TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
Many of the people I see complaining are either fixated on some abstract stat such as number of relics / g13s / zetas / fast mods or the fact that their opponent has a particular toon/squad and they do not have either a mirror or other counter for it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
Many of the people I see complaining are either fixated on some abstract stat such as number of relics / g13s / zetas / fast mods or the fact that their opponent has a particular toon/squad and they do not have either a mirror or other counter for it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
I don't mean to refute you fully, but gp is not a measure of resource investment accurately or anything close to that. There are orders of magnitude differecen between gear tiers if we consider resource investment to each tier. Gp tables of these are seemingly random, but increasing multipliers. It would need to increase much more if GP was to represent investment.
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
Many of the people I see complaining are either fixated on some abstract stat such as number of relics / g13s / zetas / fast mods or the fact that their opponent has a particular toon/squad and they do not have either a mirror or other counter for it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
I don't mean to refute you fully, but gp is not a measure of resource investment accurately or anything close to that. There are orders of magnitude differecen between gear tiers if we consider resource investment to each tier. Gp tables of these are seemingly random, but increasing multipliers. It would need to increase much more if GP was to represent investment.
Toons with equal amount of abilities when at the same gear, ability and mod levels they will have equal numbers.
Some toons have more tires of abilities or just more abilities, but thay doesnt change the fact that all GP is is the measure of investment.
GP is an absolute measure of investment, as each investment is equal on each toon, i.e. - zeta = zeta, gesr tier = gear tier, ext....
A player with 5M GP has invested an equal amount of stuff into toons as another player with 5M GP.
What their choices were and how they can use the 5M GP tool kit they have built is another story.
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
Many of the people I see complaining are either fixated on some abstract stat such as number of relics / g13s / zetas / fast mods or the fact that their opponent has a particular toon/squad and they do not have either a mirror or other counter for it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
I don't mean to refute you fully, but gp is not a measure of resource investment accurately or anything close to that. There are orders of magnitude differecen between gear tiers if we consider resource investment to each tier. Gp tables of these are seemingly random, but increasing multipliers. It would need to increase much more if GP was to represent investment.
Toons with equal amount of abilities when at the same gear, ability and mod levels they will have equal numbers.
Some toons have more tires of abilities or just more abilities, but thay doesnt change the fact that all GP is is the measure of investment.
GP is an absolute measure of investment, as each investment is equal on each toon, i.e. - zeta = zeta, gesr tier = gear tier, ext....
A player with 5M GP has invested an equal amount of stuff into toons as another player with 5M GP.
What their choices were and how they can use the 5M GP tool kit they have built is another story.
Whoooosh.
Let's try to calculate the amount of ability mats or gear that goes into each tier and see how they don't correlate with the multipliers in the gp table some day. I did that extensively on the forums on the grand matchmaking/gp topic at the ga times. The difference is an order of magnitude.
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
Many of the people I see complaining are either fixated on some abstract stat such as number of relics / g13s / zetas / fast mods or the fact that their opponent has a particular toon/squad and they do not have either a mirror or other counter for it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
I don't mean to refute you fully, but gp is not a measure of resource investment accurately or anything close to that. There are orders of magnitude differecen between gear tiers if we consider resource investment to each tier. Gp tables of these are seemingly random, but increasing multipliers. It would need to increase much more if GP was to represent investment.
Toons with equal amount of abilities when at the same gear, ability and mod levels they will have equal numbers.
Some toons have more tires of abilities or just more abilities, but thay doesnt change the fact that all GP is is the measure of investment.
GP is an absolute measure of investment, as each investment is equal on each toon, i.e. - zeta = zeta, gesr tier = gear tier, ext....
A player with 5M GP has invested an equal amount of stuff into toons as another player with 5M GP.
What their choices were and how they can use the 5M GP tool kit they have built is another story.
Whoooosh.
Let's try to calculate the amount of ability mats or gear that goes into each tier and see how they don't correlate with the multipliers in the gp table some day. I did that extensively on the forums on the grand matchmaking/gp topic at the ga times. The difference is an order of magnitude.
Maxing out a character with the same count of abilities has the same GP. That is because of the equalities between the things you add. https://swgoh.gg/characters/stats/
Here is an example:
Same level, same level on the same count of abilities, and the same number of gear placed on that level.
And here is one missing one more piece, and is lower GP:
Then when you add the missing piece to even it out, and it now has the same GP:
Yes the choices you make may mean you farmed different gear to get X toon to G13(or wherever), but again, this is just a choice that brings the player to a point ( thier GP) and from there it is how they use the tools they built.
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
Many of the people I see complaining are either fixated on some abstract stat such as number of relics / g13s / zetas / fast mods or the fact that their opponent has a particular toon/squad and they do not have either a mirror or other counter for it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
I don't mean to refute you fully, but gp is not a measure of resource investment accurately or anything close to that. There are orders of magnitude differecen between gear tiers if we consider resource investment to each tier. Gp tables of these are seemingly random, but increasing multipliers. It would need to increase much more if GP was to represent investment.
Toons with equal amount of abilities when at the same gear, ability and mod levels they will have equal numbers.
Some toons have more tires of abilities or just more abilities, but thay doesnt change the fact that all GP is is the measure of investment.
