Stop the TW mismatches

1235Next

Replies

  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    StarSon wrote: »
    Simple solution: do exactly what they do now but only match guilds with the same record in their last 10 TWs. Perhaps give higher rewards for wins in 10-0 vs 10-0 matches than in 2-8 vs 2-8 matches. At least matches will be more competitive.

    Lots of simple options. But based on Kyno's responses, it's pretty clear that CG still doesn't even see this as a problem, so it's not going to change.

    Not that they dont see it as a problem, but nothing in the data is jumping out that this is as much of a thing as the player base sees it as.

    If every guild is within a margin of error around the 50% win mark, then there is no red flag on their end. Which would also point to the fact that this may not be as viable a strategy as some think, if no guild is just popping off wins due to being at 40+/- 5.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Simple solution: do exactly what they do now but only match guilds with the same record in their last 10 TWs. Perhaps give higher rewards for wins in 10-0 vs 10-0 matches than in 2-8 vs 2-8 matches. At least matches will be more competitive.

    Lots of simple options. But based on Kyno's responses, it's pretty clear that CG still doesn't even see this as a problem, so it's not going to change.

    Not that they dont see it as a problem, but nothing in the data is jumping out that this is as much of a thing as the player base sees it as.

    If every guild is within a margin of error around the 50% win mark, then there is no red flag on their end. Which would also point to the fact that this may not be as viable a strategy as some think, if no guild is just popping off wins due to being at 40+/- 5.

    My guild has not won a TW since March due to this exact reason. A 0% win rate over our last 10 or more TWs would fall well below this "margin of error" wouldn't you say? Why is that not "jumping out" over there? We used to win 40-50% of the time but as soon as April hit, we have only ever seen way more powerful guilds with less participation than us completely demolishing us. It's not even close. This is absolutely a problem at the moment. I know that not every guild is exploiting this but the algorithm is in serious need of updating. The fact that it can be exploited in the first place should be a red flag. I can also see in the comments here that some people are very pleased with the status quo and will accuse anyone who is trying to get this looked at by the devs of exaggerating. We are drowning here. There has not been any parity for us in months. This has to change.

    Kyno, none of this is directed towards you. I know that you are volunteering your time here. I'm sorry if anything I said or how I said it didn't sit well with anyone. I am absolutely fed up with this problem. I know that I am not the only one. I contacted EA help about this last month. I was told it would be looked into. Since then it has gotten worse for us. Our last 2 match ups completely cleared our whole map within hours. We couldn't do more than half of theirs. Please someone fix this.

  • GJO wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Here’s one for you...

    tqzt1z5rm6mx.jpeg

    We went in on 43/50 (226M). We have several guild members on vacation / travelling this weekend. I guess opponents went in on 45/50.

    Here’s the board after 2hrs 45 mins
    ryh7rj1tmx9y.jpeg

    We’re quite TW focused, but the margin of victory can’t just be down to us having 2 less players than them, surely?

    Yes, which is exactly what I (and others) have been saying for over a year. Even being 2 players off is enough to throw the MM out of whack to get matches exactly like what you showed.

    Although, margin of victory... did they eventually clear? Lots of guilds just can't be that active in the first 3 hours.
    They did eventually, but the winning margin was ~400 points.

    We dropped 9 battles total. They dropped 79.

    I don’t think a 2 player difference was the cause here. We are PvP focused (we’ve had fewer than 9 drops on several occasions) and our opponents obviously aren’t.

    I mean, they dropped more than 9 clearing a zone of Bossk led Bounty Hunters - that’s surely got nothing to do with one guild having 2 more members? They dropped 7 clearing a Carth lead OR team zone.

    You have to remember that matchups analysed on paper don’t tell the whole story. If you’ve got one guild who have a problem with TM-loading Geos and Nightsisters facing another who know their counters, the result is pretty clear regardless of the stats.

    C'mon, everybody simply KNOWS: whoever enter with signifcant less players will win (2~3+). If you want make a point, bring a TW when your guild had 5+ more members than the adversary and got a win. Then, you goint a point.

