The truth about BG Matchmaking??

ChatterofforumsChatterofforums Member Posts: 1,779 ★★★★★
in General Discussion
Share this before it gets removed. Not violating an forums rules but have a strong feeling this will get removed.

https://youtu.be/IPn1FT-ps_A

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,900 ★★★★★
    How many Posts are you planning on making about Matchmaking?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,900 ★★★★★
    Chatterofforums said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    How many Posts are you planning on making about Matchmaking?

    As many as it takes. Better question is how many responses you going to make to my posts on the topic because at my last count it's several hundred.
    I discussed the subject for around a month. Kabam addressed their views and plans, and I pretty much left it at that.
    Posting over and over isn't helping it change overnight. It's spamming the Forum.
  • Artoria77Artoria77 Member Posts: 2,550 ★★★★★
    “The truth shall set you free” has never been a more relevant quote than now
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Member Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★
    Chatterofforums said:

    Colinwhitworth69 said:

    You say “proof”, I hear “I have questions I cannot answer so I am assuming the worst”.

    Did you watch the vid, my guess is no because I have evidence that goes directly opposite to what they recently put out in public statement, which is what a lie is.
    Literally 1984 😢
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 20,350 Guardian
    Pikolu said:

    DrZola said:

    Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?

    Dr. Zola

    It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up.
    It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task).
  • SHIELD4AGENTSHIELD4AGENT Member Posts: 915 ★★★★
    Kabam Miike said:

    Hey there, I hate to do this, but... We had already banned those low-level accounts that you showed in your video before you had posted it on the Forums. Before you had even made the video, we had determined those low-level accounts were cheaters, and we had taken action, the same way we do for all cheaters.

    Now, to this video. We did not lie to you at all; I think that you misunderstand what we have said in the past. You've directly screenshotted and shared information from posts about the subject but are ignoring the important bits of it. This is a confirmation bias and isn't conducive to a healthy conversation about a touchy subject.

    We never said that all Low-Level accounts in Gladiator Circuit are cheaters, but the ones that you were posting about were and were already banned before you posted. In this post that you are referring to, we said that there are matchmaking issues and that once we put in our seeding system, low-level accounts will not be able to get to GC as they did before.

    These are quotes in the section about seeding that address this topic: "Once this system is in place, the Victory Track and matchmaker will be structured to ensure any player who climbs the Victory Track and/or reaches the Gladiator’s Circuit deserves to be there and didn’t simply reach those heights because of softer matches." and "For those Uncollected or Cavalier players who in past seasons have climbed high up on the VT, it’s time to focus on growing your accounts if you want to continue to compete at that level."

    These are referring to a new Seeding System that we are actively working on, and said will take some time to implement.

    Lastly, yes, this post does break our Forum Rules because you are spreading conspiracy theories and misinformation. We'll leave this thread open, but I am removing your video.

    so we good to have our bg solo/ally event rewards now?
  • ChatterofforumsChatterofforums Member Posts: 1,779 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Pikolu said:

    DrZola said:

    Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?

    Dr. Zola

    It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up.
    It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task).
    Your a logical guy, so I'm curious on your opinion. In season 5 between 2 videos, I showed approximately 300 5k to 8k prestige accounts in GC. Kabam publicly stated that pretty much all of them got there by cheating.

    Let's go with that for now, but what I can't understand, now that we have proof of 6k prestige players legit getting to GC and seeing the matchups they did in diamond to get to GC (going against 4* star champs), doesn't it strike you a bit odd that all most of the 6k prestige players in season 5 were deemed cheats by Kabam but no one is blinking an eye about it now being legit with new evidence on the subject?
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 20,350 Guardian
    Chatterofforums said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Pikolu said:

    DrZola said:

    Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?

    Dr. Zola

    It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up.
    It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task).
    Your a logical guy, so I'm curious on your opinion. In season 5 between 2 videos, I showed approximately 300 5k to 8k prestige accounts in GC. Kabam publicly stated that pretty much all of them got there by cheating.

