Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
Why is it wrong? The result of a BG round is based on the relative results of the two fights in the round. A 6r4 has ~50% more attack and HP as compared to a 5r5 of the same champ.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Is winning a high school football game just as difficult as winning an NFL game?
Yes... it is higher level of play dosent mean higher difficulty imagine you have 2 high grade machines pushing at each other both of them applying 50 pounds of force vs 2 low grade machines the each only apply 20 pounds of force the struggle on boths sides is equal
Wrong.
What even is your example? Pounds of force? How does that apply to a sport?
It truly is shocking how many people think that winning a pro game is the same as an HS game. It really shows why so many don't grasp the reality of what Paragons are going through in the VT.
What dont you get? If you cant understand something as simple as that then there is no hope for you i even dumbed it down, the point was that a uc fighting a equal match against a uc is just as difficult as a paragon fighting a equal match against a paragon something you'd understand if your mind wasnt on one track, you keep replying saying "wrong" and "that is a fact" but someone who can only ever think of themselves can never be right.
Your argument makes so little sense that "wrong" is all that needs to be said.
In no world is an "equal" UC match nearly as difficult as an "equal" Paragon match. That's just a fact.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
Why is it wrong? The result of a BG round is based on the relative results of the two fights in the round. A 6r4 has ~50% more attack and HP as compared to a 5r5 of the same champ.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Is winning a high school football game just as difficult as winning an NFL game?
Yes... it is higher level of play dosent mean higher difficulty imagine you have 2 high grade machines pushing at each other both of them applying 50 pounds of force vs 2 low grade machines the each only apply 20 pounds of force the struggle on boths sides is equal
Wrong.
What even is your example? Pounds of force? How does that apply to a sport?
It truly is shocking how many people think that winning a pro game is the same as an HS game. It really shows why so many don't grasp the reality of what Paragons are going through in the VT.
What dont you get? If you cant understand something as simple as that then there is no hope for you i even dumbed it down, the point was that a uc fighting a equal match against a uc is just as difficult as a paragon fighting a equal match against a paragon something you'd understand if your mind wasnt on one track, you keep replying saying "wrong" and "that is a fact" but someone who can only ever think of themselves can never be right.
It's not the same, roster progression is completely diferent. an UC player wont focus on defensive rankups since he's supposed to focus on offense in order to progress.
An UC player might place Korg on defense but I can bet a large purse he's not spending sigs on that Korg, and if he is, he's placing BGs in a higher priority than progressing through story content, which would be a huge mistake.
Skill and dedication might be the same at lower levels, but roster depth is not.
Its not even a roster matter... Saying "OMG they got bigger roster" is very tunnel vision and a lame excuse specially from UC and even some Cavs... People really think its just roster based?... How many UCs have u fought with Mystic Dispersion or Suicides depending the meta?
Explain in terms of number, process, effort any metric you like this simple question: "How is facing a 6r4 champ with a 6r4 champ different than facing a 5r5 champ with a 5r5 champ in VT in BG?"
To me, very similar fights but you seem to think facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 is a 5-10x more challenging. What makes that fight so hard? Explain in terms which everyone can understand, instead of making baseless assertions.
What do you have to do differently in the 6r4 fight? How many more hits do you have to land? Do you need to use more complicated rotations? How much longer do those fights last?
The fights are only scored on HP and time - so it only comes down to how much longer the fights last and how many more hits you need to land.
You're not fighting a champ, you're fighting another player.
*Pleas bring up that BGS isn't live pvp, lol.
As usual, you avoid any meaningful debate and stick to broad, meaningless assertions.
You win a match if you win 2 out of 3 rounds. Result of a round is the difference in scores between two fights. And they are scored on 3 aspects, two are HP related, one is the time to finish the fight.
How is facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 different than 5r5 with 5r5? Why do you think the player with a 5-star roster facing another one with a 5-star roster is having an easier time than you are with your 6-star roster facing other 6-stars?
If u really think that fighting a 6r4 max sig Korg is the same as fighting a 5r5 (most likely not max sig) Korg from a UC/Cav is the same u don't belong in this Game mode...
Fighting a 6* r4 Korg with a 6* r4 doom is relatively same as fighting a 5*r5 Korg with a 5* r5 doom
Explain in terms of number, process, effort any metric you like this simple question: "How is facing a 6r4 champ with a 6r4 champ different than facing a 5r5 champ with a 5r5 champ in VT in BG?"
