TW matchmaking is too inaccurate

Prev1
Wagg_Dohana
52 posts Member
edited May 2020
I'm not entirely sure how CG determines matchmaking in this game, but being put against a guild with 200 more G13 than us isn't a reasonable pairing. Also being paired against guilds that have 5 galactic legend Rey's when we have none is incredibly overkill. Our members see that and immediately lose all will to continue fighting in TW.
Post edited by Wagg_Dohana on

Replies

  • An easy way to rectify this would be to update the matchmaking system based on open source material like DSR bot, which compares the amount of particular units each guild has, how many units at respective gear levels, the secondary speed stats on mods. All of this is out there and free use in the public domain, and it could easily be used to make the matchmaking system more accurate and generate fair fights
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    unfortunately it is highly unlikely they will take away an advantage that players pay for by only matching them against players who have a similar advantage.

    matchmaking is based on GP, GP is a pure measure of how much investment someone has in their roster. Where they used that investment and how they shaped their roster is player dependent. In theory its a good system for matching and allows the players choices to determine how effective they are in their "weight class".
  • In theory, yes, but with GAC came the streamlining of peoples rosters, the power of galactic legends heavily outclasses their GP value and so do relics. The information to refine this game mode in order to make a better experience for everyone involved is there, no theory about it. Practically, using information that scripts like DSR bot pull up is definitively more accurate for matchmaking than saying "you're 215m GP, they're 225m GP, close enough."
    It also doesnt explain why we have been paired up with guilds almost 20m more than us over our last few TW's. Again, using scripts that are in the public domain are poit for point more accurate than measuring GP. This has been highlighted by the community countless of times and the amount of work needed to implement this is next to none, it's all there.
  • nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?
  • Rebmes
    376 posts Member
    At the same time it's not that much fun winning against a much weaker opponent.
  • There are posts on this forum dating as far back as 2018 with people expressing their intentions to exploit the GP-based matchmaking. If anything, now is the time that it needs to be addressed and reworked. The game mode needs to update concurrently with the addition of new character tiers, new power scaling etc. GP was never an accurate representation, and now it's worse than it ever has been.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?
  • Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot
  • UdalCuain
    4996 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot

    You might have been, but your opponents could have had less than 50 sign up.
  • UdalCuain wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot

    You might have been, but your opponents could have had less than 50 sign up.

    This is what I'm getting at. They may have had only 40 or 45 sign up, which according to GP matchmaking would be fair, right? But not when they have multiple GL Rey on defence and our guild has no galactic legends at all. This is what I mean by GP matchmaking is outdated and needs to be updated in accordance to the current state of the game.
  • DHD
    12 posts Member
    I am in the same guild as Wagg...the required defenses for that last war were 24 so the opponent had either 47 or 48 sign up to participate. Matchmaking is the single biggest factor in determining who will win a TW and that is unfortunate and quite frankly impacts the guild's willingness to participate.
  • DHD wrote: »
    I am in the same guild as Wagg...the required defenses for that last war were 24 so the opponent had either 47 or 48 sign up to participate. Matchmaking is the single biggest factor in determining who will win a TW and that is unfortunate and quite frankly impacts the guild's willingness to participate.

    Thank you for joining us, DHD. This man here is our number cruncher, probably the best person to be talking about this
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    DHD wrote: »
    I am in the same guild as Wagg...the required defenses for that last war were 24 so the opponent had either 47 or 48 sign up to participate. Matchmaking is the single biggest factor in determining who will win a TW and that is unfortunate and quite frankly impacts the guild's willingness to participate.

    There are others out there that would disagree with that being the biggest factor. Participation and willingness are huge. its not the dog in the fight but the fight in the dog.

