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

Replies

  • MaruMaru
    2636 posts Member
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    CCyrilS wrote: »
    Recurve wrote: »
    There are more people getting squished down into the lower kyber brackets, so Kyber 1 is shrinking all the time.
    This is pushing the bigger GP people who aren't as good at the game lower into the lesser kyber brackets.
    I win my games at k2 and get promoted back or float around here.. only to keep facing more and more opponents with 5-6 GLs.

    Kyber 1 has far less people in it now because of squishes that happen.
    I wish I could explain the squish in greater detail but CG doesn't give us any info on what actually happens or affects it, I'm just looking at the ranking numbers for players in my guild near the threshold and their overall rank is just under 7k now at 3621 rating (3610 is the K1 cutoff)... this used to be waaaay more people in here.
    Kyber 2 has around 20,000 people so more are getting pushed down

    K1 isn't shrinking (as a percentage) it stays the same.
    Pushing people who aren't as good down? Actually it's their performance that causes them to drop, but that's literally the point.
    The squish happens AFTER the round starts, and doesn't change rankings, so you haven't shown how it possibly affects your matches.

    Do you have any data that it isn't shrinking on percentage? I don't, but I vaguely remember k1 standings in 5 digit numbers at the beginning. Either way, the above data point I gave of 3611-7332th spot can be used whether or not this is happening next time we get to it.

    The entire purpose is to keep the percentages in each division/league within the stated ranges. I don't remember them exactly, but they have been posted.

    That's the stated purpose. What I'm asking is if that's what's really happening. By posted you mean the intended % in each league was posted somewhere?

    Yes. For example, I think 10% of kyber should be in k1.

    The closest I can find to that statement is here:
    https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/251720/state-of-the-galaxy-november-2021#latest

    "Your Skill Rating will be adjusted after each event and the group of opponents you face will be matched based on your Skill Rating. All players that finish the season in the Division 1 (the top 10% of the League) are promoted into the next League up and players in Division 5 of their League (the bottom 10%) will move down. (NOTE: You will not face another player outside of your League)"

    Is this what you mean?

    Could be. We've had the numbers a long time without question, I don't really remember where they came from to start with.

    Ok then, can't say that was convincing the % in each division/league is staying constant.

    Since the playerbase doesn't suddenly expand or contract the next -just at the k1 cutoff- also be something close to 7300th spot. I'll try to keep in mind and report back on next squish.

    That's how it's meant to work, and there's been no reason to doubt it. But by all means, knock yourself out.

    Like I said I remember K1 size to be in 5 digits, thus I'm doubting (while also doubting my memory as I don't have screenshot of the previous #s) and want to see if the player pools in divs stay approx. the same.

    Each squish lowered my sr while raising the divs min sr pushing me closer to edge. I'm having trouble understanding how can this system not contract the # or % of people in the pool.
  • MaruMaru
    2636 posts Member
    Recurve wrote: »
    Yes probably not explaining it very well, but if you are a mid player, winning more than you lose then you climb but the squish takes you back to your starting point.
    If you are higher and have equal win/lose you are still being pushed down into the lower brackets and as such get less rewards. Looking at the number of players in each K1, k2 etc you can see this number is going down a hell of a lot from k1 so less here and more people in k2
    Now this means that these high GP rosters are getting squished down into the lower brackets which is then causing more lopsided matches, and eventually pushing down the lesser rosters even more.
    Everyone talks about the 50% win loss eventuality... but with the squish this means you move down divisions for holding the same win%

    Does this mean # / % of people in k1 decreasing or does it stay the same like @CCyrilS claims?
  • New GAC - New round of "FUN"

    Me - 7.3 million 3/6 GLs

    First - 8.2 million 5/6 GLS
    Second - 8.5 million 6/6 GLs

    fantastic
  • TVF
    31753 posts Member
    I'd suggest more GLs. I'm 7.8 and 5 and mostly behind the curve now.
    The CGDF is no more. Now we hate CG because of the change to the shipment tab. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • NicWester
    8748 posts Member
    edited April 24
    7.9, just unlocked my third GL earlier in the month and about halfway to their ult.