    Let's go with that for now, but what I can't understand, now that we have proof of 6k prestige players legit getting to GC and seeing the matchups they did in diamond to get to GC (going against 4* star champs), doesn't it strike you a bit odd that all most of the 6k prestige players in season 5 were deemed cheats by Kabam but no one is blinking an eye about it now being legit with new evidence on the subject?
    It is a bit odd, but not beyond the realm of possibility. Many things seem like they point to only one logical conclusion because of incomplete evidence: it is often difficult to know how things we don't know can radically alter the context of the information we have.

    For example, is it a coincidence that all the accounts you spotted in season five happened to get banned, but the next one you find in season six is not? Maybe that's not a coincidence. We all know the current match system offers significant advantages to lower roster players. But maybe with rampant cheating in play that advantage was not enough to propel a low roster player into GC, but once the cheaters were wiped that advantage became sufficient. Remember that the advantage low roster players get is that they match primarily against each other most of the time. When there's rampant cheating going on, those low roster players still have to face cheaters and they are still going to lose. Eliminate most of those cheaters, and those low roster players now have fewer obstacles standing in their way to reach GC.

    In other words, one possible explanation is that cheating suppressed most non-cheating low roster accounts from reaching GC, and now that they have been removed non-cheating low roster players (of sufficient skill) can now do what we were assuming they always could do: ride that advantage in VT to GC.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 20,350 Guardian
    To amplify, Kabam didn't necessarily lie about the distribution of low roster players in GC in season five. If we assume they are telling the truth they didn't prove that the match maker was not handing low roster players a sizeable advantage, they simply proved that low roster matching + cheating beats low roster matching. If they are also telling the truth about season six, then the separate reasonable conclusion is that when you remove cheating, low roster matching without cheating is still a strong enough advantage to propel low roster accounts into GC.

    Which makes that advantage still pretty sizeable.
  • DrZolaDrZola Member Posts: 9,370 ★★★★★
    edited April 2023
    DNA3000 said:

    Pikolu said:

    DrZola said:

    Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?

    Dr. Zola

    It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up.
    It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task).
    To clarify: are you suggesting the leaderboards are set in stone even if players subsequently on the leaderboards are found to have violated ToS? To provide an example, are you saying that if Player Z ranked #1000 on the final leaderboards, but there were 100 players found to have cheated ranked ahead of Player Z, that Player Z is stuck with the rewards for Rank 1000?

    Dr. Zola
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 20,350 Guardian
    DrZola said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Pikolu said:

    DrZola said:

    Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?

    Dr. Zola

    It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up.
    It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task).
    To clarify: are you suggesting the leaderboards are set in stone even if players subsequently on the leaderboards are found to have violated ToS? To provide an example, are you saying that if Player Z ranked #1000 on the final leaderboards, but there were 100 players found to have cheated ranked ahead of Player Z, that Player Z is stuck with the rewards for Rank 1000?

    Dr. Zola
    They've modified leaderboards in the past, so it isn't impossible. But its often not done in a timely manner if at all, implying that while it might be possible, it isn't always practical.

    They have said once or twice that when players are banned the rewards are somehow revoked. This suggests that in some cases they are forced to allow the rewards to go out, then immediately claw them back, rather than cancelling their distribution. But I do not have the technical details of how these types of operations are done, I am speculating from the historical information that's been communicated in the past.
  • DrZolaDrZola Member Posts: 9,370 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    DrZola said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Pikolu said:

    DrZola said:

    Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?

    Dr. Zola

    It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up.
    It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task).
    To clarify: are you suggesting the leaderboards are set in stone even if players subsequently on the leaderboards are found to have violated ToS? To provide an example, are you saying that if Player Z ranked #1000 on the final leaderboards, but there were 100 players found to have cheated ranked ahead of Player Z, that Player Z is stuck with the rewards for Rank 1000?

    Dr. Zola
    They've modified leaderboards in the past, so it isn't impossible. But its often not done in a timely manner if at all, implying that while it might be possible, it isn't always practical.