    There is always one guild on the down side of the numbers match, and there is more to TW than just numbers. strategy can overcome.

    not to say "you can always win", but if your guild is disheartened just by the numbers, try a few matches without those being posted and see how your guild does. You might be surprised. look at the strategy used, adapt and overcome.
  • DHD
    12 posts Member
    I have been tracking our TW data since Sept 3 2019. During that time frame we have gone 18 -15, but as we have climbed up the GP ladder, the TW matchmaking has been ridiculuously off. Since January 27, we are 3-12 and of those 15 matches, 8 have been epic mismatches, including 4 of the last 5 (when we crossed into the 200M GP Tier). Our current match-up is more of the same. It's not that we don't have quality rosters or strong participation. We do well on TBs, (27 on DS Geo, 11 on LS for 220M in GP). We just lack the game breaking GL toons and still need another turn at GAS to even out our rosters more. But since these top two tiers are the waters for the whales, we will continue to see these mismatches based on GP.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot

    You might have been, but your opponents could have had less than 50 sign up.

    This is what I'm getting at. They may have had only 40 or 45 sign up, which according to GP matchmaking would be fair, right? But not when they have multiple GL Rey on defence and our guild has no galactic legends at all. This is what I mean by GP matchmaking is outdated and needs to be updated in accordance to the current state of the game.

    at every juncture like this in the game, this sentiment gets brought up. What counter teams is your guild building? You may not be the most flexible, but that doesn't mean you can't plan and work towards goals that will keep you in the running.
  • DHD
    12 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot

    You might have been, but your opponents could have had less than 50 sign up.

    This is what I'm getting at. They may have had only 40 or 45 sign up, which according to GP matchmaking would be fair, right? But not when they have multiple GL Rey on defence and our guild has no galactic legends at all. This is what I mean by GP matchmaking is outdated and needs to be updated in accordance to the current state of the game.

    at every juncture like this in the game, this sentiment gets brought up. What counter teams is your guild building? You may not be the most flexible, but that doesn't mean you can't plan and work towards goals that will keep you in the running.

    you can either accept the data tells a different story or continue to pretend their isn't a better way to match guilds for TW. The long grind of GL characters and the 80 day gap in playing for GAS makes it hard to catch-up. We take the lessons from the guilds that beat us. Adjust our defensive strategy. Farm the teams that help TW. We do all the things that we should to get better. Even with all those things being true, we can't make a match-up like the screen shot shared competitive.
  • You can have all the counters set up, but when the data suggests that x team will out speed y counter, there is still next to no wiggle room.
    GL counters are either naturally inconsistent irrespective of mods and also break apart multiple teams (the very few counters to Rey) or not WAI (referencing GS solo v.s SLK.)
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator

    DHD wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot

    You might have been, but your opponents could have had less than 50 sign up.

    This is what I'm getting at. They may have had only 40 or 45 sign up, which according to GP matchmaking would be fair, right? But not when they have multiple GL Rey on defence and our guild has no galactic legends at all. This is what I mean by GP matchmaking is outdated and needs to be updated in accordance to the current state of the game.

    at every juncture like this in the game, this sentiment gets brought up. What counter teams is your guild building? You may not be the most flexible, but that doesn't mean you can't plan and work towards goals that will keep you in the running.

    you can either accept the data tells a different story or continue to pretend their isn't a better way to match guilds for TW. The long grind of GL characters and the 80 day gap in playing for GAS makes it hard to catch-up. We take the lessons from the guilds that beat us. Adjust our defensive strategy. Farm the teams that help TW. We do all the things that we should to get better. Even with all those things being true, we can't make a match-up like the screen shot shared competitive.

    I never said there isn't a better way.

    but to say you team walks onto the field to see the other team looks bigger/stronger/faster and they want to give up, just doesn't sounds like a winning situation for the future, no matter how matchmaking works/changes.

    the screenshot/data provided doesn't paint the whole picture, and guilds do overcome differences like this.

