Are we still pretending?

Prev134
Are we still pretending GAC matchmaking is fair? Or have they finally admitted that it’s broken?

Replies

  • There is no matchmaking.

    There is skill rating. Period.

    It’s not skill if I can manipulate my rank as easy as it is.
  • There is no matchmaking.

    There is skill rating. Period.

    It’s not skill if I can manipulate my rank as easy as it is.
    How can you? What’s your rank right now?
  • The only real way to “manipulate” your skill rating is by intentionally losing every match so you’d eventually end up in Carbonite.
  • What I don’t understand is why someone would make a thread complaining about matchmaking, and then assert that they can easily manipulate matchmaking.

    Why would they be complaining if it was that easy?
  • Okay right now I am 3.5 mill GP, I am facing a person with 4 GL, at 6.5 mill GP. It does not matter how “skilled” I am I will NEVER beat that gear. Yea it’s that easy, if I wanted to lower my rank all I have to do is go in get my participation points and lose on purpose. Now my only chance of winning this match is if they don’t attack at all. Which all things considered take all the fun out of GA. Going against people with similar GP have to actually plan and map out my strategy. It’s literally no fun anymore. I’ve got to a point to where I accept the L with these. Get my participation points. Hope I can get one win so I can at least get the zeta. It’s dumb. They refuse to acknowledge it and I’m tired of my rewards not being what they should or could be because they’re to lazy to fix what they broke.
  • I’m tired of my rewards not being what they should or could be because they’re to lazy to fix what they broke.

    You’re tired that your rewards are better than before ?
  • Okay right now I am 3.5 mill GP, I am facing a person with 4 GL, at 6.5 mill GP. It does not matter how “skilled” I am I will NEVER beat that gear. Yea it’s that easy, if I wanted to lower my rank all I have to do is go in get my participation points and lose on purpose. Now my only chance of winning this match is if they don’t attack at all. Which all things considered take all the fun out of GA. Going against people with similar GP have to actually plan and map out my strategy. It’s literally no fun anymore. I’ve got to a point to where I accept the L with these. Get my participation points. Hope I can get one win so I can at least get the zeta. It’s dumb. They refuse to acknowledge it and I’m tired of my rewards not being what they should or could be because they’re to lazy to fix what they broke.

    Let us know how it goes.
  • Okay right now I am 3.5 mill GP, I am facing a person with 4 GL, at 6.5 mill GP. It does not matter how “skilled” I am I will NEVER beat that gear. Yea it’s that easy, if I wanted to lower my rank all I have to do is go in get my participation points and lose on purpose. Now my only chance of winning this match is if they don’t attack at all. Which all things considered take all the fun out of GA. Going against people with similar GP have to actually plan and map out my strategy. It’s literally no fun anymore. I’ve got to a point to where I accept the L with these. Get my participation points. Hope I can get one win so I can at least get the zeta. It’s dumb. They refuse to acknowledge it and I’m tired of my rewards not being what they should or could be because they’re to lazy to fix what they broke.

    The system is designed to give players roughly 50% win rate over time.

    Are you claiming you aren’t winning about half your matches? Are you claiming your rewards are lower than they would have been under the old system?

    Care to share the swgoh.gg of your new account?
  • AlexanderG
    1532 posts Member
    edited November 13
    Are we still pretending GAC matchmaking is fair? Or have they finally admitted that it’s broken?

    If you are making an effort and still losing all the time then you still haven't found your right spot. I was in Kyber 2 for a while and getting spanked. Been in K3 for a while now. 50 / 50 win loss rate. As it should be.
  • Okay right now I am 3.5 mill GP, I am facing a person with 4 GL, at 6.5 mill GP. It does not matter how “skilled” I am I will NEVER beat that gear. Yea it’s that easy, if I wanted to lower my rank all I have to do is go in get my participation points and lose on purpose. Now my only chance of winning this match is if they don’t attack at all. Which all things considered take all the fun out of GA. Going against people with similar GP have to actually plan and map out my strategy. It’s literally no fun anymore. I’ve got to a point to where I accept the L with these. Get my participation points. Hope I can get one win so I can at least get the zeta. It’s dumb. They refuse to acknowledge it and I’m tired of my rewards not being what they should or could be because they’re to lazy to fix what they broke.