    I get matched up against 4m rosters with multiple GLs. I tend to win those because the only characters they have are requirements for GLs, making their rosters so thin that what they have left over will struggle against even my crummy little g12 defenses. Oh man and don't get me started on how awful their ships are...

    Sometimes I lose, though. Could I win more if I put relic teams on defense? Yeah, probably, but I built those teams to play with them, so I'm going to use them on offense.

    The long and the short of it is that if you're going up against people with 3+ million gp than you, then congratulations on beating all the people with normal rosters on your level that you now have to go up against normal rosters in other levels. The way you overcome that hurdle is to build out the base of your skinny, skinny roster so that now YOU are the one who has a normal roster.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • Some here think that playing light to lower themselves to a lower tier for the rewards is okay. For many who are new to the game or a few years in get hurt by your greed. Don't get mad because you think stealing rewards at lower levels is okay. You have a roster capable of taking out that tier with ease to move up, but instead you complain you can't get rewards because either A) you're not good at strategies, B) too lazy to compete at a higher level C) just want the rewards and would absolutely complain if the same was being done to you. It's sad to see people in a tier with literally 2-3 mill more in gp, and think it's okay, but dislike actually having to compete closer to what they have. Solution? Certainly, once they progress to tier Don't let them regress. Base part of it on gp. There are people with 5 67 gp in bronzium. Seriously? That's okay but you're going to tell me you only have that much for guild events and it's not a true evaluation? Sorry but you're only lying to yourself.
  • Ghost666
    118 posts Member
    Dallamar wrote: »
    New GAC - New round of "FUN"
    I am getting the impression that the real problem is how we define "FUN".
    To me it is balanced matches and having to think and plan in order to win...which inevitably means a close to 50% win ratio...as this means my opponents are as good as i am.
    It seems that many players seem to think winning ALL matches is "FUN", forgetting in the way that this probably means some other guy will be in matches without a chance to win...
    There are optimized rosters at any GP...the present system makes them beatable by matching them with increasingly stronger opponents...seems fair to me, as it also means the rewards will also be better...
    If opponent has more GP and GLs than you, but you still WIN...isn't it even MORE fun than a winning versus a guy with similar or weaker roster?
  • It isn't "fun" when someone has 2-3 GLs and 2-3 GP on you. And there's nothing you can do. The game is as much about strategy as it is about playing the game. Many can not gain any rewards because someone lays back to get the rewards over lower players. If you had 2 GLs and 6 GP. And ended up against someone with 5 GLS and 19 GP and you KNEW they belonged in a higher tier. You would be frustrated as well. People don't see a problem as long as they benefit. Even at the cost of others. It's not a problem until it effects you, or if you're one of them purposely sandbagging. The "occasionally " win over a larger player, isn't because you won. It's because they sandbagged, and for a reason
  • Tell me why someone who is still new at 4.5 gp and zero gl should be playing someone with 2 gls and 6 + gp.
  • harvestmouse
    388 posts Member
    edited May 26
    Tell me why someone who is still new at 4.5 gp and zero gl should be playing someone with 2 gls and 6 + gp.

    They never have nor would match make by GL amount. This would basically give you a reason not to get a GL.

    GP is not a great way to match make. When we did there were far more diverse win percentages compared to now. They could I guess use GP as a factor. However, not really necessary for a 6-4.5 mil match up. If they've been paired it could quite easily be because the 4.5 million player has the better roster.

    The sandbagging is the problem, not the match making.
  • Tell me why someone who is still new at 4.5 gp and zero gl should be playing someone with 2 gls and 6 + gp.

    They never have nor would match make by GL amount. This would basically give you a reason not to get a GL.

    GP is not a great way to match make. When we did there were far more diverse win percentages compared to now. They could I guess use GP as a factor. However, not really necessary for a 6-4.5 mil match up. If they've been paired it could quite easily be because the 4.5 million player has the better roster.

    The sandbagging is the problem, not the match making.

