I think OP just wants to play himself or something. He seems to want only identical rosters to be matched up, which is impossible.
Nice strawman. I simply would like to know if CG's point about "Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them." and the statement in the GAC info screen about matchups being based on the maximum power of the units allowed to be used is actually working as intended and is being reflected in the matchups currently in place.
I realize there are some of you who would personally prefer it not be as CG has clearly stated - repeatedly. Sorry if that's not how you want the game to play. In the same post (regarding GAC matchup improvements) CG clearly stated : "The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent." - that doesn't seem to be happening either. Again, whether or not that's your personal preference (or mine) is irrelevant. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework are off base, or the way the matchup algorithm is working (or not working) is. I'm just offering feedback and wanting to know which it is.
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
I think we all knew that would never happen, right?
So how do you expect that the matchmaking will take the “current and past” meta into account when it is constantly changing?
And to extend this - there are way too many variables here. New toons are released constantly, new metas come and go, even key mod stats change as teams are introduced (if GG was the top meta, would you want to be matched based on speed mods or health stats?)
The reality is that there are people with focussed rosters and those with wide rosters. Both sides are benefitted by very different algorithms. But CG doesn’t want to encourage players not to gear toons (for obvious rea$on$), so they made this change. As rounds go on, the differences will become less and less pronounced. This is what will result in players seeing more similar (which some seem to define as “mirror”) rosters.
The OP hasn't really posted any usable information to assess how the matchmaking did on the match-up. Just telling us the character GP numbers doesn't tell us anything as everyone knows that there is GP fluff which is useless in a GA battle (although apparently some people are now terrified to face this roster fluff). Also, just because one person has Malak and the other doesn't, that doesn't tell us much either. You're never going to get matched up with the exact same roster as yours. Also, I'm not sure the reference to speed and offense mods means much as I don't believe the matchmaking system has ever factored in who has more speed or offense mods. However, that does tell us that the OP ran the match-up through the bot because it will spit out the number of speed mods and offense mods for each. Therefore, the fact that the OP chose to run the match-up bot but not post the match-up and only included limited information tells us that the match-up is probably fairly balanced in terms of number of G11s and G12s or possibly even in the OP's favor. Otherwise, there would be no reason to run the match-up and hide it from the post.
I am sitting down dinner right now, but am more than happy to post full screen shots (and discord stats) to back up that claim tomorrow morning when I have more time.
Please do. Let's see the printout of the Discord bot match-up you obviously ran to get the numbers on the speed and offense mods and show us where you apparently have a huge disadvantage in terms of numbers of G11s and G12s. Otherwise, you haven't established any tangible match-making issue.
Char GP :: 2.7M vs 2.9M
Ship GP :: 1.7M vs 2.0M
C Arena :: 31 vs 28
S Arena :: 2 vs 43
Zetas :: 64 vs 70
6 Star :: 10 vs 4
7 Star :: 180 vs 208
Gear 11 :: 27 vs 40
Gear 12 :: 72 vs 74
Mod Stats:
6* Mods :: 66 vs 63 10+ Spd :: 126 vs 219
15+ Spd :: 36 vs 68
20+ Spd :: 11 vs 14 100+ Off :: 26 vs 57
This looks the same as many matchups I saw in old GA, so not sure we can say it's worse. I bet if you used the site it'll come out really close.
I still say they should do matchmaking based on what the DSR bot pulls, but I feel like the way they're doing it now is better than it was. And all the matches will even out over a 5 week GAC.
I think OP just wants to play himself or something. He seems to want only identical rosters to be matched up, which is impossible.
Nice strawman. I simply would like to know if CG's point about "Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them." and the statement in the GAC info screen about matchups being based on the maximum power of the units allowed to be used is actually working as intended and is being reflected in the matchups currently in place.
I realize there are some of you who would personally prefer it not be as CG has clearly stated - repeatedly. Sorry if that's not how you want the game to play. In the same post (regarding GAC matchup improvements) CG clearly stated : "The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent." - that doesn't seem to be happening either. Again, whether or not that's your personal preference (or mine) is irrelevant. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework are off base, or the way the matchup algorithm is working (or not working) is. I'm just offering feedback and wanting to know which it is.