    I’ve won a lot of matches I shouldn’t have simply by clearing a zone or two. If you’re up against someone who massively outrosters you like that then any of the following can be true:
    —They save their legends for offense, which means trash defense, which means you have a good chance of winning.
    —They just don’t care, especially with 3v3, so if you “just get participation” then it’s easy for them to beat you; but if you clear a couple of their zones they won’t bother trying.
    —They’re bad and you’re good and you’ve been outperforming your roster’s rating. You will never win every match, but you’re winning more than you’re losing and this is just the luck of the draw. If you lose, the next draw will be from a pool that doesn’t include this player and odds are you’ll beat them.
    Ceterum censeo Patientia esse meliat.
  • So, how did it go?
  • Ghost666
    164 posts Member
    edited November 14
    It does not matter how “skilled” I am I will NEVER beat that gear. (...) Going against people with similar GP have to actually plan and map out my strategy. It’s literally no fun anymore.
    It is the other way around...the previous method was wrong and allowed players (probably like you) to abuse the system. GP is based on ALL you have, not what you use in GA...so once you started having NON OPTIMAL stuff you would ALWAYS lose to guys that had optimal lineups. WORSE...you could be stuck for a long time on a bracket with no chances to win.
    AS IT IS NOW it works and it is fun...if you know what you are doing you will be playing a lot against better rosters (not so big difference as your skewed example) and win 50% of the time...in the long run you will slowly climb the ramks...SO IT WORKS and IS FUN.
    STRATEGY to me is how you use WHAT YOU HAVE to win. Not a long term plan where you dont get upgrades or content just to stay lower GP and get easier matches...

  • I_JnK_I
    302 posts Member
    edited November 14
    Ghost666 wrote: »
    It does not matter how “skilled” I am I will NEVER beat that gear. (...) Going against people with similar GP have to actually plan and map out my strategy. It’s literally no fun anymore.
    It is the other way around...the previous method was wrong and allowed players (probably like you) to abuse the system. GP is based on ALL you have, not what you use in GA...so once you started having NON OPTIMAL stuff you would ALWAYS lose to guys that had optimal lineups. WORSE...you could be stuck for a long time on a bracket with no chances to win.
    AS IT IS NOW it works and it is fun...if you know what you are doing you will be playing a lot against better rosters (not so big difference as your skewed example) and win 50% of the time...in the long run you will slowly climb the ramks...SO IT WORKS and IS FUN.
    STRATEGY to me is how you use WHAT YOU HAVE to win. Not a long term plan where you dont get upgrades or content just to stay lower GP and get easier matches...

    The previous system punished players that spent their resources non optimal, but players stayed in the same range of resources. And as you said, strategy is how you use what you have to win. So basically you should win with non optimal rosters if you a skilled enough.

    The new skill system is highly inaccurate imo, since both players dont have the same amount of resources spent in the game. Why should i lose "skill points" to a player with 2 million GP more and get the same amount of skill points back when i win against one. I already started with a disadvantage. I should either get more for a win or lose less for a lost match.

    Im wondering whats wrong about combining GP and skill points. There is no way that there are not enough people in the A3 area that are similar to my GP

  • I_JnK_I wrote: »
    Im wondering whats wrong about combining GP and skill points. There is no way that there are not enough people in the A3 area that are similar to my GP

    Because you will have an advantage if you manage to keep your GP at check, avoiding the strongest rosters. Back to previous gac it is, just with divisions.
  • TVF
    33137 posts Member
    Resources spent are part of the rating. The rating is poorly named but it is what it is.
    The CGDF requests that CG takes away everyone's Extra Life Charity Event rewards. We don't deserve them. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • The most damning evidence that CG ignores the forums was their inability to foresee how **** people would be over calling it a "Skill" Rating :D
  • Well..........it seems to confuse people though. Juggling is a skill to me, Grand Arena is maybe being adept or something. 'Grand Arena Power Rating' would work better or here's an idea how about............nothing?