    Actually that's exactly what happens to me. I have no GLs at all and in the current round only one other has no gls, but the rest have at least 2 and a 2 gp or more jump. I agree it's sandbagging, but it happens because they don't play once the enter. They lose at first dropping them in classes then win easily against weaker rosters. Often only doing enough so they can reap rewards. Towards the end they will climb back up to get higher daily awards, but drop back down again to steal higher round rewards. Gp is not the only way to rate. But obviously that kind if disparity , the lower isn't matched fairly against what is obviously a stronger roster. The only way that doesn't apply is someone increases all the roster with few even reliced characters.
  • I guess my question would be why not let a person only drop one class then the highest they have achieved. Everyone should want to go higher. For better daily rewards. This would stop the sandbagging to at least one class. I say one because sometimes you can win by good strategy or match ups as well as lose. The championship should be encouraging one to climb for the rewards. Whether daily or during tournament. Some just figured out how to maximize that by playing lower rosters. It discourages participation. I love when I win, as anyone would,but it sucks to lose to someone you know you shouldn't be matched against.in fact in my round right now I am at 556 arena rank the last place person? 31, 4 of them are in the top 200. 2 are less than 400. The leader 418. How did I get matched to this? I get it Arena rankings can be misleading. But I struggle to climb arena. These people clearly have good rosters and the certainly don't belong in chromium 3. I just fell to chromium 4 because of this. And I know I probably didn't belong there but elevated because a few i won was because they simply didn't battle. I am not notched to the strongest roster and if I win it's because he wants to drop again. If I win it's because he didn't try. If I lose, it's only because he wants to maintain his tier.
  • I don't think dropping to get better round rewards is a big problem. It just doesn't make sense to do it. I'm sure some people have tried it, but I can't see it being a major motivational factor.

    One of the problems is that you can drop far without trying to drop at all.

    I started in Aurodium 3, and after the first season I moved to Kyber 4. I was in Kyber 4 for a while, until they brought in the 3 ships, which was going to be a big problem for me. I dropped down to kyber 5 with a 1-2, 2-1, 1-2 then went 0-3 in the last week and at the end of the season I dropped to Aurodium 3.

    I don't have a personal problem with dropping so far, but it doesn't make sense to me to have such drastic changes.
  • I guess when dropping because of competition is one thing. But when they know the competition is still they can't get the constant rewards that would equal dropping. See the reason most wouldn't have a problem is because they know they can recover. Ir it's not being done to them. I enjoy the game, but I'm f2p. Those rewards are extremely beneficial to me and those like me. It may not make sense why they do it. But it is discouraging game growth as well as people spending. No one is going to invest knowing that sandbagging is happening. The arena while the rewards are not as interesting is another example. It's not true power ranking of pushing you down one slot. It's slot swapping. You can't call either true to the name sake. It would be like a school athletics being ranked by their perceived rosters, then taking a 5A school against a 1A because the 5A played bad on purpose to win the 1A championship. Then funding goes to that school. Of course that is just stating as an example.
    I know some would say spend money, or improve your roster etc. The point is it's not a problem to those who don't do it, or not effected. No one cared about the championship event until it started awarding crystals. Now some sand bag to take from the newer players, because in essence they can without repercussions.
    This me more venting on those that are just too lazy to actually use strategies or earn it honestly. And the same people would be complaining if done to them.
  • Well a few points.

    There are f2p players in Kyber 1. Being p2w or f2p isn't a factor in your argument, is it?

    I dropped from Kyber 4 - Aurodium 3 in a few weeks. I have not seen a significant easing in difficulty. Dropping on purpose to get easier matches, to get better rewards has too many pitfalls.

    Your daily gem intake (gems being in game currency therefore the most valuable of rewards) would decrease. So any rewards for deliberately dropping would be mitigated. So, deliberately dropping to a league you were confident of winning would mean your dailies would drop too low.

    So to hold position you'd be going 2-1 1-2. That's 750 gems per fortnight.