To me, very similar fights but you seem to think facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 is a 5-10x more challenging. What makes that fight so hard? Explain in terms which everyone can understand, instead of making baseless assertions.
What do you have to do differently in the 6r4 fight? How many more hits do you have to land? Do you need to use more complicated rotations? How much longer do those fights last?
The fights are only scored on HP and time - so it only comes down to how much longer the fights last and how many more hits you need to land.
You're not fighting a champ, you're fighting another player.
*Pleas bring up that BGS isn't live pvp, lol.
As usual, you avoid any meaningful debate and stick to broad, meaningless assertions.
You win a match if you win 2 out of 3 rounds. Result of a round is the difference in scores between two fights. And they are scored on 3 aspects, two are HP related, one is the time to finish the fight.
How is facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 different than 5r5 with 5r5? Why do you think the player with a 5-star roster facing another one with a 5-star roster is having an easier time than you are with your 6-star roster facing other 6-stars?
If u really think that fighting a 6r4 max sig Korg is the same as fighting a 5r5 (most likely not max sig) Korg from a UC/Cav is the same u don't belong in this Game mode...
Fighting a 6* r4 Korg with a 6* r4 doom is relatively same as fighting a 5*r5 Korg with a 5* r5 doom
Explain in terms of number, process, effort any metric you like this simple question: "How is facing a 6r4 champ with a 6r4 champ different than facing a 5r5 champ with a 5r5 champ in VT in BG?"
To me, very similar fights but you seem to think facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 is a 5-10x more challenging. What makes that fight so hard? Explain in terms which everyone can understand, instead of making baseless assertions.
What do you have to do differently in the 6r4 fight? How many more hits do you have to land? Do you need to use more complicated rotations? How much longer do those fights last?
The fights are only scored on HP and time - so it only comes down to how much longer the fights last and how many more hits you need to land.
You're not fighting a champ, you're fighting another player.
*Pleas bring up that BGS isn't live pvp, lol.
As usual, you avoid any meaningful debate and stick to broad, meaningless assertions.
You win a match if you win 2 out of 3 rounds. Result of a round is the difference in scores between two fights. And they are scored on 3 aspects, two are HP related, one is the time to finish the fight.
How is facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 different than 5r5 with 5r5? Why do you think the player with a 5-star roster facing another one with a 5-star roster is having an easier time than you are with your 6-star roster facing other 6-stars?
If u really think that fighting a 6r4 max sig Korg is the same as fighting a 5r5 (most likely not max sig) Korg from a UC/Cav is the same u don't belong in this Game mode...
Fighting a 6* r4 Korg with a 6* r4 doom is relatively same as fighting a 5*r5 Korg with a 5* r5 doom
And why did u leave the sig part out? 🤣
Because sig stones are really easy to access these days And If you are using doom Sigs on korg won't really matter
Explain in terms of number, process, effort any metric you like this simple question: "How is facing a 6r4 champ with a 6r4 champ different than facing a 5r5 champ with a 5r5 champ in VT in BG?"
To me, very similar fights but you seem to think facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 is a 5-10x more challenging. What makes that fight so hard? Explain in terms which everyone can understand, instead of making baseless assertions.
What do you have to do differently in the 6r4 fight? How many more hits do you have to land? Do you need to use more complicated rotations? How much longer do those fights last?
The fights are only scored on HP and time - so it only comes down to how much longer the fights last and how many more hits you need to land.
You're not fighting a champ, you're fighting another player.
*Pleas bring up that BGS isn't live pvp, lol.
As usual, you avoid any meaningful debate and stick to broad, meaningless assertions.
You win a match if you win 2 out of 3 rounds. Result of a round is the difference in scores between two fights. And they are scored on 3 aspects, two are HP related, one is the time to finish the fight.
How is facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 different than 5r5 with 5r5? Why do you think the player with a 5-star roster facing another one with a 5-star roster is having an easier time than you are with your 6-star roster facing other 6-stars?
If u really think that fighting a 6r4 max sig Korg is the same as fighting a 5r5 (most likely not max sig) Korg from a UC/Cav is the same u don't belong in this Game mode...
Fighting a 6* r4 Korg with a 6* r4 doom is relatively same as fighting a 5*r5 Korg with a 5* r5 doom
And why did u leave the sig part out? 🤣
Because sig stones are really easy to access these days And If you are using doom Sigs on korg won't really matter
...yeah im pretty damn sure lots of UC are using their sig stones on Korg.. and also they all have Doom.. 🤣
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
It's really sad how many humans will dig deeper into a wrong opinion when presented with facts that prove them wrong instead of admitting they were wrong and changing their beliefs.
