matchmaking with 2 fleet spots

Replies

  • scuba wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.

    My bot does same thing of top 80 and top 65 comparison, and gp calculations for relics and ultimates and such are correct.
    For the most part that I know of the top 80 and top 65 charaters is very close.
    I can post up an example later

    Why is it top 65? Current template has 7 slots=70 defense+offense. What we need to see is ship top x gp comparisons, otherwise we have to manually add them up xD
  • MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.
  • Legend91
    1408 posts Member
    edited September 30
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    There’s not enough ships for necessitating 4 ships for GAC yet. Each capital ship needs 7 ships. We have 8 capital ships. That necessitates 56 ships. We have 43 currently and many are specific to their faction and some that are needed for multiple capital ship strategies. Not to mention many don’t have Finalizer or Raddus close to 7* to be viable.

    Bottom line we need more ships.

    Wrong. Most fleets don't even need a full lineup on offense. Nego does fine with only 2 reinforcements (Plo + X), Male does fine with 1 (Spy) or 2-3 (like adding Ebon Hawk) for safety measures, Ackbar Rebels often do fine with only 2-3 (Phantom, Biggs/Y-Wing, Cassian) and Finalizer does fine with like only 1 if it's up against a rebel fleet as the battle is quickly over once HMF is rushed down by the offensive start of the Finalizer.
    Just like with chars the total number of ships "required" depends on how much risk you wanna take in undersizing but by only adding like 1 ship to each fleet you're already very safe if RNG doesn't completely screw you.
    Legend#6873 | YouTube | swgoh.gg
  • Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    While these are not exactly the data points fit for this gac, we don't know what exactly is. So any batch you can come up with this list might put us on the right path. It would be really nice if we have some skewed roster in the pool. Like their toon top x is very comparable, but they ignored fleets mostly etc.
  • scuba
    12421 posts Member
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    Umm.. I believe the swgoh.gg gp calculations are still off
  • scuba
    12421 posts Member
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    scuba wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.

    My bot does same thing of top 80 and top 65 comparison, and gp calculations for relics and ultimates and such are correct.
    For the most part that I know of the top 80 and top 65 charaters is very close.
    I can post up an example later

    Why is it top 65? Current template has 7 slots=70 defense+offense. What we need to see is ship top x gp comparisons, otherwise we have to manually add them up xD

    Because someone asked for top 65 along with top 80.
    It has never been confirmed as to what they are using just a top x of roster
  • MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    While these are not exactly the data points fit for this gac, we don't know what exactly is. So any batch you can come up with this list might put us on the right path. It would be really nice if we have some skewed roster in the pool. Like their toon top x is very comparable, but they ignored fleets mostly etc.
    Since I have the raw data snapshots, I can change my parser code to slice & dice the data any way I want, it's just a question of what to look at.

    I can change top 80 to top 70 toons easily enough, though I don't think that will yield much since top 66 and top 80 seem to track pretty well. I can also change fleet to top 32 & top 4 cap + top 28 fighter which might prove more interesting.

    I could also have it output the top character and top ship figures separately. I am currently just outputting the total value since it seems most likely that the matchmaker uses a single GP value just as it did originally with total roster GP.


    scuba wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    Umm.. I believe the swgoh.gg gp calculations are still off
    I am just using the individual character and ship GP values from their data, which I would think are ones they got directly from CG's Web services.

    There will always be some measure of inaccuracy since I pull data a few hours after matchmaking and I don't know how fresh the data I get from swgoh.gg is but I don't have another source of data.
  • Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    While these are not exactly the data points fit for this gac, we don't know what exactly is. So any batch you can come up with this list might put us on the right path. It would be really nice if we have some skewed roster in the pool. Like their toon top x is very comparable, but they ignored fleets mostly etc.
    Since I have the raw data snapshots, I can change my parser code to slice & dice the data any way I want, it's just a question of what to look at.

    I can change top 80 to top 70 toons easily enough, though I don't think that will yield much since top 66 and top 80 seem to track pretty well. I can also change fleet to top 32 & top 4 cap + top 28 fighter which might prove more interesting.

