Well winning 2 and loosing one has never knocked me back a rank. Also the ingame msg after I lossed said there was no change to the rank then when it went to join up I noticed it dropped. Now either they made loosing a battle worth 2 wins or they e done some wierd squishy thing again I just wish cg would actually say how gac works now and how they are squishing and moving the ranks around. Because it isnt working the same in their original post when they started this and they mentioned a bit back changes to it but never clarified how it works and now 3v3 is working different.
Well winning 2 and loosing one has never knocked me back a rank. Also the ingame msg after I lossed said there was no change to the rank then when it went to join up I noticed it dropped. Now either they made loosing a battle worth 2 wins or they e done some wierd squishy thing again I just wish cg would actually say how gac works now and how they are squishing and moving the ranks around. Because it isnt working the same in their original post when they started this and they mentioned a bit back changes to it but never clarified how it works and now 3v3 is working different.
I already explained why losing one can relegate you. If you were previously relegated, the end of week message won't indicate a change, as it's already happened.
That's what I was wondering cuz this time around with the scoring I'm having a vastly different experience. Also I am now fighting people with relatively the same gp wish is good and same number of gls plus or minus 1. Where as in 5v5 I was either a million under or over my opponent so seems like it's more balanced but the scoring just seems wierd to me
That's what I was wondering cuz this time around with the scoring I'm having a vastly different experience. Also I am now fighting people with relatively the same gp wish is good and same number of gls plus or minus 1. Where as in 5v5 I was either a million under or over my opponent so seems like it's more balanced but the scoring just seems wierd to me
It just works out differently sometimes. It's not that anything changed.
It shouldnt I'd your not close to the bottom. Unless losses deduct more points than wins
I could be wrong, but I don't think there's a set amount for wins/losses. It's relative to how those around you performed.
What about set losses? I had a guild mate that lost 3 in a row early and dropped 4 divisions.
Then at the end of the last GAC season; I'd been having a hard time with ships. I had gone down from high Kyber 4 - 5 during the season. I lost all 3 of my last week matches and I got dropped all the way to Aurodium 3!
It shouldnt I'd your not close to the bottom. Unless losses deduct more points than wins
I could be wrong, but I don't think there's a set amount for wins/losses. It's relative to how those around you performed.
What about set losses? I had a guild mate that lost 3 in a row early and dropped 4 divisions.
Then at the end of the last GAC season; I'd been having a hard time with ships. I had gone down from high Kyber 4 - 5 during the season. I lost all 3 of my last week matches and I got dropped all the way to Aurodium 3!
There's no way I naturally lost that many points.
Well depending on when you observe it, that's not surprising considering k5 gets automatically moved A1, then the squish pushes farther toward A3.
Well winning 2 and loosing one has never knocked me back a rank. Also the ingame msg after I lossed said there was no change to the rank then when it went to join up I noticed it dropped. Now either they made loosing a battle worth 2 wins or they e done some wierd squishy thing again I just wish cg would actually say how gac works now and how they are squishing and moving the ranks around. Because it isnt working the same in their original post when they started this and they mentioned a bit back changes to it but never clarified how it works and now 3v3 is working different.
It knocked you back this time because you were closer to the floor for your division than you have been in the past and the squish is removing more points from your SR than a win is adding. Pair that with the floor of your division being reset to rebalance the divisions and you end up being demoted even if you win twice in a round.
One example I found
Pre squish - SR of 3133 in K3.
Post squish - SR was 3081 in K3. (-52)
Division boundary for K3 is reset and I’m not sure of the exact number but it is somewhere above 3123 where previously the floor was somewhere below 3081 so the floor was raised by at least 42. I didn’t check all the leagues but this is happening for all kyber divisions. This is happening after the squish so that they can technically say the squish is not causing relegations.
Win first battle - SR was 3123 in K4. (+42)
Lost second battle - SR was 3082 in K4. (-41)
Won third battle - SR was 3122 in K4. (+40)
There was mathematically no way for this player to stay in K3 unless they won all three matches and I’m not even sure that was possible as I don’t know what the exact floor was set at. One win and the loss basically cancel each other out and the other win is 10 points less than the points lost during the squish so as long as CG continues to reduce the size of kyber to control the outflow of crystals, this situation will continue to happen to people who sit close to the lower boundary of a division.
A little searching and it was easy to find more cases like this.
