Constructive ideas for fixing GAC matchmaking

gufu21
335 posts Member
edited November 2022
The current "skill-rating based" system is still obviously broken.

I am 3.7 mil GP with 9 g13s, and I have been matched with an opponent that's 6.3 mil GP with 47 g13s. The only determiner of if I win or lose is simply whether my opponent shows up or not. If he plays, I lose. If he doesn't, I guess I win, but I didn't actually get to compete. Skill has absolutely nothing to do with the outcome of this match.

A system that calls this a fair, skill-based match cannot possibly be considered to be working as intended. No matter how one defends the current system, the end result is that I'm not able play a fair, competitive, and enjoyable GAC match. This can't be what CG wanted to happen.

I'm sure there were real problems with the previous system that mostly looked at GP. And I'm sure there are merits to using "skill rating." But maybe in addition to the current skill-rating matching, we could add the following parameters:
  • Cap the GP disparity of a match to some percentage of the lower player's GP. Or maybe put simpler, one player's GP should not be more than, say, 125% than the other player's. (NOT 170%, as in my case.)
  • Cap the disparity between the number of highest gear-level characters. (For example, since g13 is the highest gear-level I have, my opponent should not have more than, say, 30% more g13s than me. A disparity of 9 to 47 is not acceptable.)
  • Cap the GL disparity. A player with no GLs shouldn't match against a player with GLs. If both players have GLs, the disparity shouldn't be more than 1 or 2.

Replies

  • chpMINIsolo_77
    3103 posts Member
    edited November 2022
    Options
    gufu21 wrote: »
    [*]Cap the GL disparity. A player with no GLs shouldn't match against a player with GLs. If both players have GLs, the disparity shouldn't be more than 1 or 2.

    This:
    TVF wrote: »
    GLs should never be accounted for, nor will they be. Everything CG has done is meant to push you to get more GLs.
  • TVF
    36674 posts Member
    Options
    gufu21 wrote: »
    [*]Cap the GL disparity. A player with no GLs shouldn't match against a player with GLs. If both players have GLs, the disparity shouldn't be more than 1 or 2.

    This:
    TVF wrote: »
    GLs should never be accounted for, nor will they be. Everything CG has done is meant to push you to get more GLs.

    I like the way this guy thinks.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • StarSon
    7477 posts Member
    Options
    Don't need to fix what isn't broken.
  • Lumiya
    1527 posts Member
    Options
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't need to fix what isn't broken.

    You seriously don't think this is broken?

    If yes then I have to disagree with you.
    The MM is very broken at this point.
    We are all made of star-stuff
  • StarSon
    7477 posts Member
    Options
    Lumiya wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't need to fix what isn't broken.

    You seriously don't think this is broken?

    If yes then I have to disagree with you.
    The MM is very broken at this point.

    Nope, the MM is just fine.
  • Lumiya
    1527 posts Member
    Options
    StarSon wrote: »
    Lumiya wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't need to fix what isn't broken.

    You seriously don't think this is broken?

    If yes then I have to disagree with you.
    The MM is very broken at this point.

    Nope, the MM is just fine.


    I know that there are players whom think like you and also there are players whom think like me, so there will never be a consensus to this between us 😉
    We are all made of star-stuff
  • Options
    Lumiya wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Lumiya wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't need to fix what isn't broken.

    You seriously don't think this is broken?

    If yes then I have to disagree with you.
    The MM is very broken at this point.

    Nope, the MM is just fine.


    I know that there are players whom think like you and also there are players whom think like me, so there will never be a consensus to this between us 😉

    There are also groups of folks that think the US moon landing is fake, that doesn't mean they're correct 😉
  • Options
    Lumiya wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't need to fix what isn't broken.

    You seriously don't think this is broken?

    If yes then I have to disagree with you.
    The MM is very broken at this point.
    There is no MM.

    There is skill rating, then you form a bracket with 7 people directly adjacent to your position on the skill rating ladder.

    What is broken is how players who don’t engage with GAC are handled. They fall too quickly and spoil the experience for players who are much earlier in the roster development process.
  • Lumiya
    1527 posts Member
    Options
    Lumiya wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Lumiya wrote: »
    StarSon wrote: »
    Don't need to fix what isn't broken.

    You seriously don't think this is broken?

    If yes then I have to disagree with you.
    The MM is very broken at this point.

    Nope, the MM is just fine.


