GA Top 4: This is WRONG
I won my first battle. I get paired with someone who also won in the first round.
I lose in the 2nd round, but I'm in 6th place.
How is it possible that I'm in 6th place? You win in the first round, you're top 4. You win in the 2nd round, you're 5-6 (if you lost the first time) or 1-2 (if you won the first time).
Why are you counting a win against someone who lost in the first round as more valuable than a first round win?
This. Is. WRONG.
I lose in the 2nd round, but I'm in 6th place.
How is it possible that I'm in 6th place? You win in the first round, you're top 4. You win in the 2nd round, you're 5-6 (if you lost the first time) or 1-2 (if you won the first time).
Why are you counting a win against someone who lost in the first round as more valuable than a first round win?
This. Is. WRONG.
0
- 61.6K General Discussion
- -35 Developer Q&A Archive
- 2.6K New Players
- 30.7K Arena and Character Strategy
- 3.2K Individual Events
- 5.5K Guild Events
- 4.7K PVP and Rivalry
- 51K Guild Recruitment
- 751 Art and Media
- 4.2K Off Topic
Howdy, Stranger!
Replies
1 player 3-0
3 players 2-1
3 players 1-2
1 player 0-3
Rewards are based on that.
this.
But it'll all even out in the sort.
Exactly.
Isn't this how all sports work? If two people/teams have an equal record then there's a tiebreaker to determine who goes where on the ladder.
The prize groupings and match selection negates the tiebreaker having any substantial meaning so really it doesn't matter at all.
You can win with 1 territory cleared but if the other people won by clearing theirs they rank ahead. 1st time wins and disadvantaged attacks help with banners.
The tie-breakers are for each individual match.
There is no prize segregation between 2-4, and 5-7. After two rounds, you have:
2 players are 2-0
4 players are 1-1
2 players are 0-2.
So the 2-0 players are in spots 1&2.
The 1-1 players are in spots 3-6 (and the order shouldn't matter)
The 0-2 players are in spots 7&8.
Nope.
When you have 4 teams and they all play each other, then you use overall record to determine finish at the end of that round, the way that they do with World Cup Group Stage.
Then they enter a setup where winners only face winners (and losers only face losers for the consolation matchups).
BUT in those winners-only-face-winners matchups, it's winners advance. You lose your first match and you're out - or at least you're bumped to the consolation tournament.
GA does the worst of both worlds. There's no chance that my winning squad might face a squad that lost in the last round - this is a winners advance tournament model - BUT I can still lose rewards to someone who lost the first round and thus got an easy fight in the 2nd round.
If you have a winners-fight-winners tournament style of play, then the 4 teams that lose in the first round have to fight it out for 5th place.
If you want to have a "Group Stage" style of play, then I have to have just as much chance at playing a terrible team that lost in the first round whether I myself won or lost in the first round. My performance in the first round doesn't matter for determining my second opponent in Group Stage style play.
The GA combines the worst of both worlds.
There is no perfect system without everyone playing everyone.
If I am the second strongest player, and by bad luck I get matched up with the strongest player in round one, why should I be relegated to 5-8 rewards? In contrast, if the 7th best player played the worst player in round 1, they would be guaranteed top 4 rewards even after they are badly exposed and lose their next two matches. Since we don't have an accurate method for seeding, this style of tournament doesn't work.
The current system isn't perfect, but it is better than what you have proposed. You are overreacting to the round 2 standings. If 'bad' players luck into 1-1, and good players fall back into 1-1, this will usually be taken care of when they meet in Rd 3.
The fatal problem with GA is that it thinks a maxed ugnaught, dathcha, and CUP combine for more value than a maxed Traya and Revan. The tournament format is fine.
Tldr : what you are describing is a round robin group stage followed by a knockout stage. Grand arena uses a swiss round system. It exists and is used in lots of competitions around the world.
First there are not just « two worlds » and this not the « worst » of anything, it’s just another system, there are a lot of different systems. Group stage are usually single or double round robin, not realistic with 8 players, followed by a knock-out stage. Not the goal of the game mode since some people would have more content to play than others i guess.
Second because the matchups are random in the first round, statements like « got an easy fight the 2nd round » or « a terrible team that lost in the first round » make no sense.
Your system is not better. If you are the 2nd best team in the group but fight the best in the 1st round, you’ll end up 5th at best ? While the 2nd worst who got to play the worst team end up higher than you ?
Third i started to write a very complicated post on how exactly the standings work but i felt it was too convoluted so i just deleted^^
Fact is two positions are obviously stable and not arguable : the 3-0 and the 0-3. The other positions people try to argue, but the thing is, because there are only 8 players, 3 rounds, and people always meet others with the same standing (mainly to prevent players meeting more than once i guess), if you try for fun to write down how things can actually play out, you’ll see there is not really a situation where you can justify a « i’m better but was unlucky » claim.
To be honest i really think this system is one of the best possible, with good balance between number of players in the group, number of rounds to play and fairness in rewards.
This isn't a classic 8 team tournament. How are the results posted by @JohnAran going over people's heads? There are no seeds. There is no bracket. It is simply play against 3 opponents who have a similar win total to you - when you play them. 4 possible records after the 8 team grouping play 3 times. 3-0 gets top rewards, 2-1 gets 2nd rewards, 1-2 gets 3rd rewards, 0-3 gets last rewards. Simple.
this
I actually defeated my first and second opponent, having Revan and Traya (i don't have them) since I was smarter in dividing resources between attack and defense.
The third enemy totally crushed me (3,85 M GP like me, but 73 vs 43 G12 characters and 55 vs 37 Z!)
Matchmaking is horrible.
Wait time for everything is horrible.
Gotta say I’m not a fan either.
With 8 teams and only 3 rounds we won't battle everyone else in our GA group. However, after each round the ranking is based on the over all record - exactly like in a FIFA World Cup group stage:
After round 1 the four winners are ranked 1 through 4, while the four loosers are ranked 5 through 8.
After round 2 the two players with two wins are ranked 1 and 2, the four players with one win each are ranked 3 through 6 and the two players with two losses are ranked 7th and 8th.
Rankings after the last round has already been posted by others in their comments.
I really don't see how you can complain about being ranked 6th after round 2, when you have one win only. You belong in the 3 through 6 bracket like everybody else with one win only.
That's the cup system. That's not what's in use here. This is like a shortened World Cup group stage with 8 teams in each group but only 3 rounds instead of a 7 round raound-Robin.
GA is NOT a winners advance model. Winners don't 'advance'. Winners simply add one win to their track record. Everybody gets matched to a player with the same track record:
In round 1 everybody has zero wins and are matched against each other.
In round 2 the four players with one win each are matched against each other and the four players with no wins are matched against each other.
In round 3 the two players with two wins are matched against each other, the four players with one win each are matched against each other and the two players with zero wins battle each other.
Not when there are only three rounds instead of the seven of a round-Robin. You need to somehow determine who's the best of the best.
You're wrong. It does. It adds a win or a loss to your track record.
You may need to educate your son there's not a single method of matchmaking in the world, I bet he'll be surprised.