    They have said once or twice that when players are banned the rewards are somehow revoked. This suggests that in some cases they are forced to allow the rewards to go out, then immediately claw them back, rather than cancelling their distribution. But I do not have the technical details of how these types of operations are done, I am speculating from the historical information that's been communicated in the past.
    That kind of clunkiness seems consistent with past rewards issues. I recall having a cow over the T1a arena (yes, it was important in 2015) when prizes and scores got screwed up.

    It does beg the question, though—if someone is 1000th on the gross leaderboards but in reality 900th among the legitimate leaderboards, why would said player get the 1000th rewards?

    Dr. Zola
  • ChatterofforumsChatterofforums Member Posts: 1,779 ★★★★★
    DrZola said:

    DNA3000 said:

    DrZola said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Pikolu said:

    DrZola said:

    Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?

    Dr. Zola

    It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up.
    It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task).
    To clarify: are you suggesting the leaderboards are set in stone even if players subsequently on the leaderboards are found to have violated ToS? To provide an example, are you saying that if Player Z ranked #1000 on the final leaderboards, but there were 100 players found to have cheated ranked ahead of Player Z, that Player Z is stuck with the rewards for Rank 1000?

    Dr. Zola
    They've modified leaderboards in the past, so it isn't impossible. But its often not done in a timely manner if at all, implying that while it might be possible, it isn't always practical.

    They have said once or twice that when players are banned the rewards are somehow revoked. This suggests that in some cases they are forced to allow the rewards to go out, then immediately claw them back, rather than cancelling their distribution. But I do not have the technical details of how these types of operations are done, I am speculating from the historical information that's been communicated in the past.
    That kind of clunkiness seems consistent with past rewards issues. I recall having a cow over the T1a arena (yes, it was important in 2015) when prizes and scores got screwed up.

    It does beg the question, though—if someone is 1000th on the gross leaderboards but in reality 900th among the legitimate leaderboards, why would said player get the 1000th rewards?

    Dr. Zola
    This is exactly what I've been trying to say. If the "bans" happened before my videos or after my videos, it should be completely irrelevant to one big data point, which is why did NO one, not a single know person who was behind those hundreds of cheaters, move up even a single spot?

    The "cheaters" were still showing on leaderboard on my video right before season ended. Okay, we heard Kabam saying what they said , but those leaderboards still have people lower than them showing and those people lower then them got the same lower rewards that were showing on the leaderboard at that time, leading it hard to believe that if bans were made that anyone actually moved up any spots.
  • DrZolaDrZola Member Posts: 9,370 ★★★★★
    edited April 2023
    Chatterofforums said:

    DrZola said:

    DNA3000 said:

    DrZola said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Pikolu said:

    DrZola said:

    Serious question: was there ever an answer provided as to why ranked accounts that were allegedly penalized nevertheless resulted in no change to the final rankings last BG season?

    Dr. Zola

    It probably is an error in their different techs they have. My theory is that the cheaters were removed from the leaderboard and didn't get their rewards, but an error probably occurred between that tech and updating the leaderboard, so while the cheaters didn't get rewards, they still took up space on the leaderboard preventing others from moving up.
    It has been stated many times in the past when it came to other leaderboard discrepancies that it is often difficult to adjust the player-facing leaderboard. Probably because banning a player doesn't change the historical data that the leaderboards pull from, and editing those is not something they have the tools to do in a direct manner (for example, one possibility is if the leaderboards are not fixed tables calculated from the data, but rather directly calculated from the data, then that leaderboard data may not be editable at all: to remove a player from the leaderboard might require editing the historical data for that player, which could be a non-trivial task).
    To clarify: are you suggesting the leaderboards are set in stone even if players subsequently on the leaderboards are found to have violated ToS? To provide an example, are you saying that if Player Z ranked #1000 on the final leaderboards, but there were 100 players found to have cheated ranked ahead of Player Z, that Player Z is stuck with the rewards for Rank 1000?

    Dr. Zola
    They've modified leaderboards in the past, so it isn't impossible. But its often not done in a timely manner if at all, implying that while it might be possible, it isn't always practical.

