Kabam...AW match making frustrations boiling over

LeNoirFaineant · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:
People don't want to compete but they still want to win. Lol. Get what I'm saying?

They want even matches for the level they are playing at with a reasonable chance to win. It's not complicated.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Andrewkole said:
Prestige being a factor in war rating doesn’t make sense. I don’t care about AQ. I have to play it to get materials for AW. I have some high prestige champs I ranked up that aren’t great defenders.

This means AW focused alliances can sell non-factor high prestige champs just to get rid of them, lower their prestige, and get better AW matchups.

Top AW teams will have a MAXIMUM prestige limit for players in a high AW alliance. No higher than 9900 or something.

Bottom line, if you have Thor Rag maxed, and are competing in AW over AQ, you are better off selling him off.

GroundedWisdom said:
It actually works quite perfectly. It's not just a metric that determines Rewards. The Rewards and AQ strength you run is adjusted based on it because that's literally the metric they use to gauge the strength of your Ally. It's also not likely going to be manipualted by selling, nor could it be because we can't sell 5*s and 6*s. It's a rather appropriate solution.

Well we're going to have to disagree on Rags. I get Kills with him on All or Nothing, and I think he's underrated as an Attacker because people don't use him properly. Lol.
As for Prestige, I think people are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I didn't say high Presitge Champs are the best Defenders. Prestige is a metric based on Rating. It is an average of your highest Champs. It's a gauge to the average strength, whether Ally or Account. I don't care if Rags is your Top Champ or not. If he's the Top, you're still only as strong as what you're working with, and that is reflective of everything under him as well.

Markjv81 · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:

Markjv81 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Markjv81 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Cobs said:
Having prestige weighed as heavily as it is currently is creating bigger mismatches then before, point blank. Heres an example:
A man has a big house (prestige), surely he has exotic cars so he is challenged to a race by another man (war). The first guy replies, sorry i only own a prius i wouldnt be much of a race against your ferrari. But the second man insists and low and behold, the man with the prius loses the race. Just because he is rich and owns a big house does not mean he wants to race his prius against ferraris. Just because an allaince has high prestige doesnt mean they want to compete in war. Being competitive in one game mode shouldnt ruin another game mode.
If they don't want to compete in War, why are they running it?
You need to run AW to earn loyalty to pay for AQ. You cannot play high map AQ without playing AW, remove the loyalty costs from AQ or implement new ways to earn loyalty and can guarantee a lot of alliances stop running AW 100%.
You can earn Loyalty, win or lose.
Huh? You asked why are people running war if they don’t want to compete, I just told you why.
Yes, and I said if the issue was Loyalty, it shouldn't be. They get it no matter what. The comment was that people don't want to compete. War is a competition. Seasons are competitions. If you're entering, you need to either be prepared to compete, or not care and run the risk of losing. I don't condone overpowering other people who are trying to compete because you don't feel like putting in the effort at your level. (You in the general sense.)

You’re still implying that people should have to compete at the same level in AW as they do AQ, which is ridiculous, does that mean that everyone in master in AW should be forced to play map 7 5 days in AQ?

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Markjv81 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Markjv81 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Markjv81 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Cobs said:
Having prestige weighed as heavily as it is currently is creating bigger mismatches then before, point blank. Heres an example:
A man has a big house (prestige), surely he has exotic cars so he is challenged to a race by another man (war). The first guy replies, sorry i only own a prius i wouldnt be much of a race against your ferrari. But the second man insists and low and behold, the man with the prius loses the race. Just because he is rich and owns a big house does not mean he wants to race his prius against ferraris. Just because an allaince has high prestige doesnt mean they want to compete in war. Being competitive in one game mode shouldnt ruin another game mode.
If they don't want to compete in War, why are they running it?
You need to run AW to earn loyalty to pay for AQ. You cannot play high map AQ without playing AW, remove the loyalty costs from AQ or implement new ways to earn loyalty and can guarantee a lot of alliances stop running AW 100%.
You can earn Loyalty, win or lose.
Huh? You asked why are people running war if they don’t want to compete, I just told you why.
Yes, and I said if the issue was Loyalty, it shouldn't be. They get it no matter what. The comment was that people don't want to compete. War is a competition. Seasons are competitions. If you're entering, you need to either be prepared to compete, or not care and run the risk of losing. I don't condone overpowering other people who are trying to compete because you don't feel like putting in the effort at your level. (You in the general sense.)
You’re still implying that people should have to compete at the same level in AW as they do AQ, which is ridiculous, does that mean that everyone in master in AW should be forced to play map 7 5 days in AQ?