GP is an absolute measure of investment, as each investment is equal on each toon, i.e. - zeta = zeta, gesr tier = gear tier, ext....
A player with 5M GP has invested an equal amount of stuff into toons as another player with 5M GP.
What their choices were and how they can use the 5M GP tool kit they have built is another story.
Whoooosh.
Let's try to calculate the amount of ability mats or gear that goes into each tier and see how they don't correlate with the multipliers in the gp table some day. I did that extensively on the forums on the grand matchmaking/gp topic at the ga times. The difference is an order of magnitude.
Maxing out a character with the same count of abilities has the same GP. That is because of the equalities between the things you add. https://swgoh.gg/characters/stats/
Here is an example:
Same level, same level on the same count of abilities, and the same number of gear placed on that level.
And here is one missing one more piece, and is lower GP:
Then when you add the missing piece to even it out, and it now has the same GP:
Yes the choices you make may mean you farmed different gear to get X toon to G13(or wherever), but again, this is just a choice that brings the player to a point ( thier GP) and from there it is how they use the tools they built.
Ok, thanks for stating the obvious that has zero relation with what I'm saying. Unless you address my argument is related to the extreme skewedness of gp gain tables there's not much to talk about.
This post thread shows exactly what is going wrong with this game. They keep releasing new characters to please upper end players in order to increase revenue, but ignores the newer player base by not providing exciting content for the lower tier players. It'll ruin grand arena and possibly drag the rest of the game down with it since Grand Arena is arguably the only thing keeping players in the game.
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
Many of the people I see complaining are either fixated on some abstract stat such as number of relics / g13s / zetas / fast mods or the fact that their opponent has a particular toon/squad and they do not have either a mirror or other counter for it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
I don't mean to refute you fully, but gp is not a measure of resource investment accurately or anything close to that. There are orders of magnitude differecen between gear tiers if we consider resource investment to each tier. Gp tables of these are seemingly random, but increasing multipliers. It would need to increase much more if GP was to represent investment.
Toons with equal amount of abilities when at the same gear, ability and mod levels they will have equal numbers.
Some toons have more tires of abilities or just more abilities, but thay doesnt change the fact that all GP is is the measure of investment.
GP is an absolute measure of investment, as each investment is equal on each toon, i.e. - zeta = zeta, gesr tier = gear tier, ext....
A player with 5M GP has invested an equal amount of stuff into toons as another player with 5M GP.
What their choices were and how they can use the 5M GP tool kit they have built is another story.
Whoooosh.
Let's try to calculate the amount of ability mats or gear that goes into each tier and see how they don't correlate with the multipliers in the gp table some day. I did that extensively on the forums on the grand matchmaking/gp topic at the ga times. The difference is an order of magnitude.
Maxing out a character with the same count of abilities has the same GP. That is because of the equalities between the things you add. https://swgoh.gg/characters/stats/
Here is an example:
Same level, same level on the same count of abilities, and the same number of gear placed on that level.
And here is one missing one more piece, and is lower GP:
Then when you add the missing piece to even it out, and it now has the same GP:
Yes the choices you make may mean you farmed different gear to get X toon to G13(or wherever), but again, this is just a choice that brings the player to a point ( thier GP) and from there it is how they use the tools they built.
Ok, thanks for stating the obvious that has zero relation with what I'm saying. Unless you address my argument is related to the extreme skewedness of gp gain tables there's not much to talk about.
You want each piece of gear to be the same for each tier, for each toon. That's a great idea, but that doesnt change the fact that a toon at g12 +3 is equal to a toon at g12 +3. You can choose to invest in toons that take certain gear to get there because you view it as easier and see how well a roster works out, that will be your choice and will leave you with the tools you have.
If we could choose the pieces we could add and take the accompanying stats, then this would be relevant, but it's not that way. You can choose to invest into a piece of gear or not, and it has a farming cost and a measured value once it's on a toon.
Can you tell me how it is not a measure of the number of pieces of gear and abilities, and what not placed on a toon?
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
Many of the people I see complaining are either fixated on some abstract stat such as number of relics / g13s / zetas / fast mods or the fact that their opponent has a particular toon/squad and they do not have either a mirror or other counter for it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
I don't mean to refute you fully, but gp is not a measure of resource investment accurately or anything close to that. There are orders of magnitude differecen between gear tiers if we consider resource investment to each tier. Gp tables of these are seemingly random, but increasing multipliers. It would need to increase much more if GP was to represent investment.
Toons with equal amount of abilities when at the same gear, ability and mod levels they will have equal numbers.
Some toons have more tires of abilities or just more abilities, but thay doesnt change the fact that all GP is is the measure of investment.
GP is an absolute measure of investment, as each investment is equal on each toon, i.e. - zeta = zeta, gesr tier = gear tier, ext....
A player with 5M GP has invested an equal amount of stuff into toons as another player with 5M GP.
What their choices were and how they can use the 5M GP tool kit they have built is another story.
Whoooosh.
Let's try to calculate the amount of ability mats or gear that goes into each tier and see how they don't correlate with the multipliers in the gp table some day. I did that extensively on the forums on the grand matchmaking/gp topic at the ga times. The difference is an order of magnitude.
