Grand Arena Championships MEGATHREAD

Replies

  • Isn't bad so far the GAC
  • I'm currently cronium @20,000 rank..my next opponent is arudium roughly 9,000 rank.... fantastic match making keep up the good work!!
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    TRanger wrote: »
    I'm currently cronium @20,000 rank..my next opponent is arudium roughly 9,000 rank.... fantastic match making keep up the good work!!

    That shouldn't happen. People only get matched within their own league...but naturally this holds true only at the time of matchmaking. If you are saying you checked at that particular time and you got matched outside of your league, you should report it as a bug.
  • You could have matched me against any 11,000 other players..or is this how it is going to keep going..match lower rank with higher rank all championship...so then give me those matching odds as I have paid tons more money Intoo this game than many many others..why do I have to be disadvantage..give me my advantage with those odds.
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    TRanger wrote: »
    You could have matched me against any 11,000 other players..or is this how it is going to keep going..match lower rank with higher rank all championship...so then give me those matching odds as I have paid tons more money Intoo this game than many many others..why do I have to be disadvantage..give me my advantage with those odds.

    I agree there's no finesse in league restricted matchmaking (that's also not division restricted). I don't know the outcome of it, if it was made with close spot proximity though. Consider yourself getting matched within 1k spots in your league, but then the rosters you get matched with shows more roster parameter disrepancies. So are you saying you were at different leagues at the time of matching?
  • @no try....well it did and just as I suspected it would happen..so no disappointment there.
  • To be honest I didn't check every single player in all 8 I was pitted against...but even so the ranking in my opinion should have have been very close proximity to each other's current rank. So to answer you I don't know..but I do see what I'm up against now.
  • And it has been this way since introduction to GA/GAC. It that has been what 8-9 months now..and no end in sight. I'm at wits end...and even looking now he holds more Zetas as well...so go figure.
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    You already know by now it doesn't care for zetas or any other parameter singularly but a single number that's almost same between 8 players.
  • Your right...they don't care..even though the zatas weight should be accounted for. And yet the disadvantage is still persistent from my prospective matching since inception of the game mode. I purposely skipped the second week to test the theory...and it held true. They know it exists and yet fail to fix it. Rant over.
  • matchmaking is completely unbalanced. my adversaries are always much stronger than me. no pleasure to play. you will lose one more player. I am disappointed after more than 4 years of play
  • Nihion
    3274 posts Member
    Adios
  • I have no Malak, all 7 of my opponents in this GA have G13 Malak; in the first GA I used 3 teams and lost them all, this GA I have used 2 teams and killed Marauder so I won't be wasting a third team.
    My roster is not strong enough, and I keep getting cleared with one shots, so why am I still being paired against high powered teams after losing 7 games straight?
    Looking for 1 member with 3.5m+ GP roster to help in GEO TB; we are 185m guild who are 70-6 in TW.
  • TRanger wrote: »
    I'm currently cronium @20,000 rank..my next opponent is arudium roughly 9,000 rank.... fantastic match making keep up the good work!!

    Same

  • Gannon
    1509 posts Member
    TRanger wrote: »
    Your right...they don't care..even though the zatas weight should be accounted for. And yet the disadvantage is still persistent from my prospective matching since inception of the game mode. I purposely skipped the second week to test the theory...and it held true. They know it exists and yet fail to fix it. Rant over.

    Zetas are definitely accounted for, that's why everyone is not getting the balance. It's basically always one person with tons more geared toons vs someone with tons more zetas in almost literally every complaint on these forums. Both sides have a chance, both are whining that it's unfair, and none of them look at the math of it and understand.
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    edited August 2019
    Gannon wrote: »
    TRanger wrote: »
    Your right...they don't care..even though the zatas weight should be accounted for. And yet the disadvantage is still persistent from my prospective matching since inception of the game mode. I purposely skipped the second week to test the theory...and it held true. They know it exists and yet fail to fix it. Rant over.

    Zetas are definitely accounted for, that's why everyone is not getting the balance. It's basically always one person with tons more geared toons vs someone with tons more zetas in almost literally every complaint on these forums. Both sides have a chance, both are whining that it's unfair, and none of them look at the math of it and understand.

    lol yup... those 10-15 zetas I have on them like phasma, QGJ, Rose, holdo, etc.... yup it so evens out against that G12/13 revan/malak, GG teams...... you hit it right on the head Gannon...

    Should be a fair matchup my +15 zetas vs his malaks.... yup fair is fair !

    lol

    It's like doing good in ships has actually now hurt every aspect of the game
  • Gannon
    1509 posts Member
    Dk_rek wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    TRanger wrote: »
    Your right...they don't care..even though the zatas weight should be accounted for. And yet the disadvantage is still persistent from my prospective matching since inception of the game mode. I purposely skipped the second week to test the theory...and it held true. They know it exists and yet fail to fix it. Rant over.