What? No. You're comparing the Map of AQ with a totally different system, and it seems like you're running on with my Prestige comments.
I've already outlined what my thoughts were.

LeNoirFaineant · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:

LeNoirFaineant said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Markjv81 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Cobs said:
Having prestige weighed as heavily as it is currently is creating bigger mismatches then before, point blank. Heres an example:
A man has a big house (prestige), surely he has exotic cars so he is challenged to a race by another man (war). The first guy replies, sorry i only own a prius i wouldnt be much of a race against your ferrari. But the second man insists and low and behold, the man with the prius loses the race. Just because he is rich and owns a big house does not mean he wants to race his prius against ferraris. Just because an allaince has high prestige doesnt mean they want to compete in war. Being competitive in one game mode shouldnt ruin another game mode.
If they don't want to compete in War, why are they running it?
You need to run AW to earn loyalty to pay for AQ. You cannot play high map AQ without playing AW, remove the loyalty costs from AQ or implement new ways to earn loyalty and can guarantee a lot of alliances stop running AW 100%.
You can earn Loyalty, win or lose.
Not enough by losing, but the point is that it's causing mismatches. Some teams are in higher brackets they don't belong in because they keep matching against lower alliances and not against others in their current tiers. Others are lower than they ought to be because they keep getting matched against master alliances.
I'm sorry, what's the argument there? That Masters Allies are coming up agaisnt lower Allies, or that Allies fought their way up there with less Rating? If they're earning their position based on the Matches they are given, presumably within range, then that's where they should be.

The argument is that mismatches both ways are creating problems. Group A has low prestige and are in Plat 1 because they don't fight other Plat 1 alliances. They keep getting matched with Plat 3 groups. Group B ought to be in Plat 1 but they are in Plat 3 because they have high prestige and keep matching with master groups. Now they are stuck with the lower multiplier and don't get to climb back because they aren't getting matched with other Plat 3 groups.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

LeNoirFaineant said:

GroundedWisdom said:

LeNoirFaineant said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Markjv81 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Cobs said:
Having prestige weighed as heavily as it is currently is creating bigger mismatches then before, point blank. Heres an example:
A man has a big house (prestige), surely he has exotic cars so he is challenged to a race by another man (war). The first guy replies, sorry i only own a prius i wouldnt be much of a race against your ferrari. But the second man insists and low and behold, the man with the prius loses the race. Just because he is rich and owns a big house does not mean he wants to race his prius against ferraris. Just because an allaince has high prestige doesnt mean they want to compete in war. Being competitive in one game mode shouldnt ruin another game mode.
If they don't want to compete in War, why are they running it?
You need to run AW to earn loyalty to pay for AQ. You cannot play high map AQ without playing AW, remove the loyalty costs from AQ or implement new ways to earn loyalty and can guarantee a lot of alliances stop running AW 100%.
You can earn Loyalty, win or lose.
Not enough by losing, but the point is that it's causing mismatches. Some teams are in higher brackets they don't belong in because they keep matching against lower alliances and not against others in their current tiers. Others are lower than they ought to be because they keep getting matched against master alliances.
I'm sorry, what's the argument there? That Masters Allies are coming up agaisnt lower Allies, or that Allies fought their way up there with less Rating? If they're earning their position based on the Matches they are given, presumably within range, then that's where they should be.
The argument is that mismatches both ways are creating problems. Group A is in Plat 1 with low prestige because they don't fight other Plat 1 alliances. They keep getting matched with Plat 3 groups. Group B ought to be in Plat 1 but they are in Plat 3 because they have high prestige and keep matching with master groups.

If they're similar in Prestige and running the same Maps, then there really isn't much unfairness in it. They either win or lose.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Andrewkole said:
What I was saying is if prestige is a factor this statement is true:

Ridding yourself of a poor AW defender or attacker that is one of your top 5 prestige champs benefits your alliance.

If everyone in an alliance gets rid of high prestige champs that don’t matter in war, they get better matchups. Not saying that is happening, but it’s fundamentally true. It shouldn’t be.. just like prestige should not matter as much in AQ. It is straight out silly. Arbitrary numbers given to certain champs to create a cash grab.

GroundedWisdom said:

Andrewkole said:
Prestige being a factor in war rating doesn’t make sense. I don’t care about AQ. I have to play it to get materials for AW. I have some high prestige champs I ranked up that aren’t great defenders.