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
It's really sad how many humans will dig deeper into a wrong opinion when presented with facts that prove them wrong instead of admitting they were wrong and changing their beliefs.
I keep on saying one thing.. it baffles me that they argue matchmaking as if they are going to stay UC and Cav FOREVER
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
It's really sad how many humans will dig deeper into a wrong opinion when presented with facts that prove them wrong instead of admitting they were wrong and changing their beliefs.
I keep on saying one thing.. it baffles me that they argue matchmaking as if they are going to stay UC and Cav FOREVER
It's the same people who will come and post that matchmaking is unfair once they get to the GC and there is no matchmaking anymore.
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
Not as nice as the Paragon store.
You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not )
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
Not as nice as the Paragon store.
You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not )
Dude just stop, please. There are at least 4 people explaining at length how your vision and understanding of a simple concept is just wrong. Progression exists for a reason, the time spent in the forums arguing mindlessly over a topic you're absolutely mistaken about, would've been time well spent playing the game and progressing your account.
Its not even a roster matter... Saying "OMG they got bigger roster" is very tunnel vision and a lame excuse specially from UC and even some Cavs... People really think its just roster based?... How many UCs have u fought with Mystic Dispersion or Suicides depending the meta?
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
Not as nice as the Paragon store.
You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not )
Uh?... Trying to make sense to your post... How is a Paragon vs Paragon UC vs UC have anything to do with the stores?..
And this "You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not )".. You are welcome to progress and get those Paragon rewards...
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
Not as nice as the Paragon store.
You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not )
Dude just stop, please. There are at least 4 people explaining at length how your vision and understanding of a simple concept is just wrong. Progression exists for a reason, the time spent in the forums arguing mindlessly over a topic you're absolutely mistaken about, would've been time well spent playing the game and progressing your account.
It's a fairly simple solution, stop telling people who moved up the ranks playing by the rules that they don't deserve their position.
Is it fair from a overall competition perspective, no. But then there a many parts of the game which are not. Why pick on a handful of lower level accounts? It's not like every Paragon is stuck in VT and every low strength account breezes through.
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
Not as nice as the Paragon store.
You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not )
Dude just stop, please. There are at least 4 people explaining at length how your vision and understanding of a simple concept is just wrong. Progression exists for a reason, the time spent in the forums arguing mindlessly over a topic you're absolutely mistaken about, would've been time well spent playing the game and progressing your account.
It's a fairly simple solution, stop telling people who moved up the ranks playing by the rules that they don't deserve their position.
Is it fair from a overall competition perspective, no. But then there a many parts of the game which are not. Why pick on a handful of lower level accounts? It's not like every Paragon is stuck in VT and every low strength account breezes through.
The point of every video game is to actually progress, if you want fairness, progress accordingly.
I'm done with this thread, every time I read a post by either this Stature person or Anly, I feel my IQ drop
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
Not as nice as the Paragon store.
You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not )
Dude just stop, please. There are at least 4 people explaining at length how your vision and understanding of a simple concept is just wrong. Progression exists for a reason, the time spent in the forums arguing mindlessly over a topic you're absolutely mistaken about, would've been time well spent playing the game and progressing your account.
It's a fairly simple solution, stop telling people who moved up the ranks playing by the rules that they don't deserve their position.
Is it fair from a overall competition perspective, no. But then there a many parts of the game which are not. Why pick on a handful of lower level accounts? It's not like every Paragon is stuck in VT and every low strength account breezes through.
Once again.. FINE U DESERVE THEM... I guess that's why Kabam took this decision... Because u deserved them..
How many r5 sig 200 5* Korgs are being used in BGs? I'd say that it has to be wildly low. Korg is not a champ that players with a 5* roster would max out as he can't get any content done. Most players who maxed out their 5* Korg are most likely onto 6* defenders at this point.
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Its ridiculous to think Paragon vs Paragon is the same as UC vs UC... People who claim so they are so narrow minded... Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
Not as nice as the Paragon store.
You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not )
Why are you not protesting against Unit offers too? I’m pretty sure 5$ for an UC player buy much less of what 5$ for a Paragon player buy. Why are you not protesting against solo events too? Most of them are progression gated. An UC will get less rewards than a Paragon for doing the exact same things, but he will take resources that have equal impact on his account as Paragon for his. This is done by the game designers to keep the game balanced. We are playing a progression based game, whether someone likes it or not. The company is monetising account progression. Rewards at BGs are common for all players. They are exactly the same. Whoever doesn’t accept that, whether is ignoring that fact deliberately, probably because he gains from arguing that position, or is completely dumb. There is zero reason for Prestige matchmaking, any match is fair as far as it is within the same tier. A player’s ability to win should decide matches, not any other factor, since the league and rewards are the same for all.