    and GLs are new, and it will take time for less flexible guilds to overcome the advantage that some $$ to get, but that still doesnt' mean you can't win.
  • HiFlyer956
    1 posts Member
    edited May 2020
    I’m literally laughing out loud at kyno’s replies to this very valid concern. There’s just no logical argument that the GP based TW matchmaking model was ever optimal, and with the intro of the GL toons, it’s absolutely laughable. We’re facing a guild with 20m GP more. One wall had 4 GL Reys. We planned for that and made it through. The next wall has 6 more, 4 with Ultimate. Game over. No amount of strategy will get you through that when your own guild has half the total GLs and none with ultimate. It was never a great matchmaking model, especially with guilds’ ability to manipulate via sandbagging, but now it’s just a total joke. They could do so much better if they cared to.
    If you doubt that a better model could be built, spend some time playing MSF. IMO, their war matchmaking is far superior.
    Post edited by Kyno on
  • I’m not saying that the matchmaking can’t be improved, but it’s a hard disagree on considering the amount of GL toons when matchmaking.

    This has been suggested since the very start of TW, with the number of Traya, JKR, DR, Malak, GAS all being the subject of complaints before.

    If matching were to consider the number of these top end toons, guilds would end up fighting a very limited pool of opponents and TW would soon get stale.

    If 2 guilds signup with similar active GP, then participants can be sure that those guilds have made use of a similar amount of in game resource, and the matchup should be pretty fair. This falls down, though, when guilds with much higher GP have fewer members sign up. 41 people with 225M GP is not the same as 50 people with 225M GP.

    The only improvement the devs should implement is to match on active GP with +/- a max of 2 signed up players.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    HiFlyer956 wrote: »
    I’m literally laughing out loud at kyno’s replies to this very valid concern. There’s just no logical argument that the GP based TW matchmaking model was ever optimal, and with the intro of the GL toons, it’s absolutely laughable. We’re facing a guild with 20m GP more. One wall had 4 GL Reys. We planned for that and made it through. The next wall has 6 more, 4 with Ultimate. Game over. No amount of strategy will get you through that when your own guild has half the total GLs and none with ultimate. It was never a great matchmaking model, especially with guilds’ ability to manipulate via sandbagging, but now it’s just a total joke. They could do so much better if they cared to.
    If you doubt that a better model could be built, spend some time playing MSF. IMO, their war matchmaking is far superior.

    firstly this:
    Kyno wrote: »
    DHD wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot

    You might have been, but your opponents could have had less than 50 sign up.

    This is what I'm getting at. They may have had only 40 or 45 sign up, which according to GP matchmaking would be fair, right? But not when they have multiple GL Rey on defence and our guild has no galactic legends at all. This is what I mean by GP matchmaking is outdated and needs to be updated in accordance to the current state of the game.

    at every juncture like this in the game, this sentiment gets brought up. What counter teams is your guild building? You may not be the most flexible, but that doesn't mean you can't plan and work towards goals that will keep you in the running.

    you can either accept the data tells a different story or continue to pretend their isn't a better way to match guilds for TW. The long grind of GL characters and the 80 day gap in playing for GAS makes it hard to catch-up. We take the lessons from the guilds that beat us. Adjust our defensive strategy. Farm the teams that help TW. We do all the things that we should to get better. Even with all those things being true, we can't make a match-up like the screen shot shared competitive.

    I never said there isn't a better way.

    secondly thank you for proving my point, since you are saying that your guild was able to build a strategy and work around these new toons. just like every "new thing" to come before them. sure your guild may take time to adapt and you may be at a slower pace than your opponents, but you will catch up and even out at some point and you will probably win a few along the way.

    the total GP is absolutely pointless to point out, as you are not facing 20M more GP. matching is done on active GP, which is the players who sign up.

    This:
    If 2 guilds signup with similar active GP, then participants can be sure that those guilds have made use of a similar amount of in game resource, and the matchup should be pretty fair. This falls down, though, when guilds with much higher GP have fewer members sign up. 41 people with 225M GP is not the same as 50 people with 225M GP.

    The only improvement the devs should implement is to match on active GP with +/- a max of 2 signed up players.