    P.S.: We do use that, we limit players to 42. Still unbeaten this year this way. When we relax and accept 45 to 47 members max, we have a winning rate of 66%. The last one we got sandbagged, 45 players against 40. No need to try.

    P.S.2: Easy fix for Cg, just add to the code to pair guilds with 1+, 1- players assigned to TW. If you enter with 48, you'll be assigned against a guild with 47, 48 or 49. The prizes are not so good, so keep it funny at least.


    OK, ( @GJO ) so just so I understand. By limiting the number of entrants you believe the TW will go in your favour which would tie in with some of my earlier calculations... Last TW their 28 or 29 vs. our 34, previous one their 33 or 34 vs our 39. Both where we had more and quote "5+ more members" where we were apparently a match, and we won both times, so I want to make a point @DEVS & @CG... Clearly there's a group of intelligent people here, and I know way more than I am, but I could do a better job in excel of matching guilds lol (the lol means I am just making a joke, I don't actually have a spreadsheet where I have tried this so please don't ask me for a copy (" ,))
    @Kyno


    This post is about highlighting to CG and the Devs that TW MM doesn't work as well as they think it does, it is about asking them to listen, listen, and then listen some more. To see that we have examples, to look and maybe even talk to us and to come up with some alternatives solutions that could be tested.

    I know no-one is being nasty and most of the banter is friendly, but this is just about making the game more fun. Once again, thank you for you comments and participation...
    This is the Way
  • Natetiffer wrote: »
    GJO wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Here’s one for you...

    tqzt1z5rm6mx.jpeg

    We went in on 43/50 (226M). We have several guild members on vacation / travelling this weekend. I guess opponents went in on 45/50.

    Here’s the board after 2hrs 45 mins
    ryh7rj1tmx9y.jpeg

    We’re quite TW focused, but the margin of victory can’t just be down to us having 2 less players than them, surely?

    Yes, which is exactly what I (and others) have been saying for over a year. Even being 2 players off is enough to throw the MM out of whack to get matches exactly like what you showed.

    Although, margin of victory... did they eventually clear? Lots of guilds just can't be that active in the first 3 hours.
    They did eventually, but the winning margin was ~400 points.

    We dropped 9 battles total. They dropped 79.

    I don’t think a 2 player difference was the cause here. We are PvP focused (we’ve had fewer than 9 drops on several occasions) and our opponents obviously aren’t.

    I mean, they dropped more than 9 clearing a zone of Bossk led Bounty Hunters - that’s surely got nothing to do with one guild having 2 more members? They dropped 7 clearing a Carth lead OR team zone.

    You have to remember that matchups analysed on paper don’t tell the whole story. If you’ve got one guild who have a problem with TM-loading Geos and Nightsisters facing another who know their counters, the result is pretty clear regardless of the stats.

    C'mon, everybody simply KNOWS: whoever enter with signifcant less players will win (2~3+). If you want make a point, bring a TW when your guild had 5+ more members than the adversary and got a win. Then, you goint a point.

    P.S.: We do use that, we limit players to 42. Still unbeaten this year this way. When we relax and accept 45 to 47 members max, we have a winning rate of 66%. The last one we got sandbagged, 45 players against 40. No need to try.

    P.S.2: Easy fix for Cg, just add to the code to pair guilds with 1+, 1- players assigned to TW. If you enter with 48, you'll be assigned against a guild with 47, 48 or 49. The prizes are not so good, so keep it funny at least.


    OK, ( @GJO ) so just so I understand. By limiting the number of entrants you believe the TW will go in your favour which would tie in with some of my earlier calculations... Last TW their 28 or 29 vs. our 34, previous one their 33 or 34 vs our 39. Both where we had more and quote "5+ more members" where we were apparently a match, and we won both times, so I want to make a point @DEVS & @CG... Clearly there's a group of intelligent people here, and I know way more than I am, but I could do a better job in excel of matching guilds lol (the lol means I am just making a joke, I don't actually have a spreadsheet where I have tried this so please don't ask me for a copy (" ,))
    @Kyno


    This post is about highlighting to CG and the Devs that TW MM doesn't work as well as they think it does, it is about asking them to listen, listen, and then listen some more. To see that we have examples, to look and maybe even talk to us and to come up with some alternatives solutions that could be tested.

