Territory War Matchmaker

Replies

  • 9islc6tvv355.jpeg
    Here is our most recent match up. We had 4 sit out due to real life, bringing our Joined GP to 345M. I'm fairly sure they did not have more than 4-5 sit, because the teams set were 37 per zone.
  • FidoElite wrote: »
    FidoElite wrote: »
    So it’s quite normal for 50 strong guild that says it’s TW focused to drop 10 players ?

    The reality is - 40-42 players seems to be an optimum where you go up against a guild with up to 50 players and funnily enough the guild with the fewer players has double or treble the GL count

    So if your opponent goes in with 40-42 they’re definitely sandbagging, but when you go in with 44 it’s definitely not sandbagging?

    I do agree though, matchmaking seems worse now than it was before

    Sandbagging is a blunt and derogatory term really aimed at describing guilds that actively encourage or plan by design to artificially lower their registered players to seek a more favourable match making outcome. However, regardless planned or not - the matchmaking system still favours placing higher GP guilds with fewer registered players against lower GP guilds with more registered players. More worryingly, the match making system continues to ignore the superiority and performance benefits of GL based squads and fleets relative to non GL squads and fleets - instead continuing to treat them as GP numbers of comparable quality.
    I agree that the matchmaking is poor, irrespective of whether or not the guild entering with fewer players is doing so deliberately or not. I merely wanted to point out the irony of your statement that your guild going in with 44 was absolutely NOT sandbagging, when previously you've stated that guilds going in with 40-42 definitely ARE sandbagging. Intent is irrelevant to the argument and people should stop talking about it.

    I don't agree about GLs though. This argument has been in existence since Traya arrived in the game and has persisted with each new meta defining character / team. If a guild is fairly matched by active number of players and GP, I personally do not think that number of GLs should be considered. If there's a huge disparity in number of GLs when the # of players and active GP are equal, that reflects on some poor roster construction by the weaker guild and I don't think they should be cossetted and matched only with guilds who have made similarly poor decisions.

    I know what you were saying - I chose not to discuss the ironic value in this thread - however, for completeness I acknowledge your observation and agree - it is ironic - however unintentional the situation was it was mimicking a planned/designed sandbagging situation. My point was that the match making system still created a very unfair and unbalanced match up. So my question to you is if it’s not GL imbalance - yet you feel the match making is poor - in what way do you think it can be improved?
  • FidoElite wrote: »
    FidoElite wrote: »
    FidoElite wrote: »
    So it’s quite normal for 50 strong guild that says it’s TW focused to drop 10 players ?

    The reality is - 40-42 players seems to be an optimum where you go up against a guild with up to 50 players and funnily enough the guild with the fewer players has double or treble the GL count

    So if your opponent goes in with 40-42 they’re definitely sandbagging, but when you go in with 44 it’s definitely not sandbagging?

    I do agree though, matchmaking seems worse now than it was before

    Sandbagging is a blunt and derogatory term really aimed at describing guilds that actively encourage or plan by design to artificially lower their registered players to seek a more favourable match making outcome. However, regardless planned or not - the matchmaking system still favours placing higher GP guilds with fewer registered players against lower GP guilds with more registered players. More worryingly, the match making system continues to ignore the superiority and performance benefits of GL based squads and fleets relative to non GL squads and fleets - instead continuing to treat them as GP numbers of comparable quality.
    I agree that the matchmaking is poor, irrespective of whether or not the guild entering with fewer players is doing so deliberately or not. I merely wanted to point out the irony of your statement that your guild going in with 44 was absolutely NOT sandbagging, when previously you've stated that guilds going in with 40-42 definitely ARE sandbagging. Intent is irrelevant to the argument and people should stop talking about it.

    I don't agree about GLs though. This argument has been in existence since Traya arrived in the game and has persisted with each new meta defining character / team. If a guild is fairly matched by active number of players and GP, I personally do not think that number of GLs should be considered. If there's a huge disparity in number of GLs when the # of players and active GP are equal, that reflects on some poor roster construction by the weaker guild and I don't think they should be cossetted and matched only with guilds who have made similarly poor decisions.

