Hey Summoners!A bit of a story for you...We've also chatted about how BG is the first mode that isn't meant to be won 100% of the time.....Because you are head-to-head with other Summoners, inevitably 50% of you are losing. It is completely reasonable that this shift in gameplay mentality causes discomfort and frustration.Happy Friday, everyone. @Kabam Jax can't quite believe that's been acknowledged but the logical conclusion has not been reached. As @Greekhit @Banhammer_ste and others have pointed out, that design will lead to the death of BGs. If 50% lose and their time in game feels like dead time, they will stop playing and it does then death spiral as the next on the losers list also quit.The risk your run, is that big accounts who dedicated a lot of time and money in the game, will quit the game *entirely* if they feel that the most lucrative rewards in game mandate playing a mode which has a substantial chance of being entirely dead time, for no reward. The other discussion is littered with spending paragons, saying they are already quitting BGs; https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/328375/bgs-killing-my-drive#latestCheck your stats on game engagement; if BG play time has gone up at the expense of war, AQ and EQ, then be worried, as this matchmaking system, may kill the game as a result, when the BG death spiral kicks in. Big accounts who have spent a lot of time and money into their accounts? What about the other 50% who win and also spend a lot of time and money into their accounts?Feels like to me that they find it hard to get good and are just throwing tantrums because they aren’t getting things handed to them. I say let them quit. They are replaceable anyways
Hey Summoners!A bit of a story for you...We've also chatted about how BG is the first mode that isn't meant to be won 100% of the time.....Because you are head-to-head with other Summoners, inevitably 50% of you are losing. It is completely reasonable that this shift in gameplay mentality causes discomfort and frustration.Happy Friday, everyone. @Kabam Jax can't quite believe that's been acknowledged but the logical conclusion has not been reached. As @Greekhit @Banhammer_ste and others have pointed out, that design will lead to the death of BGs. If 50% lose and their time in game feels like dead time, they will stop playing and it does then death spiral as the next on the losers list also quit.The risk your run, is that big accounts who dedicated a lot of time and money in the game, will quit the game *entirely* if they feel that the most lucrative rewards in game mandate playing a mode which has a substantial chance of being entirely dead time, for no reward. The other discussion is littered with spending paragons, saying they are already quitting BGs; https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/328375/bgs-killing-my-drive#latestCheck your stats on game engagement; if BG play time has gone up at the expense of war, AQ and EQ, then be worried, as this matchmaking system, may kill the game as a result, when the BG death spiral kicks in.
Hey Summoners!A bit of a story for you...We've also chatted about how BG is the first mode that isn't meant to be won 100% of the time.....Because you are head-to-head with other Summoners, inevitably 50% of you are losing. It is completely reasonable that this shift in gameplay mentality causes discomfort and frustration.Happy Friday, everyone.
Meaning, "We would flatten them if they came up against us." is not a statement that they don't deserve their progress. Looking at Arcane right now, I’m 100% comfortable saying many of those accounts don’t deserve their progress or their rewards. Dr. Zola That's where I'm going to have to disagree. Unless they cheated somehow to get there, they fight within the competition, they win, they progress, and they have earned them. It's a competition based on progress made within the competition as the requirements stand. They're not manipulating the outcome, they're not cheating (the ones I'm speaking to), and they're not gaining any unfair advantages. They deserve them because they've earned them. They’ve not proved they’ve earned anything. You’re arguing they have more skill than me because they have won enough consecutive matches to get into GC and I haven’t. But I’m not getting the opportunity to play them with my years of knowledge and experience. I think there is only one solution. We limit victory track to only be able to use 3* champions and everybody plays each other, then Gladiators Circuit is open to whole roster. So for Victory track its Uncollected Vs Cavalier Vs Thronebreaker Vs Paragon but only using 3* rosters. Then it will be about skill, roster knowledge, understanding counters etc. I want to play uncollected players using an uncollected level team. Not sandbanding team of half 1* champs half 6*R3 or 4. So let’s make it about skill, limit everyone to 3* and see how many of these uncollected/cav accounts end up this quickly in GC. They won’t. That’s why I disagree with your whole perspective on this. This is why we get so annoyed seeing GS full of accounts that as paragon players we could beat. If getting through VT was truly skill based those of us complaining would be more likely to be there.So that’s my solution let’s equalise Victory Track by limiting rosters to lowest common denominator. The first point is just moot, really. They've earned their Rewards in the competition, and whether you think they deserve them or not is inconsequential. If they've made it as far as they have without cheating the system, they deserve them because they've earned them. You can't argue legitimate results.The second part I'm quite happy with. In fact, I suggested that myself, and I believe you'd be pleasantly surprised that some Players are skilled enough to advance with an equal footing. All? No. Some would still succeed.
