Why can't the BG model be fairer?
Ericson23
Member Posts: 117 ★★
Since the introduction of this BG mode, I have been very curious, why does the competitive mode not have a more fair environment.
Sure, this game needs some players who pay to win, but they already have an advantage in AW and AQ. The BG model is a competitive model, why can't it have fairer conditions?
For example, limit the heroes to the same level, such as 6R4, of course, you have not upgraded to, still need to upgrade. Wouldn't that be fairer?
Now the competitive environment of BG is that as soon as the opponent is overwhelmed by the level, there will be fear. As a result, fewer and fewer FTP players are playing this mode
Sure, this game needs some players who pay to win, but they already have an advantage in AW and AQ. The BG model is a competitive model, why can't it have fairer conditions?
For example, limit the heroes to the same level, such as 6R4, of course, you have not upgraded to, still need to upgrade. Wouldn't that be fairer?
Now the competitive environment of BG is that as soon as the opponent is overwhelmed by the level, there will be fear. As a result, fewer and fewer FTP players are playing this mode
3
Comments
BATTLE grounds
or
FAIR grounds.
Do tell. Yall should be glad that there's fair fight policy till platinum. Everyone Getting bronze silver gold rewards is good thing, so if players want more rewards then they must have skills and ranked up heroes to BATTLE for those rewards.
Plus, gahh, 6* is OLD NEWS (some exceptios are there) So get on with time and get those 7* big boy champs.
Why do you think they keep switching metas? it is to force everyone to keep ranking up champs. That's how they milk the whales.
as a valiant and a former CoD enjoyer, i cant agree more. Shepherd is indeed, a dog
This izz the nue trend.
FYI I am FTP and became valient in January 1st week.
It's a competition. That's redundant. The Rewards are meant to be appropriate to the effort someone puts in. That's also redundant. The issue people are facing is the range of Rosters is too vast to throw everyone in the mix. That's not an unreasonable statement to make. We're all aware of that.
We don't have to shut down every Thread that people communicate that issue. They're going to keep making that point either way, unless there's some kind of solution. No one on the other side is going to say, "You know, you're right. I don't deserve a fair completion. I should feel lucky to be used as easy prey for your progress.".
Just saying.
Sure OP said why cant roster be capped at R4.. why not R3 will say a TB later... Then will come a Cav saying why not R1...