Battleground matchmaking

Disagree. Any manipulation of the system ruins it for others. It's not "harmless".

Matchmaking shelter up to Plat2 is a manipulation of BGs, and its also the reason why some players manipulate it to camp out and farm points. I guess at this point that scum behavior becomes a compromise.

People can tell themselves whatever they want, but when they take it upon themselves to manipulate the outcome of the Matches, it affects more than just the people who have to come up against them every other Match.

Ironman3000

You're arguing against nobody and for a point that isn't even related to the OP. Make your own tanking thread if that's what you're passionate about GW.

It isn't a separate subject. It pertains to the reasons we have Matches that are regulated to begin with. First you argue that it isn't harmful. Then you tell me to change the subject. Sounds like a two-step to me.

No, it isn't. It's being regulated by Kabam.

Matchmaking shelter created that barrel full of fish to camp out and farm points. So pick your poison, free matchmaking or keep the barrel.

And camping out and farming points is not against ToS, what's your point?

Hahaha. That's funny. So because people can't take advantage of Matches in Bronze because Kabam sets an even playing field, then you think the results are skewed.
All that perspective says to me is, "One way or another, we will get our own way.".
No one argued against the Plat drop-off. Incase you forget, I was the loudest voice on here for SOME sort of fair start. I'm fine with things getting harder.

So that makes it benign?

DrZola

There are a few folks in this thread I vote for getting zero 😉

Dr. Zola

Ironman3000

Ugh. I never said it was harmless I said it was a non-issue. And no, tanking is not the reason we have the matchmaking we have now, sandbagging is. You aren't even arguing the correct manipulation.

When its an effect of the previous unnatural aspect? Yes.
Plat 2 being a camping ground is an effect of matchmaking shelter. You can't win this argument.
You want to fix tanking, well punish losses more, take away 2 coins per loss, see how people fair witj that change. You said it wouldn't matter because they would climb back. Not sure why you think higher players always match with lower in Plat 2, unless you are under the impressiom that strong Paragons never matched each other in Plat2.

No you are not, you complained about how hard it was to advance when they reverted back the coin system, your exact argument was "I made it to GC in season 8 and 9, and now I can't even get out of gold without spending a ton of units in shields" You are not fine with things getting more difficult at all.
I'm paraphrasing btw.

It's not a non-issue, and I'm really getting tired of mincing words so here goes.
All along in these discussions, the opposition has been calling lower Players entitled because they want a fair fight. They didn't say they want free Rewards. They didn't say they wanted guaranteed Wins or cake walk Matches. They wanted a fair fight. There is absolutely no denying that certain Matches are a guaranteed Loss. In War discussions, the argument was "If you're skilled, you can win.". That doesn't apply here. Mathematically, even if both sides play with perfect skill, one side will lose because of the vast difference in what they're using. Damage dealt and Health lost are not the same at all. You can say that people have earned their right to those Matches, but you can't deny that some mean Players are dead in the water. That's a fact. They said they want a fair chance. Not a setup for failure.
The reality is, and I don't care if it offends people at this point because I'm not talking about anyone specifically, I've seen the other side be just as entitled. They felt entitled to Tank and cherry-pick Matches to start. Then they felt entitled because lower Players were having more success than they were when they were losing their own even Matches (as if that's an argument to stomp them if you can't handle a fair fight). Now we have more entitlement arguing that Tanking is an acceptable practice, and people should suck it up. These people asking for even Matches are nowhere as entitled as the ones saying if we can't have what we want, we're just going to take it because we're bigger and better and we deserve more. Nevermind the fact that it stops the system from being a true reflection of skill because those results and Tiers are being manipulated by Players.
This right here is the reason any competition in this game becomes more than just a competition. It becomes toxic as hell.

That's part of the problem. For both sides.

Ever heard the expression don't bring a knife to a gun fight? Or Kabam's spin on it "Don't bring a Mystic to a Torch fight"? Well UC and Cavs complaining about not being able to climb high enough or get into GC are bringing a nail clipper to a Nuclear War.

They don't have a choice. That's the whole point. They rely on that Matchmaking process. That's the crux of the entire argument. Otherwise, remove them from the game mode and good luck running what's left for any length of time.

Remove them? That's wrong, let them have some rewards; but they should be happy about it. Which doesnt happen.
I don't want them to be left out, I want them to stop complaining and being entitled to higher tiers.

Stature

Here is what you are saying:
1. There is a limited number of spots in GC, an internal target (which is different from the theoretical number GC can hold).
2. Lower progress players have an easier path to GC (because they have an easier path to Plat2).

Based on this you are inferring that the system takes rewards from higher progress players and gives them to lower progress players. You are basically implying that there are for e.g. 1,000 spots in GC, devs don't care if that means 1,000 Paragons in GC or 1,000 UCs. So if one UC makes it to GC, then only 999 Paragons can be there, so 1 UC unfairly got in. Replace GC with Vibranium, Diamond, Plat etc as appropriate.

Here is what I am saying:
1. The devs intentions are more nuanced on what they want to see in terms of participation and BG progress for lower strength accounts. There can be multiple reasons for this - retention, player experience etc.
2. When people were progressing faster than the devs liked, their choice was to change scoring and number of tiers. It wasn't to change early tier matchmaking. That suggests that they were not seeing too many small accounts progressing through VT tiers, relative to what they wanted.

If the devs concern was that lower progress players are taking away spots from higher progress players, they could have just opened up matchmaking earlier (like they did with the last change). They chose not to. Which suggests that they also have a soft limit on the pace at which high progression player move through VT and GC.

While there may be only 1,000 spots in GC, they may not want 1,000 Paragons there. Maybe some are just meant for strong TBs and Cavs, if they can make it there. If they can't it doesn't mean that they want to see weaker Paragons stepping in to those spots, maybe they are just meant to be empty. Maybe they just want to see 950 Paragons +/- whoever else can make it there. You cannot accuse the others who make it of blocking progress of the 50 additional Paragons who were never meant to be there.

With respect to your attribution of "everyone could make it if only the devs would let them", I never made that statement. I only pointed out that your assumption that lower progression player are taking spots from higher progression players is not true. There has been no announcement that devs only want to see accounts of a certain size in GC.

Then you're probably in the wrong venue. As long as I've been here, someone will be complaining and someone will be entitled. It's par for the course here.

Let's be honest man, most big accounts don't want them left out; or a tiered matchmaking system with tiered rewards is because the small accounts are food for them.

Not with seeding, and I am being completely honest.
The only big accounts smaller accounts are facing right now, are accounts that don't care much for BGs and are playing it for the dust objective.
Yes its terrible to link objectives to game modes that not everyone enjoys. Another example the war objectives.
People who play it as a competition, really don't match those smaller accounts since they started in Plat 1.

I never disagreed to that, but it will get fixed in a season or two.
Kabam should stop linking new things to game modes some people don't enjoy.

Yeah. The rewards from the objectives are nice, but without an unranked mode objectives shouldn't be a thing. And tanking has been going on much earlier than season 9. It just became obvious then because players put two and two together with the buffed rewards.

I got an alliance mate, 19k prestige, hates BGs. He had to play matches for the dust, laughed at facing smaller accounts. Can't blame him for it.

I don't believe anybody is blaming any player with big accounts. It's the system and how it functions. Whether matchmaking is open from the start, or matching has a pity system it's still wrong. And it produces negative expectations. Seeding is a positive but the damage is done already.

Data for seeding should have been collected since season 2 or something.. GC players were complaining about having to grind the whole VT by then; but yeah damage is done.

Demonzfyre

10 pages of the same argument......