    To lose purposely and then win the bracket you'd go 3-0 0-3. That's 850 gems per fortnight. Minus what you'd lose in dailies and plus the risk you wouldn't win your bracket (which will happen if you continued to do it).

    My own experience was to grind from A3 to the top of A2, then shoot to K5 and move steadily to the bottom of K3, then fall rapidly to A3 and now I'm in A2 but with A1 points. And I'll probably be back in K5 next season. I try my best every GAC. I've only had one 3-0 week and one 0-3 week. I would not be confident of dropping to Chromium and getting a 3-0 week.

    It just doesn't add up to drop for better rewards. It really isn't worth doing, from what I can see.

    There are sandbaggers, yes.

    Is it a problem? It very much appears it is.

    Are they doing it for better overall rewards? I firmly think no. It's more to do with laziness, spite for the system or wanting easy matches when they do play.
  • Well my last match up whoch is on going now,the person has 6.8 GP and 3 GLs. Being f2p is irrelevant yes and not my point. But being f2p one does rely on the rewards to advanc more so than paying players. I can say this, where I am, them dropping 2 levels, the rewards would have to be higher in the long run. Or as you said it makes no sense. If they are sitting at 5-7 they get 250 right now in a round. 500 in 2-4. If they can go up a level and can not progress past 5-7 it makes better sense to lay back and get 2-4 regularly and still make better rewards even with the daily being lower. Without posting ton on pictures. This one is patron now ranked 41 in arena. I agree it makes no sense.
    I realize some will always look for a reason to sandbag for personal benefits. Whatever they may be.
    This person however in no shape or form belongs in chromium 4.
    It seems wins and losses are the major determining factor. And nothing to do with roster or GP at this point. Not from my match up.
  • RobotixWD40
    16 posts Member
    edited May 29
    Sorry his name is b and he has patron as his title. My mistake
  • Binary
    49 posts Member
    My issue with the new match making is that for the first 3 months or however long it was, i was coming up against comparible GP opponents, and the fights were close and even, I lost some and won more (usually y a banner or 2)
    However, the last 2 GAC's i've been up against significantly higher opponents. like i had a 6.5M gp roster and the last 2 GAC's i've came up against a group with 5 above 8.5 Million with 6GL's and then 2 very high7.8M gp's and every battle i would be given an opponent with the GP of 8.5 million or higher, never had a comparible opponent.
    The only reason i won 1 was because one of the guys didn't attack giving me a chance, and on the other occasion he had a few system crashes which screwed his attacks against my GL's.

    I have a pretty reasonable roster, but in order to be competitive against these higher accounts, i have to go pretty heavy on defence otherwise they'll blow through my defence like a hot knife through butter.
    There is only so much you can do against an account with 6 GL's, and starkiller, and relic 9's, and other meta teams. Lets not even mention the fact they have more fleets (which is a nightmare given the new change to more fleets being required AND no easing of the accelerated farming for fleets)

    I don't mind the challenge, as i've been good at winning in an underdog situation, however, consistently going into a a fight with a copper sword, and my opponent has a flamethrower and LMG, makes it demoralising, especially when crystals are so important.

    Its getting very stale right now, and more of a chore than it's worth.
    The dev's and management seem to have no interest in making things fair as it doesn't benefit those who spend lots of $$$$.

    sorry, rant over
  • What is your definition of fair though? GP? If so, I disagree.

    How many players consistently went 12/0 11/1 or 10/2 per season, every season. Now, results are fairer because we don't have that any more. Sadly competitive and fun matches are also down.

    My definition of fair is what we have right now. But where everybody tries and league/divisional movements are never more than one, done at the end of the week and are transparent/logical.

    Unfortunately it seems we can't have this.
  • Binary
    49 posts Member
    What is your definition of fair though? GP? If so, I disagree.

    How many players consistently went 12/0 11/1 or 10/2 per season, every season. Now, results are fairer because we don't have that any more. Sadly competitive and fun matches are also down.

    My definition of fair is what we have right now. But where everybody tries and league/divisional movements are never more than one, done at the end of the week and are transparent/logical.

    Unfortunately it seems we can't have this.