This means AW focused alliances can sell non-factor high prestige champs just to get rid of them, lower their prestige, and get better AW matchups.

Top AW teams will have a MAXIMUM prestige limit for players in a high AW alliance. No higher than 9900 or something.

Bottom line, if you have Thor Rag maxed, and are competing in AW over AQ, you are better off selling him off.

GroundedWisdom said:
It actually works quite perfectly. It's not just a metric that determines Rewards. The Rewards and AQ strength you run is adjusted based on it because that's literally the metric they use to gauge the strength of your Ally. It's also not likely going to be manipualted by selling, nor could it be because we can't sell 5*s and 6*s. It's a rather appropriate solution.

Well we're going to have to disagree on Rags. I get Kills with him on All or Nothing, and I think he's underrated as an Attacker because people don't use him properly. Lol.
As for Prestige, I think people are misunderstanding what I'm saying. I didn't say high Presitge Champs are the best Defenders. Prestige is a metric based on Rating. It is an average of your highest Champs. It's a gauge to the average strength, whether Ally or Account. I don't care if Rags is your Top Champ or not. If he's the Top, you're still only as strong as what you're working with, and that is reflective of everything under him as well.

They're not arbitrary numbers, though. They're a carefully-placed metric that determines progress. Some may disagree because all they see it as is a mechanic to get better AQ Rewards. There are reasons for every metric in the game.

Robby199696 · May 2019

So if I have 10r5s and a prestige of 9400 I should get easier matches than someone with 4 r5s and a 9600 prestige rating? Cause that’s basically what is being said

Cobs · May 2019

Again, prestige has no bearing on peoples want or ability in war. Lenoir explained very well how this is creating even worse disparity. Luckily kabam will surely change it and then you can agree with us once they do

LeNoirFaineant · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:

LeNoirFaineant said:

GroundedWisdom said:

LeNoirFaineant said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Markjv81 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Cobs said:
Having prestige weighed as heavily as it is currently is creating bigger mismatches then before, point blank. Heres an example:
A man has a big house (prestige), surely he has exotic cars so he is challenged to a race by another man (war). The first guy replies, sorry i only own a prius i wouldnt be much of a race against your ferrari. But the second man insists and low and behold, the man with the prius loses the race. Just because he is rich and owns a big house does not mean he wants to race his prius against ferraris. Just because an allaince has high prestige doesnt mean they want to compete in war. Being competitive in one game mode shouldnt ruin another game mode.
If they don't want to compete in War, why are they running it?
You need to run AW to earn loyalty to pay for AQ. You cannot play high map AQ without playing AW, remove the loyalty costs from AQ or implement new ways to earn loyalty and can guarantee a lot of alliances stop running AW 100%.
You can earn Loyalty, win or lose.
Not enough by losing, but the point is that it's causing mismatches. Some teams are in higher brackets they don't belong in because they keep matching against lower alliances and not against others in their current tiers. Others are lower than they ought to be because they keep getting matched against master alliances.
I'm sorry, what's the argument there? That Masters Allies are coming up agaisnt lower Allies, or that Allies fought their way up there with less Rating? If they're earning their position based on the Matches they are given, presumably within range, then that's where they should be.
The argument is that mismatches both ways are creating problems. Group A is in Plat 1 with low prestige because they don't fight other Plat 1 alliances. They keep getting matched with Plat 3 groups. Group B ought to be in Plat 1 but they are in Plat 3 because they have high prestige and keep matching with master groups.
If they're similar in Prestige and running the same Maps, then there really isn't much unfairness in it. They either win or lose.

How is it not unfair for someone to get plat 1 rewards without having to fight other plat 1 alliances, or for someone to get plat 3 rewards without getting to fight other plat 3 groups? This ought to be obvious.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

I think people are confusing individual Prestige with overall Prestige. It's an internal metric that gauges the capabilities and strength of the Ally. PI is not arbitrary. It increases with Nodes. It's used in everything from the Arena to AQ. They're not just random numbers. When using averages, it shows a range that can give a pretty much concrete limit to capabilities. We're not talking about some Champs that can OP their way through content. We're talking about determining what strength you will plateau at based on the average of what you're bringing.

Robby199696 · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:
I think people are confusing individual Prestige with overall Prestige. It's an internal metric that gauges the capabilities and strength of the Ally. PI is not arbitrary. It increases with Nodes. It's used in everything from the Arena to AQ. They're not just random numbers. When using averages, it shows a range that can give a pretty much concrete limit to capabilities. We're not talking about some Champs that can OP their way through content. We're talking about determining what strength you will plateau at based on the average of what you're bringing.