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
If they were good at coding in conjunction with good database design, they wouldn't have to change it every time. Set it up so you can mark certain characters or team compositions to be used in matchmaking, and then the "algorithm" is the same every time, you just flip some data every few months.
Congrats. You have Malak - and I'd guess by the power, at 7* and g12 - and he doesn't have him at all. You also have a maxed DR and judging by his power, it looks like his is g11 and probably only has 1 zeta. Good luck in round 2, because round 1 is clearly yours.
If you have any other mismatches you'd like to share, feel free to continue to contribute.
In game name: Lucas Gregory FORMER PLAYER - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie
In game guild: TNR Uprising I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
*This space left intentionally blank*
If, however, MM algorithm is based purely on actual player performance, this allows you don't care about it and develop roster purely around building better squads, counters, etc., as it should be imo.
There's something logically wrong with this paragraph. It's impossible for matchmaking to be purely based on actual player performance, but also allows you to build better squads, counters, etc etc.
It's definitely possible and actually exists in many games. All that you need is some form of permanent PvP rating like Elo or equivalents. Of course you will need some starting point for initial setup, and for this GP is as good as any other sane parameter which allows to approximate power. After initial setup the system will begin to balance itself, and the more games people will play, the less their rating will be affected by anything but actual PvP performance. The only question is "how many games we need before people will get more or less stable rating" but it requires simulation and testing.
Now let's see how different manipulations with roster will affect your matchmaking.
1. Let's assume you are not improving your roster for some time. People who do it will become more powerful but their rating still the same. You begin to lose more often and your rating will fall, as it should be.
2. Let's assume you want to raise some toon to G13 just for collection. If you have limited resources and do it instead of raising some useful toon - see before. People who do something useful for PvP will get advantage, as it should be. But if you just buy this toon and gear - you are not punished but neither get advantage. Again, as it should be.
3. Let's assume you are direct your resources into improving your roster specifically for PvP. Your are pursuing meta, developing counter squads, etc. If you do this better than other players - you will climb higher. If you do it worse - see before, you will fall. Again, as it should be.
4. Let's assume you want to try sandbagging. Well, it just completely impossible. If you will make your roster weaker in any way you still will face same players but with worse roster - it may or may not affect you in bad way but you won't get advantage.
GAC system with climbing into higher leagues may, in theory, produce something similar in long run... IF there were more leagues, movement between leagues in both ways instead climbing only, and no reset of player position with new championship. Sadly currently it's nothing like this.
I think OP just wants to play himself or something. He seems to want only identical rosters to be matched up, which is impossible.
Nice strawman. I simply would like to know if CG's point about "Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them." and the statement in the GAC info screen about matchups being based on the maximum power of the units allowed to be used is actually working as intended and is being reflected in the matchups currently in place.
I realize there are some of you who would personally prefer it not be as CG has clearly stated - repeatedly. Sorry if that's not how you want the game to play. In the same post (regarding GAC matchup improvements) CG clearly stated : "The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent." - that doesn't seem to be happening either. Again, whether or not that's your personal preference (or mine) is irrelevant. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework are off base, or the way the matchup algorithm is working (or not working) is. I'm just offering feedback and wanting to know which it is.
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
If they were good at coding in conjunction with good database design, they wouldn't have to change it every time. Set it up so you can mark certain characters or team compositions to be used in matchmaking, and then the "algorithm" is the same every time, you just flip some data every few months.
That’s a big “if” - what have you seen in this game lately to support that?
Perfect example - TB phases will now be a day and a half each because of a schedule issue? And they will remain that way “for the foreseeable future” for some reason.
So again - is it really shocking that they aren’t willing to program a game mode in a way that requires them to re-visit it each update?
Would we want that? Their track record for releasing “fixes” or “updates” is...consistent.
I think OP just wants to play himself or something. He seems to want only identical rosters to be matched up, which is impossible.
Nice strawman. I simply would like to know if CG's point about "Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them." and the statement in the GAC info screen about matchups being based on the maximum power of the units allowed to be used is actually working as intended and is being reflected in the matchups currently in place.