    I agree that the game is fairer (for the most part) than previous attempts, as i would regularly miss out on Kyber by next to nothing.
    My main gripe is that when you get put up against someone who has clearly whaled on getting the meta characters or new GL's to the point where you go Full defence and they still clear you with no bother, but then you get held on defence because they can still put 3 GL's on defence.

    In my scenario i keep coming up against 8.5 Million GP opponents who have minimum 5 GL's, Starkiller etc (more often than not its 6 GL's) and i only have 4 GL's and Starkiller. The can easily save a GL v GL counter list and still go for a heavy defence to stop me in my tracks. I have a number of GL counters but even at my level the roster Depth can only go so far, especially in 3v3 where it is even harder to go against these larger rostered opponents.

    I get that only so much can be done, but like someone said, surely they could implement a GP balancing where the highest and lowest participants are within the same million of GP. at least this way you stand more of a chance against someone with 2+ million gp over you.
    Think of how many more ships and character teams are added with an extra 2 million GP. i think that works out to be 10-15 more squads depending on zeta's/mods applied and even if you lower that slightly to account for the GP required for a GL, it is still more significant than what i currently need to run. even if they fail to win an attack they can afford to drop a battle knowing that they have a clean-up, or enough teams to conduct a clean up which sometimes is required to take out certain teams at a high level
  • harvestmouse
    388 posts Member
    edited May 30
    Well my first point is that GLs are generally a problem. They're terrible for competitive match ups, due to how much more powerful they are than anything else. I get the feeling CG has noticed this recently and hence the omicrons and conquest characters to even things up a bit.

    I also don't want to go back to a world where I have to be mindful of my GP, yet have to work on trash characters to unlock top characters. I hate this way of playing.

    "Think of how many more ships and character teams are added with an extra 2 million GP. i think that works out to be 10-15 more squads"

    But how much of that is going to be wasted GP? If you're in Kyber, you're not going to need an extra 15 squads. This highlights that GP isn't a great match making factor as a lot of the GP won't be used for bigger accounts.

    I'm a bit lower than you. I'm bouncing around high Arodium/low Kyber and seeing matches with 4-7 million. I get the feeling, the lower accounts are more likely to try harder. However, I'm not seeing a big difference in difficulty based on GP.

    I think matching via GP in the division is interesting and may make it better. I think there's a real problem especially at lower divisions with big GP accounts dropping. Not with the win percentages, but with fun competitive match ups.

    What would happen to accounts if you did match with GP though. So smaller accounts that worked hard to move up would be paired together. Also, larger accounts that hit rock bottom would be paired together. I can see positives and negatives with both those scenarios.

    Smaller (try hard) accounts might be penalized for being try hard. However, the matches would be very competitive.

    Larger lazy accounts would get free wins. However, it would mean that some of these would be moved out of lower divisions and back somewhere where they should be.

    Then how would it affect promotion or the top of Kyber 1? Right now the top teams go head to head and are promoted or gain the top spots. What would happen if you got a slightly easier match up, due to gp match making?

    It's a shame that to maintain competitive win percentages a lot of players aren't getting competitive match ups.

  • Binary
    49 posts Member
    edited May 30
    Well my first point is that GLs are generally a problem. They're terrible for competitive match ups, due to how much more powerful they are than anything else. I get the feeling CG has noticed this recently and hence the omicrons and conquest characters to even things up a bit.

    I also don't want to go back to a world where I have to be mindful of my GP, yet have to work on trash characters to unlock top characters. I hate this way of playing.

    "Think of how many more ships and character teams are added with an extra 2 million GP. i think that works out to be 10-15 more squads"

    But how much of that is going to be wasted GP? If you're in Kyber, you're not going to need an extra 15 squads. This highlights that GP isn't a great match making factor as a lot of the GP won't be used for bigger accounts.

    I'm a bit lower than you. I'm bouncing around high Arodium/low Kyber and seeing matches with 4-7 million. I get the feeling, the lower accounts are more likely to try harder. However, I'm not seeing a big difference in difficulty based on GP.

