GA matchmaking

It could do with some improvement.

I’m 90% sure where I’m going to place upon first glance at people’s rosters.

I’d recommend a system that looks more closely at specific rosters and teams that are massively advantageous.

E.g. thrawn, treya, palp etc etc.

Maybe putting characters into tiers and comparing gear levels and zetas would make the match-ups more balanced.

In my current event we have a guy who has 20-30 g12 powerful characters (CLS, JTR, Palp, Chewie, 3p0) and at the other end one guy who’s only g12 and zeta is Vader.

There’s room to improve.

P.s. put ships in!

Replies

  • Matchmaking is fine here. 8 g12 trayas, CLS, JTR, Chewie, ....
    Only 2 Revans though
  • Matchmake according to wins and may the best find out who they are.
    Que la Fuerza os acompañe!

    Kakaka

    Telegram @Kakakawakaka
    https://swgoh.gg/u/kakakawakaka/
    Código aliado 192-195-873
    https://swgoh.gg/g/516/global-elite-games/
  • I would at least recommend matchmaking based upon the usable portion of the roster. For example: this GA is toons only, so matchmaking should be based on toon power, not total GP.
    My current opponent holds a 150k advantage over me in toons (which is quite top heavy), while I I have higher overall GP due to having 200k more ship power.
  • Filter 1: matching total GP +/- 2%
    Filter 2: Traya and Revan matching (players with Revan should only get matched vs other Revan owners)
    Filter 3: evaluate the most important things such as G10-12 chars, 10+ speed mods, zetas, etc. (discord bots alrdy provide that info) and give them points - every G10 char gives X pts, G11 X pts, G12 X pts, every zeta gives X pts and so on --> then match the ppl with ~ the same pts +/- X%
    Legend#6873 | YouTube | swgoh.gg
  • Waqui
    4322 posts Member
    edited January 24
    It could do with some improvement.
    I’d recommend a system that looks more closely at specific rosters and teams that are massively advantageous.

    E.g. thrawn, treya, palp etc etc.

    Maybe putting characters into tiers and comparing gear levels and zetas would make the match-ups more balanced.

    In my current event we have a guy who has 20-30 g12 powerful characters (CLS, JTR, Palp, Chewie, 3p0) and at the other end one guy who’s only g12 and zeta is Vader.

    So, why should players, who developed a stronger roster (still with the same total GP as his opponents) only be matched with other strong opponents? Why shouldn't he instead benefit from having developed his roster well? Why should a player with a weaker roster (same GP) have an easier path to take first place than the player with the stronger roster and get the same rewards as him/her? How would that be even remotely fair and balanced? I suspect, that the algorithm actually makes sure to not pit all the strong players against each other. From what I've experienced each 'pod' of eight has had a good mix of strongly built and weakly built rosters.

    Yes, including ship GP in the algorithm, when ships are not even used is silly. Apart from that using roster GP as the 'main' match-making parameter seems quite fair.
  • Waqui wrote: »
    It could do with some improvement.
    I’d recommend a system that looks more closely at specific rosters and teams that are massively advantageous.

    E.g. thrawn, treya, palp etc etc.

    Maybe putting characters into tiers and comparing gear levels and zetas would make the match-ups more balanced.

    In my current event we have a guy who has 20-30 g12 powerful characters (CLS, JTR, Palp, Chewie, 3p0) and at the other end one guy who’s only g12 and zeta is Vader.

    So, why should players, who developed a stronger roster (still with the same total GP as his opponents) only be matched with other strong opponents? Why shouldn't he instead benefit from having developed his roster well? Why should a player with a weaker roster (same GP) have an easier path to take first place than the player with the stronger roster and get the same rewards as him/her? How would that be even remotely fair and balanced? I suspect, that the algorithm actually makes sure to not pit all the strong players against each other. From what I've experienced each 'pod' of eight has had a good mix of strongly built and weakly built rosters.

    Yes, including ship GP in the algorithm, when ships are not even used is silly. Apart from that using roster GP as the 'main' match-making parameter seems quite fair.


    All depends on how long you’ve been playing though doesn’t it.