Maxing out a character with the same count of abilities has the same GP. That is because of the equalities between the things you add. https://swgoh.gg/characters/stats/
Here is an example:
Same level, same level on the same count of abilities, and the same number of gear placed on that level.
And here is one missing one more piece, and is lower GP:
Then when you add the missing piece to even it out, and it now has the same GP:
Yes the choices you make may mean you farmed different gear to get X toon to G13(or wherever), but again, this is just a choice that brings the player to a point ( thier GP) and from there it is how they use the tools they built.
Ok, thanks for stating the obvious that has zero relation with what I'm saying. Unless you address my argument is related to the extreme skewedness of gp gain tables there's not much to talk about.
You want each piece of gear to be the same for each tier, for each toon. That's a great idea, but that doesnt change the fact that a toon at g12 +3 is equal to a toon at g12 +3. You can choose to invest in toons that take certain gear to get there because you view it as easier and see how well a roster works out, that will be your choice and will leave you with the tools you have.
If we could choose the pieces we could add and take the accompanying stats, then this would be relevant, but it's not that way. You can choose to invest into a piece of gear or not, and it has a farming cost and a measured value once it's on a toon.
Can you tell me how it is not a measure of the number of pieces of gear and abilities, and what not placed on a toon?
If a toon is easier to gear than another ,based on the gear they need ,Eg hoth scout needing blue prices up to gear 11 and barely any carbanti ,cuffs or guns if you were to compare him to a toon with the same amount of ability and ability level as you stated they would be at the same GP even though the amount of investment is not .
Im not arguing against the fact that it is an investment number ,but saying that GP is not created equal even if you look at it as a total investment number . The type of gear or how hard that gear may or may not be to get doesn't seem to be included in the GP calculation ,
Do you think the 3 toons you posted with the same investment number (GP) had the same amount of investment into them ?
This is interesting data, it would be nice to see a new division (call it zero?) To pull 20-30% of division 1 away. Its pretty cool to see people this invested to run a study like this for so long. CG_SBCrumb any reaction to this info? Any plans to look at the divisions in gac in the near future?
I think reaction is an interesting thing to ask for, as CG has more accurate data of this exact thing.
Ok, they have more accurate data, does this imply that Talianas is incorrect? That her trends are incorrect? or that it's completely wrong? are you going to provide any other information to this? Or just more comments showcasing how little it matters what the player base does, produces or researches for this game?
TW matchmaking is different than GAC matchmaking; TW Matchmaking is pretty bad and needs an overhaul
Don't they both use GP to match ?
TW matches on the total GP of the players signed up.
GAC uses the GP your top X toons, where X is number of defence slots x10.
So they are different
So they both use GP to match .
When you typed out ,use , GP and match for the answers and still can't see the point ....woooooosh
matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be .
Rather have a GL Rey or kylo at 20kGP than CUP at the same GP
GP is like calories, not all are created equal when you break them down into macros .
I can see the point just fine, and I don’t need some sarcastic wise guy suggesting I don’t.
Ultra: TW matchmaking & GAC matchmaking are different.
You: don’t they both use GP?
Me; pointed out the differences in the matchmaking to you.
You: but don’t they both use GP?
You’re being obstinate, not clever. The matchmaking is not the same. Saying they’re the same is like saying bread is the same as pasta because they both use flour as an ingredient.
Also, good luck finding a 20k GP Rey or Kylo. They are ~50K GP and the 12 toons required to unlock them add another 250K+ between them, so they already significantly inflate the matchmaking GP of any GL owner.
Again you missed my point, I never once said that the match making was the same , I'm making the point that they use the same base measurement of power which is GP , and that power level which they give toons (GP) needs to be adjusted.
I'm not being stubborn I understood ultras' point from the get go , I was pointing out that they both use GP which is a hint at what might be the problem , I tried to explain that in the quote you must posted :
" matching via GP maybe the problem ( whether it's guild or your top X )as GP is not a clear reflection of how OP a toon may or may not be "
The part were i mention guild or your Top X implies I have made a distinction between them.
If you thought that I was implying that the match making was identical then sorry ,I thought that I cleared up my hint before.
If you don't like the example of GL Vs CUP how about leader Zeta's most give the same GP but if you look at the Jedi with zeta leadership's Lumi or Qui don't really hold up against JKR or bast.
Can we at least agree that not all GP is created the same.
Yes, we can agree on that for sure. I’d be sceptical about how many people have Lumi or Qui Gon in their top X toons, but the point is a good one.
The best example for me is Geonosians. Taken all to g12 with both zetas on GBA there is pretty much nothing that matches them for efficacy for that little GP investment. Must be several lower division matches decided by having / not having that team.
So would you say that GP is a inconsistent and unfair reflection of a toons/ squads power , and matching by it whether it is guild total or total of your Top X could cause problems?
I’m not sure, to be honest.
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
Many of the people I see complaining are either fixated on some abstract stat such as number of relics / g13s / zetas / fast mods or the fact that their opponent has a particular toon/squad and they do not have either a mirror or other counter for it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
I don't mean to refute you fully, but gp is not a measure of resource investment accurately or anything close to that. There are orders of magnitude differecen between gear tiers if we consider resource investment to each tier. Gp tables of these are seemingly random, but increasing multipliers. It would need to increase much more if GP was to represent investment.