    I agree they should do more to deal with guilds that dont have full sign up, as those seem to be causing the biggest issues when guild get matched.

    no its not always sandbagging. I'm in a very active guild, we rarely have all 50 sign up for one reason or another. we are in the 46-48 range most times.
  • Hortus
    615 posts Member
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot

    You might have been, but your opponents could have had less than 50 sign up.

    This is what I'm getting at. They may have had only 40 or 45 sign up, which according to GP matchmaking would be fair, right? But not when they have multiple GL Rey on defence and our guild has no galactic legends at all. This is what I mean by GP matchmaking is outdated and needs to be updated in accordance to the current state of the game.

    Afaik TW matchmaking isn't based on the pure guild GP but instead on GP of teams which both guild can field (probably also limited by number of slots you need to fill) - https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/162893/dev-post-matchmaking-clarification-post-3-15/p1 . So it isn't question of GP, it's question of where you put this GP while developing your roster.

    If your guild for whatever reason have many high-powered B-teams while your opponent focused on top teams, your are going to lose. Is it fair? Well, if some people are strictly focused on developing best teams they deserved their win imho.
  • Hortus wrote: »
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot

    You might have been, but your opponents could have had less than 50 sign up.

    This is what I'm getting at. They may have had only 40 or 45 sign up, which according to GP matchmaking would be fair, right? But not when they have multiple GL Rey on defence and our guild has no galactic legends at all. This is what I mean by GP matchmaking is outdated and needs to be updated in accordance to the current state of the game.

    Afaik TW matchmaking isn't based on the pure guild GP but instead on GP of teams which both guild can field (probably also limited by number of slots you need to fill) - https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/162893/dev-post-matchmaking-clarification-post-3-15/p1 . So it isn't question of GP, it's question of where you put this GP while developing your roster.

    If your guild for whatever reason have many high-powered B-teams while your opponent focused on top teams, your are going to lose. Is it fair? Well, if some people are strictly focused on developing best teams they deserved their win imho.

    I’m pretty sure matchmaking has been updated at some point within the last 2years 2months. I’ve not seen any evidence that fieldable teams is considered recently.
  • Waqui
    8802 posts Member
    Hortus wrote: »
    UdalCuain wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    nx9tnu02rthh.jpg
    This is from our last TW. As you can see, GP is not close, gear levels of units aren't close, look at the difference in mods. But this is WAI?

    how many players joined?

    We were a full 50/50 last TW, which is the matchup in the screenshot

    You might have been, but your opponents could have had less than 50 sign up.

    This is what I'm getting at. They may have had only 40 or 45 sign up, which according to GP matchmaking would be fair, right? But not when they have multiple GL Rey on defence and our guild has no galactic legends at all. This is what I mean by GP matchmaking is outdated and needs to be updated in accordance to the current state of the game.

    Afaik TW matchmaking isn't based on the pure guild GP but instead on GP of teams which both guild can field (probably also limited by number of slots you need to fill) - https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/162893/dev-post-matchmaking-clarification-post-3-15/p1 . So it isn't question of GP, it's question of where you put this GP while developing your roster.

    If your guild for whatever reason have many high-powered B-teams while your opponent focused on top teams, your are going to lose. Is it fair? Well, if some people are strictly focused on developing best teams they deserved their win imho.

    AFAIK you linked outdated information. We are not matched by average squad power but by active GP. Check all those countless discussions about sandbagging and mismatches because of differences in average roster power.
  • Hortus
    615 posts Member
    Waqui wrote: »

    AFAIK you linked outdated information. We are not matched by average squad power but by active GP. Check all those countless discussions about sandbagging and mismatches because of differences in average roster power.

    Can you please link any dev posts with more actual information? Discussions about "sandbagging" by itself prove nothing - on the contrary, in this post there is dev response stating that they can't see how GP reducing (i.e. lesser people joined) can give an advantage.

    This is in line with previously posted algorithm and contradicts pure "active GP" theory, assuming we aren't suggesting that devs are stupid and can't see how smaller amount of stronger players can destroy larger amount of weaker ones in case of "active GP" matchmaking. I, however, don't know if there was some further investigation and if it lead to something. If it did, can you give a link?
    I’m pretty sure matchmaking has been updated at some point within the last 2years 2months. I’ve not seen any evidence that fieldable teams is considered recently.