I realize there are some of you who would personally prefer it not be as CG has clearly stated - repeatedly. Sorry if that's not how you want the game to play. In the same post (regarding GAC matchup improvements) CG clearly stated : "The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent." - that doesn't seem to be happening either. Again, whether or not that's your personal preference (or mine) is irrelevant. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework are off base, or the way the matchup algorithm is working (or not working) is. I'm just offering feedback and wanting to know which it is.
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
I think we all knew that would never happen, right?
So how do you expect that the matchmaking will take the “current and past” meta into account when it is constantly changing?
And to extend this - there are way too many variables here. New toons are released constantly, new metas come and go, even key mod stats change as teams are introduced (if GG was the top meta, would you want to be matched based on speed mods or health stats?)
The reality is that there are people with focussed rosters and those with wide rosters. Both sides are benefitted by very different algorithms. But CG doesn’t want to encourage players not to gear toons (for obvious rea$on$), so they made this change. As rounds go on, the differences will become less and less pronounced. This is what will result in players seeing more similar (which some seem to define as “mirror”) rosters.
That's a fair point. And my specific example is hardly the most glaring - but there are literally hundreds of others that are far more imbalanced. As CaptainRex has already pointed out earlier in this thread, the outcry (and discrepancies) seem far worse this time around.
Do expect them to re-adjust the algorithm with every release and rework? Of course not. But I do expect them to at least come close to what they stated their goals were (i.e. matchups with similar rosters and similar GP). And based on the number of posts here on the forums, on Reddit and in the various guild, shard, and ship chats, they've missed that mark by a fairly sizable margin.
In game name: Lucas Gregory FORMER PLAYER - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie
In game guild: TNR Uprising I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
*This space left intentionally blank*
I think OP just wants to play himself or something. He seems to want only identical rosters to be matched up, which is impossible.
Nice strawman. I simply would like to know if CG's point about "Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them." and the statement in the GAC info screen about matchups being based on the maximum power of the units allowed to be used is actually working as intended and is being reflected in the matchups currently in place.
I realize there are some of you who would personally prefer it not be as CG has clearly stated - repeatedly. Sorry if that's not how you want the game to play. In the same post (regarding GAC matchup improvements) CG clearly stated : "The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent." - that doesn't seem to be happening either. Again, whether or not that's your personal preference (or mine) is irrelevant. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework are off base, or the way the matchup algorithm is working (or not working) is. I'm just offering feedback and wanting to know which it is.
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
I think we all knew that would never happen, right?
So how do you expect that the matchmaking will take the “current and past” meta into account when it is constantly changing?
And to extend this - there are way too many variables here. New toons are released constantly, new metas come and go, even key mod stats change as teams are introduced (if GG was the top meta, would you want to be matched based on speed mods or health stats?)
The reality is that there are people with focussed rosters and those with wide rosters. Both sides are benefitted by very different algorithms. But CG doesn’t want to encourage players not to gear toons (for obvious rea$on$), so they made this change. As rounds go on, the differences will become less and less pronounced. This is what will result in players seeing more similar (which some seem to define as “mirror”) rosters.
That's a fair point. And my specific example is hardly the most glaring - but there are literally hundreds of others that are far more imbalanced. As CaptainRex has already pointed out earlier in this thread, the outcry (and discrepancies) seem far worse this time around.
Do expect them to re-adjust the algorithm with every release and rework? Of course not. But I do expect them to at least come close to what they stated their goals were (i.e. matchups with similar rosters and similar GP). And based on the number of posts here on the forums, on Reddit and in the various guild, shard, and ship chats, they've missed that mark by a fairly sizable margin.
There have been consistent complaints about the matchmaking since the first tw. After awhile the complaints drop off and are forgotten apparently. There is always this level of outrage.
I’m not saying that this way is any better (I don’t personally care either way), but you can’t compare the day 1 complaint threads vs. the complaints that have died off over months as we “got used to” them.
I haven’t seen a sith raid complaint thread in hours but that doesn’t mean that everyone was always happy with it since it was released. Lots of us will remember the HAAT complaint threads too, when it was first released (“only TWO levels of difficulty???”). Not seeing them today doesn’t mean that everyone was actually happy upon it’s release.