Generally when I was squished in Bronzium and Chromium 2 I have lost 40-60 points. The closer to rank 1 I was the more I lost. And ended up in rank 3 equivalent points. Even when I missed rank 1 by just 4 points I ended up with the equivalent of rank 3 points post squish, my biggest loss. When we had 3 matches I might not drop if I won all. But dropping a match or two risked not moving back up. Obviously with us changing ranks between each match it will impact it more as you can drop even on a win. However it does not affect ability to win or lose as squish will not affect mm, players of the same skill rating should be squished the same. So at my rank I lost say 5-10 crystals a day for dropping a rank. It’s not really game breaking as I could move up with 1 or 2 wins.
I was squished last time just -5 in chromium 3. As all examples so far were Kyber, they may not be working the same. As I have had a bad run I will enter next round in chromium 4 I will see for myself if I get awarded points in the squish to move up towards 3.
So it is clear from anecdotal descriptions here Kyber has been squished more extreme than my experiences in Bronzium and Chromium.
The large data set posted on this thread had a different spread for kyber, which would agree with this. It looks distributed differently with a higher proportion being in the negative zone. So maybe it’s squishing more towards K4, or at least K1-2 are towards K3 and K3 are squished towards K4?
It shouldnt I'd your not close to the bottom. Unless losses deduct more points than wins
I could be wrong, but I don't think there's a set amount for wins/losses. It's relative to how those around you performed.
What about set losses? I had a guild mate that lost 3 in a row early and dropped 4 divisions.
Then at the end of the last GAC season; I'd been having a hard time with ships. I had gone down from high Kyber 4 - 5 during the season. I lost all 3 of my last week matches and I got dropped all the way to Aurodium 3!
There's no way I naturally lost that many points.
Well depending on when you observe it, that's not surprising considering k5 gets automatically moved A1, then the squish pushes farther toward A3.
Looking on swgoh.gg, I'm thinking that I fell below the K5 threshold before the end of the season, but it kept me in K5 until the end of the season. Then demoted me.
It seems rather severe though. I was going mainly 2-1 before the 3 ship change. Then went 3 1-2s and a 0-3. I feel for balance, changes shouldn't be that extreme. However, all in all I really like the system and how it's working.
It shouldnt I'd your not close to the bottom. Unless losses deduct more points than wins
I could be wrong, but I don't think there's a set amount for wins/losses. It's relative to how those around you performed.
What about set losses? I had a guild mate that lost 3 in a row early and dropped 4 divisions.
Then at the end of the last GAC season; I'd been having a hard time with ships. I had gone down from high Kyber 4 - 5 during the season. I lost all 3 of my last week matches and I got dropped all the way to Aurodium 3!
There's no way I naturally lost that many points.
Well depending on when you observe it, that's not surprising considering k5 gets automatically moved A1, then the squish pushes farther toward A3.
Looking on swgoh.gg, I'm thinking that I fell below the K5 threshold before the end of the season, but it kept me in K5 until the end of the season. Then demoted me.
It seems rather severe though. I was going mainly 2-1 before the 3 ship change. Then went 3 1-2s and a 0-3. I feel for balance, changes shouldn't be that extreme. However, all in all I really like the system and how it's working.
Considering it's only a matter of crystal income regulation, and changing a division or 2 up and down is rather insignificant, I'd say it's working perfectly.
People are really hung up on why this or why that, as though it's some kind of insult. One round, or one relegation/promotion by itself is meaningless. We need to look at the totality of crystals over time to make a judgment. Being as our only control for what "should" be is the amount of crystals we got in SA, the vast majority of us are getting more, so it is objectively better.
In other words relegation doesn't mean you're "bad" it's just a constant self-correcting mechanism.
Well I knew I would be relegated until I got my ships in order. It's not a worry to me. However, I know I'm better than Aurodium 3 standard. So for balance I don't think I should have been relegated/demoted that far.
I feel that if everybody plays to the best of their ability and changes of division are constant and 1 up/down per week; a good balance of matches can be achieved.
It feels the game was pushing me to my perfect place gradually over a period of months and then a massive change one week. I don't think such large divisional changes are good for balancing issues.
Well I knew I would be relegated until I got my ships in order. It's not a worry to me. However, I know I'm better than Aurodium 3 standard. So for balance I don't think I should have been relegated/demoted that far.
I feel that if everybody plays to the best of their ability and changes of division are constant and 1 up/down per week; a good balance of matches can be achieved.
It feels the game was pushing me to my perfect place gradually over a period of months and then a massive change one week. I don't think such large divisional changes are good for balancing issues.
Well I knew I would be relegated until I got my ships in order. It's not a worry to me. However, I know I'm better than Aurodium 3 standard. So for balance I don't think I should have been relegated/demoted that far.
I feel that if everybody plays to the best of their ability and changes of division are constant and 1 up/down per week; a good balance of matches can be achieved.
It feels the game was pushing me to my perfect place gradually over a period of months and then a massive change one week. I don't think such large divisional changes are good for balancing issues.