    I know no-one is being nasty and most of the banter is friendly, but this is just about making the game more fun. Once again, thank you for you comments and participation...

    It’s good to see you guys can overcome the algorithm. I think player skill / guild coordination always plays a part, especially at lower GP levels (not meaning any offence by that, by the way).

    My guild (261M GP) has won plenty where the opponent had 2 less players than us, but it is telling that our only defeat in months was when the opponent had 4 less than us - here’s the matchup:
    rgk9cloo3kz2.jpeg

    When we lost that one, our opponent dropped 7 battles total. We dropped 15, so the margin of defeat was ~40 points.

    Looking back, I’m still annoyed about 10 of those drops we had - we could have beaten them!

    As I’ve said before, when a guild faces a 2 player difference but drops 10 battles clearing a Carth zone and loads TM all over the place, it’s not the 2 player difference that’s their problem.
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    Natetiffer wrote: »
    GJO wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Here’s one for you...

    tqzt1z5rm6mx.jpeg

    We went in on 43/50 (226M). We have several guild members on vacation / travelling this weekend. I guess opponents went in on 45/50.

    Here’s the board after 2hrs 45 mins
    ryh7rj1tmx9y.jpeg

    We’re quite TW focused, but the margin of victory can’t just be down to us having 2 less players than them, surely?

    Yes, which is exactly what I (and others) have been saying for over a year. Even being 2 players off is enough to throw the MM out of whack to get matches exactly like what you showed.

    Although, margin of victory... did they eventually clear? Lots of guilds just can't be that active in the first 3 hours.
    They did eventually, but the winning margin was ~400 points.

    We dropped 9 battles total. They dropped 79.

    I don’t think a 2 player difference was the cause here. We are PvP focused (we’ve had fewer than 9 drops on several occasions) and our opponents obviously aren’t.

    I mean, they dropped more than 9 clearing a zone of Bossk led Bounty Hunters - that’s surely got nothing to do with one guild having 2 more members? They dropped 7 clearing a Carth lead OR team zone.

    You have to remember that matchups analysed on paper don’t tell the whole story. If you’ve got one guild who have a problem with TM-loading Geos and Nightsisters facing another who know their counters, the result is pretty clear regardless of the stats.

    C'mon, everybody simply KNOWS: whoever enter with signifcant less players will win (2~3+). If you want make a point, bring a TW when your guild had 5+ more members than the adversary and got a win. Then, you goint a point.

    P.S.: We do use that, we limit players to 42. Still unbeaten this year this way. When we relax and accept 45 to 47 members max, we have a winning rate of 66%. The last one we got sandbagged, 45 players against 40. No need to try.

    P.S.2: Easy fix for Cg, just add to the code to pair guilds with 1+, 1- players assigned to TW. If you enter with 48, you'll be assigned against a guild with 47, 48 or 49. The prizes are not so good, so keep it funny at least.


    OK, ( @GJO ) so just so I understand. By limiting the number of entrants you believe the TW will go in your favour which would tie in with some of my earlier calculations... Last TW their 28 or 29 vs. our 34, previous one their 33 or 34 vs our 39. Both where we had more and quote "5+ more members" where we were apparently a match, and we won both times, so I want to make a point @DEVS & @CG... Clearly there's a group of intelligent people here, and I know way more than I am, but I could do a better job in excel of matching guilds lol (the lol means I am just making a joke, I don't actually have a spreadsheet where I have tried this so please don't ask me for a copy (" ,))
    @Kyno


    This post is about highlighting to CG and the Devs that TW MM doesn't work as well as they think it does, it is about asking them to listen, listen, and then listen some more. To see that we have examples, to look and maybe even talk to us and to come up with some alternatives solutions that could be tested.

    I know no-one is being nasty and most of the banter is friendly, but this is just about making the game more fun. Once again, thank you for you comments and participation...

    It’s good to see you guys can overcome the algorithm. I think player skill / guild coordination always plays a part, especially at lower GP levels (not meaning any offence by that, by the way).

