My problem with the Arena ...

Stenun

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that each time someone loses an Arena match they fall an average of X places.

If you are attacked 100 times and lose 6, you fall 6X places.
If someone is attacked just 5 times and loses them all, they fall 5X places.

But hang on, you've got a 94% success rate compared to the other person's 0% success rate but you've fallen further down the ladder.

I can't help feeling that this is rather unfair.

Anyone agree with me or am I alone in this?

freshprince19888

You are totally alone. Anyone who wins on defense 94% of the time would be ecstatic. Also having that many people losing on offense isn't really realistic. They'd be attacking someone else.

NicWester

It’s a deliberately simple system. The alternatives are prone to abuse. Rewards for defense, for example, would be nice—but then folks would just collude to spread those defense rewards around.

DarkstarSunrise

I would like to see defensive counters added like they did with TW, always curious if people have as much bad rng against me as I have time to time.

Kai_Mulai

There is a system in place to address this, at least partially. When you’re rank 1000, you can be attacked by hundreds of players. But when you’re ranked 100, that number drops to a dozen, and if you’re ranked 10, you can only be attacked by 4 or 5 players. So increasing arena rank also reduces the number of players who can attack you. So the higher in rank you get, the fewer times you get attacked. And if you have a team that has a 94% defensive success rate, it’s going to rise in rank much faster than other teams that don’t hold as well. So you will gradually get to a point where only a handful of players can attack you, at which point you’ll only be losing a couple defensive battles a day, and thus you’ll be better off than the player that can climb to #1 on offense, but loses on defense so much it’s a long climb each day.

ExarTheKun

Winner takes all. Loser gets nothing. Easiest way to run a leaderboard.

freshprince19888

Great idea. There would be no collusion if 2nd place got nothing.

FailingCrab

Stenun wrote: »

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that each time someone loses an Arena match they fall an average of X places.

If you are attacked 100 times and lose 6, you fall 6X places.
If someone is attacked just 5 times and loses them all, they fall 5X places.

But hang on, you've got a 94% success rate compared to the other person's 0% success rate but you've fallen further down the ladder.

I can't help feeling that this is rather unfair.

Anyone agree with me or am I alone in this?

This is largely a theoretical problem and I can't see it being a real-world issue. The only reason you'd be attacked 20x more frequently than someone else is if you squad were seen as an easier target than theirs, in which case you wouldn't have a higher win rate.

Stenun

FailingCrab wrote: »

This is largely a theoretical problem and I can't see it being a real-world issue. The only reason you'd be attacked 20x more frequently than someone else is if you squad were seen as an easier target than theirs, in which case you wouldn't have a higher win rate.

I picked those numbers to illustrate the problem more easily. Even at smaller numbers, the problem still exists.
It might be less of an "issue" if someone wins 2 and loses 1 as opposed to someone just losing 1; but there is still a problem.

My numbers were hypothetical to make a point - not a precise example.

Empiric1

This makes sense though, you're attacked more by having a weaker squad.

Okay let's say for example.

Player 1 has inferior mods but still wants to climb so he has a squad like: Palpatine (L), Zolo, Vader, DN and Sion, this player can probably beat any mirror on offense because zolo stuns enemy vader, DN goes and its gg.

Player 2 is smart, he plays 4 battles and then on the 5th battle he changes his team,let's say to Palpatine, DN, Sion, Sith Trooper and Thrawn (or Vader), this team is much harder to beat on offense so if player 3 sees both these teams around the same rank, he's going to attack Player 1 instead as player 1 has no defense and will drop really fast.

Working as intended, build a stronger squad if you don't want to drop as much

Stenun

If someone wins 94% of their fights - as per my original example - then they DO have a strong squad! They're only beaten by 6% of their attackers. The second player is beaten by ALL of their attackers because they have a weaker squad but just happen to be attacked less.

Kyno

If a people attack you 100 times and cant win, but keep trying..... your shard may not be so bright. Stronger opponents get skipped over all the time, most people would take 2 guaranteed wins to get to a better position than play the odds of will I win once in 3 attacks against Y player.

Not to mention that at 5 mins a battle, you would have dropped 6X positions over 8 hours vs the other person dropping that far in 30 mins. If you get dropped by 5 battles in 1 hour, over that same 8 hour period you are going to drop more.