describing is giving Rewards automatically. That's where the conflict lies. You can't give people Rewards in a competition that that never earned within that competition.
It’s not really *a* competition. It’s multiple competitions, handicapped by some as yet unknown element. Just like putting Cavs and UC in their own separate divisions, that approach would be putting the top of the top in its own separate division.
I keep hearing people arguing in favor of making it easier for smaller accounts to get to GC by handicapping competition—why is it an issue to make it easier for top end accounts (who will get there almost as a formality) to do so as well?
Precisely how or whether they earn their VT tokens is a different question, as well as specific conditions for staying there from season to season. But I really don’t have any problem with starting giant accounts in GC based on past performance.
OP here, catching up on the chat, lots going back and forth but it’s good discussion and debate.
I do want to focus on something specific, though, and it’s around the wins, needed to advance. Putting aside, matchmaking, and how the player base is split into silos, and who they are competing against in each match, do you believe the system of +1 token for a win and -1 token for a loss is the best way to have somebody progress through the victory track?
To me it’s this aspect of battlegrounds that is the most frustrating part for the player base. You can spend hours playing but if you only average a 50% win streak, chances are you’re not going to be able to advance at all. this to me is what is the drive killer in battle grounds, and if it can somehow be addressed so that people don’t feel like they are just wasting their time it will help everyone to feel like battlegrounds is a fun and enjoyable game mode to play, because in the end they will progress, they will get the tokens to buy items in the store, and feel like they’ve invested their time well related to helping their roster.
So to circle back to my question, is the way battle tokens are gained and lost the most appropriate way to have a fun and enjoyable game mode?
Short answer: no.
I think the most straightforward answer is to shift the +/-1 scoring to something that feels less punitive and reflects more of the closeness of matches.
Comments
I know in my ally p4 only half run battle grounds. I believe this is a logical number to be basing from for Paragon players
For me, I finished EOP as soon as it came out, as well as Abyss and all the other content. I love this game. But I would rather play old gameboy games on a Nintendo Switch then BGs, because it's not fair and not worth the time.
Conversely, starting people at higher start points creates other problems that need solving, namely how to award players the rewards they would have had the opportunity to get had they started lower and would now miss out on. Simply giving the players those rewards is unlikely to be acceptable, so another mechanism would have to be implemented.
All theoretically solvable to be sure, but the more things you have to do, the less likely the devs would have the time and resources to implement such a solution.
Go 12w/10l before finally stringing 3 together and find out.
Apparently, I have also agreed to something I wasn't listening to, given my enthusiasm when she asked a random question...about 3 seconds after I realised I had 3 victory tokens.
Gold 3 atm after achieving an /easy/ Plat 3 last month. All I did was the objectives and played occasionally to waste the marks to achieve Plat 3; now I'm struggling to win. Currently on a 1W:6L ratio.
Now it could be that I’m just not good enough. It’s not the games fault, it’s mine and I need to accept it. But after playing for years, amassing my roster, constant BG losses is depressing and leads to giving up and putting the game down. BTW I have zero problem in losing in Gladiators Circuit. That’s disappointing but it is what is it. To not be able to get anywhere near it, is the kicker.
This is also why I'd rather the stagger be based on how quickly one completes VT or their ending point within VT from the previous season as opposed to staggering just based on title though. I see that as more of earning those rewards in the previous season as them being handed out in the following. That also incentivizes people capable of getting through VT quickly to actually do so as opposed to taking their time and letting stronger accounts finish first so as to dilute the matchmaking pool on the way up.
As a heavy grinder of the game.
I'm not grinding BGs.
Missed half of the objectives this season.
I have played less than 20 matches this season.
Gold 3. Not struggling. 1 loss somewhere in bronze but rest wins.
The game feels like a job these days and I'm not doing it. I can reach GC when I want, but I don't want to concentrate... The conundrum lol.
Matches are intense, it's not that I dont like a challange, it's draining my mental health, so I don't want to persu mysterium which I shoot for every season.
Unrelated side note:
Also hate the fact I cannot autoplay low level eqs. Absolutely despise it.
Maybe I get some time off from the daily life, I may push GC but not a big deal if i can't.
Not to mention you're talking about compounding benefits..a higher start PLUS all previous Rewards, PLUS an accelerated climb. That's essentially expectation running wild. For people to say they should climb higher because they're the largest is one thing. For them to say they should have benefit upon benefit is another. The top 1% (.1%) is only relative to the game mode itself. They ARE. The top percentile of BGs is cruising through BGs. Dominating other game modes doesn't mean free Wins in another.