There is some unintentional Ministry of Truth stuff happening here.
I think OP just wants to play himself or something. He seems to want only identical rosters to be matched up, which is impossible.
Nice strawman. I simply would like to know if CG's point about "Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them." and the statement in the GAC info screen about matchups being based on the maximum power of the units allowed to be used is actually working as intended and is being reflected in the matchups currently in place.
I realize there are some of you who would personally prefer it not be as CG has clearly stated - repeatedly. Sorry if that's not how you want the game to play. In the same post (regarding GAC matchup improvements) CG clearly stated : "The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent." - that doesn't seem to be happening either. Again, whether or not that's your personal preference (or mine) is irrelevant. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework are off base, or the way the matchup algorithm is working (or not working) is. I'm just offering feedback and wanting to know which it is.
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
If they were good at coding in conjunction with good database design, they wouldn't have to change it every time. Set it up so you can mark certain characters or team compositions to be used in matchmaking, and then the "algorithm" is the same every time, you just flip some data every few months.
That’s a big “if” - what have you seen in this game lately to support that?
Perfect example - TB phases will now be a day and a half each because of a schedule issue? And they will remain that way “for the foreseeable future” for some reason.
So again - is it really shocking that they aren’t willing to program a game mode in a way that requires them to re-visit it each update?
Would we want that? Their track record for releasing “fixes” or “updates” is...consistent.
Yeah, I get that it's a big if, and it won't happen for multiple reasons, aside from their inability to do it. I'm not even a little shocked, I just wanted to point out that for any competent team it would be relatively easy to set up a matchmaking system that could take different things into account based on data.
And I'm not sure if we would really want them to do it if they could. I think I want them to do it in TW, because most of our matches have been bad ones, but in GAC... I don't think it matters that much, since you will eventually get matched against players of equal skill anyway.
I think OP just wants to play himself or something. He seems to want only identical rosters to be matched up, which is impossible.
Nice strawman. I simply would like to know if CG's point about "Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them." and the statement in the GAC info screen about matchups being based on the maximum power of the units allowed to be used is actually working as intended and is being reflected in the matchups currently in place.
I realize there are some of you who would personally prefer it not be as CG has clearly stated - repeatedly. Sorry if that's not how you want the game to play. In the same post (regarding GAC matchup improvements) CG clearly stated : "The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent." - that doesn't seem to be happening either. Again, whether or not that's your personal preference (or mine) is irrelevant. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework are off base, or the way the matchup algorithm is working (or not working) is. I'm just offering feedback and wanting to know which it is.
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
I think we all knew that would never happen, right?
So how do you expect that the matchmaking will take the “current and past” meta into account when it is constantly changing?
And to extend this - there are way too many variables here. New toons are released constantly, new metas come and go, even key mod stats change as teams are introduced (if GG was the top meta, would you want to be matched based on speed mods or health stats?)
The reality is that there are people with focussed rosters and those with wide rosters. Both sides are benefitted by very different algorithms. But CG doesn’t want to encourage players not to gear toons (for obvious rea$on$), so they made this change. As rounds go on, the differences will become less and less pronounced. This is what will result in players seeing more similar (which some seem to define as “mirror”) rosters.
That's a fair point. And my specific example is hardly the most glaring - but there are literally hundreds of others that are far more imbalanced. As CaptainRex has already pointed out earlier in this thread, the outcry (and discrepancies) seem far worse this time around.
Do expect them to re-adjust the algorithm with every release and rework? Of course not. But I do expect them to at least come close to what they stated their goals were (i.e. matchups with similar rosters and similar GP). And based on the number of posts here on the forums, on Reddit and in the various guild, shard, and ship chats, they've missed that mark by a fairly sizable margin.
The reason we'll never see a mm algorithm like what your wanting is cg designs new content for the sole purpose of making $. If everyone was matched by having the same toons, at the same gear lvl, with similar mods there would be no incentive for people to spend money.
I think OP just wants to play himself or something. He seems to want only identical rosters to be matched up, which is impossible.
Nice strawman. I simply would like to know if CG's point about "Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them." and the statement in the GAC info screen about matchups being based on the maximum power of the units allowed to be used is actually working as intended and is being reflected in the matchups currently in place.
