Division 1 Split
March 9, 2021 3:05PM
edited March 2021
Can we get some traction on this or even a response? 4.5-8 million is a stupid, stupid big gap of gp. We have seen the numbers recently, and way too many players are in Div1 now compared to the others. Will a split ever happen? Why or why not? There's no reason they cannot use the parameters of other divisions and have it split for every 1 mil GP. 4.5-5.49, 5.5-6.49, 6.5+....
Edit: I understand why this is technically better to be in the GA part of the forum.... this part of the forum is dead. Why is this being moved but not even addressed?
Edit: I understand why this is technically better to be in the GA part of the forum.... this part of the forum is dead. Why is this being moved but not even addressed?
6
- 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
I mean that sounds like they are choosing not to check. Genuinely asking, what do you mean they need analytics run numbers? Just checking the GP breakdown?
There was a recent reddit post showing how such a lobsided % of players are in Div1. If an everyday player can pull this data, they should have it. I'm blanking on the % but it was way out of wack. I'll see if I can find the graphic.
Edit: Still looking for the recent one, but 4 months ago 30% wer in division 1. That's insane! its likely 40-45+ right now
https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/235293/gac-division-populations#latest
Sweet thanks. So Div 1 is almost as big as Div 2, 3 and 4 COMBINED.
D1 - 7.5+
D2 - 6.5-7.49
D3 - 5.5-6.49
D4 (Old D1 cutoff) - 4.5-5.49, and the the remaining 10 divisions... Nothing needs to change on the lower divisions, just a name change.
Also, after 5-6 million, there should be more slots on the battlefield anyways. Multiple reasons to fix this.
@Kyno What more analytical data does CG even need? They can easily find the numbers of players within 1 million GP bracket afters 4.5.
It's not just about how many are there, but also making a new system that doesnt isolate any particular group too much and swing us towards the other problem when some group faces the same people repeatedly.
There is also some discussion that needs to be around the "why".... many of these players do not face each other at all due to matchmaking.
I'm sure there are other points they discuss too.
I mean there's no reason they should diminish what other divisions receive. Add ones with slightly better rewards stashes. The "why" is there is too large a gap for top 80 to compute and effectively matchmake after 5 or so million GP. Another "why" would be so people past 6 million aren't ignoring some relic toons. Expanding the layout for super high GP players would be nice.
Adding rewards is never "simple", especially when adding only to the top end.
I agree, but there is more to the situation then just those points. I would also imagine that saying matchmaking doesnt work after X would probably needs to be validated on their side (another thing that needs analytic run on)
Both MM and GAC divisions have been on the radar for a bit, but the analytics side has been backed up for multiple reasons and things like this are just lower on the list than other things that need to be looked at.
If this is not the data they are looking for, what's the data they are looking for? Their only statement on the topic so far confirms this is the data they are looking for.
They will need to run the data on their end, and I'm sure they will look at more than just that data set there as there are many factors involved in a change like this.
Is that your assumption or their response on what's actually happening?
I don't mean to try and dumb it down, and yes my "after X gp" is more of an assumption, but rosters that deep have way more than 80 useful toons, I do know that.
The rewards ofc will be a hot button topic, but the gear crunch is moving quickly to relic and g12+ as opposed to stun guns. GAC rewards being upped for 2-3 more divisions wouldn't change a ton if they scale it similarly.
That said, what needs to happen for them to parse through this data? Is there anyway to make this known? I know there's more than two people that care about this, and in another few months these percentages will be getting even further out of hand. This may not be the #1 issue, but we shouldn't wait to put this in their crosshairs.
Last we spoke about this they were waiting on analytics to run numbers on this, and yes they were looking at more than just the population, because this has many factors and points to consider.
Each of these points is not a simple thing and all has (or would need) data to define what changes would need to be made.
Everything they do is a balancing act, with new content and updates to the game and game modes. They are aware, and that will take the time it takes.
As you had the chance to talk about it... is adding slots also an option ?
That's kinda given as this is already the case for division pairs right now. When we go into implementation, if cg misses the cues the problem might be too few new divisions and too few new slots (=2 new divisions and 1 new slot)
It basically involves all the ingredients. Division structure currently prevents too high total gp difference if one isn't in division 1. One can argue it only artificially reduces the root problems of mm ofc.
The most evident problem as one stretches from the initial gp for div 1 is the slots. The lack of slots result in rather mundane matches imo which nowadays boil down to -which gl- and trying to cancel eachothers gls out. And the rewards, as the needs of different gps change (as evidenced by recent rewards structures cg is trying to put out) the reward amounts and what it contains can slightly change.
Even without any reward changes though, I'd be more than happy for more slots and new divs to aspire to if I don't end up in the highest div.
Yes it does seem to be, but that decision is also driven by the data, so while it is an option there is no firm decision that anything will happen. Just that it will be looked at.
They cannot actively look at this without the data and the data will take the time it takes to get.
They are aware and it is on the list of thing, but that all takes time.
Not sure how pulling data on their own game should interfere with other activities. Again though, why do you need to be so vague and snarky...? "It will take the time it takes..." That's not an answer. I'd rather hear you don't know than that.
Hope you get my previous response now
This is not the only thing that data needs to be collected for, and pulling data is only part of it, as the data has to be parsed and made into presentable comparisons and other actions to show what they need to look at.
I am not being snarky, it just takes what it takes, and without going into a bunch of details (some of which I do not have) it's not as simple as just pulling data.