    I know that there are players whom think like you and also there are players whom think like me, so there will never be a consensus to this between us 😉

    There are also groups of folks that think the US moon landing is fake, that doesn't mean they're correct 😉

    Please, if you have to sink to those levels it means you have no argument left.

    I could say the same about your opinion. Not cool what you are doing and also not how a civilized discussion works. Don't try to discredit what I and others say by lumping me/them in with extreme people like that.

    Just because it is your opinion it does not make it more right than mine nor should it lead to resorting to grasping at such low straws just to try to make yours seem more credible!

    I know what you did there... Do you?
    We are all made of star-stuff
  • harvestmouse
    896 posts Member
    edited November 2022
    Options
    A topic sentence makes or breaks an essay.

    "The current "skill-rating based" system is still obviously broken."

    Isn't very strong.

    1. Broken is a personal opinion.
    2. It's not 'obvious' to everybody, you're assuming it is.
    3. 'Still' suggest there's been changes, there hasn't.

    So we have opinion stated as fact, assumption that is not proven, statement that is incorrect.

    You sir have failed this assignment before you've got going.

    On topic, 2 of your suggestions are impractical. The first I do not want to go back to (even though I won more).

    We see plenty of examples of extreme differences in GP going in favour of the underdog. Just not in the way players probably want to play.

    Doing something about sandbaggers (if they exist) or players that aren't active (definitely exist) I'm all for.
  • Options
    Should he/she have just said "The Current Skill Rating system is anti-fun for many"?

    Because it is. These players that are completely mismatched are bereft of a fun GAC for that match. And the entire point of games is fun.
  • Options
    Should he/she have just said "The Current Skill Rating system is anti-fun for many"?

    Sure, if they then had proof that it was for 'many', which to be honest wouldn't be hard seeing as there are a lot of complaints.
    These players that are completely mismatched are bereft of a fun GAC for that match.

    Well there's a lot there.

    I once took a couple of hours to go through one of these GP/GAC complainer's history. And actually of over 20 match ups, only a couple were unfair. There's a lot less unfair match ups than the OPs think. This is human nature though. We remember the bad more than the good, especially if we have a run of bad. If you have a run of a few loses in GAC, it's extremely demoralizing.

    I'm going to say it again. The GP/GAC complainers are mainly lower GP (which is natural, as they're the ones getting GP mismatches). However, it also means they have less experience overall, and little to no experience in GP match making. Also a lot of these players seem oblivious to how different a person's power can be at the same GP. I mean a player that mods like a god and a player that mods like a plod aren't even comparable, even at the same GP. That.....is a total and anti-fun mismatch.

    GP match making makes players play the whole game in a min-max way. Which doesn't sit well with a gacha/collectible game. Also with the old GP system the win/loss records of players' was way out of balance. Players always going 12/0 11/1 and on the other end players that simply couldn't pick up wins. That's about as unfair and as anti-fun as you can get in my opinion.

    I think then you need to look at the GP mismatches and why they are happening. We have 3 'whys' I think.

    1. Higher GP player isn't playing or playing regularly and has dropped down leagues.
    2. Lower GP player has done rather well and moved up leagues.
    3. Higher GP player isn't very successful and has moved down leagues.

    So with the 3 scenarios, the answer is different.

    1. For me is a big problem. Especially for account that drop to low carbonite. A new player's first experience in GAC is vs a several million account................that really shouldn't happen or should be allowed to happen. CG really need to think of a way to sort this problem out.

    2. This I feel is a lot of the complainers' problem. Really, it's tough luck. You either cope or you move back down. If though, lower GP players do adapt, they may have an advantage. However, it's not winning in the 'traditional' way. They need to banner snipe and stretch the roster to the minimum. Knowing how to 1 v 5 in some cases to stretch a team to 2 match ups. To be honest, I'm not sure this is fun. It's not so fun for me. However, they are competitive match ups. Ahnaldt101's F2P account is very enlightening on this issue.

    3. So on paper it looks like an unfair match up. However, the further a player falls, the less GP they can use. So the less GP is a fair match maker. Already the higher GP player has shown they aren't that great at GAC. These players in particular, I feel need protecting from the OPs suggestions and deserve competitive match ups, which they don't get at their own GP level.

    And the entire point of games is fun.

    +1...............no actually +100! We should not forget that, and that should be at the heart of any suggestion for improvement.


    TLDR. Let's look at the players that are dropping leagues because of lack of attacking. Sort that out then see how things are.