    If you start new it’s easy to know which teams you should farm and which to avoid.

    I have a lot of older teams that were meta or raid relevant but in today’s environment are cannon fodder.

    Eg droids with jawa support, lando, teebo, jedi’s (Anakin, Aayla etc)

    All of these characters are useless and thus I won’t gear them higher which means they ultimately do nothing but give me harder opponents by inflating my GP.

    Personally I think only g10+ characters should be considered. Anything below that doesn’t actually help.
  • Pentagon
    56 posts Member
    edited January 24
    If you get to over lvl 85 and haven't decided to farm any of the legend's then why should you have as much chance as the person who has.

    I have a lvl 85 farm Luke, storm han,

    That's 20k gp that I've had to pay to get CLS.

    Surely if someone has gone to the effort of doing heroic sith with their guild they should have an advantage.

    I would say though that being able to hide teams whilst adding strategy does create a more negative experience as your opponent is stuck behind a power form. As opposed to being able to have 5 battles with one they can't get past.

    But if someone deliberately keeps their GP down for GA they do worse in TB etc. You can't have their cake and eat it.

    EDIT: also GA is precisely where toons like Aayla and Lando Rock. My gear 11 Aayla and 10 Lando are stars who trash an underdeveloped b/c team.
    Keyboard Warrior on the side of the Moderates
    I play the game for fun, if you don't like content, don't like the game, then why are you here?
  • Waqui wrote: »
    It could do with some improvement.
    I’d recommend a system that looks more closely at specific rosters and teams that are massively advantageous.

    E.g. thrawn, treya, palp etc etc.

    Maybe putting characters into tiers and comparing gear levels and zetas would make the match-ups more balanced.

    In my current event we have a guy who has 20-30 g12 powerful characters (CLS, JTR, Palp, Chewie, 3p0) and at the other end one guy who’s only g12 and zeta is Vader.

    So, why should players, who developed a stronger roster (still with the same total GP as his opponents) only be matched with other strong opponents? Why shouldn't he instead benefit from having developed his roster well? Why should a player with a weaker roster (same GP) have an easier path to take first place than the player with the stronger roster and get the same rewards as him/her? How would that be even remotely fair and balanced? I suspect, that the algorithm actually makes sure to not pit all the strong players against each other. From what I've experienced each 'pod' of eight has had a good mix of strongly built and weakly built rosters.

    Yes, including ship GP in the algorithm, when ships are not even used is silly. Apart from that using roster GP as the 'main' match-making parameter seems quite fair.

    Because those of us who started at inception were told by this forum to raise GP of useless toons to get more GP to max TB (which came first) when the only PVP was arena and not based on GP at all we have now 140 toons 80 of which are lvl 60, gear 5 or 6 and random modded

    Now we are being punished for starting the game before you.

  • Pentagon wrote: »
    If you get to over lvl 85 and haven't decided to farm any of the legend's then why should you have as much chance as the person who has.

    I have a lvl 85 farm Luke, storm han,

    That's 20k gp that I've had to pay to get CLS.

    Surely if someone has gone to the effort of doing heroic sith with their guild they should have an advantage.

    I would say though that being able to hide teams whilst adding strategy does create a more negative experience as your opponent is stuck behind a power form. As opposed to being able to have 5 battles with one they can't get past.

    But if someone deliberately keeps their GP down for GA they do worse in TB etc. You can't have their cake and eat it.

    EDIT: also GA is precisely where toons like Aayla and Lando Rock. My gear 11 Aayla and 10 Lando are stars who trash an underdeveloped b/c team.

    tmtb is a group effort. And in that group you have a mix of PvP and pve players. So it nullifys the advantage and disadvantage.

    GA is PVP only. So there is zero nullification.

    This all comes down to when did you start olaying the game.