You progress based on how you perform in the game mode. You lose, you don't go up. You win, you go up. Not "I'm the top in everything else, I deserve to be the top here.".
You earn it.
Removing those groups from the majority of the VT to begin with just makes it easier for the remaining people to finish in general or finish faster than if the first group was in the pool while having basically zero impact on the group given a headstart other than they have to waste less of their and the opponent's they'd have matched time.
I agree man this has just been bg for me its just not fun anymore its a win and then just alot of loses
In a common pool, there would still be higher progression accounts who will not move up and lower accounts who will. This is not different from offering the same rewards for all SQ tiers. It would be fairer in that case than doing so in BG as you can make the argument that you aren't blocking anyone's access to SQ rewards by completing your quest. Everyone can play at their level and get the same rewards.
You're comparing two people in a knife fight with both knives, and saying they're not bringing a knife to a gun fight so they're not really fighting. In essence, that's it. "They're not fighting the same level we are."
News flash, they're fighting the same challenges. Same Nodes, same time to do it in, same scoring. I feel like I'm repeating myself but it's still ignored, so here we are.
At the risk of being torn by the math aficionados here, I'll use a numerical example.
Let's say the strength of the Rosters of Players at the lower end are represented by 3. They're fighting people within the 2, 3, and 4 range.
You have people at the higher end, and we'll say they're 8 "power". They're fighting people in the 7, 8, 9 range.
You can say "I'm an 8, and they're a 3. I'm fighting harder fights.". The reality is, it's a one point range, or equal, on both sides. You can't say because an 8 could overpower a 3, that the 3 is not fighting as hard. They are fighting just as hard, with different tools, against different tools.
What you call preferential treatment is the antithesis of that. What people expect and call fair, is preferential treatment based on the size of their Roster. Which is all fine and well in the GC. I can't believe people are claiming that in the VT. Nevertheless, I've played ball and agreed to a number of suggestions.
What I will debate until the end of time, is how people are not earning their way up because they haven't engaged in a hypothetical ego trip.
And even though I ought not to speak on behalf of the developers, in this case I am 99% certain I know what their reasoning would be. VT rewards are *specifically* there to encourage participation: that's why the Victory track even exists. Without this need to promote participation, BG would just be one big GC. So giving VT rewards out without needing to participate would be a direct contradiction of its reason for existing. That's not just unpalatable, that would be in this specific context nonsensical.
The rewards are designed with the current 'dump everyone into Bronze at the same time' model. Change whether people are dumped into Bronze, or start at the same time, then the rewards would change (likely to something less). They definitely would not change to 'dump GC players into Platinum' and give them the same earlier rewards.
I do want to focus on something specific, though, and it’s around the wins, needed to advance. Putting aside, matchmaking, and how the player base is split into silos, and who they are competing against in each match, do you believe the system of +1 token for a win and -1 token for a loss is the best way to have somebody progress through the victory track?
To me it’s this aspect of battlegrounds that is the most frustrating part for the player base. You can spend hours playing but if you only average a 50% win streak, chances are you’re not going to be able to advance at all. this to me is what is the drive killer in battle grounds, and if it can somehow be addressed so that people don’t feel like they are just wasting their time it will help everyone to feel like battlegrounds is a fun and enjoyable game mode to play, because in the end they will progress, they will get the tokens to buy items in the store, and feel like they’ve invested their time well related to helping their roster.
So to circle back to my question, is the way battle tokens are gained and lost the most appropriate way to have a fun and enjoyable game mode?
While the ones progressing maybe fighting hard, it is at the expense of progression for other groups who are condemned to long periods of stagnation for excelling at roster development in a game where roster building is a major part of the game.
I keep hearing people arguing in favor of making it easier for smaller accounts to get to GC by handicapping competition—why is it an issue to make it easier for top end accounts (who will get there almost as a formality) to do so as well?
Precisely how or whether they earn their VT tokens is a different question, as well as specific conditions for staying there from season to season. But I really don’t have any problem with starting giant accounts in GC based on past performance.
Dr. Zola
I think the most straightforward answer is to shift the +/-1 scoring to something that feels less punitive and reflects more of the closeness of matches.
Dr. Zola