[Dev Post] Matchmaking clarification post: 3/15

Replies

  • This is awful ...what about the amount of squads needed? You folks avoid all but 1 question.
  • Territory Wars is abysmal with the increased squad requirements and if you think I'm alone comb through the posts. It's a joke...it's not even fun. You took a broken thing that we suffered through for zetas and made it not worth the suffering. I'm going to fall behind because I would rather do that than set 4 fleet squads because all my ships are 7*...who can clear ships now? The TI and WW of the world? This is supposed to be fun and you have made it miserable.

    You keep saying we are listening. Well please go see anotolaryngologist because your hearing isn't so good.
  • Nikoms565
    11959 posts Member
    @CG_RyDiggs Thank you for all the communication and being as detailed as possible. It truly is appreciated.
    In game name: Lucas Gregory - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • Neo2551
    1824 posts Member
    @CG_RyDiggs

    Can you correct me if I misunderstood: is it possible that a guild with 50 players with each having a single team at G12 with 2 zetas for each toon, but nothing else (no other G12, G11), be matches against a guild full of whales, with 50 G12 toons, fully zetaed?

    From what we read, you only consider the strongest squad (so 5 toons). I hope the scenario I described is impossible, but it is unclear.
  • Sonido
    81 posts Member
    edited March 2018
    seriously you think player with 1kk gp and 100k top squad = player with 3,5kk gp and 100k top squad ?
    how can matchmaking be worse?
  • Neo2551 wrote: »
    @CG_RyDiggs

    Can you correct me if I misunderstood: is it possible that a guild with 50 players with each having a single team at G12 with 2 zetas for each toon, but nothing else (no other G12, G11), be matches against a guild full of whales, with 50 G12 toons, fully zetaed?

    From what we read, you only consider the strongest squad (so 5 toons). I hope the scenario I described is impossible, but it is unclear.

    The way I read the explanation, your interpretation may not be 100% accurate. Only 97.5% imo. I don't think there's another conceivable (not logical) explanation how an algorithm can produce such results.

    Let's hope they fixed it. But from the explanation given, I'm not sure they totally understood the real problem: Even if 2 guilds are mirror images for the 100 strongest teams in their guild rosters, it'll still not be a fair match-up if one guild has a third row of Arena worthy teams on the bench and the other doesn't.
  • I find this description and execution to be a fair and easy approach. Nothing's perfect. We lost out on our fair opportunity for a good fight a couple times, and we stomped people a couple times. It happens. As far as this issue goes, well done.
  • I find this description and execution to be a fair and easy approach. Nothing's perfect. We lost out on our fair opportunity for a good fight a couple times, and we stomped people a couple times. It happens. As far as this issue goes, well done.

    Did you have fun either way? We didn't.
  • What about number of squads we ma have to put in defense, i think last 2 times my guild had to put 35 squads in each territory and that way too much specialy for ships territories.
  • warmonkey
    1314 posts Member
    edited March 2018
    So a jrey team with zero speed vs one with plus 100 extra speed on each toon is weighted the same? A g9-11 team with great speed can easily beat a g12 team that is slow in a mirror match. Those two teams aren't remotely comparable.

    Also 35 teams is way too much, no-one wants to fight on offense anymore. I dare you guys to try TW and try to explain how throwing 12 teams against one meta team is fun. Make a video and show us your reaction when you bring your bounty hunters or imperial troopers vs a palp team and get zero turns. Please explain where the fun factor has been implemented in a mode where you constantly get beat on offense?

    Ever play a game where you log in and spend hours of your time to constantly get your butt kick? Ya, me neither cause I'm not a sadist.

    Edit: BTW we have been winning all our matches since the first couple ones. Not sure how much longer we will want to grind like this especially with this new raid that most don't seem to want to even auto now.
  • I thought 35 teams was required from only the top tier. To expand that to lower tiers is simply too much. TW then becomes very boring as both guilds sit there and stare at each other's meta teams. It becomes very boring. Please change this.
  • CG_RyDiggs wrote: »
    Jed_Eye wrote: »
    CG_RyDiggs wrote: »
    kello_511 wrote: »
    CG_RyDiggs wrote: »
    Ely wrote: »
    The 35 teams per territory, is that what we all just automatically get now if 50 members join?

    I'm not sure what your asking. My apologies.