    They have said once or twice that when players are banned the rewards are somehow revoked. This suggests that in some cases they are forced to allow the rewards to go out, then immediately claw them back, rather than cancelling their distribution. But I do not have the technical details of how these types of operations are done, I am speculating from the historical information that's been communicated in the past.
    That kind of clunkiness seems consistent with past rewards issues. I recall having a cow over the T1a arena (yes, it was important in 2015) when prizes and scores got screwed up.

    It does beg the question, though—if someone is 1000th on the gross leaderboards but in reality 900th among the legitimate leaderboards, why would said player get the 1000th rewards?

    Dr. Zola
    This is exactly what I've been trying to say. If the "bans" happened before my videos or after my videos, it should be completely irrelevant to one big data point, which is why did NO one, not a single know person who was behind those hundreds of cheaters, move up even a single spot?

    The "cheaters" were still showing on leaderboard on my video right before season ended. Okay, we heard Kabam saying what they said , but those leaderboards still have people lower than them showing and those people lower then them got the same lower rewards that were showing on the leaderboard at that time, leading it hard to believe that if bans were made that anyone actually moved up any spots.
    The inelegant answer—if I’m understanding correctly—is because “that’s the way things work with the leaderboard.”

    Take my 2015 T1a experience: I and a couple dozen others scored enough to rank top 150 for the T1a. A leaderboard bug showed us not making top 150 and we got T3b instead. If not for a couple of ally members who piped up about scoring 100-200K less than I did (don’t scoff—getting 1.2M in arena over a day+ with R2/3 3*’s wasn’t easy) and nevertheless ranking higher, I wouldn’t have known about it.

    What was the solution? The game team couldn’t adjust the leaderboard nor could they send out “targeted” prizes to those adversely affected. So they just sent out to everyone what they should have gotten on top of what they got from the initial erroneous rankings.

    Which was unfortunate: in the first payout, players who ranked but shouldn’t have got T1a they didn’t earn; and in the second payout, players who ranked but weren’t adversely affected got double T1a rewards. Those of us who were adversely affected by the first payout were (relatively) adversely affected again by the second.

    Why do I mention this? Because I think there is a static nature to the leaderboard in general and adjustments become very difficult once it “settles” at the end of a season. I don’t know why—perhaps @DNA3000 can explain. But it’s possible there is a technical reason. I’m also not defending it—if cheaters above you get docked for cheating, I think you should move up. But I’m gathering it doesn’t (and maybe can’t) work that way.

    Dr. Zola
  • ChatterofforumsChatterofforums Member Posts: 1,779 ★★★★★
    edited April 2023
    So I can be misinterpreting what is being said here primary by DNA and DrZola (both well know and respected forum users), but it sounds like there could be a feeling that once accounts are banned, those behind them are not being moved up and stay stationary in rankings despite those above them being removed.

    If I am misunderstanding what either of you are saying is a possibility (not saying you are saying that is for sure happening) please let me know. But honestly, this makes a lot of sense.

    I mean how many of us have ever actually moved up in rankings on pretty much anything in ranking rewards after the ban wave went through. Me personally, I never have once, of course that in itself doesn't mean yes or no to this as I'm just one which is too small of a sample group to formulate any decent conclusions on limited qualitative and quantitative data.

    If this is the case, it would answer A LOT of questions on many rank rewards events. However, it would also be a massive injustice for the player base if it's true.
  • rockykostonrockykoston Member Posts: 1,505 ★★★★
    Agree with a lot of whats been said here.
    I only remember one instance where my rank was changed and I got a champ from arena, but other than that I have rarely seen any change in my rank after a ban wave.

    Alliance ranks do not seem to change nor do individual ranks and everyone stays with the rewards they were given initially. This is very wrong if it is inherent in the system.

    I, like so many others, play against cheaters every season which results not only in loss of final rewards, but also a waste of BG tokens, victory shield(s) etc. Not to mention that last day in BG is impossible to play because cheaters come out in full flow to get as high as they can.

    I really like BGs, but there are a few cheaters around and the actions taken are not sufficient.
Sign In or Register to comment.