It can't gradually move a player down below div5, because league changes are limited to between seasons. People who are immediately at the top of aurodium at the start of a month can build up a high enough SR to be promoted well above k5 at the end of the season. Likewise someone starting in k5 can lose enough SR over the season to be well down the aurodium divisions when they finally get moved.
This is the data I've put together from our 6 highest skill rating players in our guild
It does seem a bit random as R gained 19 squish points when in K4 but lost 53 when in K5
Also Q lost 52 squish skill points when in K4
It may have something to do with the the desired ( by CG) population of each league/division
but from this limited data it doesn't always push you toward the middle
Well I knew I would be relegated until I got my ships in order. It's not a worry to me. However, I know I'm better than Aurodium 3 standard. So for balance I don't think I should have been relegated/demoted that far.
I wouldn't be so sure. "Aurodium 3 standard" is a vague and constantly moving benchmark...
I feel that if everybody plays to the best of their ability and changes of division are constant and 1 up/down per week; a good balance of matches can be achieved.
It feels the game was pushing me to my perfect place gradually over a period of months and then a massive change one week. I don't think such large divisional changes are good for balancing issues.
They could get rid of divisions and tie rewards directly to the SR, which is what I think they should do at this point. People would just go up/down a global ladder. No more of those "you have dropped 2 divisions overnight" messages.
OTOH, even if they did that, the SR inflation would still be there as in any ELO system. They would still need to synthetically adjust everyone's SR somehow to keep all of them within a range, if they don't want a crystal inflation. Although at least in that case squishes wouldn't change people's rankings.
Well I knew I would be relegated until I got my ships in order. It's not a worry to me. However, I know I'm better than Aurodium 3 standard. So for balance I don't think I should have been relegated/demoted that far.
I wouldn't be so sure. "Aurodium 3 standard" is a vague and constantly moving benchmark...
I feel that if everybody plays to the best of their ability and changes of division are constant and 1 up/down per week; a good balance of matches can be achieved.
It feels the game was pushing me to my perfect place gradually over a period of months and then a massive change one week. I don't think such large divisional changes are good for balancing issues.
They could get rid of divisions and tie rewards directly to the SR, which is what I think they should do at this point. People would just go up/down a global ladder. No more of those "you have dropped 2 divisions overnight" messages.
OTOH, even if they did that, the SR inflation would still be there as in any ELO system. They would still need to synthetically adjust everyone's SR somehow to keep all of them within a range, if they don't want a crystal inflation. Although at least in that case squishes wouldn't change people's rankings.
I agree. Imho it would be better to get rid of at least divisions, I would even say leagues. I also see no more point in brackets. GAC has changed immensely and the brackets don't make any sense anymore. That way people would be matched 1 on 1, every SR change would then pair people with a similar SR again.
I think divisions are good, it gives you goals. However, I don't see the point in leagues..........or differences in going up leagues to divisions.
If they had exact numbers per division, and exact numbers promoted/relegated, it'd be a lot more straight forward.
Hiding the number of players in each division is due to what? They don't want the public to know the exact number of players taking part? It's not quite the 10 million plus accounts that have signed up for the game?!!
GAC has changed immensely and the brackets don't make any sense anymore. That way people would be matched 1 on 1, every SR change would then pair people with a similar SR again.
I am assuming brackets add "competitive" feeling...we all have more fun watching tournaments than exhibition matches...even if effect is the same. And also not sure if a sequence of "single" opponents would be more "uniform" in terms of teams used...
And the best argument...1on1 could result on players repeating opponents a lot...as they traded wins and losses a group may end up playing versus the same opps several times. With "broader" brackets this is less probable...
Replies
If you were close enough to the lower threshold one loss can easily drop you.
If you are higher up, sometimes you can afford a loss or two.
Based on what?
I already explained why losing one can relegate you. If you were previously relegated, the end of week message won't indicate a change, as it's already happened.
I could be wrong, but I don't think there's a set amount for wins/losses. It's relative to how those around you performed.
It just works out differently sometimes. It's not that anything changed.
What about set losses? I had a guild mate that lost 3 in a row early and dropped 4 divisions.
Then at the end of the last GAC season; I'd been having a hard time with ships. I had gone down from high Kyber 4 - 5 during the season. I lost all 3 of my last week matches and I got dropped all the way to Aurodium 3!
There's no way I naturally lost that many points.
Well depending on when you observe it, that's not surprising considering k5 gets automatically moved A1, then the squish pushes farther toward A3.
It knocked you back this time because you were closer to the floor for your division than you have been in the past and the squish is removing more points from your SR than a win is adding. Pair that with the floor of your division being reset to rebalance the divisions and you end up being demoted even if you win twice in a round.