    Arsenal are 5 tiny top super custard windy river points ahead of Man C at the top of the Premier League.

    Just 'points' works better.....
  • Oh... calling it "skill" was intentional.
  • PeachyPeachSWGOH
    505 posts Member
    edited November 14
    "Points", or "Matchmaking Index", sounds good to me. Any neutral, unindicative, non-judgemental, can't-possibly-be-perceived-as-judgemental-even-by-the-most-fragile-ego, terms at this point.
  • TVF
    33137 posts Member
    GAC widgets.
    The CGDF requests that CG takes away everyone's Extra Life Charity Event rewards. We don't deserve them. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Honestly both systems he had.arent prefect, but this one is generally better then before.

    HOWEVER i think they should bring GP back into account when matching players. Because the matchmaking just makes you fight the people direcly nect to you in the skill level and nothing more. So if you had a skill value of1000 with say1000 other people and your rank is 500 overall you only fight the people of rank between 494 507. I think it could be better if instead those 1000 similar skilled people were then match together if there GP was similar
  • flux_rono wrote: »
    Honestly both systems he had.arent prefect, but this one is generally better then before.

    HOWEVER i think they should bring GP back into account when matching players. Because the matchmaking just makes you fight the people direcly nect to you in the skill level and nothing more. So if you had a skill value of1000 with say1000 other people and your rank is 500 overall you only fight the people of rank between 494 507. I think it could be better if instead those 1000 similar skilled people were then match together if there GP was similar

    Then you will have an advantage if you manage to keep your GP at check, avoiding the strongest rosters. Back to previous gac it is, just with divisions
  • Granolo wrote: »
    I_JnK_I wrote: »
    Ghost666 wrote: »
    It does not matter how “skilled” I am I will NEVER beat that gear. (...) Going against people with similar GP have to actually plan and map out my strategy. It’s literally no fun anymore.
    It is the other way around...the previous method was wrong and allowed players (probably like you) to abuse the system. GP is based on ALL you have, not what you use in GA...so once you started having NON OPTIMAL stuff you would ALWAYS lose to guys that had optimal lineups. WORSE...you could be stuck for a long time on a bracket with no chances to win.
    AS IT IS NOW it works and it is fun...if you know what you are doing you will be playing a lot against better rosters (not so big difference as your skewed example) and win 50% of the time...in the long run you will slowly climb the ramks...SO IT WORKS and IS FUN.
    STRATEGY to me is how you use WHAT YOU HAVE to win. Not a long term plan where you dont get upgrades or content just to stay lower GP and get easier matches...

    The previous system punished players that spent their resources non optimal, but players stayed in the same range of resources. And as you said, strategy is how you use what you have to win. So basically you should win with non optimal rosters if you a skilled enough.

    The new skill system is highly inaccurate imo, since both players dont have the same amount of resources spent in the game. Why should i lose "skill points" to a player with 2 million GP more and get the same amount of skill points back when i win against one. I already started with a disadvantage. I should either get more for a win or lose less for a lost match.

    Im wondering whats wrong about combining GP and skill points. There is no way that there are not enough people in the A3 area that are similar to my GP

    The problem is that the game is more than just GAC. You can't have multiple game modes that require different teams, then punish people on one of the game modes with better rewards, just for leveling up teams for other modes. It's not only unfair, but it also goes against the whole idea of a "hero collector" game.

    This is why not taking GP into account is one of the best changes they ever made, and I hope they never undo it.

    Oh and I agree that the term "skill-based" is ridiculous, but if we see past that, the system is not that bad.

    You could also say newer/smaller players get punished now, by matching them with lot bigger accounts. Punishing someone for simply being shorter in the game is also not exactly the right way to keep them in the game/keep them interested/keep the fun for them.