    We were under the impression that the additional teams (changed from 25 to 30 or even 35 per zone) was intended for guilds at the highest tier (160M + GP). However it seems that the change affected a much larger spectrum of guilds. Was this intended?

    Ahh, thank you.
    The 'deepening' of defensive squad assignments was for upper tiers. Not just the top reward tier.

    Remember, reward tier has NOTHING to do with matchmaking. We have a bandwidth of upper tiers of matchmaking that have the deep defenses. It has nothing to do with rewards tiers.

    Can you give us the criteria for these additional teams. And what the tires are?

    Unfortunately, I can't because it's a band of the matchmaking algorithm. However it is definitely UPPER guilds of the game, where they would be expected able to field deep defenses. Again, matchmaking does NOT have tiers.

    Matchmaking has matches.
    Rewards have tiers.

    I hope that clarifies :)

    You cannot answer because you don’t know what constitutes an UPPER tier, or you’re not sure if the algorithm would screw up again.

    Can you atleast give us a decent answer if 140+ Million GP is considered upper tier...?

    Hopefully you’ll answer this as part of being “transparent”
  • @CG_RyDiggs for clarification, so we all are on the same page... when is an individual's gp locked? When they join the territory war, or when the territory war goes from the join phase to the defense phase?
  • @CG_RyDiggs Thanks for the clarification. However, can you please clarify some additional points please?

    1. Is the revised match-making algorithm simply a tweaking of the existing algorithm, or a new one?
    I assume that the change implemented last week was a tweak of the algorithm, producing results wholly different to intended. Therefore, please forgive me for not getting excited right now for this announcement. Having been on the receiving end of mismatches on a number of occasions since TW was launched, it may take a few wars for me to feel comfortable that this new system is working

    2.You state that the number of defensive teams to set is a band of the matchmaking algorithm. Can you confirm whether this aspect was WAI from the last round of TW?
    Essentially, I would like to know whether my guild can expect to set 35 defences per zone for the foreseeable future, or whether this was not working as designed.

    3. Can you clarify why you can’t share information that established how many defences need to be set?
    This is a key component of TW strategy. How are guilds supposed to prepare adequately if we don’t even have a rough idea how many teams we need to set? Why so much secrecy? If we don’t know what this is based on, how can we flag any potential bugs to you?

    Thanks
  • @CG_RyDiggs . I also have a recommendation regarding reward tiers that I would be grateful if you could share with the TW design team.

    The current system just rewards guilds based on their size; essentially the strongest guilds will get the better rewards. But it doesn’t take into account the fundamental nature of this game mode – it is a war against two guilds. So surely they should be entitled to the same reward tier for a win or loss? My recommendation is that reward tiers are based on the combined active GP of both participants. This will still be tiered to give better rewards to the stronger guilds; but it actually brings the difficulty of the war itself into the reward structure.

    Severe mismatches that the game provided last round can almost be seen as a positive for the underdog guild (e.g. they might get an extra zeta out of a thumping loss!)

    Furthermore, the combined active GP could also provide the benchmark for number of defensive teams to set (e.g. 35 teams per zone if combined active GP is above 300m). This would be a lot more transparent for the player base to understand
  • I hope this additional squads thing will be reconsidered. With TB and raids, we need to farm squads that are for the purposes of PvE, and with this algorithm, it may seem like we have extra PvP squads for TW when they are completely ineffective. The requirements of TB are completely opposite of TW. For TB, our rosters have to be widened (more stars), while TW is better for deeper rosters (fewer characters, more gear and mods).

    With all the other changes to how battles are scored, the issue of ties should be completely resolved without the need for additional squads. In addition, having such a variable requirement is troublesome for guilds, who need to advise members on how many squads each need to contribute, especially when it is not an equal amount for all (i.e. in the same guild, some having to deploy 5 and others 4). The issue of the scarcity of ships should also be considered, as having 1 fleet on defence is pretty much half of all the ships the average player has.

    Also related to the variable number of squads needed, it is also unfair that such extra effort does not result in a proportional increase in rewards. "Upper tier guilds" (the definition which is still unknown to us) are penalised for having to do more work for the same rewards.
  • Notnukin
    83 posts Member
    edited March 2018
    @CG_RyDiggs over a week ago we were told you were looking into the data to provide us information on the problems. Here is where we stand...you answer 1 question. The word problems is plural and indicates more than 1. What was done to walk back needing all these new squads? How do you think it plausible to require up to 70 fleets?