I realize there are some of you who would personally prefer it not be as CG has clearly stated - repeatedly. Sorry if that's not how you want the game to play. In the same post (regarding GAC matchup improvements) CG clearly stated : "The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent." - that doesn't seem to be happening either. Again, whether or not that's your personal preference (or mine) is irrelevant. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework are off base, or the way the matchup algorithm is working (or not working) is. I'm just offering feedback and wanting to know which it is.
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
If they were good at coding in conjunction with good database design, they wouldn't have to change it every time. Set it up so you can mark certain characters or team compositions to be used in matchmaking, and then the "algorithm" is the same every time, you just flip some data every few months.
That’s a big “if” - what have you seen in this game lately to support that?
Perfect example - TB phases will now be a day and a half each because of a schedule issue? And they will remain that way “for the foreseeable future” for some reason.
So again - is it really shocking that they aren’t willing to program a game mode in a way that requires them to re-visit it each update?
Would we want that? Their track record for releasing “fixes” or “updates” is...consistent.
Yeah, I get that it's a big if, and it won't happen for multiple reasons, aside from their inability to do it. I'm not even a little shocked, I just wanted to point out that for any competent team it would be relatively easy to set up a matchmaking system that could take different things into account based on data.
And I'm not sure if we would really want them to do it if they could. I think I want them to do it in TW, because most of our matches have been bad ones, but in GAC... I don't think it matters that much, since you will eventually get matched against players of equal skill anyway.
I used to get angry at incompetence as well. I’ve since realized that it’s my expectations that need to change, and since I’ve done that I’m happier.
I now expect them to fail every release, and they no longer disappoint me.
I think OP just wants to play himself or something. He seems to want only identical rosters to be matched up, which is impossible.
Nice strawman. I simply would like to know if CG's point about "Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them." and the statement in the GAC info screen about matchups being based on the maximum power of the units allowed to be used is actually working as intended and is being reflected in the matchups currently in place.
I realize there are some of you who would personally prefer it not be as CG has clearly stated - repeatedly. Sorry if that's not how you want the game to play. In the same post (regarding GAC matchup improvements) CG clearly stated : "The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent." - that doesn't seem to be happening either. Again, whether or not that's your personal preference (or mine) is irrelevant. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework are off base, or the way the matchup algorithm is working (or not working) is. I'm just offering feedback and wanting to know which it is.
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
I think we all knew that would never happen, right?
So how do you expect that the matchmaking will take the “current and past” meta into account when it is constantly changing?
And to extend this - there are way too many variables here. New toons are released constantly, new metas come and go, even key mod stats change as teams are introduced (if GG was the top meta, would you want to be matched based on speed mods or health stats?)
The reality is that there are people with focussed rosters and those with wide rosters. Both sides are benefitted by very different algorithms. But CG doesn’t want to encourage players not to gear toons (for obvious rea$on$), so they made this change. As rounds go on, the differences will become less and less pronounced. This is what will result in players seeing more similar (which some seem to define as “mirror”) rosters.
That's a fair point. And my specific example is hardly the most glaring - but there are literally hundreds of others that are far more imbalanced. As CaptainRex has already pointed out earlier in this thread, the outcry (and discrepancies) seem far worse this time around.
Do expect them to re-adjust the algorithm with every release and rework? Of course not. But I do expect them to at least come close to what they stated their goals were (i.e. matchups with similar rosters and similar GP). And based on the number of posts here on the forums, on Reddit and in the various guild, shard, and ship chats, they've missed that mark by a fairly sizable margin.
The reason we'll never see a mm algorithm like what your wanting is cg designs new content for the sole purpose of making $. If everyone was matched by having the same toons, at the same gear lvl, with similar mods there would be no incentive for people to spend money.
Their -new matchmaking- announcement which is nowhere to be seen in reality doesn't promise matching rosters with their toon make-ups...but one uses many variables to compare them to match. We simply don't know what those parameters are. In the way I imagine what those variables are (disregards what toons player has but compares the amounts of them and their development level as well as other stuff like amounts of mods but not the inherent quality of those) CG can drive spending upwards as well. That's ideal for both ends may we have such an algo.