Explain in terms of number, process, effort any metric you like this simple question: "How is facing a 6r4 champ with a 6r4 champ different than facing a 5r5 champ with a 5r5 champ in VT in BG?"
To me, very similar fights but you seem to think facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 is a 5-10x more challenging. What makes that fight so hard? Explain in terms which everyone can understand, instead of making baseless assertions.
What do you have to do differently in the 6r4 fight? How many more hits do you have to land? Do you need to use more complicated rotations? How much longer do those fights last?
The fights are only scored on HP and time - so it only comes down to how much longer the fights last and how many more hits you need to land.
You're not fighting a champ, you're fighting another player.
*Pleas bring up that BGS isn't live pvp, lol.
As usual, you avoid any meaningful debate and stick to broad, meaningless assertions.
You win a match if you win 2 out of 3 rounds. Result of a round is the difference in scores between two fights. And they are scored on 3 aspects, two are HP related, one is the time to finish the fight.
How is facing a 6r4 with a 6r4 different than 5r5 with 5r5? Why do you think the player with a 5-star roster facing another one with a 5-star roster is having an easier time than you are with your 6-star roster facing other 6-stars?
If u really think that fighting a 6r4 max sig Korg is the same as fighting a 5r5 (most likely not max sig) Korg from a UC/Cav is the same u don't belong in this Game mode...
Fighting a 6* r4 Korg with a 6* r4 doom is relatively same as fighting a 5*r5 Korg with a 5* r5 doom
And why did u leave the sig part out? 🤣
Because sig stones are really easy to access these days And If you are using doom Sigs on korg won't really matter
...yeah im pretty damn sure lots of UC are using their sig stones on Korg.. and also they all have Doom.. 🤣
Pretty sure we aren't(or at least I am not) talking about UCs or Cavs we are just comparing that fighting the same champion with the same champion at a higher or lower rarity won't make the competition harder or easier
Lets cool down here folks. The arguments for both sides have been posted... and reposted. This argument has been rehashed a million times. neither side will give ground, Kabam has made their decision to try and improve the state of BGs so lets just wait and see?
An UC will get less rewards than a Paragon for doing the exact same things, but he will take resources that have equal impact on his account as Paragon for his.
I completely agree. And that is what is happening right now.
BG is not like other game modes in the game. It's not about getting the defender down to zero. It is about getting the defender down, sooner and with higher HP remaining than the person you are matched with.
In this context, a lower progression account is doing the same things as the higher progression accounts are. The store is there to manage the reward payouts also accordingly.
Asking a 10K account to face a 17K account is not the same as asking a 17K account to face a 17K account. Under BG rules there is no chance a 10K account can win against a 17K (but for maybe connection issues).
An UC will get less rewards than a Paragon for doing the exact same things, but he will take resources that have equal impact on his account as Paragon for his.
I completely agree. And that is what is happening right now.
BG is not like other game modes in the game. It's not about getting the defender down to zero. It is about getting the defender down, sooner and with higher HP remaining than the person you are matched with.
In this context, a lower progression account is doing the same things as the higher progression accounts are. The store is there to manage the reward payouts also accordingly.
Asking a 10K account to face a 17K account is not the same as asking a 17K account to face a 17K account. Under BG rules there is no chance a 10K account can win against a 17K (but for maybe connection issues).
This is why we need a seeding system to avoid these matchups. 10k accounts shouldn’t make it that far to VT or GC to face 17k accounts in the first place. A random matchmaking would balance itself out after a few matches (like does at AW) but that cannot happen as long as progress is reset on each season. Let’s hope Kabam implement seeding soon enough, so we have stronger competitors starting ahead of weaker, and have limited missmatches.
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
Why is it wrong? The result of a BG round is based on the relative results of the two fights in the round. A 6r4 has ~50% more attack and HP as compared to a 5r5 of the same champ.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Is winning a high school football game just as difficult as winning an NFL game?
Yes... it is higher level of play dosent mean higher difficulty imagine you have 2 high grade machines pushing at each other both of them applying 50 pounds of force vs 2 low grade machines the each only apply 20 pounds of force the struggle on boths sides is equal
This perspective is the relative difficulty perspective. It says it can be just as hard for a high school team to beat another high school team as it is for one NFL team to beat another NFL team because while the NFL opponent is stronger, the NFL team playing them is itself composed of much stronger players, so relative to their ability the NFL team might be trying just as hard as the high school team to win.