Meaning, "We would flatten them if they came up against us." is not a statement that they don't deserve their progress. Looking at Arcane right now, I’m 100% comfortable saying many of those accounts don’t deserve their progress or their rewards. Dr. Zola That's where I'm going to have to disagree. Unless they cheated somehow to get there, they fight within the competition, they win, they progress, and they have earned them. It's a competition based on progress made within the competition as the requirements stand. They're not manipulating the outcome, they're not cheating (the ones I'm speaking to), and they're not gaining any unfair advantages. They deserve them because they've earned them. They’ve not proved they’ve earned anything. You’re arguing they have more skill than me because they have won enough consecutive matches to get into GC and I haven’t. But I’m not getting the opportunity to play them with my years of knowledge and experience. I think there is only one solution. We limit victory track to only be able to use 3* champions and everybody plays each other, then Gladiators Circuit is open to whole roster. So for Victory track its Uncollected Vs Cavalier Vs Thronebreaker Vs Paragon but only using 3* rosters. Then it will be about skill, roster knowledge, understanding counters etc. I want to play uncollected players using an uncollected level team. Not sandbanding team of half 1* champs half 6*R3 or 4. So let’s make it about skill, limit everyone to 3* and see how many of these uncollected/cav accounts end up this quickly in GC. They won’t. That’s why I disagree with your whole perspective on this. This is why we get so annoyed seeing GS full of accounts that as paragon players we could beat. If getting through VT was truly skill based those of us complaining would be more likely to be there.So that’s my solution let’s equalise Victory Track by limiting rosters to lowest common denominator.
Meaning, "We would flatten them if they came up against us." is not a statement that they don't deserve their progress. Looking at Arcane right now, I’m 100% comfortable saying many of those accounts don’t deserve their progress or their rewards. Dr. Zola That's where I'm going to have to disagree. Unless they cheated somehow to get there, they fight within the competition, they win, they progress, and they have earned them. It's a competition based on progress made within the competition as the requirements stand. They're not manipulating the outcome, they're not cheating (the ones I'm speaking to), and they're not gaining any unfair advantages. They deserve them because they've earned them.
Meaning, "We would flatten them if they came up against us." is not a statement that they don't deserve their progress. Looking at Arcane right now, I’m 100% comfortable saying many of those accounts don’t deserve their progress or their rewards. Dr. Zola
Meaning, "We would flatten them if they came up against us." is not a statement that they don't deserve their progress.
For the record, I don't like the statement. However, the point is that no one appreciates being marginalized. No one appreciates having their frustrations belittled, and no one appreciates being told their progress is invalid. I understand there is a certain amount of tit-for-tat in discussions, but all sides are valid, and no one is going to get anywhere by negating the other side's concerns.
For the record, I don't like the statement. However, the point is that no one appreciates being marginalized. No one appreciates having their frustrations belittled, and no one appreciates being told their progress is invalid. I understand there is a certain amount of tit-for-tat in discussions, but all sides are valid, and no one is going to get anywhere by negating the other side's concerns. I will never change my mind that if someone is getting better rewards than me when it is obvious they can't beat me but don't have to face me, then they don't deserve those better rewards than me.That's like paying an amateur boxer more than a professional or giving a higher contract to a minor league baseball player than a professional. Sure their stats are good, but they are facing a far lower quality of opponents so they obviously don't get higher rewards than those at higher progression such as the professionals. That's the part of your argument that you consistently refuse to accept. I will keep shouting that if you can't beat me,/ but don't have to face me, you don't deserve better rewards than me from now until BG is fixed.
You've just got to filter out the serious replies from the nonsense. A complete free for all would be ridiculous as you've said. You'd have 4m paragons matching with 100k uc accounts. Beyond demoralising for those little accounts. Clearly that isn't sensible or fair.Neither is 800k cav accounts easlily outperforming 3m paragon accounts. Despite what you may think those paragons are in 99% of cases much more skilled than those lower accounts. It isn't just roster strength There are ways to fix it to make it reasonably equitable for everyone. We just have to keep banging on about it until we get something a bit more concrete from kabam.