    Zetas are definitely accounted for, that's why everyone is not getting the balance. It's basically always one person with tons more geared toons vs someone with tons more zetas in almost literally every complaint on these forums. Both sides have a chance, both are whining that it's unfair, and none of them look at the math of it and understand.

    lol yup... those 10-15 zetas I have on them like phasma, QGJ, Rose, holdo, etc.... yup it so evens out against that G12/13 revan/malak, GG teams...... you hit it right on the head Gannon...

    Should be a fair matchup my +15 zetas vs his malaks.... yup fair is fair !

    lol

    It's like doing good in ships has actually now hurt every aspect of the game

    I have some useless ones too, like qgj and gmy lead. But I still can beat Malak with padme so it's fine. Everyone has those type of regretted zetas, but all you gotta do is focus outside your current top # and bring others up. My brood alpha and gg teams got there, but the number didn't really change
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    Gannon wrote: »
    Dk_rek wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    TRanger wrote: »
    Your right...they don't care..even though the zatas weight should be accounted for. And yet the disadvantage is still persistent from my prospective matching since inception of the game mode. I purposely skipped the second week to test the theory...and it held true. They know it exists and yet fail to fix it. Rant over.

    Zetas are definitely accounted for, that's why everyone is not getting the balance. It's basically always one person with tons more geared toons vs someone with tons more zetas in almost literally every complaint on these forums. Both sides have a chance, both are whining that it's unfair, and none of them look at the math of it and understand.

    lol yup... those 10-15 zetas I have on them like phasma, QGJ, Rose, holdo, etc.... yup it so evens out against that G12/13 revan/malak, GG teams...... you hit it right on the head Gannon...

    Should be a fair matchup my +15 zetas vs his malaks.... yup fair is fair !

    lol

    It's like doing good in ships has actually now hurt every aspect of the game

    I have some useless ones too, like qgj and gmy lead. But I still can beat Malak with padme so it's fine. Everyone has those type of regretted zetas, but all you gotta do is focus outside your current top # and bring others up. My brood alpha and gg teams got there, but the number didn't really change

    your right but that has nothing to do with what we were talkign about nothing
  • Gannon
    1509 posts Member
    Dk_rek wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    Dk_rek wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    TRanger wrote: »
    Your right...they don't care..even though the zatas weight should be accounted for. And yet the disadvantage is still persistent from my prospective matching since inception of the game mode. I purposely skipped the second week to test the theory...and it held true. They know it exists and yet fail to fix it. Rant over.

    Zetas are definitely accounted for, that's why everyone is not getting the balance. It's basically always one person with tons more geared toons vs someone with tons more zetas in almost literally every complaint on these forums. Both sides have a chance, both are whining that it's unfair, and none of them look at the math of it and understand.

    lol yup... those 10-15 zetas I have on them like phasma, QGJ, Rose, holdo, etc.... yup it so evens out against that G12/13 revan/malak, GG teams...... you hit it right on the head Gannon...

    Should be a fair matchup my +15 zetas vs his malaks.... yup fair is fair !

    lol

    It's like doing good in ships has actually now hurt every aspect of the game

    I have some useless ones too, like qgj and gmy lead. But I still can beat Malak with padme so it's fine. Everyone has those type of regretted zetas, but all you gotta do is focus outside your current top # and bring others up. My brood alpha and gg teams got there, but the number didn't really change

    your right but that has nothing to do with what we were talkign about nothing

    Fair enough, but you mentioned zetas you find useless. I don't disagree, I have em too. But I realize that they add a ton of gp, about the same as going from g11 to g12 or flat g12 to g13. Sometimes the benefit is worth that much, sometimes it was a bad investment, but it's always a major gp jump. In this system, that matters quite a lot.
  • Gorem
    1185 posts Member
    So, so far for this test run:

    Gac is worse then GA was in every way possible, less rewards, a month worth of effort instead of a week, giant buggy mess with score not correctly being added to constant disconnects during battles or game freezes, terrible matchmaking putting people against people they shouldn't be fighting. Feats is a system designed by dumb people.

    Like, do people not realise the amount of gear they will be able to buy at the end of this? If you not in at least Kyber, you are getting basically nothing. And even in Kyber you have to come at least above 200. Since I lost ONCE it means I am stuck never getting the top 200, which means this entire last week has been pointless since it won't actually give me anything to participate. People still try-harding it though of course, with me being as lazy as possible, still won twice till the matchmaking gave me someone I can't beat.

    Why'd they not include ships for the test run?
    Why'd they make the rewards terrible for the amount of effort required?
    Why is the new currency designed by dumb people who hate their playerbase?

    Ga was good, it was fine, had some fun 3v3'ing. GAC is one of the worst things to happen to this game.
  • not sure if its still just a teething issue but In my last two GAC sets of 8 players, 12 of the 16 playes have been from the division above me and have atleast a 600k GP advantage on me. no idea what the matchmaking selection criteria is based on but thats whack, it completely kills my chance of making it to Kyber in my div, im looking at the players in the top 10 of Kyber and my roster would beat more than half of them yet im still only halfway in the Aurodium league facing off against people in Kyber in the division above me.

