Getting old with the GP disparity - every level is having this problem besides Kyber 1

Prev13456
Dallamar
44 posts Member
edited May 26
a331boryoz61.png

VS

l2jhd6i2agws.png

Post edited by Kyno on

Replies

  • John_Matrix1985
    2206 posts Member
    edited April 9
    That isn't even much of a disparity tbh. But like the reply above you can have better mods more GL and omicron starkiller etc or better skilled overall
  • There's a guy in my collective's starter guild who has 972k GP. His opponent in round 1 was 3.6 mil GP.

    If I have to explain to you how lopsided that is then something is wrong.
  • The old division systems didn't work either. A hybrid of them both would.

    That way you get fair matchups across a similar GP range
  • The old division systems didn't work either. A hybrid of them both would.

    That way you get fair matchups across a similar GP range

    So long as handicapped (i.e. GP limited) divisions get worse rewards and we are free to choose to join an Open division with the best rewards, sure.
  • Also, Ahnald earlier this week beat a 5M account with his 1.5M f2p alt. There's a reason these big accounts fall so far. If they're sandbagging and then start trying, that stinks. But they may just be bad at the game.

    Give the 1.5mil f2p alt to a noob and see how they do vs the 5 mil account. I'm betting it's a different result completely. just bc someone who's experienced with the game can do it doesn't mean every 1.5 mil account can. It's a really unfair comparison.
  • Waqui
    8802 posts Member
    Also, Ahnald earlier this week beat a 5M account with his 1.5M f2p alt. There's a reason these big accounts fall so far. If they're sandbagging and then start trying, that stinks. But they may just be bad at the game.

    Give the 1.5mil f2p alt to a noob and see how they do vs the 5 mil account. I'm betting it's a different result completely. just bc someone who's experienced with the game can do it doesn't mean every 1.5 mil account can. It's a really unfair comparison.

    Give the 5 Million account to a skilled and active player.......
  • Waqui wrote: »
    Also, Ahnald earlier this week beat a 5M account with his 1.5M f2p alt. There's a reason these big accounts fall so far. If they're sandbagging and then start trying, that stinks. But they may just be bad at the game.

    Give the 1.5mil f2p alt to a noob and see how they do vs the 5 mil account. I'm betting it's a different result completely. just bc someone who's experienced with the game can do it doesn't mean every 1.5 mil account can. It's a really unfair comparison.

    Give the 5 Million account to a skilled and active player.......

    Exactly. My whole point is that skill gap can overcome a pretty substantial GP gap.

    I'm not advocating for such hopeless matches. I think something could and should be done to try and improve the early and mid-game experience. But most of the solutions I see offered are too similar to the old system and/or would ruin what has been a great change for us K1 tryhards.
  • Pan2218 wrote: »
    Azhriaz wrote: »
    Still, there is a point where the difference is too big. I have 3.6M GP and am currently in Chrome 2.
    My opponents usually have more than 5M GP. I know I can beat opponents with 5.1M GP - I already have.
    But against opponents with 6M GP I simply have absolutely no chance.
    Then why am I in Chrome 2? Because the opponents don't attack! My last two opponents (7.1M and 6.4M) didn't attack.
    And that's just frustrating. I can only win if the opponent doesn't attack.
    Sorry, but this is no fun.
    I don't mind losing, but I want real competition. I'm happy when I can beat someone who has more GP. I'm not sad when someone who supposedly is weaker beats me.But winning because the other doesn't attack is pointless.
    Therefore the GP should play a role, at least as a factor.

    That's a huge difference & if folks are saying its not, they're delusional. People like to troll on here & make you feel like you don't have a valid point or that you are alone. Don't listen to those people. Things like this need to be posted. That is basically twice you're GP & no matter how good your roster is at that level. 2x your size is too much.
    Sorry you got that matchup

    I just beat a 2.7m GP account (who showed up and tried) with a 1.3m GP account. I regularly beat 6m GP accounts with 4.5m GP. Yes, there are some who don't play often and when they wake up they crush you and that sucks. I see it about 25% of the time and it really isn't fun but its not as bad as people make it out to be. The people who have massive disparity wouldn't be challenged at ALL against equal GP opponents. Stop doing well and you won't be facing harder opponents.

    Grum the third swgoh.gg https://swgoh.gg/p/144884575/
    || Grum the Mighty swgoh.gg || OldBaldGuyGaming Youtube
  • Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    Unless you are at the top of Kyber 1, GAC is no longer about competition. It's just about crystals. Take what you can get and move on to the next match.