    My guild (261M GP) has won plenty where the opponent had 2 less players than us, but it is telling that our only defeat in months was when the opponent had 4 less than us - here’s the matchup:
    rgk9cloo3kz2.jpeg

    When we lost that one, our opponent dropped 7 battles total. We dropped 15, so the margin of defeat was ~40 points.

    Looking back, I’m still annoyed about 10 of those drops we had - we could have beaten them!

    As I’ve said before, when a guild faces a 2 player difference but drops 10 battles clearing a Carth zone and loads TM all over the place, it’s not the 2 player difference that’s their problem.

    Even with 20m guild gp difference, that match still doesn't have much gl difference. This frequently happens nowadays though. 10-20 gl count difference is not something to overcome simply by skill. The guild on the other side of it will have efficiency drop due to it. I can see how significant this is, since I'm on the side that's taking advantage of it.
  • Well the weeks have passed and the results have been good and bad... I assume because we won some mismatches and we lost some mismatches and roughly 50% it doesn't raise any flags.

    I tell my guild now that we just have to accept that it is ok to be 14m GP behind our opponent and that their 32 Participants have roughly the same GP as our 36... We will do our best, our 1 GAS vs their 5, their 23 RJT vs our 10 etc... Maybe I should tell all of our sub 1m players, sorry, but your can't play with us anymore because TW Matching thinks you can beat a 2m account!...

    Thank you everyone for your input!!!!

    All the best!

    NMT
    This is the Way
  • Our last TW they had an advantage of 48 to 15 GL and JKL was 11 to 1

    This were the other stats. Not even close!
    50ibx0c6pm8b.jpeg
    a02h7v4l1sz0.jpeg
  • This is why it’s great being in WORLD’S FIRST and WORLD’S BEST guild: You win all the TWs! What could be more fun than that?
    SnakesOnAPlane
  • This is why it’s great being in WORLD’S FIRST and WORLD’S BEST guild: You win all the TWs! What could be more fun than that?
    A forum without frequent self-aggrandisement?
  • Natetiffer
    290 posts Member
    edited July 2020
    GUILD 49 MEMBERS 111m vs GUILD 47 MEMBERS correction they have 130m (3 Mercs left 19m)
    42 Join 36 Join
    avg 2,233,521 avg 2,765,957

    HMMMMMM
    Post edited by Natetiffer on
    This is the Way
  • Here is my current matchup.
    tajvg5u0fnwd.jpg

    So yet again we have absolutely no chance before it evens begins. Ridiculous that with so many people playing this game that they can't find one guild close to mine for us to fight.
  • 700 more g13s, 500 more zetas, 21 more gl ults, and over 20m more gp. We should not even be in a bracket with a guild so far beyond us. Nothing we could do could possibly make up for this difference.
  • The more of us that join, the worse the mismatches are...

    Our 42 Vs their 30
    Guild level they had 50m more than us so average GP per player is really silly
    This is the Way
  • and since the nerfing has been imposed on us, the matching is even more unfair
    This is the Way
  • Xcien
    2436 posts Member
    Natetiffer wrote: »
    and since the nerfing has been imposed on us, the matching is even more unfair

    Necro!

    But to be honest, it’s sad that after all this time, TW matchmaking still hasn’t been fixed.
    I've found this whole experience to be very enlightening.

    Thank you for evaluating. Your feedback is appreciated.
  • @Xcien not the first time I have been called that!

    I think most had just accepted it is broken and either quit the game, don't join TW or just carry on and ignore the issue as when push comes to shove, we play because we want to

    Cheers for your support
    This is the Way
  • Xcien
    2436 posts Member
    Natetiffer wrote: »
    @Xcien not the first time I have been called that!

    I think most had just accepted it is broken and either quit the game, don't join TW or just carry on and ignore the issue as when push comes to shove, we play because we want to

    Cheers for your support

    Agreed. Hopefully CG we change the matchmaking system to make it more fair. May the Force be with you.
    I've found this whole experience to be very enlightening.

    Thank you for evaluating. Your feedback is appreciated.
Sign In or Register to comment.