    Many of us are struggling to gather participation in the TW because we require you put up strong defensive teams and then have to go get the META teams with a butter knife. And here us the kicker...you put up weaker teams and people complain you didn't try. Many things seem to be happening...you seem to be promising changes and indicating them to occur at certain levels and then putting these changes in game at levels other then what was specified. This is due to a few things imo...the person communicating with the community isn't doing so clearly or with the proper information. Another possibility is you have a desired outcome but it's taking too long to code and you are running out of time due to hard release deadlines you set internally. I also understand the backlash from us when you don't meet your dates.

    I can candidly say I would prefer the less tortured route of you saying hey we promised this on 2/28 and it's not ready...and you say we are now aiming for 3/15 but given what we are trying to do we are unsure if that is reachable. Boom we know have a new date to move to and you can inform us if your new goal was attainable.

    But you have always chosen to release bad content and expect us to always say thank you sir may I have another.
  • Sonido
    81 posts Member
    so easy to make good matchmaking

    1. check active gp and match +\-10% guilds
    2. summarize all active players arena ranks and make correction to active gp matching using this
  • Entus
    161 posts Member
    What I will say for sure is, active players seem to take precedent. We almost never run 50, and anytime we do not run 50, whether its 44 or 48, we always face a team with the exact number of players. So im guessing this is a variable within the algorithm and is probably the first thing the algorithm looks at.
  • I understand that you can’t divulge the matchmaking algorithm, can you tell us why though? I’m not trying to be confrontational, just curious
  • Entus
    161 posts Member
    CG_RyDiggs wrote: »
    Jed_Eye wrote: »
    CG_RyDiggs wrote: »
    Jed_Eye wrote: »
    CG_RyDiggs wrote: »
    kello_511 wrote: »
    CG_RyDiggs wrote: »
    Ely wrote: »
    The 35 teams per territory, is that what we all just automatically get now if 50 members join?

    I'm not sure what your asking. My apologies.

    We were under the impression that the additional teams (changed from 25 to 30 or even 35 per zone) was intended for guilds at the highest tier (160M + GP). However it seems that the change affected a much larger spectrum of guilds. Was this intended?

    Ahh, thank you.
    The 'deepening' of defensive squad assignments was for upper tiers. Not just the top reward tier.

    Remember, reward tier has NOTHING to do with matchmaking. We have a bandwidth of upper tiers of matchmaking that have the deep defenses. It has nothing to do with rewards tiers.

    Can you give us the criteria for these additional teams. And what the tires are?

    Unfortunately, I can't because it's a band of the matchmaking algorithm. However it is definitely UPPER guilds of the game, where they would be expected able to field deep defenses. Again, matchmaking does NOT have tiers.

    Matchmaking has matches.
    Rewards have tiers.

    I hope that clarifies :)

    What is you definition of upper guilds? That clarification may be helpful.

    Last two tws my guild had 24 and then 29. This new with raid show us I'm not in a top guild.

    Again, unfortunately, I can't give you a number that would not divulge the algorithm. :(
    CG_RyDiggs wrote: »
    Thank you all for the great FAQ questions. I answered what I could, but we are going to have some parts that are 'mystery'. I hope it still helps!

    I'm heading out for the night. I'll check in again tomorrow.

    TTYL!


    RT

    I understand that you want to keep your secret sauce a secret to avoid players manipulating and gaming the system.

    I get it, I really do!

    But having our defensive squad needs feel so random is decidedly unfun, and makes my job as a guild officer hell. As I’ve said previously, I like Territory Wars. A lot. And the original design, where we could reliably expect guild members to need to place 4 squads and 1 fleet, with the occasional 5 and 3 or whatever allowed us to set an expectation, and a plan, for both defense and offense, which we could consistently execute.

    Under the new system, I no longer enjoy Territory Wars. Having to expect an extra defense squad from everyone has turned a fun game mode with lots of cheerleading and planning into three days where I have to yell at my friends constantly to do more unfun things (setting all of their strong characters on defense) and then to not have any resources availiable to do fun things.

    We’re a 100m GP guild. 4 Defensive squads was just about perfect for our average players. They could reliably set one top tier, arena quality team, two more pretty good teams, and one that maybe wasn’t so great, while still having 1-2 great offensive teams, and maybe two or three gimmick squads that can punch above their weight class like a Nute Gunray setup.