The new algorithm is simply faulty also. In my grouping, the top guy is division 1, and has 300k more gp than the lowest guy. Top guy has fully developed Malek, bottom guy doesn't have him at all. This is a mess. And for those out there that like to rely on the various bots, those are very flawed as well and pull incorrect data on a regular basis. To look at the true picture, you have to look at the rosters.
Matching players based on the gp of say their tol 30 toons is still terrible. A player with no Revans, could still have a similar go with their top 30 toons, as a player with both Revans and Malek. They did nothing that improved matchmaking.
If, however, MM algorithm is based purely on actual player performance, this allows you don't care about it and develop roster purely around building better squads, counters, etc., as it should be imo.
There's something logically wrong with this paragraph. It's impossible for matchmaking to be purely based on actual player performance, but also allows you to build better squads, counters, etc etc.
It's definitely possible and actually exists in many games. All that you need is some form of permanent PvP rating like Elo or equivalents. Of course you will need some starting point for initial setup, and for this GP is as good as any other sane parameter which allows to approximate power. After initial setup the system will begin to balance itself, and the more games people will play, the less their rating will be affected by anything but actual PvP performance. The only question is "how many games we need before people will get more or less stable rating" but it requires simulation and testing.
Now let's see how different manipulations with roster will affect your matchmaking.
1. Let's assume you are not improving your roster for some time. People who do it will become more powerful but their rating still the same. You begin to lose more often and your rating will fall, as it should be.
2. Let's assume you want to raise some toon to G13 just for collection. If you have limited resources and do it instead of raising some useful toon - see before. People who do something useful for PvP will get advantage, as it should be. But if you just buy this toon and gear - you are not punished but neither get advantage. Again, as it should be.
3. Let's assume you are direct your resources into improving your roster specifically for PvP. Your are pursuing meta, developing counter squads, etc. If you do this better than other players - you will climb higher. If you do it worse - see before, you will fall. Again, as it should be.
4. Let's assume you want to try sandbagging. Well, it just completely impossible. If you will make your roster weaker in any way you still will face same players but with worse roster - it may or may not affect you in bad way but you won't get advantage.
GAC system with climbing into higher leagues may, in theory, produce something similar in long run... IF there were more leagues, movement between leagues in both ways instead climbing only, and no reset of player position with new championship. Sadly currently it's nothing like this.
Okay, it seems like i misunderstood what you meant by "player performance".
What you're proposing is basically just a ladder system in which your roster is the main determining factor. You may be able to compensate a little by being a better player, but not by a lot. Better player as in better at anything non-roster related like strategy, with which team you attack, battle skill etc. Basically the things a lot of players think should be the sole determining factor in winning GA; player skill.
Personally i do like my roster to matter o a certain degree because resource management is a large part of this game and one of the aspects i enjoy most. And also because i want to win more than i lose and having the latest and greatest as well as solid counter teams is my main competative advantage, haha.
As a side effect it will also result in a winrate of 50% across the board except for at the very top and very bottom.
People will never, ever be happy. This is an extremely silly place, but not in a good way.
True, but you're on this forum more than anyone. Are there more matchup complaints now than previous GA's? I'd claim yes.
I guess you don't remember when GA was first launched. Or TW for that matter.
This is exactly the same as every single time there's new content.
Correct, but it tapered off. However, we have a new influx of people previously okay with GA matchups now displeased, which indicates a problem.
#CloneHelmets4Life...VICTORY!!!! "I don't like sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere." The more you tighten your grip, CG/EA, the more whales will slip through your fingers (and go F2P or quit).
People will never, ever be happy. This is an extremely silly place, but not in a good way.
True, but you're on this forum more than anyone. Are there more matchup complaints now than previous GA's? I'd claim yes.
I guess you don't remember when GA was first launched. Or TW for that matter.
This is exactly the same as every single time there's new content.
Correct, but it tapered off. However, we have a new influx of people previously okay with GA matchups now displeased, which indicates a problem.
Previously flocking ones since the beginning of GA also indicated a problem, yet were constantly getting shut down by certain portion of the community which the MM was to their benefit.