    I know what you were saying - I chose not to discuss the ironic value in this thread - however, for completeness I acknowledge your observation and agree - it is ironic - however unintentional the situation was it was mimicking a planned/designed sandbagging situation. My point was that the match making system still created a very unfair and unbalanced match up. So my question to you is if it’s not GL imbalance - yet you feel the match making is poor - in what way do you think it can be improved?
    Easy* - match on signed up players +/- 2 and on signed up GP +/- 5%

    There is one obvious difficulty here, that primarily affects the very top guilds. If the highest GP guild in the game enters TW with 50/50, and the next twenty guilds enter TW with 40/50, who does the highest GP guild face?

  • I think the comments of not considering the number of GLs are the complete opposite of what is needed to fix matchmaking. By not taking into account the number of GLs and matching guilds on just GP, it can make a completely imbalanced matchup. When you match up guilds where one has twice as many GLs as the other guild (which is happening a lot now), the guild with more GLs will win 100% of the time. Period. No strategy. No competition. Just boredom. So the argument that is being made is “Good, the better guild has made better choices and deserves better rewards”. The problem with this attitude is it takes all the fun out of TW. Remember we do play this game to have fun right? When TW becomes all about rewards at the expense of having a competitive battle where either team can win it essentially becomes another grind in the game.

    Instead let’s try to keep the fun in the game and not be scared of competition.
  • mbys5v19hbgj.jpeg

    And that ladies and gentlemen is a GL balance mechanism happening
  • FidoElite wrote: »
    mbys5v19hbgj.jpeg

    And that ladies and gentlemen is a GL balance mechanism happening
    You think?

    The guilds who have a comparatively low number of GLs are going to have fewer DadBodBoba than their opponents too.
  • FidoElite
    67 posts Member
    edited October 26
    FidoElite wrote: »
    mbys5v19hbgj.jpeg

    And that ladies and gentlemen is a GL balance mechanism happening
    You think?

    The guilds who have a comparatively low number of GLs are going to have fewer DadBodBoba than their opponents too.

    It’s a start - I appreciate its not perfect but I think represents an opportunity to help close the gap. Let’s see how things pan out.
  • FidoElite
    67 posts Member
    edited November 3
    Another ‘interesting’ match up - in our favour - 46/49 and 28 slots vs a guild down GP20mil

    zonn9d7m1k93.png
    4xa47lx8vmfg.jpeg
  • FidoElite wrote: »
    Another ‘interesting’ match up - in our favour - 46/49 and 28 slots vs a guild down GP20mil

    zonn9d7m1k93.png
    4xa47lx8vmfg.jpeg

    Hey that was my guild! Ya we were a little disappointed with the matchup. Makes it hard to motivate people during an uphill battle.
  • FidoElite
    67 posts Member
    edited November 4
    Hey that was my guild! Ya we were a little disappointed with the matchup. Makes it hard to motivate people during an uphill battle.[/quote]

    Hi Prosser; yeah I continue to post here regularly about our match ups. FWIW, your guild did a really good job against our defences. However, agree, trying to keep momentum and enthusiasm in a guild when the match up remains unbalanced is not easy and as you will see from my posts, Reys has had its fair share of challenges when we have been outgunned easily. The R9 pieces now introduced in the event at the higher GP300+ mark are also having an impact on guilds at the 250-290 GP levels as players seek to get a place in an R9 enabled guild. I have seen players as low as GP3mil seeking a slot in a GP300+ guild - which is just silly, when the average required is GP6mil minimum. I remain hopeful that the TW match making improves - it does need further work, GL balancing remains a non working element (imho) - with GL ships and GL squads, you need to have similar levels in both guilds. Utilising the guild average GP is also a sensible indicator of overall guild roster depth. The introduction of Omnicron enhanced toons for events also brings in a different dynamic. While it is no silver bullet, it will impact TW dynamics. I recently spoke to a GL of a leading guild and the suggestion he made really made sense. Rather than having fixed toon with fixed enhancement for an event, CG could make the Omnicorn model more dynamic, so you could have a selection of toons that are given an uplift in their stats for a single TW by using Omnicron materials, that give that toon both improvements in key metrics for defence and offence. So maybe for one event, a selection of 5 toons are available for Omnicron upgrades, you can enhance all 5 if you have the materials, they retain the benefit for one TW only. In that way, you allow a much broader range of toons to become more TW viable, driving roster development and really spicing up the squad and defence configs.
  • Prosser
    199 posts Member
    edited November 4
    And then we get this......7u3iyivo6bsv.jpeg