  • Options
    The idea that a game should be fun is absolutely correct. However that doesn’t mean every aspect of it needs to be fun. I’ve always thought of it like driving. I enjoy driving, but every so often I have to stop and get gas. Is it fun to get gas? No. But it doesn’t take away from the rest of it.

    GAC is not the point of SWGOH, but it is where everyone likes to focus because of the rewards. And all mmo games have end game grind - which is fun sometimes, but eventually tedious. GAC has inconvenient spots, but a vast majority of competitive matches and IMO fun. So while it might sound a bit corny, focus on the next match. Focus on what you control. Focus on twitter. Anything. Because when you focus on what is frustrating, all you get is more frustrated.
    Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life.
  • Options
    There is no matchmaking in the new GAC… you simply are placed in a bracket with 7 other accounts that have a similar skill rating to you, which is based on your ability to win/lose in GAC matches.

    GLs are not counted (neither should they be) and GP isn’t counted either (you can argue there should be a maximum GP differential between you and an opponent).
  • gufu21
    335 posts Member
    edited December 2022
    Options
    For some reason, this thread popped up again today. I've come back to say that I mostly recant everything I said.

    With a little more thought, I've come around to see the advantages of the current system.

    In the old system, improving your roster could feel futile because getting stronger just meant you had to fight stronger opponents. In other words, as you progressed, the goal posts kept moving. That system also disproportionately rewarded players who kept their GP lean, making any work on non-meta characters a net negative.

    By having the new system ignore GP, the progress you make is real progress—you move up an absolute, not relative, ladder. The GP of your unit improvements isn't being counted against you, as it were, either for matchmaking or because it moves you up to a tougher league or bracket. You feel like your investments matter. What moves you up or down is only the strength of your teams plus your skill (in theory).

    I do still think that GLs are so monstrously overpowered compared to any non-GL characters that matching someone with no GLs (or one) against someone with GLs (or many) is never going to be a fair, balanced fight. But that's maybe more of a problem I have with the nature of GLs themselves. The "skill"-rating system sure does reward the effort of getting GLs, and that's what CG wants.

    So, I guess I was mostly wrong. Sorry about that.
    Post edited by gufu21 on
  • Options
    gufu21 wrote: »
    For some reason, this thread popped up again today............

    Fantastic post.

  • Options
    gufu21 wrote: »

    With a little more thought, I've come around….

    There is hope for the forums… and humanity
  • Options
    But all that said, my GAC matchup today is again completely absurd.

    I'm 3.8 mil GP with 0 GLs and 10 g13s. My opponent in 7.2 mil GP with 2 GLs and 75 g13s. (Even after I dropped leagues after last season.) No one can tell me that this is a remotely competitive matchup.

    So like, I really do see the merits of the skill rating system. It makes great, logical sense on paper. But in practice, something about it just isn't working out. I can't imagine that this is what's intended.

    So, smart forum thinkers, what do you think is causing this? What do you think can be done while still preserving the positive aspects of the GP-agnostic skill rating system?
  • Options
    What is causing this is exactly what the devs said about this problem a year ago in the Q&A. You are beating opponents that are similar to the opponents he is losing to. Or vice versa.
    Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life.
  • Options
    gufu21 wrote: »
    But all that said, my GAC matchup today is again completely absurd.

    I'm 3.8 mil GP with 0 GLs and 10 g13s. My opponent in 7.2 mil GP with 2 GLs and 75 g13s. (Even after I dropped leagues after last season.) No one can tell me that this is a remotely competitive matchup.

    So like, I really do see the merits of the skill rating system. It makes great, logical sense on paper. But in practice, something about it just isn't working out. I can't imagine that this is what's intended.

    So, smart forum thinkers, what do you think is causing this? What do you think can be done while still preserving the positive aspects of the GP-agnostic skill rating system?

    The system works very well when all players put in the same effort of winning. This is the league system. However, the issue we have is that players can simply not play and drop.

    This means that their 'actual' GAC power is significantly different to their skill rating/league position.

    Basically we need a way of dealing with inactivity and/or sandbagging.
  • TVF
    36674 posts Member
    Options
    They haven't dealt with it in TW, I don't expect them to deal with it here.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Options
    There was a good thread about K1 squeezing, but I get the feeling that's not what OP was after
  • TVF
    36674 posts Member
    Options
    It's not
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
Sign In or Register to comment.