    I could also have it output the top character and top ship figures separately. I am currently just outputting the total value since it seems most likely that the matchmaker uses a single GP value just as it did originally with total roster GP.


    scuba wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    Umm.. I believe the swgoh.gg gp calculations are still off
    I am just using the individual character and ship GP values from their data, which I would think are ones they got directly from CG's Web services.

    There will always be some measure of inaccuracy since I pull data a few hours after matchmaking and I don't know how fresh the data I get from swgoh.gg is but I don't have another source of data.

    What does 66 correspond to, 3v3? My gut feeling is even if mm is considering ships in some manner, it would be as an addition to squads contribution and mm will be will be made on a single value as you said.

    This is the only information we have

    gfsyms7juzes.png

    When I first read it, it made me think of top 40 since those are the deployment slots. I don't even remember why everyone settled on top 80 (for div1-2), but I can also confirm on my own botting it always held pretty closely since the first gac.

    I will be surprised to see a case where top 70 (for div1-2) has a disparity in a pool in the current template. That will be the starting point we can confirm this is not only squad top x.
  • Legend91 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    There’s not enough ships for necessitating 4 ships for GAC yet. Each capital ship needs 7 ships. We have 8 capital ships. That necessitates 56 ships. We have 43 currently and many are specific to their faction and some that are needed for multiple capital ship strategies. Not to mention many don’t have Finalizer or Raddus close to 7* to be viable.

    Bottom line we need more ships.

    Wrong. Most fleets don't even need a full lineup on offense. Nego does fine with only 2 reinforcements (Plo + X), Male does fine with 1 (Spy) or 2-3 (like adding Ebon Hawk) for safety measures, Ackbar Rebels often do fine with only 2-3 (Phantom, Biggs/Y-Wing, Cassian) and Finalizer does fine with like only 1 if it's up against a rebel fleet as the battle is quickly over once HMF is rushed down by the offensive start of the Finalizer.
    Just like with chars the total number of ships "required" depends on how much risk you wanna take in undersizing but by only adding like 1 ship to each fleet you're already very safe if RNG doesn't completely screw you.

    There are 7 slots to fill for each capital ship. Saying you can underman, therefore don’t need to field full ships is anecdotal, at best. Undermanning it is taking a certain amount of risk that some may not want to take, or are even capable of taking. Nor is that an excuse for CG to not allow us to be able to have that choice to field full teams, let alone ones with faction synergy based on the capital ship. Therefore to field a full fleet of ships utilizing all capital ships, you need 56. We currently have 43. We need more ships.
  • MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    While these are not exactly the data points fit for this gac, we don't know what exactly is. So any batch you can come up with this list might put us on the right path. It would be really nice if we have some skewed roster in the pool. Like their toon top x is very comparable, but they ignored fleets mostly etc.
    Since I have the raw data snapshots, I can change my parser code to slice & dice the data any way I want, it's just a question of what to look at.

    I can change top 80 to top 70 toons easily enough, though I don't think that will yield much since top 66 and top 80 seem to track pretty well. I can also change fleet to top 32 & top 4 cap + top 28 fighter which might prove more interesting.

    I could also have it output the top character and top ship figures separately. I am currently just outputting the total value since it seems most likely that the matchmaker uses a single GP value just as it did originally with total roster GP.


    scuba wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    Umm.. I believe the swgoh.gg gp calculations are still off
    I am just using the individual character and ship GP values from their data, which I would think are ones they got directly from CG's Web services.

    There will always be some measure of inaccuracy since I pull data a few hours after matchmaking and I don't know how fresh the data I get from swgoh.gg is but I don't have another source of data.

    What does 66 correspond to, 3v3? My gut feeling is even if mm is considering ships in some manner, it would be as an addition to squads contribution and mm will be will be made on a single value as you said.

    This is the only information we have

    gfsyms7juzes.png

    When I first read it, it made me think of top 40 since those are the deployment slots. I don't even remember why everyone settled on top 80 (for div1-2), but I can also confirm on my own botting it always held pretty closely since the first gac.

    I will be surprised to see a case where top 70 (for div1-2) has a disparity in a pool in the current template. That will be the starting point we can confirm this is not only squad top x.
    Top 66 is 3v3 for division 1 & 2: 11 squads x 3 toons x 2 (offense + defense).

