Suggestion to make battleground match-up better

Battleground is really annoying especially after Diamond 1, So kabam can fix this problem of match up by integrating Alliance rating or alliance war league (eg. Gold, platinum) in their battleground match up system.
If we use alliance rating as base to decide match up that will improve the match ups, Atleast if we can use this system in victory track that will be better.

Comments

xLunatiXx

Don't know what alliance has to do with a 1v1 game mode...

ahmynuts

obsidiman

What about players that participate in BGs who aren't in an alliance?

Hemendra_

Don't know what alliance has to do with a 1v1 game mode...

Alliance rating is a total of all players in the alliance, and did you ever seen a player which has 1000 rating in platinum alliance.

Ashacekar

They should lock tiers specific to progression. Say an UC can only reach gold 3 after that they will get a popup warning "You hereby accept not to complain regarding further matchups? Declining this may result in locking your bg tier. Accept/Reject". Before this message they can get matched with their pals in same progression.

Because the point is if you want to reach GC you have best the best in the last tiers.

ReignkingTW

This is nonsense.

iwoso

This is nonsense.

Not really, i have had this same complaint myself but the sad fact is he's right about it but kabam being kabam wont tackle it unless they're losing profits

WOLF_LINK

AW and BG are totally different playing grounds, probably the worst idea I‘ve seen for a long time.

Hemendra_

AW and BG are totally different playing grounds, probably the worst idea I‘ve seen for a long time.

Really, what do you find bad, i didn't said it's solely be decided by alliance rating but should be included.

BringPopcorn

This is nonsense.
Not really, i have had this same complaint myself but the sad fact is he's right about it but kabam being kabam wont tackle it unless they're losing profits

Just cause you agree doesnt make both of you smart or right.

Pikolu

Gotcha, move my whole alliance to a new alliance so our alliance rating is 0, or move into my alts alliance where it is like 900 and get super easy matchups. It's like sandbagging, except you lose literally nothing to your deck strength.

Colinwhitworth69

Battleground is really annoying especially after Diamond 1, So kabam can fix this problem of match up by integrating Alliance rating or alliance war league (eg. Gold, platinum) in their battleground match up system.
If we use alliance rating as base to decide match up that will improve the match ups, Atleast if we can use this system in victory track that will be better.

Matchmaking may hurt sometimes, but that is by design and will/should persist as long as every summoner is competing in the same pool. You have to climb over players to reach the top, and there is no express elevator.

The best solution IMO is to have tiers or leagues that separate summoners by progression or something so that there is less discrepancy in rosters.

BringPopcorn

Battleground is really annoying especially after Diamond 1, So kabam can fix this problem of match up by integrating Alliance rating or alliance war league (eg. Gold, platinum) in their battleground match up system.
If we use alliance rating as base to decide match up that will improve the match ups, Atleast if we can use this system in victory track that will be better.
Matchmaking may hurt sometimes, but that is by design and will/should persist as long as every summoner is competing in the same pool. You have to climb over players to reach the top, and there is no express elevator.

The best solution IMO is to have tiers or leagues that separate summoners by progression or something so that there is less discrepancy in rosters.

Its basically a compromise solution, you won't imagine how many Cavs are out there with better rosters than some TBs (Progression title is as relevant as player rating for this matter)

Hemendra_

Gotcha, move my whole alliance to a new alliance so our alliance rating is 0, or move into my alts alliance where it is like 900 and get super easy matchups. It's like sandbagging, except you lose literally nothing to your deck strength.

I see, so you can sacrifice your alliance war rewards for bg rewards.

xLunatiXx

I think it's time to implement a forum rating in BG. Special tier for nonsensical posts

Demonzfyre

This is nonsense.
Not really, i have had this same complaint myself but the sad fact is he's right about it but kabam being kabam wont tackle it unless they're losing profits

What is there to tackle exactly? You're in a competition. Both you and the OP don't want to face competition. You think you should get the same rewards as the top of the leaderboard for doing less work.

Kabam isn't going to tackle something because you don't like facing harder competition.

WinterFields

Gotcha, move my whole alliance to a new alliance so our alliance rating is 0, or move into my alts alliance where it is like 900 and get super easy matchups. It's like sandbagging, except you lose literally nothing to your deck strength.
I see, so you can sacrifice your alliance war rewards for bg rewards.

Except not everyone actually cares about AW. I don't like the stress of high-end AW so I'm in a chill alliance, but we care more about BG. It's just too prone to manipulation

Pikolu

Gotcha, move my whole alliance to a new alliance so our alliance rating is 0, or move into my alts alliance where it is like 900 and get super easy matchups. It's like sandbagging, except you lose literally nothing to your deck strength.
I see, so you can sacrifice your alliance war rewards for bg rewards.