Toons with equal amount of abilities when at the same gear, ability and mod levels they will have equal numbers.
Some toons have more tires of abilities or just more abilities, but thay doesnt change the fact that all GP is is the measure of investment.
GP is an absolute measure of investment, as each investment is equal on each toon, i.e. - zeta = zeta, gesr tier = gear tier, ext....
A player with 5M GP has invested an equal amount of stuff into toons as another player with 5M GP.
What their choices were and how they can use the 5M GP tool kit they have built is another story.
Whoooosh.
Let's try to calculate the amount of ability mats or gear that goes into each tier and see how they don't correlate with the multipliers in the gp table some day. I did that extensively on the forums on the grand matchmaking/gp topic at the ga times. The difference is an order of magnitude.
Maxing out a character with the same count of abilities has the same GP. That is because of the equalities between the things you add. https://swgoh.gg/characters/stats/
Here is an example:
Same level, same level on the same count of abilities, and the same number of gear placed on that level.
And here is one missing one more piece, and is lower GP:
Then when you add the missing piece to even it out, and it now has the same GP:
Yes the choices you make may mean you farmed different gear to get X toon to G13(or wherever), but again, this is just a choice that brings the player to a point ( thier GP) and from there it is how they use the tools they built.
Ok, thanks for stating the obvious that has zero relation with what I'm saying. Unless you address my argument is related to the extreme skewedness of gp gain tables there's not much to talk about.
You want each piece of gear to be the same for each tier, for each toon. That's a great idea, but that doesnt change the fact that a toon at g12 +3 is equal to a toon at g12 +3. You can choose to invest in toons that take certain gear to get there because you view it as easier and see how well a roster works out, that will be your choice and will leave you with the tools you have.
If we could choose the pieces we could add and take the accompanying stats, then this would be relevant, but it's not that way. You can choose to invest into a piece of gear or not, and it has a farming cost and a measured value once it's on a toon.
Can you tell me how it is not a measure of the number of pieces of gear and abilities, and what not placed on a toon?
This is not what I mean at all. Current gp gain tables doesn't represent the resource value of investment at all. You can check the gear tier gp values and what approximately goes into each tier on any toon. I'm not discussing whether there is an element of choice on the player, there ofc is. You can reverse the gear gp table and everything you said would still be true even if g2 causing the most gp gain would be super weird. Cg didn't intend to use gp in this way when they introduced it and they didn't bother to (or didn't want to face the outcomes) revamp gp tables when they did.
If it's still not obvious, go to g7 and g11 of any toon, establish a method to valuate the number and value of gear in these tiers and see if it corellates with the miniscule gp bumps between these vastly different value (in terms of investment) tiers.
To alleviate confusion about sub threads of gp, I'm not talking about differences of gear that goes into tiers in between toons either (which is yet another problem). One can easily see the problem on any single toon's gear tiers and the fixed gp table that applies to all of them.
Tal here - I just posted over in reddit since Maru kicked me into action :-) there’s some more details there.
We can draw some conclusions. We can get “players who log in during the first week of GA and who are over level 85, with some caveats”. Assume probably 1-8k possible additional players per division depending on who I get to share data each month and when they enter.
So it’s a pretty good proxy for active playerbase.
How many players in the active player base are not on Discord, therefore do not self report data? How many active players on discord did not self report?
Tal here - I just posted over in reddit since Maru kicked me into action :-) there’s some more details there.
We can draw some conclusions. We can get “players who log in during the first week of GA and who are over level 85, with some caveats”. Assume probably 1-8k possible additional players per division depending on who I get to share data each month and when they enter.
So it’s a pretty good proxy for active playerbase.
How many players in the active player base are not on Discord, therefore do not self report data? How many active players on discord did not self report?
Don't see what you mean. This is not a study to figure out some overall community position. There's a single data point that's important and that's the very lowest person in each division. Any player that are on 0 banners before league advance happens is somewhat close to bottom. As more people tie to being last is willing to contribute in a division, the accuracy increases and after a while new data that's coming in isn't any lower as long as the few people that's even lower doesn't report in. With this method there is no way to know the exact bottom.
It still is accurate enough depending on the contributions in each division. The outcome table itself shows how consistent the numbers is moving besides players below the threshold (beyond div 10) which there is no data for.
Tal here - I just posted over in reddit since Maru kicked me into action :-) there’s some more details there.
We can draw some conclusions. We can get “players who log in during the first week of GA and who are over level 85, with some caveats”. Assume probably 1-8k possible additional players per division depending on who I get to share data each month and when they enter.
So it’s a pretty good proxy for active playerbase.
How many players in the active player base are not on Discord, therefore do not self report data? How many active players on discord did not self report?
Don't see what you mean. This is not a study to figure out some overall community position. There's a single data point that's important and that's the very lowest person in each division. Any player that are on 0 banners before league advance happens is somewhat close to bottom. As more people tie to being last is willing to contribute in a division, the accuracy increases and after a while new data that's coming in isn't any lower as long as the few people that's even lower doesn't report in. With this method there is no way to know the exact bottom.
It still is accurate enough depending on the contributions in each division. The outcome table itself shows how consistent the numbers is moving besides players below the threshold (beyond div 10) which there is no data for.
cool your jets, I just asked a couple of questions about the data i did not question the validity of study or the conclusions.