That's true, but also irrelevant. The relative difficulty perspective is only meaningful when the goal is to judge relative effort expended. But a competition does not judge relative effort. It judges absolute effort. If Usain Bolt runs the 100 in 9.8 seconds and I run it in 19.8 seconds but I pushed myself harder, nobody cares. If he crosses the finish line before me, he wins. Period.
Kabam itself has stated that the primary purpose of Battlegrounds is to find the strongest competitors. It reinforced that by making changes explicitly designed to correct errors made in the past that overly devalued roster strength in the Victory Track. It has always used ELO to match in the Gladiator track, the most competitive part of BG. There's no reasonable way to argue that BG isn't a competition in the traditional sense, and in competitions we don't reward effort, we reward results.
The high school team can get an A for effort at the same time an NFL team might get a D for effort from its coach. But the NFL team will still destroy the high school team 100 times out of 100 because they are the stronger team, and the high school team would never get the opportunity to win the Super Bowl by simply beating enough high school teams. The level of competition is so absurdly different, they never actually participate in the same competitions.
High school teams play in high school competitions and are judged against high school competitors. NFL teams play in the NFL and are judged against NFL competitors. They might be superficially playing the same game, but they are not actually playing within the same competition. When teams are playing in the same competitive field, their opponents are not selected to roughly match their strength, or are they given allowances for being behind their peers. In the MLB, a team might be spending a tenth of the salary as their competitors, but there's no poor MLB league. The lowest spenders must play against the highest spenders, even if they are outspent ten to one.
That's true, but also irrelevant. The relative difficulty perspective is only meaningful when the goal is to judge relative effort expended. But a competition does not judge relative effort. It judges absolute effort. If Usain Bolt runs the 100 in 9.8 seconds and I run it in 19.8 seconds but I pushed myself harder, nobody cares. If he crosses the finish line before me, he wins. Period.
If you beat Usain Bolt you get the gold medal and the prize money that comes with it.
You don't get a candy bar and a pat on the head. And be told the prize money is only applicable if Bolt had won. Neither does your money buy you lesser things than anyone else's.
Your chances of winning are infinitesimally small, you should at least get the appropriate reward for it, if you do win.
High school teams play in high school competitions and are judged against high school competitors. NFL teams play in the NFL and are judged against NFL competitors. They might be superficially playing the same game, but they are not actually playing within the same competition.
Isn't this also true of BGs? Lower progression accounts are facing their peers and getting appropriate rewards at their level. Higher progression accounts are doing the same.
The higher progression accounts who cannot keep up with their peers are now pointing to the lower progression accounts who did win and complaining that they would beat those players easily. It is like an NFL team at the bottom of the league complaining they could have easily won the high school competition. That may be true but they seem to also want NFL level rewards for doing so.
We just have a common leaderboard. But the assumption that lower accounts are blocking higher accounts or are somehow not playing fair is ridiculous.
We just have a common leaderboard. But the assumption that lower accounts are blocking higher accounts or are somehow not playing fair is ridiculous.
Lower progress players aren't "blocking" higher progress players, but that's also irrelevant.
A lot of the complaints about BG, in all directions, are wrong. Complaints are just that: complaints. Sometimes they are based on incorrect or incomplete information. Sometimes they are based on errors in judgment. Sometimes they are just rants. Often, they are expressing a feeling, that the player cannot articulate a logical foundation about, but the feeling itself may point to a legitimate problem worth addressing, even if it isn't directly the one being complained about.
The feeling higher progress players have, that lower progress players are or were somehow hurting their progress, is based on a real problem: the problem of prestige matching creating competition silos. When lower progress players only face other lower progress players, it allows a substantial fraction of them to progress much faster than they otherwise would. Meanwhile isolating higher progress players to only matching against other higher progress players - instead of matching against the average player in their track on average - increases their difficulty and lower their progress rate.
In effect, in a normal competition everyone should either be facing competitors that are statistically average, or they should be facing competitors by competitive progress (i.e. ELO matching). However, when BG was matching by roster strength, it was lowering the statistical average competition for lower progress players and increasing it for higher progress players. This had the net effect of making things statistically harder for higher progress players and making things statistically easier for lower progress players than what a mathematically proper competition would be generating.
