I'm curious if tier7 will fix the siege tanking problem.

I also think CVC matching making for PR should be based soley on previous PR scores, not the non-PR weeks.

Yes, I think the siege update hints at addressing the tanking problem. 

As for cvc, I'm convinced the bean counters and analysts think it's maximizing spend.  Otherwise it would have changed by now.

As for live matchmaking... i think my assertion that 95% (minimum) of battles fall in a reasonable range of seasonal rating.  Polling in my cluster discord leans towards 1 bad matchup every 3 days or so.  These are people doing 10 or 15 per day.

So the only argument for a problem is that other factors should be included.  The only reasonable suggestion I've seen is that the season should start with staggered scores based on prior finish to separate out the big dogs from the get go.  I think this is fair to all, but really will have no significant impact after the first few days.  That said, those differences could be enough to snag an extra reward or two for many. 

The only other viable solution imo, is to split gold into two brackets for seasons with the lower having worse rewards.  This would cause more uproar though, as fair matchmaking isn't the real issue.  Obtaining pvp rewards without putting effort into pvp is the objective. 

i

Random screenshot from classic today.  This is probably a "late game" account in the 50th percentile? 75th? Idk tbh.  But if you think someone like this should be maxing live arena Rewards... and I've seen full clans of 90% this in last 4 sieges.

I'm not sure what your point is about this one.

Could you elaborate, please?

It supports both your claim that accounts like ours are way better than most battling in Live Seasons and my assertion that matching is "fair".

I concede we have clear differences in what is fair lol.  My point is that if we are all in one big group (as currently designed) going for the same rewards then the LoE to get those should scale accordingly from "level":

1. Account above, non pvp level 100.  Will have win rate of 35% to 40% or so.

2. Xxx

3. Xxx

5. Me (win rate 60%)  10 to 15 battles per day

6. Next 1000 to 2000? Only need 10

7. Top 100 to 200 (irrelevant lol)

I think to get top rewards at 50% win rate would require 15 battles (10 gems per day) = 45pts

20 @ 45% = 51 pts/day

20 @ 40% = 36 pts/day (not enough)

I doubt anyone under 50% wants to do more than battles 😆 especially with slow bots...

Splitting into two groups (based on prior season? Total live rating?), assuming less rewards in easy groups would be terrible for me but balance the competition significantly. 

Polling in your cluster, who are in the top 100 clans, who consist of entirely end-game account spenders? Gosh, well that's a prefectly representative sampling. :P

I'm not really sure how else to say it: Having 5 matches where you get brutally stomped and having 5 matches where the other guy gets brutally stomped isn't good matchmaking, even though the win/loss trends towards 50/50

For most players who don't have end-game accounts with multiple +4 6* blessed champs, they aren't trying to get pvp rewards without effort. They don't *care* about the pvp rewards, they don't want to do it in the first place. But opting out means not being able to complete the daily assignments; means losing out on 180 energy per day

You've actually hit on a good idea by trying to make the opposite point though. Try the carrot instead of the stick: If every live arena LOSS still gave some area bonus medals, say 10% of a win, you'd probably see participation go up.

Oh, and in the interest of accuracy, a minor update since my post from the other day: 1 person in my cluster has pulled 3 mythics, one has an astounding 4.

Also, a day or two after I did my poll, ONE guy said he enjoys live arena. so that changes the total to 1 out of ~120 instead of 0

My cluster has many that despise live arena and have same invalid complaints :)

My polling was just to validate that the seasonal rating and matchmaking is WAI, many in my cluster don't like it.  The pvp enthusiasts don't care one way or the other.

Conflating the seasonal rewards with just doing the daily win one seems to be where we are at? I mean with bot wins u can get 3 of 10 and be done quickly.  Or just 1 win and move on.  I see the level of complaining escalating only due to the seasonal rewards obtainability.  If your 119 of 120 can't be bothered to get the 1 win for the daily... then that is why I posted that screenshot 😆. 