Tal here - I just posted over in reddit since Maru kicked me into action :-) there’s some more details there.
We can draw some conclusions. We can get “players who log in during the first week of GA and who are over level 85, with some caveats”. Assume probably 1-8k possible additional players per division depending on who I get to share data each month and when they enter.
So it’s a pretty good proxy for active playerbase.
How many players in the active player base are not on Discord, therefore do not self report data? How many active players on discord did not self report?
Don't see what you mean. This is not a study to figure out some overall community position. There's a single data point that's important and that's the very lowest person in each division. Any player that are on 0 banners before league advance happens is somewhat close to bottom. As more people tie to being last is willing to contribute in a division, the accuracy increases and after a while new data that's coming in isn't any lower as long as the few people that's even lower doesn't report in. With this method there is no way to know the exact bottom.
It still is accurate enough depending on the contributions in each division. The outcome table itself shows how consistent the numbers is moving besides players below the threshold (beyond div 10) which there is no data for.
cool your jets, I just asked a couple of questions about the data i did not question the validity of study or the conclusions.
Tal here - I just posted over in reddit since Maru kicked me into action :-) there’s some more details there.
We can draw some conclusions. We can get “players who log in during the first week of GA and who are over level 85, with some caveats”. Assume probably 1-8k possible additional players per division depending on who I get to share data each month and when they enter.
So it’s a pretty good proxy for active playerbase.
How many players in the active player base are not on Discord, therefore do not self report data? How many active players on discord did not self report?
Don't see what you mean. This is not a study to figure out some overall community position. There's a single data point that's important and that's the very lowest person in each division. Any player that are on 0 banners before league advance happens is somewhat close to bottom. As more people tie to being last is willing to contribute in a division, the accuracy increases and after a while new data that's coming in isn't any lower as long as the few people that's even lower doesn't report in. With this method there is no way to know the exact bottom.
It still is accurate enough depending on the contributions in each division. The outcome table itself shows how consistent the numbers is moving besides players below the threshold (beyond div 10) which there is no data for.
cool your jets, I just asked a couple of questions about the data i did not question the validity of study or the conclusions.
The people reporting are reporting not only their rank, but the ranks of others they know and can find in game (allies, guild mates, people they face in GAC, anyone you can see their profile). This makes any player being part of the study irrelevant, as the data collected has several degrees of separation to try and hunt down the lowest number in each division.
I dont need to be "the guy", but I know a guy who knows "the guy". if that makes sense.
This is interesting data, it would be nice to see a new division (call it zero?) To pull 20-30% of division 1 away. Its pretty cool to see people this invested to run a study like this for so long. CG_SBCrumb any reaction to this info? Any plans to look at the divisions in gac in the near future?
I think reaction is an interesting thing to ask for, as CG has more accurate data of this exact thing.
Would certainly be nice to see how accurate these numbers are, and again to see if adjusting divisions is even on their radar.
April Q&A:
"Q: Do you plan on adding any more divisions to GA? The top divisions have a wide range of power levels and I'm bound to come across some with GL Rey or Kylo sooner or later even thoug I'm still working on them.
A: CG_Miller - Yes, we've got some work to do in order to add those new tiers, and we're waiting for a critical mass of players before we commit to that task." @CG_Miller I think it's the right time now.
This is interesting data, it would be nice to see a new division (call it zero?) To pull 20-30% of division 1 away. Its pretty cool to see people this invested to run a study like this for so long. CG_SBCrumb any reaction to this info? Any plans to look at the divisions in gac in the near future?
I think reaction is an interesting thing to ask for, as CG has more accurate data of this exact thing.
Would certainly be nice to see how accurate these numbers are, and again to see if adjusting divisions is even on their radar.
They do not like to give out or even confirm actual numbers that are not already given out, it really doesn't matter what the context.
If we break down what @Kyno said a simple analogy would be a competition where you match people by the money they spent. Think of a community athletics event. You have 2 competitors and one bought shoes, a shirt and isotonic drinks and the other bought a pile of sweets. Who wins? More realistically speaking it would not be about sweets vs. shoes but appropriate shoes vs. inappropriate shoes. In the game this translates into toons unlocked, gear applied and zetas put on toons. In the model the game employs prices do not vary by utility by the way although this is a fundamental economical principle.
This approach leads to what we see in the game: more and more accounts look the same. People have the same toons and squads. Because if you want to be successful you have to develop your roster according to an ideal player life cycle model. Ultimately that makes the game more of a paint-by-numbers thing then a strategy game.
If we break down what @Kyno said a simple analogy would be a competition where you match people by the money they spent. Think of a community athletics event. You have 2 competitors and one bought shoes, a shirt and isotonic drinks and the other bought a pile of sweets. Who wins? More realistically speaking it would not be about sweets vs. shoes but appropriate shoes vs. inappropriate shoes. In the game this translates into toons unlocked, gear applied and zetas put on toons. In the model the game employs prices do not vary by utility by the way although this is a fundamental economical principle.
This approach leads to what we see in the game: more and more accounts look the same. People have the same toons and squads. Because if you want to be successful you have to develop your roster according to an ideal player life cycle model. Ultimately that makes the game more of a paint-by-numbers thing then a strategy game.