Individual low progress players were not "blocking" individual high progress players, but the overall effect was ultimately materially similar. And this was all hashed out once before, when the exact same problem happened in Alliance war. There's the logical arguments, the game theoretical ones, and then there's the actual practical results observed in alliance war that ultimately validated both. We see the same thing happen again in BG: there are logical reasons why roster strength matching is improper, game theoretical reasons why no one usually does this, and once again we've seen that those arguments are not just academic ones, they generate observable results that in retrospect were easy to predict.
Ultimately, it is easy to pick on the players who are complaining about things that are not technically correct. And if they are not technically correct AND there's no other foundation behind those complaints, then they can be dismissed. But in this case, those complaints are highlighting real problems that takes significant expertise to properly define and articulate. That's not their fault. It is up to those of us who can articulate them to advocate for them, when this sort of thing arises.
I say this to offer a post-diction. I'm not advocating for anything specifically here. I made my case in beta, I made my case during the sandbag era, and I made my case when they shifted to roster strength matching. And the devs have already stated they agree with me on basic principles, if not on implementation solutions. These basic principles of competition are what is guiding the ongoing iteration of the game mode. Anyone who thinks this is not how competition works or how it should work, is swimming upstream.
Alliance war does not gate rewards by progression. You get the same shards, rank-up materials etc. as others in your tier, irrespective of progression title. There is also some flexibility, such as weaker alliances can put up more points by running more BGs than alliances with stronger players. If rewards were gated, participation in wars would be far lower.
Alliance war does not gate rewards by progression. You get the same shards, rank-up materials etc. as others in your tier, irrespective of progression title. There is also some flexibility, such as weaker alliances can put up more points by running more BGs than alliances with stronger players. If rewards were gated, participation in wars would be far lower.
Are u UC?.. if yes.. how long have u been UC?.. cause its almost the 8th season of bgs....
Alliance war does not gate rewards by progression. You get the same shards, rank-up materials etc. as others in your tier, irrespective of progression title. There is also some flexibility, such as weaker alliances can put up more points by running more BGs than alliances with stronger players. If rewards were gated, participation in wars would be far lower.
The seasonal rewards in BGs aren't progressionally based either, uru 3 get x amount of this that and the other (sorry I don't recall the actual rewards lol) so an UC will get the same seasonal rewards as a paragon subject to them both finishing in the same tier of GC
Actually thats where u are wrong... Look at every Side quest or SOLO event thay had a currency as reward other than BG... Lower progressions always earn less and paid more... BG is the only one that had same milestone rewards, same objective rewards and same tier climb rewards for all progressions and the only difference is the store... If u r UC u r 3 progressions levels behind.. doesnt even make sense u r competing or playing against Paragons for rewards...
SQ paid less if you did lower difficulty, same difficulty gives the same amount of currency - complete threat level 5, you get threat level 5 rewards. In BG, difficulty is relative. A 10K roster vs. 10K roster is almost the same difficulty as 17k v 17k.
10K vs 17K is very easy for a 17K roster and almost impossible for a 10K roster. It's an EOP level match for the 10K and may threat level 2 for the 17K. The 10K players can play flawlessly 100% health, the most ideal rotation etc. and 9 out of 10 times they will still lose because the other match got over sooner. Conversely, the 17k player can take many hits, mess up a few times and will still win almost every one of those match-ups. But you want 17K to get top end rewards for doing this and 10K to get something worthless.
UC is competing with UC to get currency to buy UC rewards. Paragons and doing the same.
This is so unequivocally wrong that it's almost not worth discussing.
Why is it wrong? The result of a BG round is based on the relative results of the two fights in the round. A 6r4 has ~50% more attack and HP as compared to a 5r5 of the same champ.
Imagine a 5r5 roster facing off against an similar 5r5 roster - maybe they need 30 hits to K.O the defender, their opponents also need to land a similar number of hits in a similar amount of time to win the match.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against an equal 6r4 roster, the math is largely the same. Since HP and attack increases are almost equal.
When a 6r4 roster faces off against the same 5r5 roster - with a 6r4 champ you only need 20 hits to down the defender. On the other side, the 5r5 needs 45 hits to down the 6r4 defender. Even if the 5r5 plays a perfect game, there is very little chance that they win the match since the room for error with a 6r4 is so much more.
If you wants rewards at your progression level, you should at least be willing to face opponents at your progression level. Picking on teams with 2x handicaps to rake in rewards is not the Paragon thing to do.
The 10K roster who has progressed hasn't played any easier games than you did to get to your level. Because BG matches are relative not absolute.