    I believe top 80 came from the original 5v5 squad-only GACs where divisions 1 & 2 placed 8 squads.
  • Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    While these are not exactly the data points fit for this gac, we don't know what exactly is. So any batch you can come up with this list might put us on the right path. It would be really nice if we have some skewed roster in the pool. Like their toon top x is very comparable, but they ignored fleets mostly etc.
    Since I have the raw data snapshots, I can change my parser code to slice & dice the data any way I want, it's just a question of what to look at.

    I can change top 80 to top 70 toons easily enough, though I don't think that will yield much since top 66 and top 80 seem to track pretty well. I can also change fleet to top 32 & top 4 cap + top 28 fighter which might prove more interesting.

    I could also have it output the top character and top ship figures separately. I am currently just outputting the total value since it seems most likely that the matchmaker uses a single GP value just as it did originally with total roster GP.


    scuba wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Wimma wrote: »
    Has anyone confirmed match making actually doesn't include ships?
    Are there any bots that can spit this out? (somehow in SWGoHBot?)
    Mine looks fairly close just looking at totals, but a guild colleague looks way off:
    Char GP :: 2.7M vs 3.1M
    Ship GP :: 2.0M vs 2.5M
    Wouldn't think there's enough ships to have that difference.

    You are looking it wrong since mm works on some portion of the gp, not full of it.

    In order to verify this we need to look at a few players match up comparison on some data points and isolate the commonality.

    - Top X (this is top 80 for div 1-2) : even though we have 3 vs 3 and 7 slots+ships I have yet to see proof anything but -only squad slots*10- used
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots
    - Top X adjusted to lower slots + Top Y for ships (assuming top 28 for div1-2 for now)

    One of these 3 values should be pretty close on opponent comparisons across all players we check this on. Ships part has to be done manually.

    Hotbot gives exact values like this which takes care of the squad top x part.
    0lbi1zdopd5l.png

    Let me know if there's a working tool that calculates custom top X values like this one (which doesn't work with new toons anymore) so we can check top 80 and 70 seperately.
    https://swgohevents.com/gp-compare

    Or @scuba or someone else tech savvy can help us pull this info automatically from the api which should be publicly avaliable.
    I have such a parser and data from my last 9 GA brackets but the results are mixed. In 7 of 9 brackets, character GP only is the best candidate but in the other 2 brackets, character + ship GP is the best.

    What top x and top y(ships) did you use to compare?

    It's good to keep in mind current gac and 1 fleet of variety of the same template may be using top 70 instead of top 80 (and nothing else).

    It would be pretty nice if you can check your current pool in the 3 varities I wrote before people's gps start to sail away from the values mm was made.
    I pull the data from the swgoh.gg Web API, usually within 6-8hrs of matchmaking and store the JSON files locally, so I can rerun the parses at will.

    I can currently output
    * top 80 toons
    * top 80 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 80 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters
    * top 66 toons
    * top 66 toons + top 16 ships
    * top 66 toons + top 2 cap ships + top 14 fighters

    I have not yet added support for the new 4x fleets.

    For each formula I calculate the matchmaking GP for each roster and then the difference between highest and lowest MM GP.

    The lowest MM GP difference is theoretically the best candidate, since the matchmaker is trying to produce closely matched brackets.

    Umm.. I believe the swgoh.gg gp calculations are still off
    I am just using the individual character and ship GP values from their data, which I would think are ones they got directly from CG's Web services.

    There will always be some measure of inaccuracy since I pull data a few hours after matchmaking and I don't know how fresh the data I get from swgoh.gg is but I don't have another source of data.

    What does 66 correspond to, 3v3? My gut feeling is even if mm is considering ships in some manner, it would be as an addition to squads contribution and mm will be will be made on a single value as you said.

    This is the only information we have

    gfsyms7juzes.png

    When I first read it, it made me think of top 40 since those are the deployment slots. I don't even remember why everyone settled on top 80 (for div1-2), but I can also confirm on my own botting it always held pretty closely since the first gac.

    I will be surprised to see a case where top 70 (for div1-2) has a disparity in a pool in the current template. That will be the starting point we can confirm this is not only squad top x.
    Top 66 is 3v3 for division 1 & 2: 11 squads x 3 toons x 2 (offense + defense).