Maybe we are making false assumptions. I've read people claiming discrepancies of 800,000 GP in the 3.5 to 4.5 mill GP ranges. Perhaps the devs have data that show the average 3.5 mill GP player isn't that awesomely different than a 4.5 mill player in terms of roster quality.
Just a thought. We often think these things extrapolate linearly and they may not after all. Not saying any certainties here other than the devs are the ones with the data. I lost my 1st round, am winning my 2nd by the skin of my scrotum.
Maybe we are making false assumptions. I've read people claiming discrepancies of 800,000 GP in the 3.5 to 4.5 mill GP ranges. Perhaps the devs have data that show the average 3.5 mill GP player isn't that awesomely different than a 4.5 mill player in terms of roster quality.
Just a thought. We often think these things extrapolate linearly and they may not after all. Not saying any certainties here other than the devs are the ones with the data. I lost my 1st round, am winning my 2nd by the skin of my scrotum.
I made a rough calculation sometime ago how much fluff I had, the figure was 1.28M GP. And now I'm at 4.78M GP, just reset that part, you get a 3.5M GP roster where everything functional is the same...just less room to move mods xD.
Replies
Serious question.
Did you really think that CG was going to recode the matchmaking algorithm every time a new meta is introduced?
What about after every major rework? “GG was reworked so droid teams are good now, so we need to tweak matchmaking”
I think we all knew that would never happen, right?
So how do you expect that the matchmaking will take the “current and past” meta into account when it is constantly changing?
And to extend this - there are way too many variables here. New toons are released constantly, new metas come and go, even key mod stats change as teams are introduced (if GG was the top meta, would you want to be matched based on speed mods or health stats?)
The reality is that there are people with focussed rosters and those with wide rosters. Both sides are benefitted by very different algorithms. But CG doesn’t want to encourage players not to gear toons (for obvious rea$on$), so they made this change. As rounds go on, the differences will become less and less pronounced. This is what will result in players seeing more similar (which some seem to define as “mirror”) rosters.
This looks the same as many matchups I saw in old GA, so not sure we can say it's worse. I bet if you used the site it'll come out really close.
I still say they should do matchmaking based on what the DSR bot pulls, but I feel like the way they're doing it now is better than it was. And all the matches will even out over a 5 week GAC.
If they were good at coding in conjunction with good database design, they wouldn't have to change it every time. Set it up so you can mark certain characters or team compositions to be used in matchmaking, and then the "algorithm" is the same every time, you just flip some data every few months.
Congrats. You have Malak - and I'd guess by the power, at 7* and g12 - and he doesn't have him at all. You also have a maxed DR and judging by his power, it looks like his is g11 and probably only has 1 zeta. Good luck in round 2, because round 1 is clearly yours.
If you have any other mismatches you'd like to share, feel free to continue to contribute.
In game guild: TNR Uprising
I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
*This space left intentionally blank*
It's definitely possible and actually exists in many games. All that you need is some form of permanent PvP rating like Elo or equivalents. Of course you will need some starting point for initial setup, and for this GP is as good as any other sane parameter which allows to approximate power. After initial setup the system will begin to balance itself, and the more games people will play, the less their rating will be affected by anything but actual PvP performance. The only question is "how many games we need before people will get more or less stable rating" but it requires simulation and testing.
Now let's see how different manipulations with roster will affect your matchmaking.
1. Let's assume you are not improving your roster for some time. People who do it will become more powerful but their rating still the same. You begin to lose more often and your rating will fall, as it should be.
2. Let's assume you want to raise some toon to G13 just for collection. If you have limited resources and do it instead of raising some useful toon - see before. People who do something useful for PvP will get advantage, as it should be. But if you just buy this toon and gear - you are not punished but neither get advantage. Again, as it should be.
3. Let's assume you are direct your resources into improving your roster specifically for PvP. Your are pursuing meta, developing counter squads, etc. If you do this better than other players - you will climb higher. If you do it worse - see before, you will fall. Again, as it should be.
4. Let's assume you want to try sandbagging. Well, it just completely impossible. If you will make your roster weaker in any way you still will face same players but with worse roster - it may or may not affect you in bad way but you won't get advantage.