Clearly you are confused. Prestige does not determine skill or usefulness of a champion. Half the high prestige champs are garbage in AW

Cobs · May 2019

Word, let me bring my thor rags and gold pool tk wreck all these war fights cause the metric says there the best lmfao. Prestige has had nothing to do with war for 3 years for a reason, suddenly it gets implemented and its been a train wreck. Not a coincidence.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

LeNoirFaineant said:

GroundedWisdom said:

LeNoirFaineant said:

GroundedWisdom said:

LeNoirFaineant said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Markjv81 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Cobs said:
Having prestige weighed as heavily as it is currently is creating bigger mismatches then before, point blank. Heres an example:
A man has a big house (prestige), surely he has exotic cars so he is challenged to a race by another man (war). The first guy replies, sorry i only own a prius i wouldnt be much of a race against your ferrari. But the second man insists and low and behold, the man with the prius loses the race. Just because he is rich and owns a big house does not mean he wants to race his prius against ferraris. Just because an allaince has high prestige doesnt mean they want to compete in war. Being competitive in one game mode shouldnt ruin another game mode.
If they don't want to compete in War, why are they running it?
You need to run AW to earn loyalty to pay for AQ. You cannot play high map AQ without playing AW, remove the loyalty costs from AQ or implement new ways to earn loyalty and can guarantee a lot of alliances stop running AW 100%.
You can earn Loyalty, win or lose.
Not enough by losing, but the point is that it's causing mismatches. Some teams are in higher brackets they don't belong in because they keep matching against lower alliances and not against others in their current tiers. Others are lower than they ought to be because they keep getting matched against master alliances.
I'm sorry, what's the argument there? That Masters Allies are coming up agaisnt lower Allies, or that Allies fought their way up there with less Rating? If they're earning their position based on the Matches they are given, presumably within range, then that's where they should be.
The argument is that mismatches both ways are creating problems. Group A is in Plat 1 with low prestige because they don't fight other Plat 1 alliances. They keep getting matched with Plat 3 groups. Group B ought to be in Plat 1 but they are in Plat 3 because they have high prestige and keep matching with master groups.
If they're similar in Prestige and running the same Maps, then there really isn't much unfairness in it. They either win or lose.
How is it not unfair for someone to get plat 1 rewards without having to fight other plat 1 alliances, or for someone to get plat 3 rewards without getting to fight other plat 3 groups? This ought to be obvious.

You don't win based on what other Allies are in your Tier. You win based on the Wars you play. That's how it's fair. I don't have to beat everyone in the system. That's impossible. I just have to win the Matches I'm in. The system has been so linear and stagnant for so long that people are convinced some Allies own their spot. It should be based on performance.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Cobs said:
Word, let me bring my thor rags and gold pool tk wreck all these war fights cause the metric says there the best lmfao. Prestige has had nothing to do with war for 3 years for a reason, suddenly it gets implemented and its been a train wreck. Not a coincidence.

It's like you didn't even read what I said. Lol. I didn't say using the highest Champs will win Wars automatically. I said overall Preatige is a gauge to capability limits.

LeNoirFaineant · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:
I think people are confusing individual Prestige with overall Prestige. It's an internal metric that gauges the capabilities and strength of the Ally. PI is not arbitrary. It increases with Nodes. It's used in everything from the Arena to AQ. They're not just random numbers. When using averages, it shows a range that can give a pretty much concrete limit to capabilities. We're not talking about some Champs that can OP their way through content. We're talking about determining what strength you will plateau at based on the average of what you're bringing.

Don't know what PI has to do with the discussion. Prestige is only the top 5 champs and alliance prestige is made up of individual prestige. If an alliance focuses on AQ and everyone ranks 5 high prestige champs the alliance will have high prestige. They will get destroyed by a master alliance with 12 r5 champs including god tier defenders and similar prestige.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Drooped2 said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I think people are confusing individual Prestige with overall Prestige. It's an internal metric that gauges the capabilities and strength of the Ally. PI is not arbitrary. It increases with Nodes. It's used in everything from the Arena to AQ. They're not just random numbers. When using averages, it shows a range that can give a pretty much concrete limit to capabilities. We're not talking about some Champs that can OP their way through content. We're talking about determining what strength you will plateau at based on the average of what you're bringing.
Then prestige needs to factor top 11 champs
Aq and aw teams.
Top 5 is way unbalancing war. I have 5 r5s I'm ballpark 9900.

