Has Kabam degraded over last few years regarding bg matchup?

Mihir_901 · February 25

I would like to point out to Kabam that they are doing absolute terrible job in keeping this game alive for the coming years.
Because of a lot of reasons, most of them centering on Kabam valuing Valiant players more than Paragon players(I'm a paragon 3 mil rating acc and have 3 R5 ascended 6* champs). In the last few days I've seen myself matching with valiant players back to back with 5-6 mil rating acc and that's not even the worst part. Besides every valiant players literally having onslaught and bullseye (two of the most powerful champs on def) R5 and ascended, not only do I have to ban them but also look out for banning a R3 7 *. Okay even if I overlook that, the AI is just been so freaking weird lately that I'm just like......F*** it. I come here in this game to play battlegrounds only for 1 reason, to have fun and get T6 and T3 catalysts coz God knows how many accounts I've matched that literally are full of 6* R5s. I don't have a problem in matching with valiant players, but I've never seen myself matching with accounts lower than me or throne breakers at all. It's like Kabam is devoiding me to match with accounts lower than me as if a curse has been set on me. I know knowing the reputation of Kabam in our community is very low atm ( tbh it's down the drain) but I'm here to request the so called "moderators" of this forum, who think they have everything sorted out (but they dont) that please make this game as fair as possible( which clearly looks like a herculean task for you) and let accounts like me have a chance to atleast get to match with accounts having the same progression level as me. If this is too much to ask from you guys, then it clearly shows how incapable the developers and moderators of this game are and in fact prove that you are just another game finding ways to get money (which is really a spit on the face to the people having the gaming spirit).

Leanbison · February 25

Are you in GC or VT?

Pikolu · February 25

Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.

Grub88 · February 25

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.

I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill

_Pez_ · February 25

It's okay I'm valiant and I literally don't have onslaught, don't have him metaphorically either

willrun4adonut · February 25

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/361039/2-bg-tournament-100-prize

2* are better than 3* anyways.

For sandbagging, it had to do with people loading up their deck with 15-20 of their strongest champs, and then loading the rest with 1-2* champs. This allowed them to face accounts that had an average of their deck strength. So if your top champs were 17k and your bottom. Champs were 200, then you got to face decks whose strength was ~10k. You could easily win.

ItsClobberinTime · February 25

Matchmaking is working as intended and as a Paragon myself, I think it's fine. The reason you're facing so many stacked accounts is probably because people are losing interest in BGs and barely playing due to rewards being absolutely appalling and borderline useless or way too pricy (considering the amount of shards or fragments you get) for most Valiants. This will only keep getting worse until they update the store and milestone rewards, they are severely outdated and people don't really feel a need to grind BGs all the way up to GC every month cause it doesn't really pay off.

Disthene_T · February 25

I think the match making is about as good as it can be. Part of the problem is that really strong players don't always move through VT fast enough. It discourages the thronebreaker players from playing more than their 3 matches every 2 days. So lower paragons become the bottom of the barrel in diamond until the last few days of the season when the big account exodus to GC.

Pikolu · February 25

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill

Sandbagging refers to putting some weak champions on your team to get easier matchups. Lots of people would fill half of their deck with 1 and 2 star champions and then have their best champions fill in the rest so they get matched with people with cav rosters or other sandbaggers. You also could have just 5*s in your deck and match people of similar deck ratings. Due to how easily that was exploited, it was removed after season 2.

mgj0630 · February 25

I'm a Valiant. Don't have Onslaught or Bullseye in my BG deck.....yet.

Wozzle007 · February 25

I’m Valiant, no Onslaught or Bullseye wither. Also lost interest this season. I’m in victory track and won the last 11 match in a row, but rewards are meh and my time is valuable. I like Kabam doesn’t value time as part of the game, but it really is. So this is the first season since I think season 7 that I’m not pushing for Gladiators Circuit. So even though I’m winning and would likely get to Gladiators circuit if I put the effort in. I just don’t really want to at the moment.

ReignkingTW · February 25

Years?

BringPopcorn · February 25

Kabam degraded because it doesnt cater to new Paragons?....Yeah no...

Typhoon · February 25

First post. What a doozie. Welcome back!

Mihir_901 · February 25

Leanbison said:
Are you in GC or VT?

Gc

Mihir_901 · February 25

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill

I've played bg solely on the basis of having fun and I didn't know abt sandbagging until s9. I'm referring to ppl have a frickin 6 mil account and still looming in gamma3 and uru1. And yes, they should keep some metas with 3* decks so that atleast u can fight on the basis of skill and skill only. I'd much rather prefer loosing to a skilled player rather than dumb amateurs with much larger rosters and sitting down the league to prey on weaker accounts.

Mihir_901 · February 25

Disthene_T said:
I think the match making is about as good as it can be. Part of the problem is that really strong players don't always move through VT fast enough. It discourages the thronebreaker players from playing more than their 3 matches every 2 days. So lower paragons become the bottom of the barrel in diamond until the last few days of the season when the big account exodus to GC.