    This. There is a reason they killed the squad arena. This is the new squad arena. GA used to be a fun game mode.
  • CCyrilS
    6669 posts Member
    It's fair. If you have the lower gp you are more skilled. Why is that so hard to fathom.

    I'm on a terrible losing streak and will be in Kyber 2 next round. Just the way it is. My 4.2M alt with 2GL made it to Kyber 4 after a good run.

    The 2 accounts are like chalk and cheese yet they may end up fighting each other!

    Doesn't that sort of disprove the idea that it's because of skill?

    Not that I think it isn't, it would just be difficult to reconcile the fact, since you're playing both accounts.
  • Lumiya
    360 posts Member
    I just faced an opponent with more than double my GP. My 1 year 3.2M roster against a 6 year 6.7M roster can not match that.
    People like to say it is because some perform too good and that's why they face these opponents. Well, that's maybe half of the story. The other half is that people win against others because they don't participate. A win against an opponent that doesn't show up does not mean you won because you were good or better. Yet you get moved up.

    I agree that there needs to be some kind of filter or something to regulate this at least a little.

    As it is now, it feels like especially new or small accounts are being fed to the wolves. It is one thing to try to get people to spend so they expand their roster, but it is totally counter productive to let them feel, no matter what they do it is no use because they can never catch up. In a game where it takes a long time to significantly grow your account you can't throw them together like this.
    We are all made of star-stuff
  • zatho
    733 posts Member
    I could imagine that recalculation of skill ratings would take into account GP difference and GL-mismatch. If you lose vs. more GLs and/or more GP, then you don't loose much skill value. But if you lose against an enemy with less GLs and/or less GP, you drop further in skill rating.
    And of course if you can win against more GLs and/or more GP, you gain more skill Value than against a weaker enemy.
  • Pan2218 wrote: »
    People like to troll on here & make you feel like you don't have a valid point or that you are alone. Don't listen to those people. Things like this need to be posted. That is basically twice you're GP & no matter how good your roster is at that level. 2x your size is too much.
    Sorry you got that matchup

    You are right, this community has a part of very toxic and addicted people who think they know the meaning of life: trol in a dying game.
    For CG try to manage with hybrid MM this kind of absurd situation. Regards
  • zatho wrote: »
    I could imagine that recalculation of skill ratings would take into account GP difference and GL-mismatch. If you lose vs. more GLs and/or more GP, then you don't loose much skill value. But if you lose against an enemy with less GLs and/or less GP, you drop further in skill rating.
    And of course if you can win against more GLs and/or more GP, you gain more skill Value than against a weaker enemy.

    I think that would be a reasonable change for the upper tiers. CG still needs to do something to stop sandbagging tho bc the current system is incredibly easy to manipulate if you just want to stomp on some weaker accounts.
  • zatho
    733 posts Member
    zatho wrote: »
    I could imagine that recalculation of skill ratings would take into account GP difference and GL-mismatch. If you lose vs. more GLs and/or more GP, then you don't loose much skill value. But if you lose against an enemy with less GLs and/or less GP, you drop further in skill rating.
    And of course if you can win against more GLs and/or more GP, you gain more skill Value than against a weaker enemy.

    @CG_SBCrumb_MINI @CG_Tusken_Meathead Can you please forward this suggestion to devs? Probably they thought about that already but it sounds like an improvement to the current system.
  • It will only get worse as people fall from the higher ranks. Will take a long time to stabilize.
  • It's fair. If you have the lower gp you are more skilled. Why is that so hard to fathom.

    It has nothing to do with skill if my opponents (7,1 M & 6,4M) don't attack. And it has nothing to do with skill if my 5.9M opponent beats me (3.6M).That's just ridiculous.
    Lumiya wrote: »
    I just faced an opponent with more than double my GP. My 1 year 3.2M roster against a 6 year 6.7M roster can not match that.
    People like to say it is because some perform too good and that's why they face these opponents. Well, that's maybe half of the story. The other half is that people win against others because they don't participate. A win against an opponent that doesn't show up does not mean you won because you were good or better. Yet you get moved up.

    I agree that there needs to be some kind of filter or something to regulate this at least a little.