One example I found
Pre squish - SR of 3133 in K3.
Post squish - SR was 3081 in K3. (-52)
Division boundary for K3 is reset and I’m not sure of the exact number but it is somewhere above 3123 where previously the floor was somewhere below 3081 so the floor was raised by at least 42. I didn’t check all the leagues but this is happening for all kyber divisions. This is happening after the squish so that they can technically say the squish is not causing relegations.
Win first battle - SR was 3123 in K4. (+42)
Lost second battle - SR was 3082 in K4. (-41)
Won third battle - SR was 3122 in K4. (+40)
There was mathematically no way for this player to stay in K3 unless they won all three matches and I’m not even sure that was possible as I don’t know what the exact floor was set at. One win and the loss basically cancel each other out and the other win is 10 points less than the points lost during the squish so as long as CG continues to reduce the size of kyber to control the outflow of crystals, this situation will continue to happen to people who sit close to the lower boundary of a division.
A little searching and it was easy to find more cases like this.
DISCLAIMER: Post is subject to change.
I was squished last time just -5 in chromium 3. As all examples so far were Kyber, they may not be working the same. As I have had a bad run I will enter next round in chromium 4 I will see for myself if I get awarded points in the squish to move up towards 3.
So it is clear from anecdotal descriptions here Kyber has been squished more extreme than my experiences in Bronzium and Chromium.
The large data set posted on this thread had a different spread for kyber, which would agree with this. It looks distributed differently with a higher proportion being in the negative zone. So maybe it’s squishing more towards K4, or at least K1-2 are towards K3 and K3 are squished towards K4?
https://us.v-cdn.net/6025736/uploads/editor/un/t38wum2yi2xt.png
Looking on swgoh.gg, I'm thinking that I fell below the K5 threshold before the end of the season, but it kept me in K5 until the end of the season. Then demoted me.
It seems rather severe though. I was going mainly 2-1 before the 3 ship change. Then went 3 1-2s and a 0-3. I feel for balance, changes shouldn't be that extreme. However, all in all I really like the system and how it's working.
Considering it's only a matter of crystal income regulation, and changing a division or 2 up and down is rather insignificant, I'd say it's working perfectly.
People are really hung up on why this or why that, as though it's some kind of insult. One round, or one relegation/promotion by itself is meaningless. We need to look at the totality of crystals over time to make a judgment. Being as our only control for what "should" be is the amount of crystals we got in SA, the vast majority of us are getting more, so it is objectively better.
In other words relegation doesn't mean you're "bad" it's just a constant self-correcting mechanism.
I feel that if everybody plays to the best of their ability and changes of division are constant and 1 up/down per week; a good balance of matches can be achieved.
It feels the game was pushing me to my perfect place gradually over a period of months and then a massive change one week. I don't think such large divisional changes are good for balancing issues.
That's an awful lot of "feels", just sayin...
It can't gradually move a player down below div5, because league changes are limited to between seasons. People who are immediately at the top of aurodium at the start of a month can build up a high enough SR to be promoted well above k5 at the end of the season. Likewise someone starting in k5 can lose enough SR over the season to be well down the aurodium divisions when they finally get moved.
It does seem a bit random as R gained 19 squish points when in K4 but lost 53 when in K5
Also Q lost 52 squish skill points when in K4
It may have something to do with the the desired ( by CG) population of each league/division
but from this limited data it doesn't always push you toward the middle
I wouldn't be so sure. "Aurodium 3 standard" is a vague and constantly moving benchmark...
They could get rid of divisions and tie rewards directly to the SR, which is what I think they should do at this point. People would just go up/down a global ladder. No more of those "you have dropped 2 divisions overnight" messages.
OTOH, even if they did that, the SR inflation would still be there as in any ELO system. They would still need to synthetically adjust everyone's SR somehow to keep all of them within a range, if they don't want a crystal inflation. Although at least in that case squishes wouldn't change people's rankings.
I agree. Imho it would be better to get rid of at least divisions, I would even say leagues. I also see no more point in brackets. GAC has changed immensely and the brackets don't make any sense anymore. That way people would be matched 1 on 1, every SR change would then pair people with a similar SR again.
If they had exact numbers per division, and exact numbers promoted/relegated, it'd be a lot more straight forward.
Hiding the number of players in each division is due to what? They don't want the public to know the exact number of players taking part? It's not quite the 10 million plus accounts that have signed up for the game?!!
And the best argument...1on1 could result on players repeating opponents a lot...as they traded wins and losses a group may end up playing versus the same opps several times. With "broader" brackets this is less probable...