All day, everyday, 24/7. Landed in Gold 1 last season, so really not missing out on anything except reduced stress from no AW

Demonzfyre

AW and BG are totally different playing grounds, probably the worst idea I‘ve seen for a long time.
Really, what do you find bad, i didn't said it's solely be decided by alliance rating but should be included.

The fact that you can create alliances with zero AW rating. Just another thing Kabam will have to monitor.

Ironman3000

A better idea wold to be remove the protection starting in Bronze 3 so people don't get a free ride and then hit a wall.

ThePotatoJohn

I'm in Plat 1, and have 2 R3 6*s with about 15 R5 5*s as my strongest champs. I consecutively faced 3 Legend accounts with a huge roster or R5 6*s and R2 7*s. Like, how is this supposed to be fair? It's like asking a random person on the street to face up against Mike Tyson.

Split the rewards, make leagues or brackets (based on progression, or prestige, or account rating, whatever) and set rewards accordingly, but don't just open the gates for any and all accounts to face other players. Implement proper skill-based matchmaking with an ELO system.

Or remove deck restrictions from players rosters to ALL CHAMPS IN THE GAME. That way you'll get an actual fun game-mode, instead of this chore.

The_Gruffalo

Battlegrounds is the worst format going and a potential deal breaker and that comes from a 9yr veteran. Matches are too long, matchups are ridiculously inaccurate in challenge/equality… how do I lose 50 in a row and still face team’s vastly superior??? The format will require about 25hrs of play time to reach rewards - stupid!

FieryWater

I can assure you OP, if they did introduce an Alliance rating based matchmaking system, you'd be back here very soon complaining about why it should be removed.

WOLF_LINK

I'm in Plat 1, and have 2 R3 6*s with about 15 R5 5*s as my strongest champs. I consecutively faced 3 Legend accounts with a huge roster or R5 6*s and R2 7*s. Like, how is this supposed to be fair? It's like asking a random person on the street to face up against Mike Tyson.

Split the rewards, make leagues or brackets (based on progression, or prestige, or account rating, whatever) and set rewards accordingly, but don't just open the gates for any and all accounts to face other players. Implement proper skill-based matchmaking with an ELO system.

Or remove deck restrictions from players rosters to ALL CHAMPS IN THE GAME. That way you'll get an actual fun game-mode, instead of this chore.

It is an ELO system, at least in GC.

You gain points for winning, you loose points for loosing and face opponents with equal Rating.

In Victory Track (after Babysitting Bonus ends in Platin) you‘ll face opponents from the same League (Tier) … so just an ELO light system.

Zeke_the_Xbot

Why is it that every idea for how to “improve BG” is always sounding like some entitlement nonsense like Kabam owes you the rewards of a competitive mode just for playing?

The mode is by design meant to check your skill and roster if you can’t beat big accounts then you know you aren’t progressed or developed enough as a player it’s just what it is.

ReignkingTW

I'm in Plat 1, and have 2 R3 6*s with about 15 R5 5*s as my strongest champs. I consecutively faced 3 Legend accounts with a huge roster or R5 6*s and R2 7*s. Like, how is this supposed to be fair? It's like asking a random person on the street to face up against Mike Tyson.

Split the rewards, make leagues or brackets (based on progression, or prestige, or account rating, whatever) and set rewards accordingly, but don't just open the gates for any and all accounts to face other players. Implement proper skill-based matchmaking with an ELO system.

Or remove deck restrictions from players rosters to ALL CHAMPS IN THE GAME. That way you'll get an actual fun game-mode, instead of this chore.
It is an ELO system, at least in GC.

You gain points for winning, you loose points for loosing and face opponents with equal Rating.

In Victory Track (after Babysitting Bonus ends in Platin) you‘ll face opponents from the same League (Tier) … so just an ELO light system.

Blinded by the light?

Tei

What about fix lags and bugs?

HSS75

Worst idea i ever heard, it's easy to take advantage of this method

iDestroyerZ

Looks like someone is trying to compete with golivarez in the Most Nonsense Post Award 2023

DNA3000

Battleground is really annoying especially after Diamond 1, So kabam can fix this problem of match up by integrating Alliance rating or alliance war league (eg. Gold, platinum) in their battleground match up system.
If we use alliance rating as base to decide match up that will improve the match ups, Atleast if we can use this system in victory track that will be better.

I'm honestly not even sure what this is supposed to do. Are we supposed to match against people with the same alliance war rating? I'm a 17k prestige 5 million+ player currently in an alliance currently in tier 10, and that has in the past been as low as tier 13. Is your intent to have me match against other players in tier 13? There are players stronger than me in retirement alliances with war ratings approaching zero.

Even without manipulation, even players who don't manipulate war rating are going to be having wildly random match ups under such a scheme. Factoring in the effects of manipulation this would be a disaster.