Amen to this.
One of my guild mates and I have near identical rosters, as we’ve both chased the first 2 GLs and now JML. Almost no difference in the make up of our top 80.
If we break down what Kyno said a simple analogy would be a competition where you match people by the money they spent. Think of a community athletics event. You have 2 competitors and one bought shoes, a shirt and isotonic drinks and the other bought a pile of sweets. Who wins? More realistically speaking it would not be about sweets vs. shoes but appropriate shoes vs. inappropriate shoes. In the game this translates into toons unlocked, gear applied and zetas put on toons. In the model the game employs prices do not vary by utility by the way although this is a fundamental economical principle.
This approach leads to what we see in the game: more and more accounts look the same. People have the same toons and squads. Because if you want to be successful you have to develop your roster according to an ideal player life cycle model. Ultimately that makes the game more of a paint-by-numbers thing then a strategy game.
Yes and no, I mean this is a meta drive game, so yes players will always be striving to have the meta teams, at some point.
But we also have many game modes that a player can focus on. The more extreme GAC rosters avoid some teams and use "off counters", so those rosters are not going to look the same.
But in the end the "end game" is designed to be maxed everything, so yes everyone is driving towards that same goal, and if you play it out to infinity they all look the same.
The thing is, looking the same doesnt mean winning the same. Many players do play "by the numbers", but that doesn't mean they have "the skill" to have the same win ratio as their neighbors. Watching videos only gets you so far in a match, and GAC/TW also have another layer of strategy. Modding is another layer too.
If we break down what @Kyno said a simple analogy would be a competition where you match people by the money they spent. Think of a community athletics event. You have 2 competitors and one bought shoes, a shirt and isotonic drinks and the other bought a pile of sweets. Who wins? More realistically speaking it would not be about sweets vs. shoes but appropriate shoes vs. inappropriate shoes. In the game this translates into toons unlocked, gear applied and zetas put on toons. In the model the game employs prices do not vary by utility by the way although this is a fundamental economical principle.
This approach leads to what we see in the game: more and more accounts look the same. People have the same toons and squads. Because if you want to be successful you have to develop your roster according to an ideal player life cycle model. Ultimately that makes the game more of a paint-by-numbers thing then a strategy game.
Amen to this.
One of my guild mates and I have near identical rosters, as we’ve both chased the first 2 GLs and now JML. Almost no difference in the make up of our top 80.
That's a really good point, too, since the creation of Galactic Legends has introduced the concept of gearing up multiple teams-worth of characters to get that one character, which has led to a homoginization of at least the top 40, if not the top 80 of most rosters. Going for Rey and for Luke means putting relics on something like 24-26 characters (I lost count bouncing between screens, lol!) plus of course you're going to gear up the Legends themselves once you have them, so potentially anyone with those two characters will have 28 identical characters showing up in their top 80.
If we break down what @Kyno said a simple analogy would be a competition where you match people by the money they spent. Think of a community athletics event. You have 2 competitors and one bought shoes, a shirt and isotonic drinks and the other bought a pile of sweets. Who wins? More realistically speaking it would not be about sweets vs. shoes but appropriate shoes vs. inappropriate shoes. In the game this translates into toons unlocked, gear applied and zetas put on toons. In the model the game employs prices do not vary by utility by the way although this is a fundamental economical principle.
This approach leads to what we see in the game: more and more accounts look the same. People have the same toons and squads. Because if you want to be successful you have to develop your roster according to an ideal player life cycle model. Ultimately that makes the game more of a paint-by-numbers thing then a strategy game.
Amen to this.
One of my guild mates and I have near identical rosters, as we’ve both chased the first 2 GLs and now JML. Almost no difference in the make up of our top 80.
That's a really good point, too, since the creation of Galactic Legends has introduced the concept of gearing up multiple teams-worth of characters to get that one character, which has led to a homoginization of at least the top 40, if not the top 80 of most rosters. Going for Rey and for Luke means putting relics on something like 24-26 characters (I lost count bouncing between screens, lol!) plus of course you're going to gear up the Legends themselves once you have them, so potentially anyone with those two characters will have 28 identical characters showing up in their top 80.
Yeah, GLs certainly increased homogenity. New batch might bring some variety on paper, but this won't hold at higher gps as people already did first 2 and are doing 3-4. I don't have an overall solution to it or sure if it needs a solution. But this is why we need more slots, to reach the non-similar end of eachothers rosters.
One thing I’ve noticed with match making is that sandbaggers and players who are very careful with their upgrades and relic upgrades seem to do a lot better / face easier opponents. We all know about the top 70/80 character GP for matchmaking. Some shrewd friends of mine leave many toons at r0 as the gp increase from g12-r0 is minuscule with a high effectiveness return. It’s when you start to upgrade everything to r3-r7 that you see a huge GP boost. I think if more ppl knew about this there would be a much fairer playing field.
At the end of the day you’re in control of your roster and need to be careful about what you upgrade and relic - it all matters for your matchmaking and can be the difference between facing someone with 3 GLs when you have 1. Maybe the next time you go to relic a toon that isn’t for a GL you’ll stop to think about whether you really need to take it to r3-5. I know I will. Atleast until something is done to improve matchmaking.