    I think matching via GP in the division is interesting and may make it better. I think there's a real problem especially at lower divisions with big GP accounts dropping. Not with the win percentages, but with fun competitive match ups.

    What would happen to accounts if you did match with GP though. So smaller accounts that worked hard to move up would be paired together. Also, larger accounts that hit rock bottom would be paired together. I can see positives and negatives with both those scenarios.

    Smaller (try hard) accounts might be penalized for being try hard. However, the matches would be very competitive.

    Larger lazy accounts would get free wins. However, it would mean that some of these would be moved out of lower divisions and back somewhere where they should be.

    Then how would it affect promotion or the top of Kyber 1? Right now the top teams go head to head and are promoted or gain the top spots. What would happen if you got a slightly easier match up, due to gp match making?

    It's a shame that to maintain competitive win percentages a lot of players aren't getting competitive match ups.

    GL's are a problem, but they are not unbeatable if you have the off meta counters. The only problem GL really is JMK who doesn't have a consistent 1 shot counter, and even a 2 shot can be risky. LV can be beaten by Fennec and other bounty hunters t high relic so these match ups can be done. CG don't really want to have their GL's beaten by other non GL's, considering they nerfed Vader, Thrawn etc in the great nerf of 2020.

    Omicrons aren't exactly designed to help you counter GL's except in the case of Starkiller.

    I completely agree with you that watching your GP was an awful way to play, as you had to continuously remove add mods before sign up etc to make you drop to a bracket you could compete in. I am merely saying that within the current matchmaking it would be good if you weren't matched against someone so outwith your own reach. i.e. if the lowest gp participant had 6.9M gp then they would be placed with other participants UP TO 1 million GP higher, that way you are not going up against someone massively out of your reach. This would also work at lower levels too and probably provide a better system for keeping newer players motivated and focused.

    This issue has only really began to occur more and more since the skill squish they conducted before recent GAC's. I get that I am probably punching above my weight in terms of competitiveness, which is a good thing, and I would relish facing other similar GP opponents up to 1 million gp more, but it gets a bit demoralising when I come up against someone who can do whatever they like on defence and still blitz through my defence and I struggle to break through their own zones and If I do it comes at a serious cost to banners.

    I understand your point that currently there wouldn't be a need to having a 15 extra squads, however, when you are still needing to place G12 teams on defence when your opponent is able to go full Relic defence and have clean-up crews leftover, as at the moment you kinda need to save a little extra for offence if you come up against a sturdy defence, it kinda makes it a bit s***

    I doubt us moaning will ever change things as CG are notorious for not caring about their community, sorry they care about the money the community spend, and care about keeping those who spend a bucket load at the top and "happier". I'll just reiterate a combination of the current Skill based and GP based matchmaking would probably be a good solution, that way you are facing similar skill and roster size opponents, and it eliminates that GP management aspect they had previously, as the primary matchmaking aspect would be Skill based, and then from the smaller pool matchmake those who are of similar GP and Skill together, rather than giving those with the significantly higher GP an easier time of it, as that’s not really skill at that point, that becomes Pay to win.