GAC system with climbing into higher leagues may, in theory, produce something similar in long run... IF there were more leagues, movement between leagues in both ways instead climbing only, and no reset of player position with new championship. Sadly currently it's nothing like this.
That’s a big “if” - what have you seen in this game lately to support that?
Perfect example - TB phases will now be a day and a half each because of a schedule issue? And they will remain that way “for the foreseeable future” for some reason.
So again - is it really shocking that they aren’t willing to program a game mode in a way that requires them to re-visit it each update?
Would we want that? Their track record for releasing “fixes” or “updates” is...consistent.
That's a fair point. And my specific example is hardly the most glaring - but there are literally hundreds of others that are far more imbalanced. As CaptainRex has already pointed out earlier in this thread, the outcry (and discrepancies) seem far worse this time around.
Do expect them to re-adjust the algorithm with every release and rework? Of course not. But I do expect them to at least come close to what they stated their goals were (i.e. matchups with similar rosters and similar GP). And based on the number of posts here on the forums, on Reddit and in the various guild, shard, and ship chats, they've missed that mark by a fairly sizable margin.
In game guild: TNR Uprising
I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
*This space left intentionally blank*
There have been consistent complaints about the matchmaking since the first tw. After awhile the complaints drop off and are forgotten apparently. There is always this level of outrage.
I’m not saying that this way is any better (I don’t personally care either way), but you can’t compare the day 1 complaint threads vs. the complaints that have died off over months as we “got used to” them.
I haven’t seen a sith raid complaint thread in hours but that doesn’t mean that everyone was always happy with it since it was released. Lots of us will remember the HAAT complaint threads too, when it was first released (“only TWO levels of difficulty???”). Not seeing them today doesn’t mean that everyone was actually happy upon it’s release.
There is some unintentional Ministry of Truth stuff happening here.
Yeah, I get that it's a big if, and it won't happen for multiple reasons, aside from their inability to do it. I'm not even a little shocked, I just wanted to point out that for any competent team it would be relatively easy to set up a matchmaking system that could take different things into account based on data.
And I'm not sure if we would really want them to do it if they could. I think I want them to do it in TW, because most of our matches have been bad ones, but in GAC... I don't think it matters that much, since you will eventually get matched against players of equal skill anyway.
The reason we'll never see a mm algorithm like what your wanting is cg designs new content for the sole purpose of making $. If everyone was matched by having the same toons, at the same gear lvl, with similar mods there would be no incentive for people to spend money.
I used to get angry at incompetence as well. I’ve since realized that it’s my expectations that need to change, and since I’ve done that I’m happier.
I now expect them to fail every release, and they no longer disappoint me.
Their -new matchmaking- announcement which is nowhere to be seen in reality doesn't promise matching rosters with their toon make-ups...but one uses many variables to compare them to match. We simply don't know what those parameters are. In the way I imagine what those variables are (disregards what toons player has but compares the amounts of them and their development level as well as other stuff like amounts of mods but not the inherent quality of those) CG can drive spending upwards as well. That's ideal for both ends may we have such an algo.
Okay, it seems like i misunderstood what you meant by "player performance".
What you're proposing is basically just a ladder system in which your roster is the main determining factor. You may be able to compensate a little by being a better player, but not by a lot. Better player as in better at anything non-roster related like strategy, with which team you attack, battle skill etc. Basically the things a lot of players think should be the sole determining factor in winning GA; player skill.
Correct, but it tapered off. However, we have a new influx of people previously okay with GA matchups now displeased, which indicates a problem.
Previously flocking ones since the beginning of GA also indicated a problem, yet were constantly getting shut down by certain portion of the community which the MM was to their benefit.
Just a thought. We often think these things extrapolate linearly and they may not after all. Not saying any certainties here other than the devs are the ones with the data. I lost my 1st round, am winning my 2nd by the skin of my scrotum.
I made a rough calculation sometime ago how much fluff I had, the figure was 1.28M GP. And now I'm at 4.78M GP, just reset that part, you get a 3.5M GP roster where everything functional is the same...just less room to move mods xD.
No it doesn't, it indicates something changed, which always created new complaints.