    Is this going to get fixed or am I just eternally going to get bent over because I pumped a bit of money into the game (which I thought would be something EA likes and would throw me a bone because of it)

    smh, if i hadnt already deleted my card details off the app store I definitely have now.

    if someone knows what is going on let me now. Thanks
  • Wanted to run this past a group because I am a little thrown but don't want to go crying sour grapes. I've actually been pretty happy with my matchups since the change, won some...lost some but always been in the mix. Last opponent was a total blow out, which I haven't seen lately but am okay with except the stats were hinky to me. It said my opponent has won 232 offensive matches and cleared 92 territories. I'm fine with being a middling player but I'm at 63 and 28 and it caused me to think. Have we even been playing GAC long enough to have won 232 matches and cleared 92 territories? Anyone have any input as to if those numbers are even possible at this point? Thanks.
  • Saada
    617 posts Member
    Wanted to run this past a group because I am a little thrown but don't want to go crying sour grapes. I've actually been pretty happy with my matchups since the change, won some...lost some but always been in the mix. Last opponent was a total blow out, which I haven't seen lately but am okay with except the stats were hinky to me. It said my opponent has won 232 offensive matches and cleared 92 territories. I'm fine with being a middling player but I'm at 63 and 28 and it caused me to think. Have we even been playing GAC long enough to have won 232 matches and cleared 92 territories? Anyone have any input as to if those numbers are even possible at this point? Thanks.

    Yep, it's possible. Think they count from the very first GA not just GAC. My stats are similar
  • USAFmedic129
    1538 posts Member
    edited August 2019
    I believe this is correct. If you are putting 10 squads on def, we’ve had 5 matches for this run. We have had 2 rounds last go. And there was the very first failed test which some got to fight in. So the individual fights add up the territory clearing does not.

    Aside from the 4th cycle which I faced nothing but absolute horror matches, I have 0 complaints on match making. They have all been very close in score between 1903 and 1906 points. Where a perfect run was the difference between winning or not.
  • I believe this is correct. If you are putting 10 squads on def, we’ve had 5 matches for this run. We have had 2 rounds last go. And there was the very first failed test which some got to fight in. So the individual fights add up the territory clearing does not.

    Aside from the 4th cycle which I faced nothing but absolute horror matches, I have 0 complaints on match making. They have all been very close in score between 1903 and 1906 points. Where a perfect run was the difference between winning or not.

    Thanks. I have had a few matches go perfect vs perfect in the beginning but most of them have settled out somewhere in the middle where neither of us had the depth to one shot the entire roster while still setting a competent defense. When I looked that their roster, it looked like a close match in terms of toons we owned but apparently this person is a ninja out of making B squads amazing.
  • maraexibil
    165 posts Member
    edited August 2019
    The GAC reward structure must be adjusted.

    I don't understand why the rewards brackets are so narrow and topheavy. Bottom tier is rank 501+. With 10000+ players per division/league this means that 95% of players get the same rewards. I don't see how such a reward structure can motivate 95% of players to try to rank higher.

    Or to put it in a different light, being at the top 6% of your division/league gives you the same end of month rewards as a bottom dweller of that league.

    There are a lot of brilliant calculating minds in the dev team and management. I'm not sure why this obvious mistake was missed.
    Post edited by maraexibil on
  • Liath
    5140 posts Member
    maraexibil wrote: »
    The GAC reward structure must be adjusted.

    I don't understand why the rewards brackets are so narrow and topheavy. Bottom tier is rank 501+. With 10000+ players per division this means that 95% of players get the same rewards. I don't see how such a reward structure can motivate 95% of players to try to rank higher.

    Or to put it in a different light, being in the top 6% gives you the same end of month rewards as a bottom dweller.

    There are a lot of brilliant calculating minds in the dev team and management. I'm not sure why this obvious mistake was missed.

    In addition to being divided by division, those ranks are also divided by league. The person in last place in kyber is getting better rewards than the person in first place in aurodium, and so on. So no, being in the top 6% does not give you the same rewards as a bottom dweller.
  • Clarified to state ranking within a division/league. My Aurodium league has approximately 10k players.

    So yes, Rank 600 (6%) is getting the same end of month rewards as rank 10000 (bottom dweller).
    Liath wrote: »
    maraexibil wrote: »
    The GAC reward structure must be adjusted.

    I don't understand why the rewards brackets are so narrow and topheavy. Bottom tier is rank 501+. With 10000+ players per division this means that 95% of players get the same rewards. I don't see how such a reward structure can motivate 95% of players to try to rank higher.

    Or to put it in a different light, being in the top 6% gives you the same end of month rewards as a bottom dweller.

    There are a lot of brilliant calculating minds in the dev team and management. I'm not sure why this obvious mistake was missed.

    In addition to being divided by division, those ranks are also divided by league. The person in last place in kyber is getting better rewards than the person in first place in aurodium, and so on. So no, being in the top 6% does not give you the same rewards as a bottom dweller.

Sign In or Register to comment.