Is winning a high school football game just as difficult as winning an NFL game?
Yes... it is higher level of play dosent mean higher difficulty imagine you have 2 high grade machines pushing at each other both of them applying 50 pounds of force vs 2 low grade machines the each only apply 20 pounds of force the struggle on boths sides is equal
Wrong.
What even is your example? Pounds of force? How does that apply to a sport?
It truly is shocking how many people think that winning a pro game is the same as an HS game. It really shows why so many don't grasp the reality of what Paragons are going through in the VT.
What dont you get? If you cant understand something as simple as that then there is no hope for you i even dumbed it down, the point was that a uc fighting a equal match against a uc is just as difficult as a paragon fighting a equal match against a paragon something you'd understand if your mind wasnt on one track, you keep replying saying "wrong" and "that is a fact" but someone who can only ever think of themselves can never be right.
It's not the same, roster progression is completely diferent. an UC player wont focus on defensive rankups since he's supposed to focus on offense in order to progress.
An UC player might place Korg on defense but I can bet a large purse he's not spending sigs on that Korg, and if he is, he's placing BGs in a higher priority than progressing through story content, which would be a huge mistake.
Skill and dedication might be the same at lower levels, but roster depth is not.
Thats old information
Also theres alot of champs that double as both attackers and defenders
Comments
In no world is an "equal" UC match nearly as difficult as an "equal" Paragon match. That's just a fact.
Saying "OMG they got bigger roster" is very tunnel vision and a lame excuse specially from UC and even some Cavs...
People really think its just roster based?...
How many UCs have u fought with Mystic Dispersion or Suicides depending the meta?
And If you are using doom
Sigs on korg won't really matter
You probably see them in the ~12k rosters but at that point, you'll have at least a number of r3 6*champs and Doom being Doom, he'll be one of the first used.
I'd love to see the number of r5 sig 200 Korg vs r5 Dooms there was last season. I'd guess less than 100.
Sure at UC they all got cookie cutter mastery setups... Must be nice...
You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not
Progression exists for a reason, the time spent in the forums arguing mindlessly over a topic you're absolutely mistaken about, would've been time well spent playing the game and progressing your account.
How is a Paragon vs Paragon UC vs UC have anything to do with the stores?..
And this "You are welcome to beat UCs, if you are ok with the rewards in the UC store that comes with it. You can even bring your sig 200 Korg and Doom and suicides/MD and the other perks exclusive to Paragon (they are not
Is it fair from a overall competition perspective, no. But then there a many parts of the game which are not. Why pick on a handful of lower level accounts? It's not like every Paragon is stuck in VT and every low strength account breezes through.
I'm done with this thread, every time I read a post by either this Stature person or Anly, I feel my IQ drop
I guess that's why Kabam took this decision... Because u deserved them..
I’m pretty sure 5$ for an UC player buy much less of what 5$ for a Paragon player buy.
Why are you not protesting against solo events too?
Most of them are progression gated.
An UC will get less rewards than a Paragon for doing the exact same things, but he will take resources that have equal impact on his account as Paragon for his.
This is done by the game designers to keep the game balanced.
We are playing a progression based game, whether someone likes it or not.
The company is monetising account progression.
Rewards at BGs are common for all players. They are exactly the same.
Whoever doesn’t accept that, whether is ignoring that fact deliberately, probably because he gains from arguing that position, or is completely dumb.
There is zero reason for Prestige matchmaking, any match is fair as far as it is within the same tier.
A player’s ability to win should decide matches, not any other factor, since the league and rewards are the same for all.
BG is not like other game modes in the game. It's not about getting the defender down to zero. It is about getting the defender down, sooner and with higher HP remaining than the person you are matched with.
In this context, a lower progression account is doing the same things as the higher progression accounts are. The store is there to manage the reward payouts also accordingly.
Asking a 10K account to face a 17K account is not the same as asking a 17K account to face a 17K account. Under BG rules there is no chance a 10K account can win against a 17K (but for maybe connection issues).
10k accounts shouldn’t make it that far to VT or GC to face 17k accounts in the first place.
A random matchmaking would balance itself out after a few matches (like does at AW) but that cannot happen as long as progress is reset on each season.
Let’s hope Kabam implement seeding soon enough, so we have stronger competitors starting ahead of weaker, and have limited missmatches.
That's true, but also irrelevant. The relative difficulty perspective is only meaningful when the goal is to judge relative effort expended. But a competition does not judge relative effort. It judges absolute effort. If Usain Bolt runs the 100 in 9.8 seconds and I run it in 19.8 seconds but I pushed myself harder, nobody cares. If he crosses the finish line before me, he wins. Period.