    Updated - maybe, but entirely replaced with plain and simple "active GP" as many people claim? I've seen no such information. If you do - can you provide a link please?

    P.S. Btw, based on our own casual experience - many last months we have pretty stable amount of people joining the TW (35-40). But we see big difference between amount of TW nodes between matches (13-19). This mean that our opponents should have very different amount of people joined. In the "active GP" theory, we should expect some overwhelming matchups with smaller amount of nodes. But in practice, I've seen no such thing - we have never been matched against opponents with obviously stronger roster despite clearly having more people joined.
  • Waqui
    8802 posts Member
    Hortus wrote: »
    Waqui wrote: »

    AFAIK you linked outdated information. We are not matched by average squad power but by active GP. Check all those countless discussions about sandbagging and mismatches because of differences in average roster power.

    Can you please link any dev posts with more actual information?

    Why should I? Everybody knows, that we are not matched by average squad power. Again: The countless discussions about sandbagging have proof that we are not. Check them out.

  • Hortus
    615 posts Member
    Waqui wrote: »
    Hortus wrote: »
    Waqui wrote: »

    AFAIK you linked outdated information. We are not matched by average squad power but by active GP. Check all those countless discussions about sandbagging and mismatches because of differences in average roster power.

    Can you please link any dev posts with more actual information?

    Why should I? Everybody knows, that we are not matched by average squad power. Again: The countless discussions about sandbagging have proof that we are not. Check them out.

    Nor me nor developers posts which I referred never said that we are matched by "average squad power". It has been said that matchmaking goal is to create situation where people have similar average squad power, which is entirely different thing. How good the algorithm can achieve such goals is the another question.

  • Hortus wrote: »
    Waqui wrote: »

    AFAIK you linked outdated information. We are not matched by average squad power but by active GP. Check all those countless discussions about sandbagging and mismatches because of differences in average roster power.

    Can you please link any dev posts with more actual information? Discussions about "sandbagging" by itself prove nothing - on the contrary, in this post there is dev response stating that they can't see how GP reducing (i.e. lesser people joined) can give an advantage.

    This is in line with previously posted algorithm and contradicts pure "active GP" theory, assuming we aren't suggesting that devs are stupid and can't see how smaller amount of stronger players can destroy larger amount of weaker ones in case of "active GP" matchmaking. I, however, don't know if there was some further investigation and if it lead to something. If it did, can you give a link?
    I’m pretty sure matchmaking has been updated at some point within the last 2years 2months. I’ve not seen any evidence that fieldable teams is considered recently.

    Updated - maybe, but entirely replaced with plain and simple "active GP" as many people claim? I've seen no such information. If you do - can you provide a link please?

    P.S. Btw, based on our own casual experience - many last months we have pretty stable amount of people joining the TW (35-40). But we see big difference between amount of TW nodes between matches (13-19). This mean that our opponents should have very different amount of people joined. In the "active GP" theory, we should expect some overwhelming matchups with smaller amount of nodes. But in practice, I've seen no such thing - we have never been matched against opponents with obviously stronger roster despite clearly having more people joined.

    I don’t need to provide a link. Every matchup we’ve had for 1+ years has seen an almost identical amount of Active GP for us and our opponents. Certainly within 2%, and the last dozen or so within 1%. And in every sandbagging complaint post the same is true.

    And I don’t think the theory really applies for your guild. The people reporting the overwhelming matchups are almost invariably going in with 48-50 signed up, being matched with guilds with 35-40 signed up.

    If you get your entire guild (assuming you have 50 members) to sign up, that’s when you’ll occasionally get a matchup with a larger guild going in with fewer members.
  • Hortus
    615 posts Member
    edited May 2020
    Hortus wrote: »
    Waqui wrote: »

    AFAIK you linked outdated information. We are not matched by average squad power but by active GP. Check all those countless discussions about sandbagging and mismatches because of differences in average roster power.

