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

Replies

  • I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides
  • CCyrilS
    6669 posts Member
    I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides

    Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.

    Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)

    Terrible idea.
  • GP is not everything. I'm 7M and just beat a 9.4M account that pretty much had everything, and with relics at that. They actually played well but made one small mistake that caused them to drop a battle. I punished that and ended up winning with a 1 banner difference.

    0eik4pib4dqg.jpg
  • I think this is the best matchmaking has ever been.
  • New systems works perfectly fine without the sandbaggers. The skill system can't really take into account sandbagging. So higher reward penalties and less skill points lost for sandbagging might help.
  • Just curious how do you seperate sandbagging and reallife problems?
  • here is an idea to "punish" sandbaggers:
    don't reward everyone with the same amount of crystals for a win. put in the gp difference as a factor (maybe only if the difference gets to high, like it exceeds 10% of the players gp). so low gp winning against a big one will give significantly more crystals.
  • zatho
    730 posts Member
    here is an idea to "punish" sandbaggers:
    don't reward everyone with the same amount of crystals for a win. put in the gp difference as a factor (maybe only if the difference gets to high, like it exceeds 10% of the players gp). so low gp winning against a big one will give significantly more crystals.

    I don't support this. People like me, who have bloated their GP for TB deployment and TW-rewards, are punished by your Idea.
  • Phoenixeon wrote: »
    Just curious how do you seperate sandbagging and reallife problems?

    Maybe you can't, but if you have real life problems rewards ain't your biggest concern. However, maybe you can.

    1. Sandbagging is a repeated thing.

    2. Sandbagging you're signing up and doing minimal attacking for rewards. An RL more likely than not wouldn't result in this.
  • Meh, I just take those days off. I look for a squad to auto with Wampa and relax until the next round. Some people envy Sisyphus pushing the rock up the hill for eternity. Don't be those people. Put the rock down.
  • CCyrilS wrote: »
    I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides

    Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.

    Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)

    Terrible idea.

    No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.

    Your first statement contradicts your second statement. Additionally the fact you beat people with more gls doesn't disapprove anything. Just because gls will tell skill WITH A GIVEN ROSTER. Read what I actually wrote instead of just resorting to straw man arguments. Logical fallacies should be left at the door.

    Cg has nerfed the vast majority of non gl counters. So your skill is moot, if you are at a disadvantage in gls. Again with some exception as there are a few counters left with high relics and great mods. Also the fact that your opponents showed up to play doesn't mean they played well, their skill might be significantly inferior to yours.

    Also I said close on number of gls, not the exact same number. How many more did your opponents have?
  • CCyrilS
    6669 posts Member
    Phoenixeon wrote: »
    Just curious how do you seperate sandbagging and reallife problems?

    Maybe you can't, but if you have real life problems rewards ain't your biggest concern. However, maybe you can.

    1. Sandbagging is a repeated thing.

    2. Sandbagging you're signing up and doing minimal attacking for rewards. An RL more likely than not wouldn't result in this.

    Does anyone here even know what sandbagging means? It's performing low to increase your handicap for championship matches. This game doesn't handicap. Stop using that rediculous term here.
  • Kathark
    57 posts Member
    edited April 13
    I have complained about this as well in several other posts but my unique perspective is from the bottom of the barrel (carbonite, 1.3M f2p, a few zetas and no relics). The matching there is bonkers. But I kept hoping it would get better. That the hail storm of inactive accounts would pass. My last week I had three reasonable matchups and went 3-0 with some close games. Was this it? Was I in the clear? I was promoted to carbonite 3! And my first match is against a 4.9M acct with 100s of relic lvls. Sigh. Can we please have a sliding scale of GP differential on top of SR to force these folks to play each other? Larger allowed differential the higher you rise of course. But man it’s no fun facing these inactive “hope they don’t play” matches.
  • The real issue here is that the Win/Loss factor of "Skill Rating" is counting for far too much.

    The Win/Loss would be fine if it moved you from Div-5 to Div-3 in the same League, but, the Leagues should still be set up by GP.

    So if "Kyber" is 7+ Mil to start, then the 7.0 Kyber-5's should be able to advance to Kyber-1 if they keep winning & the 11 Mil Kyber-1 can drop to Kyber-5 with repeated losses, but, you shouldn't see people who have good Mods but only 3 Mil up in Kyber-2.

    You should never loose against an opponent who doesn't attack more than 1x just because the wall they set is unbeatable by any of your teams.

  • Waqui
    8802 posts Member
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides

    Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.

    Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)

    Terrible idea.

    No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.

    The current MM is performance based - not skill based. Don't get too hung up on the term "skill rating". It rates your actual performance - not skill. You ARE matched with opponents who are close - close in past performance.
  • 24_Tuesdays
    1198 posts Member
    edited April 13
    Waqui wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides

    Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.

    Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)

    Terrible idea.

    No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.

    The current MM is performance based - not skill based. Don't get too hung up on the term "skill rating". It rates your actual performance - not skill. You ARE matched with opponents who are close - close in past performance.

    not true

    i start in k5 and keep winning

    someone starts in k1 and keeps losing

    our past performance could not be more different but we will potentially match eventually
    hello
  • CCyrilS wrote: »
    Phoenixeon wrote: »
    Just curious how do you seperate sandbagging and reallife problems?

    Maybe you can't, but if you have real life problems rewards ain't your biggest concern. However, maybe you can.

    1. Sandbagging is a repeated thing.

    2. Sandbagging you're signing up and doing minimal attacking for rewards. An RL more likely than not wouldn't result in this.