    EDIT: to add some context, we had 47/49 join (the two were ticket alts that total were around 1 mil gp iirc) and we have to place 38 def slots!
    Post edited by Prosser on
  • FidoElite
    67 posts Member
    edited November 4
    OMG - I thought we had it bad with 36 slots and 48/49 registered

    l876bl8rqvwd.jpeg
    Post edited by FidoElite on
  • FidoElite wrote: »
    OMG - I thought we had it bad with 36 slots and 48/49 registered

    Oh you got a "fun" one too! I forgot to add we had 47/49 join (two ticket alts) and we have to place 38 slots. Like how does it make sense that we have that much of an uphill battle and they add more slots????
  • 665.jpeg
    3hv152jp2ws2.jpg

    So because we "only" lost the last battle because we were very outnumbered, we got now an enemy that extremely outnumbers us, just because matchmaking thinks he "deserves" a win now and our loss streak ist still "too good" got get a fair opponent...
  • Well, I am using this TW as an attacking masterclass - we will take everything meta into battle and place a pile of chaff down in defence. Sadly, while I applaud the changes and the intention to inject fun and competition back in the event, the balance remains broken. The match up posts we are seeing now are even worse than they were before the changes. I also think if any developers are reading these posts, getting a proper and accurate match up comparison of registered players in the TW on either side would really help, if nothing else, to know exactly what you are dealing with and seeing if you are still facing absolute insurmountable odds. I am not stressing this TW - my guild deserve better, and for the reason we will not stress - we just need to roll with the punches. It remains a feast or famine experience - which ultimately will continue to frustrate and drive people off the event. I will continue to post and to try get positive changes brought about by the developers. An update from CG on TW stats would be really helpful.
  • Date of TW: Nov 4th
    Your guilds GP: 250gp Droidikas
    Their guilds GP: 316gp PAKT der deutschen MÄCHTE
    # of my guild who joined: 46
    # of opposing guild who joined: unknown
    We had to set 20 teams per territory.
    They have 99GLs vs our 30. You cant just base it off GP and have to take into account total GLS!
  • So this post was created since 2018, has anything been done or any update provided on this issue in this post? 2 years later and the issue still persists with no updates from CG.
  • zatho
    183 posts Member
    So this post was created since 2018, has anything been done or any update provided on this issue in this post? 2 years later and the issue still persists with no updates from CG.

    They did some weeks ago:
    https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/249886/state-of-the-gear-laxy-september-2021

    But it got worse. You don't lose every match now because according to you loss streak you eventually get an opponent that you can destroy instead of getting destroyed all the time. Had no fair matchup since the update, regarding number of legends, that are most important
  • I fail to see how any of the recent matchmaking changes make things either more balanced or more fun. Facing a guild with a sector more worth of GLs AND a GP advantage isn't fun. Facing a guild with a sector fewer worth of GLs AND a GP disadvantage isn't fun (our last two TWs).

    All I can imagine is that they wanted to pass out Omicron materials as participation trophies for the higher GP guilds and the rest of us just get caught up in the algorithm? Player experience has taken a beating lately.
  • FidoElite
    67 posts Member
    edited November 6
    Well the result of our match up was as expected - we got walked. We did go defence lite but still couldn’t get through all the meta they had down and GLs. The 9 Executor in the front fleets was a blocker.