    Nobody gets punished for leveling and building their roster if there is a matchmaking that actually matches similar people or would you say that matching players with +/- 1 M GP for example would be a punishment? It's about matching people with more similar investment, that's hardly a punishment. That's what I would consider more fair instead of huge differences. I also want to make clear that I for example do not say return to the old system, but I think there needs to be some sort of GP max difference.
    I also think that things have changed drastically in the game and the way it is evolving, with more and more Relics needed and GP actually now also being a requirement for certain events such as PG, TW for better rewards and Conquest etc, it would not be possible for players to "rig" the system as they could in the past if they want to advance. Otherwise they would actually punish themselves if they hinder themselves on being able to participate or get better rewards/toons etc.

    Edit for typos... 2nd try
    We are all made of star-stuff
  • harvestmouse
    817 posts Member
    edited November 15
    Lumiya wrote: »
    'Stuff'

    I have lots of issues here.

    "You could also say newer/smaller players get punished now, by matching them with lot bigger accounts."

    If the 2 players play the exact same amount of GAC, then I totally disagree. If anything the underdog (in GP) probably stands a better chance as they're much more successful and do not have as much original GP in their skill rating.

    We're seeing a lot of disparity in GP, but good match ups.

    "Punishing someone for simply being shorter in the game is also not exactly the right way to keep them in the game/keep them interested/keep the fun for them."

    Who's being punished? Either the GP underdog has done well, moved up and being rewarded or they're facing weaker opponents.

    "Nobody gets punished for leveling and building their roster if there is a matchmaking that actually matches similar people"

    Well those that have dropped legitimately a long way would be severely punished. You're basically forcing them to play in their small pool (repeat matches) and/or against players that aren't always active. There GAC is basically broken under your system.

    Also you're not taking into account push on effects. Players won't want to leave the zone you've then created for them and this will affect GP management. It happens in all games that work like this; players find a 'sweet spot' and do their best to stay in it.

    Which means that lower GP players that do particularly well under your system would be overly rewarded and move up an artificially controlled amount.

    "I also want to make clear that I for example do not say return to the old system, but I think there needs to be some sort of GP max difference."

    How is your suggestion much different than the old system? It's basically 'week 4' of the old system all the time. Where you're GP based matches are tailored vs players of a similar win/loss record.

    "I also think that things have changed drastically in the game and the way it is evolving, with more and more Relics needed and GP actually now also being a requirement for certain events such as PG, TW for better rewards and Conquest"

    TW pre-dates any form of GAC and is also GP based match making. Guilds aren't looking for bloated players to boost GP brackets.

    Conquest and old GP GAC existed together at the same time. I'm doubtful whether Conquest is a big enough concern or influence to players.

    What is PG?

    I don't think anything has drastically changed in the last year, where players would change a min-maxing approach to gaming. If GP was brought back to GAC. I know there's nothing that affects me anyway.

    "it would not be possible for players to "rig" the system as they could in the past if they want to advance."

    Absolutely and 100% disagree with this. In the past GAC was the flagship arena, but without the rewards. Now it's the flagship arena AND with the best rewards. Doing well here is more important than ever. Therefore tailoring your roster to GAC has never been more important.

    Thankfully we're in a position where you don't have to manage your GP at all to do well. Under your system we go back to the old environment (in my opinion) but we the new rewards. GP management would never have been as important as it would be if we used your system.

    You feel the game has changed drastically since we left the old system. Which was exactly a year ago? Environmentally what's changed apart from GAC itself? How has toon farming changed? The only big change in importance is Arena gems being moved to GAC, which makes GAC even more important than before. All the other environments are as they were. In my mind nothing would influence players' need to manage their GP more than GAC.

    I feel your system is a much more drastic change than needed. And would influence players roster management a lot more than you think. I'll say it again; deal with the inactives and their negative influences then see how the land lies. I don't think many would disagree that that's an issue.
  • Lumiya wrote: »
    'Stuff'

    I have lots of issues here.