It seems like since the release of GLs the best thing to do is upgrade nothing until you have all the gear ready for the next GL otherwise your progress on gearing toons will count to your match making and likely put you against someone with more GLs finished. It seems unfair and boring but that’s GAC matchmaking.
One thing I’ve noticed with match making is that sandbaggers and players who are very careful with their upgrades and relic upgrades seem to do a lot better / face easier opponents. We all know about the top 70/80 character GP for matchmaking. Some shrewd friends of mine leave many toons at r0 as the gp increase from g12-r0 is minuscule with a high effectiveness return. It’s when you start to upgrade everything to r3-r7 that you see a huge GP boost. I think if more ppl knew about this there would be a much fairer playing field.
Once you hit div1 it matters much less. If that's how you want to play, knock yourself out, but it's a whole lot of gimping yourself elsewhere for lackluster rewards in GA.
It seems like since the release of GLs the best thing to do is upgrade nothing until you have all the gear ready for the next GL otherwise your progress on gearing toons will count to your match making and likely put you against someone with more GLs finished. It seems unfair and boring but that’s GAC matchmaking.
This is not new It has always been best to hoard everything until you know what's coming next. Getting in early on the new meta has always outweighed just spending your resources on things.
Replies
I mean I understand the edge cases. People always used to mention g12 Nest and g12 Jyn as a good example of not all GP being equal.
But I’m not sure how relevant that is to division 1 matchmaking. If someone still has g12 Jyn as part of their top 70 in division 1, I feel that they might need to shoulder some of the blame.
Also, I really can’t see a better alternative than using GP. If people are matched based on the composition of their rosters, then unlocking new toons could be disadvantageous, which doesn’t seem to fit with the game philosophy.
On top of that, we all know that no matter what metric is used to match people, there will always be the usual procession of whiners on here complaining about how they’ve been stitched up by the matchmaking. “Opponent has more +4% Crit Chance mods than me!” Etc
I think when people say GP is not a good measure of anything and mm should involve other factors, they basically are not satisfied by how gp is calculated, so the solution can come from reiterating the gp calculation. I'm in no way in the camp asking for meta toons to have much higher values (thus all gp should be somewhat equal). But there are significant problems with gp distribution amongst gear tiers and the weights of other factors (mods, skills=zetas) relic levels can be reiterated.
Currently it's meh, we get by and adapt to it.
GP has existed for longer than GA(C) has been around and has always been a measure of resource investment, not combat power.
Anyone who has failed to recognize that and work with it in the 18+ months that GA(C) has been around has only themselves to blame for their predicament.
I don't mean to refute you fully, but gp is not a measure of resource investment accurately or anything close to that. There are orders of magnitude differecen between gear tiers if we consider resource investment to each tier. Gp tables of these are seemingly random, but increasing multipliers. It would need to increase much more if GP was to represent investment.
Toons with equal amount of abilities when at the same gear, ability and mod levels they will have equal numbers.
Some toons have more tires of abilities or just more abilities, but thay doesnt change the fact that all GP is is the measure of investment.
GP is an absolute measure of investment, as each investment is equal on each toon, i.e. - zeta = zeta, gesr tier = gear tier, ext....
A player with 5M GP has invested an equal amount of stuff into toons as another player with 5M GP.
What their choices were and how they can use the 5M GP tool kit they have built is another story.
Whoooosh.
Let's try to calculate the amount of ability mats or gear that goes into each tier and see how they don't correlate with the multipliers in the gp table some day. I did that extensively on the forums on the grand matchmaking/gp topic at the ga times. The difference is an order of magnitude.
Maxing out a character with the same count of abilities has the same GP. That is because of the equalities between the things you add.
https://swgoh.gg/characters/stats/
Here is an example:
Same level, same level on the same count of abilities, and the same number of gear placed on that level.
And here is one missing one more piece, and is lower GP:
Then when you add the missing piece to even it out, and it now has the same GP:
Yes the choices you make may mean you farmed different gear to get X toon to G13(or wherever), but again, this is just a choice that brings the player to a point ( thier GP) and from there it is how they use the tools they built.
Ok, thanks for stating the obvious that has zero relation with what I'm saying. Unless you address my argument is related to the extreme skewedness of gp gain tables there's not much to talk about.
You want each piece of gear to be the same for each tier, for each toon. That's a great idea, but that doesnt change the fact that a toon at g12 +3 is equal to a toon at g12 +3. You can choose to invest in toons that take certain gear to get there because you view it as easier and see how well a roster works out, that will be your choice and will leave you with the tools you have.
If we could choose the pieces we could add and take the accompanying stats, then this would be relevant, but it's not that way. You can choose to invest into a piece of gear or not, and it has a farming cost and a measured value once it's on a toon.
Can you tell me how it is not a measure of the number of pieces of gear and abilities, and what not placed on a toon?
If a toon is easier to gear than another ,based on the gear they need ,Eg hoth scout needing blue prices up to gear 11 and barely any carbanti ,cuffs or guns if you were to compare him to a toon with the same amount of ability and ability level as you stated they would be at the same GP even though the amount of investment is not .
Im not arguing against the fact that it is an investment number ,but saying that GP is not created equal even if you look at it as a total investment number . The type of gear or how hard that gear may or may not be to get doesn't seem to be included in the GP calculation ,
Do you think the 3 toons you posted with the same investment number (GP) had the same amount of investment into them ?
