GAC and GL's
September 1, 2021 11:38AM
edited September 2021
So if only a GL can beat a GL, wouldn't it have been wise to make the GAC match making take into account of the number of GL's people have? and pair them off equally?
Post edited by Kyno on
4
- 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
Or both set it on D and see who can 2 shot it the cleanest.
Why would paying players have more GLs than ftp players they meet in gac ?
If you match 2 vs 4 GLs (i have seen some YTer Kyber Champion alts being matched like this) its rather pointless especially at the state of the game.
They only updated the game to be more stale - MM, KI, bugs they left alone it appears to me (personal opinion)
Reminds me on the earlier change of fleets down to 3v3 lineup. A change for the worse - but celebrated like a new invention of the wheel.
That’s not what it means. In this game, matchmaking put players with similar resources in their top X together, to factor strategic decisions in the game mode. If you want similar strength you need to face a mirror roster with similar mods (if we have the same number of GLs but i have better mods or only I have GAS, we’re not at similar strength). It’s possible and will only be about tactics, but it sounds pretty boring tbh.
I am F2P and have 3GLs. I have faced 7 opponents in a row who have all 5 GLs.
I went for Exec because I care about ships and squad arena. The bloat of those mid-tier, now relic'd characters puts me in the same bracket as lean P2P'rs who went for all the GLs and skipped Exec. Sadly if they set all 5 GLs in the front, I can't clear with the GL counters being nerfed, even if my Exec costs them a few battles or even fully blocks them.
So you made a resource management decision that it was better to do well in the arenas than gac? I agree that that was the right call to make. However, if you are facing 5 GL’s when you have 3, there is a lot of bloat in your roster that is not just executor related. That isn’t a judgement, it’s just a factual statement. Imo
I feel like I have to agree here...Exec requirements are about half a GL, with two chars overlapping SEE. It would be interesting to see if there is anything else going on here, or if those 5 GL rosters are in fact really top heavy.
(oh the one person with 4 GLs this round has 3 actual GLs and a G8 JMK)
Ok, so as you were matched against them, it means you had the resources to unlock 5 GLs just as those lean p2p’rs and you chose to develop other teams instead. I still dont understand how it’s a money issue… if you were against lean ftp’ers it would be the exact same thing.
A roster bloating or not does not matter.
GLs are unbeatable basically in 3v3 especially for non GLs - no matter if you throw 10+ teams on them nothing will happen vs most of them.
The MM algorithm should be hardcoded GL vs GL and not allow some "tuned"roster without high clones/padme to simply autowin GAC. Because that is all what is happening.
The MM for GAC + TW is really bad - point. Be it sandbagging at finest which ends up in 200 GLs vs 50 GLs (seen this), or be it 4-5 GLs vs 2-3 GLs its in the end just very bad matchmaking.
In race car championship no one drives F1 vs GT class, but this exact thing is happening here. And people defend it only because they get full free wins - nothing else.
Thx you for telling me i only defend the game mode as it is because i get free wins; silly me, i thought i liked strategy games. I enjoy starting gac with an advantage; it means i did good with my roster, the aspect of the game where i take the most meaningful decisions, because it is followed by months of farming. It doesn't prevent me to lose against people who are better than me at tactics.
What you propose will shrink the strategy aspect of gac in favor of a tactical heavy game mode (where mods will be more important than they are now btw). I respect that, to each his own. But it doesn’t mean the actual gac system is wrong. It is what it is, a game mode where roster building is very important.
What i would like to see is a new game mode more tactical heavy, like a draft/sealed system. But i appreciate gac as it is, as others do. Some people like F1 manager better than F1 mobile racing, to follow your analogy (and btw, f1/gt is more like d1/d4 imo, so they dont race against each other).
So you are proposing that matchmaking only looks at whether both teams have Padmé and Clones? Because for non-GL users the ones with Padmé and Clones has a clear advantage?
No the MM algorithm for GAC simply takes xx number of top chars and takes the median GP score and than looks for opponents.
However certain characters are way better for similar GP than others - which is the issue.
Most GL in certain setups are ONLY beatable by another GL. Means if you got high relic Padme/Clones/etc for TB you will simply auto loose. Making gearing somehow a fan favorite team kind of unattractive too - like Phoenix.
The MM algorithm should be far more based on real strength, than some nonsense GP what doesnt have any kind of real roster strength. Just watch the roster of top1-3 in the divisions below Div1 and you will notice lots of G13 and only relic for characters they need for the GL. If you want just watch a few Kyber Champion rosters and you will understand it. Watch their opponents and you will notice they mostly had a HUGE advantage in troops and mostly the double of the opponent GLs. They win automatically.
GLs should be treated separately to allow a somehow more senseful MM. The system now favours not to relic whenever possible.