Hey, I absolutely agree to you brother. As I said, I have no problem facing valiant players at all. It's just that matching then back to back is frustrating along with the AI that just literally does random things to not let you move up the tiers. I literally cannot recall a single match where I didn't matched a throne breaker account, even for once. So, all I'm just saying is if they can differentiate gifting offers between paragon and valiants(and other progression levels as well), they should do the same in battlegrounds as well. As in, paragon players will face paragon players with a mix of valiant accounts ofc to test the skill level and rise up the ranks.

Mihir_901 · February 25

ItsClobberinTime said:
Matchmaking is working as intended and as a Paragon myself, I think it's fine. The reason you're facing so many stacked accounts is probably because people are losing interest in BGs and barely playing due to rewards being absolutely appalling and borderline useless or way too pricy (considering the amount of shards or fragments you get) for most Valiants. This will only keep getting worse until they update the store and milestone rewards, they are severely outdated and people don't really feel a need to grind BGs all the way up to GC every month cause it doesn't really pay off.

I agree dude. The store def needs an upgrade with T6B and T3A fragments so that we paragons atleast have a chance to stand against valiant players. Also, I kinda got into GC pretty early(within 6 days) with just 3 R5 ascended 6* champs, which I think is crazy. It's just that the AI has been behaving so wierd to me nowadays that it felt like the last chance to stand against bigger accounts is going to be borderline useless for me.

Mihir_901 · February 25

ReignkingTW said:
Years?

Yeah it should be months ig I was thinking what to put so went with years

Demonzfyre · February 26

Mihir_901 said:

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill
I've played bg solely on the basis of having fun and I didn't know abt sandbagging until s9. I'm referring to ppl have a frickin 6 mil account and still looming in gamma3 and uru1. And yes, they should keep some metas with 3* decks so that atleast u can fight on the basis of skill and skill only. I'd much rather prefer loosing to a skilled player rather than dumb amateurs with much larger rosters and sitting down the league to prey on weaker accounts.

So you want to compete for the same rewards as them but not have to face any of them.

Greekhit · February 26

Demonzfyre said:

Mihir_901 said:

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill
I've played bg solely on the basis of having fun and I didn't know abt sandbagging until s9. I'm referring to ppl have a frickin 6 mil account and still looming in gamma3 and uru1. And yes, they should keep some metas with 3* decks so that atleast u can fight on the basis of skill and skill only. I'd much rather prefer loosing to a skilled player rather than dumb amateurs with much larger rosters and sitting down the league to prey on weaker accounts.
So you want to compete for the same rewards as them but not have to face any of them.

And imagine this guy is not even complaining about VT 😂
He is complaining for GC matchups 🤯

Grub88 · February 26

Well I'm valiant and only have a 2.2 mill account but I'm only vibranium 3 and I would probably rather be in plat so I can get challenges completed easier lol maybe instead of wasting time in BG's that have below meta rewards you should use your "skill" to push for exploration of Necropolis, i think you will see your account grow much faster to compete with these massive account you are struggling with

laserjohn26 · February 26

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill

The same people who win using the current format would still win using only 3* decks you would just feel much worse about yourself. The biggest fallacy about battlegrounds is that people like Andrew the ruff, bero man, kt1, and fintech win because of their accounts. That's not true in the slightest. They earn those champs by being both extremely skilled and knowledgeable. You think you lose because you don't know how to beat bullseye or onslaught and they have them. Well guess what, they face those champs every match and are comfortable fighting them. So you would still lose to those champs and they would defeat yours.

SummonerNR · February 26

Didn’t the forums just go thru a rather long thread about this issue (although they were still back at Platinum).
With long enough luck some slightly lower accounts may eventually be able to get past Platinum and maybe reach G.C., but the change in matching happened to them back at Plat.

(in my worst “Ferris Buehlers Day Off” voice)
Jiggens… Jiggens…

Grub88 · February 26

laserjohn26 said:

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill
The same people who win using the current format would still win using only 3* decks you would just feel much worse about yourself. The biggest fallacy about battlegrounds is that people like Andrew the ruff, bero man, kt1, and fintech win because of their accounts. That's not true in the slightest. They earn those champs by being both extremely skilled and knowledgeable. You think you lose because you don't know how to beat bullseye or onslaught and they have them. Well guess what, they face those champs every match and are comfortable fighting them. So you would still lose to those champs and they would defeat yours.