    I believe top 80 came from the original 5v5 squad-only GACs where divisions 1 & 2 placed 8 squads.

    I understand the logic of top 80, it just isn't that apparent from the info in the game and why scuba says we are not even sure about it. It should have said -double the number of deployed- for clarity.
  • This is finally people’s punishment for neglecting fleets. This is good. I hope matchmaking wont change.
    If ppl didnt work on their fleet it’s their fault and they just deserve to lose :)

    Punish people for not playing the game a certain way. They should put that in the add.
  • @Rath_Tarr it would be pretty cool if you can launch a new topic when you are ready to drop the data as this topic has long became about personal woes of a player despite the name.
  • Gth
    282 posts Member
    Ah crap. Didn’t notice I needed 2 fleets.

    Welp, thanks EA for that. LiKe gac was fun anyways. I’m just going to stop playing it like a lot of others now. Not worth the headache
  • TVF
    25588 posts Member
    **** wrote: »
    Ah crap. Didn’t notice I needed 2 fleets.

    Welp, thanks EA for that. LiKe gac was fun anyways. I’m just going to stop playing it like a lot of others now. Not worth the headache

    You didn't see the 2/2?

    I was wondering how many people would fall for the single circle as soon as I saw it. I figured the answer would be at least one.
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Endurance is rubbish and so is Executrix

    you have enough ships if you had actually spent time farming for them.. for a good fleet on

    Raddus - HT/Poe/Rey Falcon - XB/Resistance X Wing / and two others
    Chimaera - Empire/Sith ships - plenty of them especially with the new Tie Bomber
    Negotiator - GR ships - easy enough to form a very good team
    Malevolence - Geos, and Separatist ships + 2 other ships not really important never really needed anyway
    Home One - Rebels - decent fleet if you have the standard rebels + Y wing.

    yes more ships would be great, but really they aren't needed

    You can also create a kind of First Order fleet but it needs a tank, which is why i left it off the list.
  • If people love their ships so much, then make a Grand Arena for fleets only. I hate fleets. And I've farmed them as much as I could anyways. But I simply loved GA when it didn't have fleets in them. And yes, they were without fleets for a while. And before people say, "there's not enough ships to make a GA for ships", not my problem. Build it to work with what we have or take them out until you do have enough. They are not what I started playing this game for and were never a big part of the game for me. Sorry to all you who love your ships, but they suck. And no, not everyone who has 4 million GP has Mal and Neg unlocked yet. I will be unlocking Neg this Geo TB and still need to even start on Mal. And I've put all the resources I could towards it so far sence being able to do the Geo TB.

    Oh, by the way, it's not always a person's fault that they couldn't get in on the Geo TB as soon as others who were in elite guilds. "So switch guilds" you say. But elite guilds require a specific GP to join. Um...yeah, all the player's fault!!! Didn't spend enough $$$.
  • Vi1teran_ wrote: »
    This is finally people’s punishment for neglecting fleets. This is good. I hope matchmaking wont change.
    If ppl didnt work on their fleet it’s their fault and they just deserve to lose :)

    Punish people for not playing the game a certain way. They should put that in the add.
    How about rewarding people for having invested in a wider range of fleets?
  • definitely caught me off guard. My fleets have always been in question tho. What I love is that we are at Dathomir for October
  • Moorebid
    365 posts Member
    edited October 1
    @HerderOfNerf
    I've been playing for a little under 3 years now. I've maybe invested 500 euro into this game, so mostly FTP.
    Currently I'm sitting at 5.75m GP, and have every ship maxed out, except for the newer ones (Raddus and Hux and the 2 new bombers) and a 6* Mal and FOSFTF.
    As for the normal characters, I've got them all maxed out as well (again, not counting the new ones) except for Vandor Chewie and Visas, which both sit at 6*.
    I do on the other hand have a few cantina energy characters to farm, but due to relicing, that's become harder now.
    Currently I'm also sitting at 30/330 in my quest for Rey, which will be my first GL.
    Okay, I'm hovering around 100 in arena, but do get 1st every day in fleet.
    I win almost every GAC round and am rocking a 38/38 combat wave streak atm in TB.