    Can you please link any dev posts with more actual information? Discussions about "sandbagging" by itself prove nothing - on the contrary, in this post there is dev response stating that they can't see how GP reducing (i.e. lesser people joined) can give an advantage.

    This is in line with previously posted algorithm and contradicts pure "active GP" theory, assuming we aren't suggesting that devs are stupid and can't see how smaller amount of stronger players can destroy larger amount of weaker ones in case of "active GP" matchmaking. I, however, don't know if there was some further investigation and if it lead to something. If it did, can you give a link?
    I’m pretty sure matchmaking has been updated at some point within the last 2years 2months. I’ve not seen any evidence that fieldable teams is considered recently.

    Updated - maybe, but entirely replaced with plain and simple "active GP" as many people claim? I've seen no such information. If you do - can you provide a link please?

    P.S. Btw, based on our own casual experience - many last months we have pretty stable amount of people joining the TW (35-40). But we see big difference between amount of TW nodes between matches (13-19). This mean that our opponents should have very different amount of people joined. In the "active GP" theory, we should expect some overwhelming matchups with smaller amount of nodes. But in practice, I've seen no such thing - we have never been matched against opponents with obviously stronger roster despite clearly having more people joined.

    I don’t need to provide a link. Every matchup we’ve had for 1+ years has seen an almost identical amount of Active GP for us and our opponents. Certainly within 2%, and the last dozen or so within 1%. And in every sandbagging complaint post the same is true.

    And just how it contradicts "squad-based" approach? If algorithm tried to create squads with close power it automatically means that overall power of those squads also usually will be close, isn't that obvious? Active GP may play some role as one of parameters but stating that it's the only (or main) thing considered is a little too far fetched, especially when we have developer post with clear statement that they don't see how lowering amount of people joined can lead to advantage.
    And I don’t think the theory really applies for your guild. The people reporting the overwhelming matchups are almost invariably going in with 48-50 signed up, being matched with guilds with 35-40 signed up.

    If you get your entire guild (assuming you have 50 members) to sign up, that’s when you’ll occasionally get a matchup with a larger guild going in with fewer members.

    I assume we are all matched by the same algorithm. If it applies to guilds with 50 member joined it also applies to guilds with 35. And if opponent have 1.5 times less people than us but have same active GP it should lead to obvious squad power advantage. But it doesn't. Can you please explain why it works in 50vs45 but doesn't work in 35 vs 25?
  • Hortus wrote: »
    And just how it contradicts "squad-based" approach? If algorithm tried to create squads with close power it automatically means that overall power of those squads also usually will be close, isn't that obvious? Active GP may play some role as one of parameters but stating that it's the only (or main) thing considered is a little too far fetched, especially when we have developer post with clear statement that they don't see how lowering amount of people joined can lead to advantage.
    Active GP plays the only role. There is no squad based approach. The reasons the devs posted that is because they don’t have the ability / resources to address the issue, so the easiest thing they can do is pretend the issue doesn’t exist.
    I assume we are all matched by the same algorithm. If it applies to guilds with 50 member joined it also applies to guilds with 35. And if opponent have 1.5 times less people than us but have same active GP it should lead to obvious squad power advantage. But it doesn't. Can you please explain why it works in 50vs45 but doesn't work in 35 vs 25?
    To do so I have to make some assumptions about your guild, but it goes a little like this:

    Guilds with 50 signing up tend to be pretty “serious” about the game. If you’ve got 50 people with 4M GP average fighting 40 people with 5M GP average, the difference between those 4M and 5M accounts is huge.

    I theorise that guilds with 35, 30, 25 people signing up are much more casual and the GP figures involved are much lower. If your guild has 35 signing up, I’m guessing the average GP is nearer 3M than 4M. And I don’t think it’s likely that a guild with average GP above that will be going into TW with only 25 signed up.
Sign In or Register to comment.