SMH, Even though the lower gp player did better with his roster.
People keep repeating this argument and there's nothing behind it. You were matched because the characters deemed relevant for the match by the algorithm were close. Whether you used more or less is irrelevant, you reached the same score.
Take it like this, if after the tie you would have to deploy the rest of your roster, the one with higher GP supposedly has better toons left and so they win.
Thanks for your input. I disagree. The lower gp player is literally, at a disadvantage in one form or another.
It’s a competition, not a deployment contest.
A tie should go to the player that had a disadvantage to begin with.
But that's his point the matchmaking uses the exact number of toons needed for attack and defense, so they are not at a disadvantage, they are at the same point for that mode.
They also didn't do better, they did the same, not better not worse, hence the tie.
Thanks for your input. I disagree. The lower gp player is literally, at a disadvantage in one form or another.
Only in case of ties. Apart from that it's only a matter of who built the roster more suitable for GAC. The matchmaking algorithm is very close to matching players by the GP of the characters actually used to win/clear. The GP of unused characters/units is completely irrelevant. Those units didn't contribute to the battle.
Lower gp player didn't do better necessarily. The matches are done by superbly close top 80 which the lower gp player might as well have. This argument has been beaten to silliness long ago. Just don't tie.
You assume they use the same toons. The higher gp has more options and a advantage by that premise alone.
Check your GAC history. Check how many characters (on average) the round winners actually use to win a round. Then check which characters you yourself actually use in the rounds you win.
In my case the average number of characters is approximately 2 + (10 times the number of defensive character slots) and less than 28 non-capital ships. And there's only little variation in which teams/characters are used. I assume you will see a similar pattern.
Thanks for your input. I disagree. The lower gp player is literally, at a disadvantage in one form or another.
It’s a competition, not a deployment contest.
A tie should go to the player that had a disadvantage to begin with.
Which GP, total or matchmaking? Player A may have higher total GP but Player B higher matchmaking GP. So who has the advantage?
Replies
Because whales
Whales dont tie.
Take it like this, if after the tie you would have to deploy the rest of your roster, the one with higher GP supposedly has better toons left and so they win.
But that's his point the matchmaking uses the exact number of toons needed for attack and defense, so they are not at a disadvantage, they are at the same point for that mode.
They also didn't do better, they did the same, not better not worse, hence the tie.
How many toons outside your top 80 (assuming you are in div 1 or 2) characters do you regularly use in GAC?
Only in case of ties. Apart from that it's only a matter of who built the roster more suitable for GAC. The matchmaking algorithm is very close to matching players by the GP of the characters actually used to win/clear. The GP of unused characters/units is completely irrelevant. Those units didn't contribute to the battle.
Check your GAC history. Check how many characters (on average) the round winners actually use to win a round. Then check which characters you yourself actually use in the rounds you win.
In my case the average number of characters is approximately 2 + (10 times the number of defensive character slots) and less than 28 non-capital ships. And there's only little variation in which teams/characters are used. I assume you will see a similar pattern.
No. Because simple arbitrary tie-breaker. This mechanic predates GAC, going all the way back to the beginning of GA when everything was by total GP.
It's a dumb system but not for the reasons you think.