    Placing 5 defensive squads has completely broken our ability to do that. Now we place 5 each on defense, and are left with nothing in the tank to take out the wall of g12 arena teams that our opponent has placed to match ours. TW has ceased to become a game of active play, and hasn’t instead become 24 hours of hounding people to place defenses, followed by 24 hours of stressed out watching how they hold, yelling at my friends to try impossible and unfun matchups because they have nothing to use, and watching our opponents do the same.

    And this is all compounded by the fact that, from TW to TW, I have no idea which version we’ll get to play.

    Keep the matchmaking as secret as you need to. But we really need some transparency on the squad placement formula.

    I think its more fun this way, you nust need to think outside the box. Just because we have more defensive slots to use, doesnt mean you need to use them. Our guild has taken this new attribute and have used it to our advantage. We have 11 wins and many of those were due to our strategy, and had nothing to do with gp. Weve beaten teams that had 25mil more gp.

    I wont reveal our strategy, but try to think differently. Do you really need a full defensive setup? Sure you lose some points at the outset, but the advsntages can far outweigh that. misdirection is key.
  • Huge issue I keep seeing but have seen no response, Why do the rewards change in regards to GP? Why are the rewards not the exact same for all winners and all losers? All this is doing is making the stronger guilds even stronger, and taking the lower guilds that much longer to catch up, if that would even be possible. It makes no sense to have tier based rewards, it should be the same across the board. If you are the winning guild, you get this, if you lose you get this. Make it fair across the board! If matchmaking is on similar guilds, rewards should be the same for every guild that wins. It's very discouraging to see the higher guild raking in rewards, when my guild is putting in the same amount of time and effort for the Win. Can you please address this, and hopefully change it? You will have alot more satisfied customers who grind daily to be as good as they can get. Thank you for you input!!
    SaintJames
  • Huge issue I keep seeing but have seen no response, Why do the rewards change in regards to GP? Why are the rewards not the exact same for all winners and all losers? All this is doing is making the stronger guilds even stronger, and taking the lower guilds that much longer to catch up, if that would even be possible. It makes no sense to have tier based rewards, it should be the same across the board. If you are the winning guild, you get this, if you lose you get this. Make it fair across the board! If matchmaking is on similar guilds, rewards should be the same for every guild that wins. It's very discouraging to see the higher guilds raking in rewards, when my guild is putting in the same amount of time and effort for the Win. Can you please address this, and hopefully change it? You will have alot more satisfied customers who grind daily to be as good as they can get. Thank you for you input!!
    SaintJames
  • SSB
    63 posts Member
    CG_RyDiggs wrote: »
    Thank you all for the great FAQ questions. I answered what I could, but we are going to have some parts that are 'mystery'. I hope it still helps!

    I'm heading out for the night. I'll check in again tomorrow.

    TTYL!


    RT

    Thanks for the Q&A and answering basic questions for the update, I really liked this format
  • Spang
    269 posts Member
    @CG_RyDiggs
    Were you attended a PR course on that ominous out-of-office Friday when you announced the Sith raid changes? :smile:
    Much much better tone and style you're using now than previously. Great improvement in communication in general. Congrats!
  • Well for people looking for transparency, here yah go!
  • I've never been so impressed by the devs here. I really hope this level of interaction with the community continues.
  • @CG_RyDiggs
    I love TW.
    I love this game.
    I hate the matchmaking system.
    At least now i know why; it's theologically flawed beyond repair.
    The idea of matching guilds based on their best teams is like setting up a chess board and taking all the pawns from one player, and calling it even, just because their good pieces are identical. It's just plain incorrect.
    The problem is 2 fold:
    A: it actually penalizes guilds for encouraging players to grow GP intelligently instead of just maxing it out as they please.
    B: yeah, all those 6-9k toons may not seem useful, but if you throw waves of them at the opponent, they can be The winning difference; and an unfair advantage in a landslide matchup.
    Oh, and 2 guilds face to face with different rewards for the same contest is half baked at best. At the very least, the reward tiers should be REVERSED when one guild is overmatched, giving the smaller guild a big reward for pulling an upset, and the bigger guild a slightly lesser reward for doing what they should.
    I know you're here to make dollars, not sense...
    But work with us,

    Signed,
    Your loyal players.
Sign In or Register to comment.