    I have 2 accounts. 1 from inception of game. 3.7 million GP... And one from 18 months ago... 2
    2 million gp... f2P for both and my newer account will slaughter my ilder account 100 out of 100 times. And yet both are in guilds that 45 and 48 TB's
  • Waqui
    4322 posts Member
    Waqui wrote: »
    So, why should players, who developed a stronger roster (still with the same total GP as his opponents) only be matched with other strong opponents? Why shouldn't he instead benefit from having developed his roster well? Why should a player with a weaker roster (same GP) have an easier path to take first place than the player with the stronger roster and get the same rewards as him/her? How would that be even remotely fair and balanced? I suspect, that the algorithm actually makes sure to not pit all the strong players against each other. From what I've experienced each 'pod' of eight has had a good mix of strongly built and weakly built rosters.

    Yes, including ship GP in the algorithm, when ships are not even used is silly. Apart from that using roster GP as the 'main' match-making parameter seems quite fair.


    All depends on how long you’ve been playing though doesn’t it.

    If you start new it’s easy to know which teams you should farm and which to avoid.

    I believe experienced players have that knowledge too.
    I have a lot of older teams that were meta or raid relevant but in today’s environment are cannon fodder.

    Eg droids with jawa support, lando, teebo, jedi’s (Anakin, Aayla etc)

    All of these characters are useless and thus I won’t gear them higher which means they ultimately do nothing but give me harder opponents by inflating my GP.

    You and your opponents have almost the same total GP, right? So, if you started way back when droids and Wiggs + Lando was a thing, and your opponent started (more) recently, then I guess, you either had a break from the game or you didn't play consistently every day, while your opponent played more consistently. So, to repeat myself:
    Why shouldn't your opponent benefit from having developed his/her roster better than you?

    (On a side note, Anakin and certainly Aayla have their uses in GA, and my alt's opponent choked on a Teebo lead ewok team yesterday, but i get your point)
    Personally I think only g10+ characters should be considered. Anything below that doesn’t actually help.

    A team of low gear Ackbar and C-3P0 with high gear Leia, actually did well on offense for me yesterday. In december my alt had success with the strategy of setting a Chewie defense (weak defense) against an opponent with far better character GP than me (He never got through my fleet, while I cleared his board). If low gear characters can be used - and used successfully - why shouldn't they be considered for matchmaking?



  • Waqui wrote: »
    It could do with some improvement.
    I’d recommend a system that looks more closely at specific rosters and teams that are massively advantageous.

    E.g. thrawn, treya, palp etc etc.

    Maybe putting characters into tiers and comparing gear levels and zetas would make the match-ups more balanced.

    In my current event we have a guy who has 20-30 g12 powerful characters (CLS, JTR, Palp, Chewie, 3p0) and at the other end one guy who’s only g12 and zeta is Vader.

    So, why should players, who developed a stronger roster (still with the same total GP as his opponents) only be matched with other strong opponents? Why shouldn't he instead benefit from having developed his roster well? Why should a player with a weaker roster (same GP) have an easier path to take first place than the player with the stronger roster and get the same rewards as him/her? How would that be even remotely fair and balanced? I suspect, that the algorithm actually makes sure to not pit all the strong players against each other. From what I've experienced each 'pod' of eight has had a good mix of strongly built and weakly built rosters.

    Yes, including ship GP in the algorithm, when ships are not even used is silly. Apart from that using roster GP as the 'main' match-making parameter seems quite fair.

    Because those of us who started at inception were told by this forum to raise GP of useless toons to get more GP to max TB (which came first) when the only PVP was arena and not based on GP at all we have now 140 toons 80 of which are lvl 60, gear 5 or 6 and random modded

    Now we are being punished for starting the game before you.

    So surely you would have gained extra rewards in TB from having a TB focused roster? Wouldn't those extra rewards have been used to boost your roster and the toons in it?

    Someone else who didn't have a TB focused roster won't have those extra rewards and so would be at a disadvantage

    How you have chosen to spend those rewards is possibly the crux of the matter. If, as you say, you still have a huge amount of toons at lvl 60, gear 5 or 6, then that was your choice.

    There is also the arguement you only need to put down x amount of teams, which would mean x amount of total toons needed. If those x amount of toons were all maxed out, it won't matter about the bottom of the roster
  • Waqui
    4322 posts Member
    Waqui wrote: »
    It could do with some improvement.
    I’d recommend a system that looks more closely at specific rosters and teams that are massively advantageous.