You've just got to filter out the serious replies from the nonsense. A complete free for all would be ridiculous as you've said. You'd have 4m paragons matching with 100k uc accounts. Beyond demoralising for those little accounts. Clearly that isn't sensible or fair.Neither is 800k cav accounts easlily outperforming 3m paragon accounts. Despite what you may think those paragons are in 99% of cases much more skilled than those lower accounts. It isn't just roster strength There are ways to fix it to make it reasonably equitable for everyone. We just have to keep banging on about it until we get something a bit more concrete from kabam. I'm not really saying the system is perfect as-is. What I take issue with is telling people they don't deserve the Rewards they've earned fairly. Then you should start a thread about that topic, rather than spam this one with an off topic focus. That's not off-topic. It's at the heart of the OP's argument.
You've just got to filter out the serious replies from the nonsense. A complete free for all would be ridiculous as you've said. You'd have 4m paragons matching with 100k uc accounts. Beyond demoralising for those little accounts. Clearly that isn't sensible or fair.Neither is 800k cav accounts easlily outperforming 3m paragon accounts. Despite what you may think those paragons are in 99% of cases much more skilled than those lower accounts. It isn't just roster strength There are ways to fix it to make it reasonably equitable for everyone. We just have to keep banging on about it until we get something a bit more concrete from kabam. I'm not really saying the system is perfect as-is. What I take issue with is telling people they don't deserve the Rewards they've earned fairly. Then you should start a thread about that topic, rather than spam this one with an off topic focus.
You've just got to filter out the serious replies from the nonsense. A complete free for all would be ridiculous as you've said. You'd have 4m paragons matching with 100k uc accounts. Beyond demoralising for those little accounts. Clearly that isn't sensible or fair.Neither is 800k cav accounts easlily outperforming 3m paragon accounts. Despite what you may think those paragons are in 99% of cases much more skilled than those lower accounts. It isn't just roster strength There are ways to fix it to make it reasonably equitable for everyone. We just have to keep banging on about it until we get something a bit more concrete from kabam. I'm not really saying the system is perfect as-is. What I take issue with is telling people they don't deserve the Rewards they've earned fairly.
You've just got to filter out the serious replies from the nonsense. A complete free for all would be ridiculous as you've said. You'd have 4m paragons matching with 100k uc accounts. Beyond demoralising for those little accounts. Clearly that isn't sensible or fair.Neither is 800k cav accounts easlily outperforming 3m paragon accounts. Despite what you may think those paragons are in 99% of cases much more skilled than those lower accounts. It isn't just roster strength There are ways to fix it to make it reasonably equitable for everyone. We just have to keep banging on about it until we get something a bit more concrete from kabam. I'm not really saying the system is perfect as-is. What I take issue with is telling people they don't deserve the Rewards they've earned fairly. Then you should start a thread about that topic, rather than spam this one with an off topic focus. That's not off-topic. It's at the heart of the OP's argument. I am the OP, I made the video and NO, it wasn't at the heart at my argument at all. My argument was there is clearly something wrong if so many lower accounts/ UC and Cav are in Arcane 2 and so many Paragons are still in victory track. I feel like I was close enough
You've just got to filter out the serious replies from the nonsense. A complete free for all would be ridiculous as you've said. You'd have 4m paragons matching with 100k uc accounts. Beyond demoralising for those little accounts. Clearly that isn't sensible or fair.Neither is 800k cav accounts easlily outperforming 3m paragon accounts. Despite what you may think those paragons are in 99% of cases much more skilled than those lower accounts. It isn't just roster strength There are ways to fix it to make it reasonably equitable for everyone. We just have to keep banging on about it until we get something a bit more concrete from kabam. I'm not really saying the system is perfect as-is. What I take issue with is telling people they don't deserve the Rewards they've earned fairly. Then you should start a thread about that topic, rather than spam this one with an off topic focus. That's not off-topic. It's at the heart of the OP's argument. I am the OP, I made the video and NO, it wasn't at the heart at my argument at all. My argument was there is clearly something wrong if so many lower accounts/ UC and Cav are in Arcane 2 and so many Paragons are still in victory track.
Your message is the same as it's been in numerous Threads. You're upset they're in the GC while some Paragons are not. You yourself have said in this Thread that they don't deserve the Rewards when they would lose against you. I think you're having trouble staying on your own topic.
