Compromises to Matchmaking GAC

Nothingface

This thread is intended to open a discussion about matchmaking. We aren't stuck with only two possible options and it's worth exploring if the algorithm can be improved to satisfy a larger portion of the player base.
3 possible compromises:
1. Expand rosters by 30% when considering relevant gp.
2. "Weigh" certain characters or gear levels differently. Most would agree g13 is under weight considering its importance.
3. Use matchmaking algorithms similar to TW. Only characters over 8k gp can be placed and effect gp rate.
Obviously this is not a comprehensive list and each can be further developed. The idea is that compromises can be made to make matchmaking considered fair (or at least less broken) to a larger portion of the player base.

Gp beyond what is considered "relevant" stil has an impact on the battle and should be taken into consideration. It also effects divisions and decides tie breakers.
Thank you in advance for keeping this discourse civil and productive.

Nothingface

Austin9370 wrote: »

1). Why 30%? That seems like an arbitrary number.
2). Just work on your personal G13 characters.
3). How is this that diffrent to #1?

Really, there are just fundamental beliefs in how GAC should work. Here are the main 4 types I see.

1). Previous iteration of players who want to keep the advantage they had of building a lean roster and always getting favorable matchups.

2). Players who look exactly like them. It doesn't matter how you build your roster. You'll play someone the same. This involves looking very detailed in the roster (G13, 6E mods, meta characters, etc..)

3). Competitive players. Meta teams and maxed characters are the goal.

4). This last is a combination of 2 & 3. There should be some type of way to limit matchups from being too one-sided, but acknowledges there could be less than even matchups for players not actively pursuing the metas. However, in this system, players can change their focus to be more meta based to improve their overall success. This is the current system.

30% is arbitrary but offers enough "extra" to cover a large portion of what is being used outside of top 20-80. This would be a better depiction of relevant gp.
Also, since you offered no alternative to the current matchmaking system, do you believe this is the best possible system.

BeralCator

Nothingface wrote: »

Austin9370 wrote: »

1). Why 30%? That seems like an arbitrary number.
2). Just work on your personal G13 characters.
3). How is this that diffrent to #1?

Really, there are just fundamental beliefs in how GAC should work. Here are the main 4 types I see.

1). Previous iteration of players who want to keep the advantage they had of building a lean roster and always getting favorable matchups.

2). Players who look exactly like them. It doesn't matter how you build your roster. You'll play someone the same. This involves looking very detailed in the roster (G13, 6E mods, meta characters, etc..)

3). Competitive players. Meta teams and maxed characters are the goal.

4). This last is a combination of 2 & 3. There should be some type of way to limit matchups from being too one-sided, but acknowledges there could be less than even matchups for players not actively pursuing the metas. However, in this system, players can change their focus to be more meta based to improve their overall success. This is the current system.

30% is arbitrary but offers enough "extra" to cover a large portion of what is being used outside of top 20-80. This would be a better depiction of relevant gp.
Also, since you offered no alternative to the current matchmaking system, do you believe this is the best possible system.

Agree with this 100%, even though it would yield harder matches for me. I have about 2-4 teams outside the relevant GP that are viable, and they give me a massive advantage against leaner rosters (as I can place unfavorable matchups on defense).

Counting 100% of GP was stupid, but so is only counting n*5 characters. I am being matched on top 70, but regularly use about 90-100 characters from my roster depending on what my opponent has. An extra 30% would be 91, which seems like a nice balance.

Gannon

Nothingface wrote: »

1. Expand rosters by 30% when considering relevant gp.
2. "Weigh" certain characters or gear levels differently. Most would agree g13 is under weight considering its importance.
3. Use matchmaking algorithms similar to TW. Only characters over 8k gp can be placed and effect gp rate.

1: I agree to some extent, 30 seems steep at first glance, and will result in the same complains from lean roster people anyway. With well developed rosters tho, that's Only and extra few hundred k, But they'll still be matched with the same whales they face now anyway. So it seems a lot of work for very little change in the end.

2: after don't tons of my own research into the numbers gp considers for each gear piece, ability, etc, I'd say the only real issue is the final tiers. Most ppl forget that that one g13 piece is only one of six, that's why it seems so low, but honestly all six g12 bits should give way more gp tbh.

3: seems like it wouldn't help most ppl, and could cause more complaints about toons they can't use.

So imo, 2 is best, and would result in the least complaints or manipulations.
👍

Sneekypete

How about just use leader board and let people higher up fight others higher up like it was supposed to be, problem solved.

Nothingface

Sneekypete wrote: »

How about just use leader board and let people higher up fight others higher up like it was supposed to be, problem solved.

Wouldn't we have to br limited to fighting inside our own divisions for this to work?

Manumicio

evoluza wrote: »

Every group should get an additional 5 team to place on defense.

I like that, would generate interesting teams to fight against

Or better, exclude the top 80 toons from GAC, that would be fun