    E.g. thrawn, treya, palp etc etc.

    Maybe putting characters into tiers and comparing gear levels and zetas would make the match-ups more balanced.

    In my current event we have a guy who has 20-30 g12 powerful characters (CLS, JTR, Palp, Chewie, 3p0) and at the other end one guy who’s only g12 and zeta is Vader.

    So, why should players, who developed a stronger roster (still with the same total GP as his opponents) only be matched with other strong opponents? Why shouldn't he instead benefit from having developed his roster well? Why should a player with a weaker roster (same GP) have an easier path to take first place than the player with the stronger roster and get the same rewards as him/her? How would that be even remotely fair and balanced? I suspect, that the algorithm actually makes sure to not pit all the strong players against each other. From what I've experienced each 'pod' of eight has had a good mix of strongly built and weakly built rosters.

    Yes, including ship GP in the algorithm, when ships are not even used is silly. Apart from that using roster GP as the 'main' match-making parameter seems quite fair.

    Because those of us who started at inception were told by this forum to raise GP of useless toons to get more GP to max TB (which came first) when the only PVP was arena and not based on GP at all we have now 140 toons 80 of which are lvl 60, gear 5 or 6 and random modded

    Now we are being punished for starting the game before you.

    After TB came TW. In TW your 'fluff GP' could match your guild against higher GP opponents - even if you didn't use your 'fluff' toons during the match. It's nothing new. What people see in GA today was always present in TW. The only difference is, that while players didn't really notice how their 'fluff GP' hurt their guild, now they notice how it hurts themselves.

    Furthermore, raising your GP with 'fluff' was a choice - just like it was a choice back when I myself farmed jawas and took my Ugnuahgt to g11 in the early days of the tank raid. IT was my own decision. Now you have another decision to make: Do you continue creating more 'fluff' or do you change your strategy today?

  • The issue isn't in the matchmaking. Conceptually, matching all players with a near-identical rating is the correct move; players that focused on this game mode exclusively should win more often than not, and players who focused on other game modes should lose most of the time. Everyone else will fall somewhere in-between.

    The real problems are a) the calculation for GP is arbitrary and not really a good data point for comparison, b) the PvP modes of the game are structured in a way where whatever team goes first wins 80+% of the time, and c) there are too many teams with protection regeneration or resetting buffs (Saviour, Zombie, Bastila lead) that prevent attrition from being a viable strategy.



  • Concerning character tierd, consider the fact that magma trooper can beat a traya squad. The whole point of this mode is to strategize how best to use your roster, and then how best to set a defense. If your GP is skewed by fluff, it's up to you to start focusing on gearing certain characters higher, and focus on mods.

    There is no gp difference between a purple 5* mod with no speed and one with 15 speed, for instance. It's not matchmaking's fault if you've ignored mods, and matchmaking based on mods would be crazy, considering that's sort of the point from a business perspective.

    The fact is that there are a lot of different kinds of players, focused on different areas or styles of the game. If you want to focus on GA, it may take some time to adjust your roster, but that's what you'll have to do. Otherwise, set a defense, and enjoy some free rewards.
  • My opinion is that it's really only gear 11/12 that matter, maybe a few gear 10, so if you want more competitive matchups only count GP from gear 11/12 in the top end. For lower overall GP count others.

    But that will give a competitive matchup.
  • Rmaxtpmx wrote: »
    Concerning character tierd, consider the fact that magma trooper can beat a traya squad. The whole point of this mode is to strategize how best to use your roster, and then how best to set a defense. If your GP is skewed by fluff, it's up to you to start focusing on gearing certain characters higher, and focus on mods.

    There is no gp difference between a purple 5* mod with no speed and one with 15 speed, for instance. It's not matchmaking's fault if you've ignored mods, and matchmaking based on mods would be crazy, considering that's sort of the point from a business perspective.

    The fact is that there are a lot of different kinds of players, focused on different areas or styles of the game. If you want to focus on GA, it may take some time to adjust your roster, but that's what you'll have to do. Otherwise, set a defense, and enjoy some free rewards.