    Does anyone here even know what sandbagging means? It's performing low to increase your handicap for championship matches. This game doesn't handicap. Stop using that rediculous term here.

    I think it's pretty accurate. Performing low to decrease skill rating and therefore increasing the handicap.
  • CCyrilS wrote: »
    So if I'm at 6m but a very good player, I'm still forced to play Aurodium for lower rewards? No thanks.

    Also, what if I buy an account from 13jkelly but I can't play for crap... should I be guaranteed kyber rewards?

    That is pretty much exactly how it used to work.

    You were split up by GP in your Division & then could work up to Kyber-League based on your performance.

    But you still didn't change your Division w/o gaining more GP.

    That system worked just fine.

    Suddenly having 900K face 3Mil that may or may not play that day isn't an improvement.
  • JoryG87 wrote: »
    It isn't all about GP.

    Your opponent has the same skill level. He/she could have a bad strategy, bad mods or participation isn't great.

    With the right strategy, there is still a chance you can win.

    Since I am the one that posted this ongoing issue:

    That opponent had all 6 Gls VS my 3 - He placed 2 of Defense and went ham on me. I used two on O to punch into his D. If I placed all 3 on D, would of lost because "off meta" at this level is a 30% or less chance win rate.

    The Omni issue: Yup, got all the good ones so far. Qui? cant use VS GLs, StarKiller? nope Zam? sure for a 2 shot most times. Wampa? if the right GL is on D

    I can punch out of my GP level, few hundred thousand 1-2 GLs more, however, 1.6 million in Kyber 2 is brutal difference and 3 extra GLs.. welp... its ugly
  • CCyrilS wrote: »
    So if I'm at 6m but a very good player, I'm still forced to play Aurodium for lower rewards? No thanks.

    Also, what if I buy an account from 13jkelly but I can't play for crap... should I be guaranteed kyber rewards?

    That is pretty much exactly how it used to work.

    You were split up by GP in your Division & then could work up to Kyber-League based on your performance.

    But you still didn't change your Division w/o gaining more GP.

    That system worked just fine.

    Suddenly having 900K face 3Mil that may or may not play that day isn't an improvement.

    for every person that thinks it worked fine there were four more complaining about it

    hello
  • CCyrilS
    6669 posts Member
    edited April 13
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    So if I'm at 6m but a very good player, I'm still forced to play Aurodium for lower rewards? No thanks.

    Also, what if I buy an account from 13jkelly but I can't play for crap... should I be guaranteed kyber rewards?

    That is pretty much exactly how it used to work.

    You were split up by GP in your Division & then could work up to Kyber-League based on your performance.

    But you still didn't change your Division w/o gaining more GP.

    That system worked just fine.

    Suddenly having 900K face 3Mil that may or may not play that day isn't an improvement.

    There was a reason it was changed.

    I'm not saying there couldn't possibly be some improvement, but I disagree with this suggestion.

    The best idea I can think if would be like it is now, but with a floor for how far a person can drop (relative to their highest rank). But to make things more fair, their rewards would continue to drop below that floor as they do now.

    So if someone is k3 today, and they stop playing for a few rounds, they could drop as far as k5 maybe, but rewards would continue to decline as they already do, until they rejoin and "earn" k5 or better rewards. But there would be no scenario where this kyber worthy person ends up fighting a legit aurodium (or lower) player.
  • "Kyber League" means two different things between the old and the new systems.
  • CCyrilS
    6669 posts Member
    Screerider wrote: »
    "Kyber League" means two different things between the old and the new systems.

    Thanks? I guess...
  • for every person that thinks it worked fine there were four more complaining about it

    What exactly where the complaints that have now been corrected?

    The Matchmaking was bunk but it is now too.

    In no way does it account for # of GLs or some of the other MM issues.

  • CCyrilS wrote: »

    The best idea I can think if would be like it is now, but with a floor for how far a person can drop (relative to their highest rank). But to make things more fair, their rewards would continue to drop below that floor as they do now.

    So if someone is k3 today, and they stop playing for a few rounds, they could drop as far as k5 maybe, but rewards would continue to decline as they already do, until they rejoin and "earn" k5 or better rewards. But there would be no scenario where this kyber worthy person ends up fighting a legit aurodium (or lower) player.

    The linking of "Daily" rewards from Squad did create a bit of an odd mismatch in the way Kyber now earns more than everyone.

    I'd say the biggest change could be that there is an overlap in the "Daily" rewards.

    So instead of it naturally going from K1 to K2 to K3, etc etc.

    It should probably pay out as K1, to A1, to C1, etc etc, then come back to K2 to A2, to C2.

    That way your Kyber makes more than Chromium, but your Division 1-5 which is set by your "performance" and not your "GP" is where the daily comes from.

    It would create a bigger drive to participate.

    I'm not sure if that is the perfect solution but it does handle non-performers getting lower rewards but NOT dropping down to face people 50% of their GP.
  • harvestmouse
    391 posts Member
    edited April 14
    So if Kyber 2 plays less than Aurodium 1...........where are players going to try to be?

    I'm perfectly fine with the payouts as your piers are on the same payout (well before this latest update anyway).

    The old way it was a lot about getting lucky with your arena pool.
    Post edited by harvestmouse on
  • for every person that thinks it worked fine there were four more complaining about it

    What exactly where the complaints that have now been corrected?

    The Matchmaking was bunk but it is now too.

    In no way does it account for # of GLs or some of the other MM issues.

    where did i say anything was corrected

    things people complain about just changed
    hello
Sign In or Register to comment.