    7wgn2szw3uz4.png


  • Date of TW: Nov 4th
    Your guilds GP: 250gp Droidikas
    Their guilds GP: 316gp PAKT der deutschen MÄCHTE
    # of my guild who joined: 46
    # of opposing guild who joined: unknown
    We had to set 20 teams per territory.
    They have 99GLs vs our 30. You cant just base it off GP and have to take into account total GLS!

    It would suggest the opponent guild had quite a few players not register if you only had to to set 20 slots. Normally that could be as high as 28-30 per sector if they also had a similar number of players join. Never the less I bet you got walked off the park with their GL walls and/or CLS, Padme and similar defences
  • I haven't found anything with the search function so I'll ask here:
    What exactly is the formula that determines the amounts of squads we have to place in a TW?
  • So CG doesn’t match reward tiers when matchmaking. I’m in a 262M guild, we signed up 248M (47/50). That put us in the 240M to 260M prize tier. We’re going against a 230M guild. So they could t possibly be in the same prize tier as us. We have a 2:1 GL advantage plus and even larger advantage in the next tier of teams. How is this “good” matchmaking?

    TW is the most fun when you’re matched against an EQUAL guild. CG fix your formula because it’s this kind of thing that is killing the game! Don’t prioritize anything else over your customers enjoyment of the game!
  • 50 GLS versus 24 against us, god CG really know what they're doing with this matchmaking balancing if their strategy is to annoy and **** off people on the other end of these sorts of matches.
  • Just posted in a separate thread, but paste it here too.Our guild is over 330mil, so basically most of our ranks need to join for having secured any droid brains. And that becomes the main target for our guild (and probably many others). This is also most sensible way of doing TW currently. Matching is still unfair as more or less the same size guilds can have a serious difference in number of GLs. This TW our opponents had 45 GLs more from us (38 was needed for the full sector); once we had a difference of 50 GLs too. And as non-GL counters were seriously nerfed/limited by number of the game updates, actually the GL number decides about winning or losing the particular TW.
    So Capital Games, this is what really happens and your declarations about fair matching are not worth much I guess...
  • FidoElite
    67 posts Member
    edited November 17
    So here is our latest match up and result.
    We were 48/50. 24 slots per sector.
    Pretty balanced on GLs on paper.
    We set a solid sector of GL in front of fleets.
    Opponents pretty much set weaker squads with very limited GL.
    Suggests they had many fewer registered numbers? 24 slots for us was a lot less than some of our previous match ups at 34-35 slots per sector?
    0jrvo6p78wh9.png
    f3ahgya1bbje.jpeg
    1nkiccc3pcos.jpeg
  • This week: 165 GL vs our 120 GL and 164 GL vs. our 120. This should be named Territory Lottery by Capital Games as this is obviously not a War. Unless you create conditions for a fair duel this Guild Event will only be a shame of CG programers. One of the worst parts of the game currently
  • I really hope that the developers are aware of the terrible current matchmaking system and are going to do something about it.

    Detachments on the territory of 40/40. We have the 19th division, the enemy has 22.
    Yes, we have a winning streak of 57, the opponent has 6 defeats in the last 8 games.
    And in order for them to have at least some chance of winning, they are given a guild that is several times weaker in composition?
    At the same time, in case of defeat, they will receive the same rewards as we do in case of victory.
    Is this really considered fair?

    Why not make matchmaking so that strong guilds get the same strong guilds from their division? I don't mind if we have a guild with 2 times more legends against us, but from our division. But this situation is discouraging
    521.jpeg
  • i have some dificult enemy, 42 legends vs 12
    Yup MM is broken AFgwbgta4z9nj7.jpeg
  • Mol_PP
    15 posts Member
    edited November 20
    Our latest matchup, down by over 50m GP and 87 GLs vs our 32. 4 of our last 5 TWs against guilds with over 280m GP. Their frontline has 30 GLs, more than we have in our guild and they have 13 Executors to our 1. Game over before we even start!

    d77fxxon919x.png
    thzda9icplpr.png

Sign In or Register to comment.