I think roughly 1/3 (40-50, based on informal polling) of us do the 'get one win". Maybe 5-10 of us use all 10 tokens every day.

My point is that other than one guy, no one LIKES it. And no one likes it because it's a bad design. I'm trying to come up with ways that would make more people enjoy it, even if just in small incremental baby steps.

And your argument all along seems to be that it's fine as because *enough* people who hate it will do it anyway, and therefore trying to get people to hate it less is a waste?

Am I wrong? Have I completely misunderstood your point?

Just to clarify, you're confirming that "many" others have the same complaint.

Then you're saying the PVP folk don't care and the others don't like it. That all leans to the situation being negative. What exactly is your issue here? What Change do you have the problem with? 

Seriously, if the two sides to this are one saying "There's a imbalance that needs to be addressed" and the other side is "There's no imbalance" what exactly are you afraid of happening here? The only possible outcome is matchmaking is more balanced and high win ratios aren't as easy... 

Also no change is permanent, if they try something and the majority of the playerbase is against it, they can try further adjustments... This is just getting very strange and the interpritation you seem to be having is "All casuals get maximum rewards for a couple battles a day" which NO ONE has suggested... but that's what you're hearing apparently.

Seriously, what exactly are you concerned will happen? Because the only thing that has been brought up is OTHER people getting rewards that don't take anything AWAY from you (and again, no one is suggesting the casual players "deserve" max rewards)

Reading back through, realizing QB wasn't quarterback lol.  I'd probably quick battle 5 a day myself, especially if you all 5 in one click. That would be awesome.  Same with classic against all 10 on page.

The main point I'm arguing with os the initial premise of "trequent mismatching".  This is just false.  I honest;y think we could find common ground if people would comcede <5% is npt frequent,

Ok, if nothing else, it should be fixed so that it is literally impossible for someone with X Seasonal points to be matched up with someone with 5X as many once you've got 100 points or so (and these are just arbitrary numbers to illustrate the point). Even if you don't think there's imbalance with with matchups in general (at a rate much higher than 5%) we should at least be able to agree there's zero reason a point disparity that large should be allowed. This is purely numbers after all, it would be a easy restriction.

The only people who would argue AGAINST that is folks with a ton of points that want shorter queue times so they get easier wins, so if we're talking about what people don't "Deserve" then that goes both ways. People can get easy wins in Classic and Tag all they want, LA is by definition supposed to be competitive and balanced.

I think the logic/code could be modified to reduce it no near zero with minimal impact on queue times.  I still don't see it worth the effort.  I'd much rather address real problems: afk, slow play, slow bots.

But I have no problems with the suggestion. 

Yes I will agree the AFK/Slow play is a big problem too. I do NOT understand why bots are so slow. Like... they're bots. It should be near instant picks and turns... but maybe that's because I grew up playing against bots in chess

I think this thread gonna die... up next FW hard mode complaining  😀 ....

Should we guess what top complaint will be, other than "too hard"?

I'm gonna go with some trial not counting "properly" for 3 stars 

One of my clanmates has the revival fw key thing ready to go, I am actually glad that I do not.

Since I believe it requires ALL FW to be completed and Lydia to be obtained to get access to FW Hard, the biggest complaint is going to be from players that can't do it. I might be wrong about the Lydia thing and maybe they just need all the FW stages cleared regardless of Stars, but if that is the requirement then that is gonna cause the biggest uproar.

If that happens, my next prediction is the backlash will lead to a change where you can do FW Hard for ONLY the Factions you've gotten full stars on. That way the complainers will get some access to the new rewards and glyphs.

Other than that, top complaint is gonna be "OMG Power gap widening because Super Awesome Accounts have the new leggo glyphs and we can't get them"

i

Bot I fought just now. 5* Karnage, 5* Taras

At least they weren't all empowered

Ban marichka ftw? 

i

Just lost to a bot, banned a 6* +2 Arbais, shoulda banned the Nais insted