GAC opponent
December 17, 2020 10:56PM
edited December 2020
So I've noticed that im consistently matched up with someone who has between 1 and 1.3 million more in gp than I do. Im in Division 1. Is that a fairly normal matchup?
Post edited by Kyno on
0
- 61.6K General Discussion
- -35 Developer Q&A Archive
- 2.6K New Players
- 30.7K Arena and Character Strategy
- 3.2K Individual Events
- 5.5K Guild Events
- 4.7K PVP and Rivalry
- 51K Guild Recruitment
- 751 Art and Media
- 4.2K Off Topic
Howdy, Stranger!
Replies
Honest question, how many is “a ton of relics”?
It's really more of the level they are at. Some people take every relic character up to R7. The R5+ ones have a big impact on the top 80 GP.
2000 (in pounds)
2,200 if it's a metric ton of relics.
In game guild: TNR Uprising
I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
*This space left intentionally blank*
Your character roster is very top-heavy, stacked with highly relic'd characters. You have a GL to show for it, which is better than most rosters I see with your complaint, but all that extra GP is likely to draw you some rather tough GAC opponents and I don't think Sith Eternal Emperor is really the best GL for that setup.
To top things off, you also have a lot of high powered fighters but you have neither Negotiator nor Malevolence, putting you at a serious disadvantage at this level of play.
You should never get punished for gearing up chars. Gp has like nothing to do in matchmaking.
We were told repeatedly that matchmaking is based on GP as an indicator of investment. But unfortunately and inappropriately they do not measure total investment.
I am close to my 3rd GL, have 76 relics and I am also matched against rosters with 300k to 700k more GP. Not top heavy. This whole top 80 approach doesn’t take into account that my opponents have more toons to choose from.
Top 80 isn't fair. You only need 35 on defence and often less than 35 on offence
This x10
And you shouldn't get easier matches because you choose not to gear toons in purpose for the sole purpose of this here system. Should be a two way street and not a one lane highway to Breezeville.
I think everyone can agree you shouldn't be punished for upgrading characters.
Now that that is out of the way, how are you being punished if they are making better choices than you are/did?
The match is decided by the top 80 system, meaning that you are each measured on the tools that you would need to win that match, if they are only upgrading the tools they need and can use to win, anything else they do with their roster is irrelevant. There are some arguments for total GP being relevant, but strategy can overcome that, as anyone going into 2nd and 3rd battles has already made bad choices/mistakes in the match.
no one is punishing a player for upgrades made, but a player can make better choices than someone else about who makes it into their top 80.
Yes, they have more to choose from, but they rarely do. Check your own GAC history. How many characters do round winners use to win/clear on average? How many different teams/characters do they/you use across all their rounds? Do they really use all those extra teams/characters? How many more?
How would you include this "purpose" parameter in the matchmaking algorithm?
I think the actual formula is 'numbers of teams on D x10' (for 5v5). 'Top 80' is an expression based on old gac where you put 8 teams on D in D2/D1. Now that's it's 7 teams + fleet, i guess it actually is top 70.
However, it's understandable that some players would prefer a more tactical approach where ressource management doesn't play such a major role. Rather than changing matchmaking, i would prefer a new game mode, like some kind of sealed/draft mode where you don't use your roster but characters from a pool.
Your opponents with multiple GLs chose to gear/relic characters that unlock GLs instead of taking their BH, NS and JKR teams to high relic levels along with single characters like JTR and Plo Koon like you did. They built rosters more suitable for GAC than yours. It's fair that they have the benefit.
Before I had a GL, I only saw one potential opponent with a GL and his roster was very poorly balanced.
Since acquiring a GL, I see opponents with 0-1 GL. I could conceivably encounter a 2 GL opponent but they would have to have a very poorly balanced roster and there is no way I could encounter a 3 GL opponent without adding a lot more bloat to my own roster.
you have toons with out of date zetas in your top 80?
GLs: 3 vs 1
22 relic 7's with lots of relic 4's and 5's aswell and then he wonders why he faces opponents with such rosters, LOL.
How can you even have so many high relics and only have one GL and no JKL yet...sigh.
A GAC roster you say. I say my roster smacks yours around a few times but that's not the point of this thread. The point is pointing out the system flaws and your comment just acknowledges said point. Built a better GAC roster... just say that a few times in your head until it clicks in on how absurd that even sounds. And if your roster was indeed better for GAC its a shame we would never know now would we. Identical GP you and I have but yet we'll NEVER face one another. Sounds like a quality matchmaking system is in place. Cool g11 Wat you have my man. I'd hate to see you improve him without hurting your oh so easy and manipulated GAC matches
The part where it shows relic levels comparison is nowhere to be seen, interesting...