    What I'm saying is that you, sir, have made choices in the past that now reflect on your roster, rendering you an easy(?) target in GAC, according to yourself.
    My best mate started one month after me and he's got a full million less GP than me, because he decided to farm stun guns and I stuck with my plan to farm all toons first.

    In a way, you did it to yourself lol 😉
  • Endurance is rubbish and so is Executrix

    you have enough ships if you had actually spent time farming for them.. for a good fleet on

    Raddus - HT/Poe/Rey Falcon - XB/Resistance X Wing / and two others
    Chimaera - Empire/Sith ships - plenty of them especially with the new Tie Bomber
    Negotiator - GR ships - easy enough to form a very good team
    Malevolence - Geos, and Separatist ships + 2 other ships not really important never really needed anyway
    Home One - Rebels - decent fleet if you have the standard rebels + Y wing.

    yes more ships would be great, but really they aren't needed

    You can also create a kind of First Order fleet but it needs a tank, which is why i left it off the list.

    The better empire fleet uses the executrix, not the chimera... The turn meter gain on passive and the 1st special is what can hold the fleet.
  • Tbh OP and anyone that doesn’t do ships isn’t playing the game properly and doesn’t deserve a voice.
  • DubbQ
    64 posts Member
    Im in div 2 for the first time this gac and have 7 star nego and mal. I also have a strong rebel and empire/bh fleet and even a decent fo. You should have farmed your ships. They are part of the game and def part of gac. And that all has nothing to do with gal legends as I already had my ships completed by the time they were announced. And yes im f2p
  • Kyno
    25804 posts Moderator
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    There’s not enough ships for necessitating 4 ships for GAC yet. Each capital ship needs 7 ships. We have 8 capital ships. That necessitates 56 ships. We have 43 currently and many are specific to their faction and some that are needed for multiple capital ship strategies. Not to mention many don’t have Finalizer or Raddus close to 7* to be viable.

    Bottom line we need more ships.

    I dont agree with your conclusion, but your math is wrong.

    yes each capital ship needs 7 ships. but we only need 4 capital ships for 2 squads in GAC. so 28 total ships for 4 capital ships. so yes we have that, but we still need more with synergy.

    Just because we need only 4 doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have more. There aren’t enough ships for the expansion. For most, 3 of those ships will be Negotiator, Malevolence and Ackbar. That’s 21 ships alone and many of them like the bugs and hounds tooth are taken up that are needed for the strategies with the other capital ships. The remaining capital ships are Mace (trash and no GR ships left after Negotiator), Executrix (which doesn’t have enough empire ships Or the bugs after Mal), Thrawn (which lacks the proper empire ship or bugs after Mal) and finally raddus and Finalizer which most players don’t have 7* and neither have close to enough ships for synergy.

    So aside from being picky about my math, which technically is right, we don’t have enough ships and need more. Hence this was a premature move for GAC’s and was a bad move by CG.

    Yes, and since I am technically right, the statement that we dont have enough is technically wrong.

    I also said I agree we need more, but nothing points to this being premature or a bad move.

    We have enough ships to do it, and it will only go up from here. There was no reason to farm a new ship that wasnt meta, doing this will drive that and allow them to even the playing field with the ships we have, hence them releasing HT replacements into each faction.
  • TVF
    25588 posts Member
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    There’s not enough ships for necessitating 4 ships for GAC yet. Each capital ship needs 7 ships. We have 8 capital ships. That necessitates 56 ships. We have 43 currently and many are specific to their faction and some that are needed for multiple capital ship strategies. Not to mention many don’t have Finalizer or Raddus close to 7* to be viable.

    Bottom line we need more ships.

    I dont agree with your conclusion, but your math is wrong.

    yes each capital ship needs 7 ships. but we only need 4 capital ships for 2 squads in GAC. so 28 total ships for 4 capital ships. so yes we have that, but we still need more with synergy.

    Just because we need only 4 doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have more. There aren’t enough ships for the expansion. For most, 3 of those ships will be Negotiator, Malevolence and Ackbar. That’s 21 ships alone and many of them like the bugs and hounds tooth are taken up that are needed for the strategies with the other capital ships. The remaining capital ships are Mace (trash and no GR ships left after Negotiator), Executrix (which doesn’t have enough empire ships Or the bugs after Mal), Thrawn (which lacks the proper empire ship or bugs after Mal) and finally raddus and Finalizer which most players don’t have 7* and neither have close to enough ships for synergy.