    As it is now, it feels like especially new or small accounts are being fed to the wolves. It is one thing to try to get people to spend so they expand their roster, but it is totally counter productive to let them feel, no matter what they do it is no use because they can never catch up. In a game where it takes a long time to significantly grow your account you can't throw them together like this.

    I totally agree.



  • zatho wrote: »
    I could imagine that recalculation of skill ratings would take into account GP difference and GL-mismatch. If you lose vs. more GLs and/or more GP, then you don't loose much skill value. But if you lose against an enemy with less GLs and/or less GP, you drop further in skill rating.
    And of course if you can win against more GLs and/or more GP, you gain more skill Value than against a weaker enemy.

    This doesn't solve the sinking roster problem though? In fact it would actually make the inactive rosters sink even faster, and stay down there for longer.
  • zatho
    733 posts Member
    zatho wrote: »
    I could imagine that recalculation of skill ratings would take into account GP difference and GL-mismatch. If you lose vs. more GLs and/or more GP, then you don't loose much skill value. But if you lose against an enemy with less GLs and/or less GP, you drop further in skill rating.
    And of course if you can win against more GLs and/or more GP, you gain more skill Value than against a weaker enemy.

    This doesn't solve the sinking roster problem though? In fact it would actually make the inactive rosters sink even faster, and stay down there for longer.

    Why is this a problem if inactive roster sink to the ground?
  • zatho wrote: »
    zatho wrote: »
    I could imagine that recalculation of skill ratings would take into account GP difference and GL-mismatch. If you lose vs. more GLs and/or more GP, then you don't loose much skill value. But if you lose against an enemy with less GLs and/or less GP, you drop further in skill rating.
    And of course if you can win against more GLs and/or more GP, you gain more skill Value than against a weaker enemy.

    This doesn't solve the sinking roster problem though? In fact it would actually make the inactive rosters sink even faster, and stay down there for longer.

    Why is this a problem if inactive roster sink to the ground?

    Well, I just thought the main complaint on this thread had been the "GP disparity" - that younger rosters were getting matched up with heavy rosters.
  • zatho
    733 posts Member
    zatho wrote: »
    zatho wrote: »
    I could imagine that recalculation of skill ratings would take into account GP difference and GL-mismatch. If you lose vs. more GLs and/or more GP, then you don't loose much skill value. But if you lose against an enemy with less GLs and/or less GP, you drop further in skill rating.
    And of course if you can win against more GLs and/or more GP, you gain more skill Value than against a weaker enemy.

    This doesn't solve the sinking roster problem though? In fact it would actually make the inactive rosters sink even faster, and stay down there for longer.

    Why is this a problem if inactive roster sink to the ground?

    Well, I just thought the main complaint on this thread had been the "GP disparity" - that younger rosters were getting matched up with heavy rosters.

    With my solution they are still matched up but don't lose points in there skill rating. So it reduces the damage.
  • zatho wrote: »
    zatho wrote: »
    zatho wrote: »
    I could imagine that recalculation of skill ratings would take into account GP difference and GL-mismatch. If you lose vs. more GLs and/or more GP, then you don't loose much skill value. But if you lose against an enemy with less GLs and/or less GP, you drop further in skill rating.
    And of course if you can win against more GLs and/or more GP, you gain more skill Value than against a weaker enemy.

    This doesn't solve the sinking roster problem though? In fact it would actually make the inactive rosters sink even faster, and stay down there for longer.

    Why is this a problem if inactive roster sink to the ground?

    Well, I just thought the main complaint on this thread had been the "GP disparity" - that younger rosters were getting matched up with heavy rosters.

    With my solution they are still matched up but don't lose points in there skill rating. So it reduces the damage.

    Ok, I see what you are thinking now. Sure, once all the inactive rosters sink to the absolute bottom of ocean, they'll just stay there and get matched up against each other. But they still cause the disparities on the way. Also what about those who do play occasionally? They don't sink all the way.
  • Oh, it's in Kyber 1, also.

    I'm 8.9 facing an 11M opponent. This after beating a 9.6 to earn this matchup.

    But I'm not going to whine about it, because that's the system. If this super kraken misplays, I have a shot.

    Update. I did not win, but I did have a shot. I had 2 misplays of my own. First time I've run up against multiple R9 tanks (5s and RG), and the SLKR / NS counter failed due to just too much dps from my opponent. Wampacron couldn't handle R7/8 Iden Troopers. I took it as the learning experience I needed.
Sign In or Register to comment.