Kabam itself has stated that the primary purpose of Battlegrounds is to find the strongest competitors. It reinforced that by making changes explicitly designed to correct errors made in the past that overly devalued roster strength in the Victory Track. It has always used ELO to match in the Gladiator track, the most competitive part of BG. There's no reasonable way to argue that BG isn't a competition in the traditional sense, and in competitions we don't reward effort, we reward results.
The high school team can get an A for effort at the same time an NFL team might get a D for effort from its coach. But the NFL team will still destroy the high school team 100 times out of 100 because they are the stronger team, and the high school team would never get the opportunity to win the Super Bowl by simply beating enough high school teams. The level of competition is so absurdly different, they never actually participate in the same competitions.
High school teams play in high school competitions and are judged against high school competitors. NFL teams play in the NFL and are judged against NFL competitors. They might be superficially playing the same game, but they are not actually playing within the same competition. When teams are playing in the same competitive field, their opponents are not selected to roughly match their strength, or are they given allowances for being behind their peers. In the MLB, a team might be spending a tenth of the salary as their competitors, but there's no poor MLB league. The lowest spenders must play against the highest spenders, even if they are outspent ten to one.
You don't get a candy bar and a pat on the head. And be told the prize money is only applicable if Bolt had won. Neither does your money buy you lesser things than anyone else's.
Your chances of winning are infinitesimally small, you should at least get the appropriate reward for it, if you do win.
Isn't this also true of BGs? Lower progression accounts are facing their peers and getting appropriate rewards at their level. Higher progression accounts are doing the same.
The higher progression accounts who cannot keep up with their peers are now pointing to the lower progression accounts who did win and complaining that they would beat those players easily. It is like an NFL team at the bottom of the league complaining they could have easily won the high school competition. That may be true but they seem to also want NFL level rewards for doing so.
We just have a common leaderboard. But the assumption that lower accounts are blocking higher accounts or are somehow not playing fair is ridiculous.
A lot of the complaints about BG, in all directions, are wrong. Complaints are just that: complaints. Sometimes they are based on incorrect or incomplete information. Sometimes they are based on errors in judgment. Sometimes they are just rants. Often, they are expressing a feeling, that the player cannot articulate a logical foundation about, but the feeling itself may point to a legitimate problem worth addressing, even if it isn't directly the one being complained about.
The feeling higher progress players have, that lower progress players are or were somehow hurting their progress, is based on a real problem: the problem of prestige matching creating competition silos. When lower progress players only face other lower progress players, it allows a substantial fraction of them to progress much faster than they otherwise would. Meanwhile isolating higher progress players to only matching against other higher progress players - instead of matching against the average player in their track on average - increases their difficulty and lower their progress rate.
In effect, in a normal competition everyone should either be facing competitors that are statistically average, or they should be facing competitors by competitive progress (i.e. ELO matching). However, when BG was matching by roster strength, it was lowering the statistical average competition for lower progress players and increasing it for higher progress players. This had the net effect of making things statistically harder for higher progress players and making things statistically easier for lower progress players than what a mathematically proper competition would be generating.
Individual low progress players were not "blocking" individual high progress players, but the overall effect was ultimately materially similar. And this was all hashed out once before, when the exact same problem happened in Alliance war. There's the logical arguments, the game theoretical ones, and then there's the actual practical results observed in alliance war that ultimately validated both. We see the same thing happen again in BG: there are logical reasons why roster strength matching is improper, game theoretical reasons why no one usually does this, and once again we've seen that those arguments are not just academic ones, they generate observable results that in retrospect were easy to predict.
Ultimately, it is easy to pick on the players who are complaining about things that are not technically correct. And if they are not technically correct AND there's no other foundation behind those complaints, then they can be dismissed. But in this case, those complaints are highlighting real problems that takes significant expertise to properly define and articulate. That's not their fault. It is up to those of us who can articulate them to advocate for them, when this sort of thing arises.
I say this to offer a post-diction. I'm not advocating for anything specifically here. I made my case in beta, I made my case during the sandbag era, and I made my case when they shifted to roster strength matching. And the devs have already stated they agree with me on basic principles, if not on implementation solutions. These basic principles of competition are what is guiding the ongoing iteration of the game mode. Anyone who thinks this is not how competition works or how it should work, is swimming upstream.
Also theres alot of champs that double as both attackers and defenders