    So aside from being picky about my math, which technically is right, we don’t have enough ships and need more. Hence this was a premature move for GAC’s and was a bad move by CG.

    Yes, and since I am technically right

    gRk1uZm.gif
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Moorebid wrote: »
    @HerderOfNerf
    I've been playing for a little under 3 years now. I've maybe invested 500 euro into this game, so mostly FTP.
    Currently I'm sitting at 5.75m GP, and have every ship maxed out, except for the newer ones (Raddus and Hux and the 2 new bombers) and a 6* Mal and FOSFTF.
    As for the normal characters, I've got them all maxed out as well (again, not counting the new ones) except for Vandor Chewie and Visas, which both sit at 6*.
    I do on the other hand have a few cantina energy characters to farm, but due to relicing, that's become harder now.
    Currently I'm also sitting at 30/330 in my quest for Rey, which will be my first GL.
    Okay, I'm hovering around 100 in arena, but do get 1st every day in fleet.
    I win almost every GAC round and am rocking a 38/38 combat wave streak atm in TB.

    What I'm saying is that you, sir, have made choices in the past that now reflect on your roster, rendering you an easy(?) target in GAC, according to yourself.
    My best mate started one month after me and he's got a full million less GP than me, because he decided to farm stun guns and I stuck with my plan to farm all toons first.

    In a way, you did it to yourself lol 😉

    There's not enough free energy and crystals in the game to max out every ship and nearly every toon in less than three years. I've been playing just over three years and have been first in arena and fleet every day after the first few months. So I've earned far more crystals than you have.

    If you mean you have nearly every character at 7*, that's not the same thing. You sound more like a collector who has a lot of weak toons, but few if any strong teams. Rosters like that are garbage in TB.

    Which is the major flaw with matchmaking. TB (LS especially) requires all high relic toons to get 4/4 in combat missions. To do well in arena, you have to max out every new meta. When you do this f2p, it puts you at a disadvantage in GA. You get matched with players who have over a million more GP, 10-20 more relic toons, and 20-30 more zetas.

    The original matchmaking was in line with the rest of the game. To do well, you build the strongest possible teams. But the collectors all whined that they couldn't beat those players at the same GP. So they skewed match making to appease the players that are mediocre at every other phase of the game.

    To say I did something to myself is just a dumb thing to say. I chose to play the game strategically. CG chose to skew matchmaking in a way that runs counter to the best strategy in every other phase of the game.

    All that said, I still made kyber because 2/3 of my opponents couldn't get past Rey. Mostly because collectors suck at farming mods.
  • GJO
    132 posts Member
    Not a fact.
    The game is Star Wars galaxy of HEROES, not Star Wars GAlaxy of SHIPS.

    You got it wrong.

    Froggyogy wrote: »
    Since I can't possibly win, I'll no longer participate in GA. I'll just set every meta squad on defense and it won't be fun for anyone. Not that CG ever cared about players having fun.

    I get the frustration. I don't get the response. You won't have fun, so you want to ruin other people's fun? Are you a child?

    Facts. The OP is also literally getting mad over something that is their fault. If you don't have good Negotiator AND Malevolence fleets by the time you are up there, that is entirely your fault. I am in Division 7 right now and I have two perfectly viable offensive and defensive fleets and a well rounded roster and I am probably a third or a fourth of your GP. And also, farming Vulture droid and Hyena bomber are not massive resources, they don't even require characters so I don't know what you mean by that. Obviously the matchmaking can and will be unfair at times but many times that's because you did not plan out your roster efficiently.

  • GJO
    132 posts Member
    There's no IF.
    MatchMaking DOESN'T COUNT SHIPS. That's a fact.
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    I think all of you are beating on herderofnerd unjustly right away. If mm is really comparing the ships both sides are using along with top x toons, it's all on him to not have functional teams.

    For a second let's pause that try to figure out if that's the case. If the mm is not comparing ships, he's fully justified to make a matter of this and it's a developer problem.

Sign In or Register to comment.