Now let's take this guy
Has 12 or more r5s and is a top 1 allainces in war his prestige is max 10500 ish.. not that far off guess were equal in war

Not at all talking about matching individuals against individuals based on Prestige, but answer this. Prestige is a measure of the highest Champs you have. When you go into a War, do you use your lowest?

Robby199696 · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:

Drooped2 said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I think people are confusing individual Prestige with overall Prestige. It's an internal metric that gauges the capabilities and strength of the Ally. PI is not arbitrary. It increases with Nodes. It's used in everything from the Arena to AQ. They're not just random numbers. When using averages, it shows a range that can give a pretty much concrete limit to capabilities. We're not talking about some Champs that can OP their way through content. We're talking about determining what strength you will plateau at based on the average of what you're bringing.
Then prestige needs to factor top 11 champs
Aq and aw teams.
Top 5 is way unbalancing war. I have 5 r5s I'm ballpark 9900.

Now let's take this guy
Has 12 or more r5s and is a top 1 allainces in war his prestige is max 10500 ish.. not that far off guess were equal in war
Not at all talking about matching individuals against individuals based on Prestige, but answer this. Prestige is a measure of the highest Champs you have. When you go into a War, do you use your lowest?

Who the heck is gonna use Thor ragnarok in high tier war. He’s a trash attacker but has high prestige

Cobs · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:

Cobs said:
Word, let me bring my thor rags and gold pool tk wreck all these war fights cause the metric says there the best lmfao. Prestige has had nothing to do with war for 3 years for a reason, suddenly it gets implemented and its been a train wreck. Not a coincidence.
It's like you didn't even read what I said. Lol. I didn't say using the highest Champs will win Wars automatically. I said overall Preatige is a gauge to capability limits.

No, its me explaining why its not a measurement for anything war related and a terrible factor for war matches. Its literally an arbitrary number assigned to champs, most people have ranked up specific champs for AQ, not to tell kabam where we want to be in war

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Look, this is getting tiring so the bottom line is, this is a result of people trying to manipulate the system. When you have it to the extreme that it's been, something is needed. I'm not going to change my view and say they should remove it and let people Tank and pile drive others and shift the Matchmaking themselves. So, unless they completely remove Seasons from Off, this is what I'm in favor of. As with most things that have to be regulated drastically, we've done it to ourselves. Not us personally, perhaps. Either way, the system will always change to move towards more fair scenarios.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Cobs said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Cobs said:
Word, let me bring my thor rags and gold pool tk wreck all these war fights cause the metric says there the best lmfao. Prestige has had nothing to do with war for 3 years for a reason, suddenly it gets implemented and its been a train wreck. Not a coincidence.
It's like you didn't even read what I said. Lol. I didn't say using the highest Champs will win Wars automatically. I said overall Preatige is a gauge to capability limits.
No, its me explaining why its not a measurement for anything war related and a terrible factor for war matches. Its literally an arbitrary number assigned to champs, most people have ranked up specific champs for AQ, not to tell kabam where we want to be in war

It's a measurment of many things, whether you realize it or not.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Robby199696 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Drooped2 said:

GroundedWisdom said:
I think people are confusing individual Prestige with overall Prestige. It's an internal metric that gauges the capabilities and strength of the Ally. PI is not arbitrary. It increases with Nodes. It's used in everything from the Arena to AQ. They're not just random numbers. When using averages, it shows a range that can give a pretty much concrete limit to capabilities. We're not talking about some Champs that can OP their way through content. We're talking about determining what strength you will plateau at based on the average of what you're bringing.
Then prestige needs to factor top 11 champs
Aq and aw teams.
Top 5 is way unbalancing war. I have 5 r5s I'm ballpark 9900.

Now let's take this guy
Has 12 or more r5s and is a top 1 allainces in war his prestige is max 10500 ish.. not that far off guess were equal in war
Not at all talking about matching individuals against individuals based on Prestige, but answer this. Prestige is a measure of the highest Champs you have. When you go into a War, do you use your lowest?
Who the heck is gonna use Thor ragnarok in high tier war. He’s a trash attacker but has high prestige

Did I say use Rags? No. I said people use their higher Champs. They don't use the mid-Ranked ones they have. They put up the highest-Ranked Champs that are the best Defenders.

Kabam...AW match making frustrations boiling over

Comments