Ok, they have more accurate data, does this imply that Talianas is incorrect? That her trends are incorrect? or that it's completely wrong? are you going to provide any other information to this? Or just more comments showcasing how little it matters what the player base does, produces or researches for this game?
This is not what I mean at all. Current gp gain tables doesn't represent the resource value of investment at all. You can check the gear tier gp values and what approximately goes into each tier on any toon. I'm not discussing whether there is an element of choice on the player, there ofc is. You can reverse the gear gp table and everything you said would still be true even if g2 causing the most gp gain would be super weird. Cg didn't intend to use gp in this way when they introduced it and they didn't bother to (or didn't want to face the outcomes) revamp gp tables when they did.
If it's still not obvious, go to g7 and g11 of any toon, establish a method to valuate the number and value of gear in these tiers and see if it corellates with the miniscule gp bumps between these vastly different value (in terms of investment) tiers.
How many players in the active player base are not on Discord, therefore do not self report data? How many active players on discord did not self report?
Don't see what you mean. This is not a study to figure out some overall community position. There's a single data point that's important and that's the very lowest person in each division. Any player that are on 0 banners before league advance happens is somewhat close to bottom. As more people tie to being last is willing to contribute in a division, the accuracy increases and after a while new data that's coming in isn't any lower as long as the few people that's even lower doesn't report in. With this method there is no way to know the exact bottom.
It still is accurate enough depending on the contributions in each division. The outcome table itself shows how consistent the numbers is moving besides players below the threshold (beyond div 10) which there is no data for.
cool your jets, I just asked a couple of questions about the data i did not question the validity of study or the conclusions.
So then....I don't understand what you mean.
The people reporting are reporting not only their rank, but the ranks of others they know and can find in game (allies, guild mates, people they face in GAC, anyone you can see their profile). This makes any player being part of the study irrelevant, as the data collected has several degrees of separation to try and hunt down the lowest number in each division.
I dont need to be "the guy", but I know a guy who knows "the guy". if that makes sense.
Would certainly be nice to see how accurate these numbers are, and again to see if adjusting divisions is even on their radar.
"Q: Do you plan on adding any more divisions to GA? The top divisions have a wide range of power levels and I'm bound to come across some with GL Rey or Kylo sooner or later even thoug I'm still working on them.
A: CG_Miller - Yes, we've got some work to do in order to add those new tiers, and we're waiting for a critical mass of players before we commit to that task."
@CG_Miller I think it's the right time now.
They do not like to give out or even confirm actual numbers that are not already given out, it really doesn't matter what the context.
yes its on their radar.
This approach leads to what we see in the game: more and more accounts look the same. People have the same toons and squads. Because if you want to be successful you have to develop your roster according to an ideal player life cycle model. Ultimately that makes the game more of a paint-by-numbers thing then a strategy game.
One of my guild mates and I have near identical rosters, as we’ve both chased the first 2 GLs and now JML. Almost no difference in the make up of our top 80.
Yes and no, I mean this is a meta drive game, so yes players will always be striving to have the meta teams, at some point.
But we also have many game modes that a player can focus on. The more extreme GAC rosters avoid some teams and use "off counters", so those rosters are not going to look the same.
But in the end the "end game" is designed to be maxed everything, so yes everyone is driving towards that same goal, and if you play it out to infinity they all look the same.
The thing is, looking the same doesnt mean winning the same. Many players do play "by the numbers", but that doesn't mean they have "the skill" to have the same win ratio as their neighbors. Watching videos only gets you so far in a match, and GAC/TW also have another layer of strategy. Modding is another layer too.
That's a really good point, too, since the creation of Galactic Legends has introduced the concept of gearing up multiple teams-worth of characters to get that one character, which has led to a homoginization of at least the top 40, if not the top 80 of most rosters. Going for Rey and for Luke means putting relics on something like 24-26 characters (I lost count bouncing between screens, lol!) plus of course you're going to gear up the Legends themselves once you have them, so potentially anyone with those two characters will have 28 identical characters showing up in their top 80.
Yeah, GLs certainly increased homogenity. New batch might bring some variety on paper, but this won't hold at higher gps as people already did first 2 and are doing 3-4. I don't have an overall solution to it or sure if it needs a solution. But this is why we need more slots, to reach the non-similar end of eachothers rosters.
At the end of the day you’re in control of your roster and need to be careful about what you upgrade and relic - it all matters for your matchmaking and can be the difference between facing someone with 3 GLs when you have 1. Maybe the next time you go to relic a toon that isn’t for a GL you’ll stop to think about whether you really need to take it to r3-5. I know I will. Atleast until something is done to improve matchmaking.
It seems like since the release of GLs the best thing to do is upgrade nothing until you have all the gear ready for the next GL otherwise your progress on gearing toons will count to your match making and likely put you against someone with more GLs finished. It seems unfair and boring but that’s GAC matchmaking.
Once you hit div1 it matters much less. If that's how you want to play, knock yourself out, but it's a whole lot of gimping yourself elsewhere for lackluster rewards in GA.
This is not new It has always been best to hoard everything until you know what's coming next. Getting in early on the new meta has always outweighed just spending your resources on things.