That is 100% incorrect the game mode requires planning and counters for each different meta. As bero man has mentioned in the forums before he ranks champion specifically for the meta. If an account doesnt have those counters as 6* or 7* they can't compete at the top level, accounts that have much more depth in roster and size will easily beat an account that doesn't have the roster so 3* champs makes it available for anyone because if you do the arenas and get all the new champs you have those counters/meta champs

laserjohn26 · February 27

Grub88 said:

laserjohn26 said:

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill
The same people who win using the current format would still win using only 3* decks you would just feel much worse about yourself. The biggest fallacy about battlegrounds is that people like Andrew the ruff, bero man, kt1, and fintech win because of their accounts. That's not true in the slightest. They earn those champs by being both extremely skilled and knowledgeable. You think you lose because you don't know how to beat bullseye or onslaught and they have them. Well guess what, they face those champs every match and are comfortable fighting them. So you would still lose to those champs and they would defeat yours.
That is 100% incorrect the game mode requires planning and counters for each different meta. As bero man has mentioned in the forums before he ranks champion specifically for the meta. If an account doesnt have those counters as 6* or 7* they can't compete at the top level, accounts that have much more depth in roster and size will easily beat an account that doesn't have the roster so 3* champs makes it available for anyone because if you do the arenas and get all the new champs you have those counters/meta champs

I am extremely confident that beroman would beat you in a 3* only match.

Grub88 · February 27

laserjohn26 said:

Grub88 said:

laserjohn26 said:

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill
The same people who win using the current format would still win using only 3* decks you would just feel much worse about yourself. The biggest fallacy about battlegrounds is that people like Andrew the ruff, bero man, kt1, and fintech win because of their accounts. That's not true in the slightest. They earn those champs by being both extremely skilled and knowledgeable. You think you lose because you don't know how to beat bullseye or onslaught and they have them. Well guess what, they face those champs every match and are comfortable fighting them. So you would still lose to those champs and they would defeat yours.
That is 100% incorrect the game mode requires planning and counters for each different meta. As bero man has mentioned in the forums before he ranks champion specifically for the meta. If an account doesnt have those counters as 6* or 7* they can't compete at the top level, accounts that have much more depth in roster and size will easily beat an account that doesn't have the roster so 3* champs makes it available for anyone because if you do the arenas and get all the new champs you have those counters/meta champs
I am extremely confident that beroman would beat you in a 3* only match.

No doubt, has no relevance to the argument though.

Mihir_901 · February 27

Greekhit said:

Demonzfyre said:

Mihir_901 said:

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill
I've played bg solely on the basis of having fun and I didn't know abt sandbagging until s9. I'm referring to ppl have a frickin 6 mil account and still looming in gamma3 and uru1. And yes, they should keep some metas with 3* decks so that atleast u can fight on the basis of skill and skill only. I'd much rather prefer loosing to a skilled player rather than dumb amateurs with much larger rosters and sitting down the league to prey on weaker accounts.
So you want to compete for the same rewards as them but not have to face any of them.
And imagine this guy is not even complaining about VT 😂
He is complaining for GC matchups 🤯

Hey I was here to just vent out my anger but yeah same thing happens while I was in VT

Mihir_901 · February 27

Grub88 said:
Well I'm valiant and only have a 2.2 mill account but I'm only vibranium 3 and I would probably rather be in plat so I can get challenges completed easier lol maybe instead of wasting time in BG's that have below meta rewards you should use your "skill" to push for exploration of Necropolis, i think you will see your account grow much faster to compete with these massive account you are struggling with

Tbh I want to do a necro exploration, I'm sitting on 7k units but I'm waiting to get a 7* shuru as I don't wanna rank my 6* otherwise I would've been done with the exploration as well.

Mihir_901 · February 27

laserjohn26 said:

Grub88 said:

Pikolu said:
Having fair matchups in BGs is what broke BGs in the first place. At first it was based on deck strength which introduced sandbagging. Then it was based on roster strength which caused a lot of large accounts to be brawling it out in Diamond while many Cavs and alt accounts had an essentially free pass all the way to GC. As a compromise, kabam kept roster matchmaking up until plat but made it a free-for-all after that. Doing this allows smaller accounts to still participate in the gamemode without having a free pass to GC while also not punishing larger roster rankups.
I only joined in about Season 9 or 10 so curious to know about when it was based on deck strength. Is the sand bagging you refer to people throwing the fight to stay in lower tiers and take advantage of easy win with Elder Marks? This still happens on occasion.

I have always thought that having say a 3 star only BG season would be awesome. Most people have access to all the 3 star versions of champs through the arenas and they are pretty inexpensive to rank up so it would be a good test of skill
The same people who win using the current format would still win using only 3* decks you would just feel much worse about yourself. The biggest fallacy about battlegrounds is that people like Andrew the ruff, bero man, kt1, and fintech win because of their accounts. That's not true in the slightest. They earn those champs by being both extremely skilled and knowledgeable. You think you lose because you don't know how to beat bullseye or onslaught and they have them. Well guess what, they face those champs every match and are comfortable fighting them. So you would still lose to those champs and they would defeat yours.

Listen bud, the reason why they are able to beat bullseye and onslaught is bcoz they have bigger roster, that is true. Alongside that they have a huge 7* roster and 6* R5 as well that aid them to fight champions like that. My 7* roster is a bit low and I haven't got the craziest of champs to counter bullseye so having a skill set to get thru these champions is one thing and having a counter to them is other.
And talking about they earn those champions, yeah they earn it by using money by buying the early access deals. Sure, they defo sitting on the Celes tier bcoz of their skill set true, but they get those champs by using money.

Has Kabam degraded over last few years regarding bg matchup?

Comments