    To a point yes, but is a gear 9 magmatrooper a threat to a g12 treya?

    Matchmaking really needs to take into account gear.
  • Waqui
    4322 posts Member
    edited January 25
    Sparrow wrote: »
    My opinion is that it's really only gear 11/12 that matter, maybe a few gear 10, so if you want more competitive matchups only count GP from gear 11/12 in the top end. For lower overall GP count others.

    But that will give a competitive matchup.

    I'm not so sure, that a competitive matchup is really the goal here.
  • Waqui wrote: »
    It could do with some improvement.
    I’d recommend a system that looks more closely at specific rosters and teams that are massively advantageous.

    E.g. thrawn, treya, palp etc etc.

    Maybe putting characters into tiers and comparing gear levels and zetas would make the match-ups more balanced.

    In my current event we have a guy who has 20-30 g12 powerful characters (CLS, JTR, Palp, Chewie, 3p0) and at the other end one guy who’s only g12 and zeta is Vader.

    So, why should players, who developed a stronger roster (still with the same total GP as his opponents) only be matched with other strong opponents? Why shouldn't he instead benefit from having developed his roster well? Why should a player with a weaker roster (same GP) have an easier path to take first place than the player with the stronger roster and get the same rewards as him/her? How would that be even remotely fair and balanced? I suspect, that the algorithm actually makes sure to not pit all the strong players against each other. From what I've experienced each 'pod' of eight has had a good mix of strongly built and weakly built rosters.

    Yes, including ship GP in the algorithm, when ships are not even used is silly. Apart from that using roster GP as the 'main' match-making parameter seems quite fair.

    As of my last matchup I was matched against players with all 8 defensive slots with higher power players and he was able to have enough power to still beat all 8 of mine. Making my roster unequally matched which has a 2.3million gp while as previously said in other comments as well average 100k to 150k go over mine
  • Waqui
    4322 posts Member
    Thor9133 wrote: »
    Waqui wrote: »
    It could do with some improvement.
    I’d recommend a system that looks more closely at specific rosters and teams that are massively advantageous.

    E.g. thrawn, treya, palp etc etc.

    Maybe putting characters into tiers and comparing gear levels and zetas would make the match-ups more balanced.

    In my current event we have a guy who has 20-30 g12 powerful characters (CLS, JTR, Palp, Chewie, 3p0) and at the other end one guy who’s only g12 and zeta is Vader.

    So, why should players, who developed a stronger roster (still with the same total GP as his opponents) only be matched with other strong opponents? Why shouldn't he instead benefit from having developed his roster well? Why should a player with a weaker roster (same GP) have an easier path to take first place than the player with the stronger roster and get the same rewards as him/her? How would that be even remotely fair and balanced? I suspect, that the algorithm actually makes sure to not pit all the strong players against each other. From what I've experienced each 'pod' of eight has had a good mix of strongly built and weakly built rosters.

    Yes, including ship GP in the algorithm, when ships are not even used is silly. Apart from that using roster GP as the 'main' match-making parameter seems quite fair.

    As of my last matchup I was matched against players with all 8 defensive slots with higher power players and he was able to have enough power to still beat all 8 of mine. Making my roster unequally matched which has a 2.3million gp while as previously said in other comments as well average 100k to 150k go over mine

    A. The game is matching full rosters - not just 2 x (6 to 11 teams). Players, who developed a stronger rosters will then have an advantage, which is great in my oppinion. Let them benefit from their effort/skill.
    B. I have a hard time believing, that your opponent had 150k more GP than you. All matche-ups, I've seen, have been pretty equal GP-wise. If you're trying to say, that your oponents have more character GP than you, but less ship GP, then I'm glad you agree with me, that including ship GP, when fleets are excluded from battle, is a bit silly.
  • I have 2.04m toon GP and everyone I had to fight has 200-300k more in toons than I had, though i had generally speaking more ship GP and one player who i needed to fight has overall 100k in GP than everyone else.

    Simple if toon vs toon use toon GP and if ship vs ship use ship GP and if you use both use GP if you want to have it simple
Sign In or Register to comment.