Same thing. You say they don't deserve them because they never fought you, and you're lower than them. No, they're saying that it isn't fair that they're being judged against those who have faced lesser competition, without the opportunity to face that same competition. If it was the eq, we wouldn't say it was fair if it was prestige locked but all the rewards were the same for each tier. Incursions gives higher rewards for higher tiers, where people are locked into a certain level of competition.
Same thing. You say they don't deserve them because they never fought you, and you're lower than them.
Same thing. You say they don't deserve them because they never fought you, and you're lower than them. No, they're saying that it isn't fair that they're being judged against those who have faced lesser competition, without the opportunity to face that same competition. If it was the eq, we wouldn't say it was fair if it was prestige locked but all the rewards were the same for each tier. Incursions gives higher rewards for higher tiers, where people are locked into a certain level of competition. Define lesser. Everyone compares the opponent but they don't factor in what they're using. By lesser I mean the competition is weaker in every way including champs (rarity, rank, sig, variety) masteries, and experience (which potentially impacts opponents skill level).
Same thing. You say they don't deserve them because they never fought you, and you're lower than them. No, they're saying that it isn't fair that they're being judged against those who have faced lesser competition, without the opportunity to face that same competition. If it was the eq, we wouldn't say it was fair if it was prestige locked but all the rewards were the same for each tier. Incursions gives higher rewards for higher tiers, where people are locked into a certain level of competition. Define lesser. Everyone compares the opponent but they don't factor in what they're using.
Same thing. You say they don't deserve them because they never fought you, and you're lower than them. No, they're saying that it isn't fair that they're being judged against those who have faced lesser competition, without the opportunity to face that same competition. If it was the eq, we wouldn't say it was fair if it was prestige locked but all the rewards were the same for each tier. Incursions gives higher rewards for higher tiers, where people are locked into a certain level of competition. Define lesser. Everyone compares the opponent but they don't factor in what they're using. By lesser I mean the competition is weaker in every way including champs (rarity, rank, sig, variety) masteries, and experience (which potentially impacts opponents skill level). Yes. So is the Roster they're using to fight with. Which means the challenge level (affected by Nodes Rarity, Rank, Sig, variety) is scaled the same. People compare the opponents they're facing with the ones higher Players are facing, but they're not facing them with the same Roster either. The Matches are scaled within a close proximity of each other, given what both sides are using versus their own Opponents.The comparison is one-sided. It's also self-serving. "They wouldn't last against my Account."You're not lasting WITH your Account, and you expect people with less to be slaughtered just because you're not succeeding. (By you I mean the Royal "you".)It's lacking perspective. They're not fighting Rosters 5 times their size, but neither are you. You're facing Rosters within the same range of what you're working with as they are.I'm going to be blunt. If people spent more time on their own Matches than they did being jealous of the progress other people are making, they would progress more. Right, but the game mode only has 1 pool so the job then is to determine if the challenge is equitable and decide if the rewards are meant to be equal for those differences or similarly scaled (the value of t6 cats for a paragon player versus the value of t6 material for a uc player etc). I would say its like in pro sports, where the roster is judged against the same competition across the board (they don't sub out stars for less skilled players when facing an inferior roster as a rule, and the prizes are the same for everyone).
Same thing. You say they don't deserve them because they never fought you, and you're lower than them. No, they're saying that it isn't fair that they're being judged against those who have faced lesser competition, without the opportunity to face that same competition. If it was the eq, we wouldn't say it was fair if it was prestige locked but all the rewards were the same for each tier. Incursions gives higher rewards for higher tiers, where people are locked into a certain level of competition. Define lesser. Everyone compares the opponent but they don't factor in what they're using. By lesser I mean the competition is weaker in every way including champs (rarity, rank, sig, variety) masteries, and experience (which potentially impacts opponents skill level). Yes. So is the Roster they're using to fight with. Which means the challenge level (affected by Nodes Rarity, Rank, Sig, variety) is scaled the same. People compare the opponents they're facing with the ones higher Players are facing, but they're not facing them with the same Roster either. The Matches are scaled within a close proximity of each other, given what both sides are using versus their own Opponents.The comparison is one-sided. It's also self-serving. "They wouldn't last against my Account."You're not lasting WITH your Account, and you expect people with less to be slaughtered just because you're not succeeding. (By you I mean the Royal "you".)It's lacking perspective. They're not fighting Rosters 5 times their size, but neither are you. You're facing Rosters within the same range of what you're working with as they are.I'm going to be blunt. If people spent more time on their own Matches than they did being jealous of the progress other people are making, they would progress more.