  • I would suggest a GP as mentioned earlier with in a range they are in. It should be more about strategy. Because you are deciding to use either heavy defense, attack or balance before you battle. But GP is misleading when someone with 2 GLs and a low GP. But they will or should advance. Instead of rewarding the lower GP in non battles award it to the higher GP. I know this sounds unfair, but those that purposely refuse to fight so they can drop becomes a non factor. Take one element from them that helps them sandbag. This may seem more fair, but imo it's less fair. Only because people are able to lose, move down a tier and collect rewards even though they are fully capable of being at minimum a tier higher without any effort. This round I'm in right now the person has no desire to move up it seems. But should be competing in at least in Aurodium 5. See I would be an easy win for most because I still really haven't picked an alignment. I play for balance and thr characters in general. So championship is not going to be successful in much if any way for a long time. I've accepted that. But this recent case? Is just sad when more than have the people in the round should be at 2+ tiers easily above where I am. Not Chromium 5.
  • I do agree with binary, I don't think this an issue for developers, nor do they care. I also don't believe they will be addressing at any point.I started this about 2 years ago. There were times I seriously thought to spend money. But things like this discourage me more than encouraged me. The sad part is the more fair and balanced, the more it encourages people to spend to move up.
    But as I stated earlier, this is more me venting. And i appreciate you all letting me bend your ear. Sometimes we just want to be heard.
  • Binary
    49 posts Member
    I agree with you on the money front. I'm not an avid spender, i have dropped a bit of ££ on the game but nothing substantial. the temptation is always there, to just speed up a character or gear farm by a week, but since the turn of the year i have refused to spend anything unless i have google play reward points to give me free stuff. I will continue to spend nothing until the developers/producers actually give something to the community and stop thinking about their own pockets.
    I guarantee you if another studio were to get a similar star wars hero collector game, CG would s**t themselves and start being all generous with packs and gifts, throwing in double drops and extra crystals etc to show they are great, and that people need to stay.
  • I really don't think the dev's understand what encourages most to spend. If you looked at the proving grounds event. The requirements where ridiculous. They need you at 4GP which somehow now matters and then say relic 3 and up. I have 23 toons over relic 3. Guess how many got toasted? They think that people will spend money to win event that doesn't garner the investment to reward. New toons, fair and balance, rewards encourage people to spend. Aside if your whales who will spend just to stay in top or relevant there isn't many who will unless someone thinks they are staying even or invested to much to quit. If money was the thing they wanted, they are going about it all wrong. And the issues they have with like sandbaggers, unrealistic or improper requirements, etc, just kill the masses that would spend more but discouraged because it wouldn't benefit them. It even encourages f2p to spend because of balance reward etc. In some ways I wished they had servers that separated people from f2p and how much people spend. That would help a little.
  • Each to their own. I'm 'pretty' happy with GAC. Personally, I don't think sandbaggers would put too many players off of spending. If you think about it, the more you spend, the less sandbaggers you'll see.

    My biggest concern about spending is that the support is useless. If I spend money and there's a problem, I'm not confident it'd be rectified.

    As for proving grounds; you need some serious teams to beat them. Each event took a different team for me too. They're not even a formality for GLs.
  • I really don't think the dev's understand what encourages most to spend. If you looked at the proving grounds event. The requirements where ridiculous. They need you at 4GP which somehow now matters and then say relic 3 and up. I have 23 toons over relic 3. Guess how many got toasted? They think that people will spend money to win event that doesn't garner the investment to reward. New toons, fair and balance, rewards encourage people to spend. Aside if your whales who will spend just to stay in top or relevant there isn't many who will unless someone thinks they are staying even or invested to much to quit. If money was the thing they wanted, they are going about it all wrong. And the issues they have with like sandbaggers, unrealistic or improper requirements, etc, just kill the masses that would spend more but discouraged because it wouldn't benefit them. It even encourages f2p to spend because of balance reward etc. In some ways I wished they had servers that separated people from f2p and how much people spend. That would help a little.

    Wait a minute - you want separate servers for f2p and spenders, and you think the devs don't understand what encourages spending?!
  • You do understand I first said based on spending. Second those that are F2P would be encouraged to spend because most will either want to move up based on fair play and the balance. Most f2p are more discouraged by whales and those who spend. You want to encourage them to spend by showing they are matched by skill. Not the ability to spend. But then again I don't think you understand what makes people buy. Just what advantages you think your buying holds you over those who are easily discouraged.

  • Each to their own. I'm 'pretty' happy with GAC. Personally, I don't think sandbaggers would put too many players off of spending. If you think about it, the more you spend, the less sandbaggers you'll see.

    My biggest concern about spending is that the support is useless. If I spend money and there's a problem, I'm not confident it'd be rectified.

    As for proving grounds; you need some serious teams to beat them. Each event took a different team for me too. They're not even a formality for GLs.

    My problem with it was the requirements were not only way off, they didn't even apply.
Sign In or Register to comment.