    "You could also say newer/smaller players get punished now, by matching them with lot bigger accounts."

    If the 2 players play the exact same amount of GAC, then I totally disagree. If anything the underdog (in GP) probably stands a better chance as they're much more successful and do not have as much original GP in their skill rating.

    We're seeing a lot of disparity in GP, but good match ups.

    "Punishing someone for simply being shorter in the game is also not exactly the right way to keep them in the game/keep them interested/keep the fun for them."

    Who's being punished? Either the GP underdog has done well, moved up and being rewarded or they're facing weaker opponents.

    "Nobody gets punished for leveling and building their roster if there is a matchmaking that actually matches similar people"

    Well those that have dropped legitimately a long way would be severely punished. You're basically forcing them to play in their small pool (repeat matches) and/or against players that aren't always active. There GAC is basically broken under your system.

    Also you're not taking into account push on effects. Players won't want to leave the zone you've then created for them and this will affect GP management. It happens in all games that work like this; players find a 'sweet spot' and do their best to stay in it.

    Which means that lower GP players that do particularly well under your system would be overly rewarded and move up an artificially controlled amount.

    "I also want to make clear that I for example do not say return to the old system, but I think there needs to be some sort of GP max difference."

    How is your suggestion much different than the old system? It's basically 'week 4' of the old system all the time. Where you're GP based matches are tailored vs players of a similar win/loss record.

    "I also think that things have changed drastically in the game and the way it is evolving, with more and more Relics needed and GP actually now also being a requirement for certain events such as PG, TW for better rewards and Conquest"

    TW pre-dates any form of GAC and is also GP based match making. Guilds aren't looking for bloated players to boost GP brackets.

    Conquest and old GP GAC existed together at the same time. I'm doubtful whether Conquest is a big enough concern or influence to players.

    What is PG?

    I don't think anything has drastically changed in the last year, where players would change a min-maxing approach to gaming. If GP was brought back to GAC. I know there's nothing that affects me anyway.

    "it would not be possible for players to "rig" the system as they could in the past if they want to advance."

    Absolutely and 100% disagree with this. In the past GAC was the flagship arena, but without the rewards. Now it's the flagship arena AND with the best rewards. Doing well here is more important than ever. Therefore tailoring your roster to GAC has never been more important.

    Thankfully we're in a position where you don't have to manage your GP at all to do well. Under your system we go back to the old environment (in my opinion) but we the new rewards. GP management would never have been as important as it would be if we used your system.

    You feel the game has changed drastically since we left the old system. Which was exactly a year ago? Environmentally what's changed apart from GAC itself? How has toon farming changed? The only big change in importance is Arena gems being moved to GAC, which makes GAC even more important than before. All the other environments are as they were. In my mind nothing would influence players' need to manage their GP more than GAC.

    I feel your system is a much more drastic change than needed. And would influence players roster management a lot more than you think. I'll say it again; deal with the inactives and their negative influences then see how the land lies. I don't think many would disagree that that's an issue.

    - The "underdogs" do not stand a better chance with what's happening to GAC right now. I mean the whole of it, including the shrinking of Kyber and those players falling, facing smaller accounts,then the lack of participation etc. You just simply do not stand a chance against a roster with 2 more GLs and almost 3M GP more no matter how you spin it.

    - But high relic materials and reroll materials for datacrons do not predate GAC and that's what I was talking about. Only bigger guilds with high GP get the high relic and reroll mats. So yes, they want to get those if possible which would be in direct contradiction to keeping your GP low.

    - PG = Proving grounds. Gets used here in the forums quite a lot.

    - What I meant with the changes is that now more than ever things are required that go directly in the opposite of keeping your GP low and contradict that. Some of those points were already in my examples:
    - R8 and R9 introduction
    - TW now has those higher relic materials for big guilds as reward requiring a high GP for guilds to get them.
    - Some new Characters now require 4-5 other characters on R5 to get them. (adds lots of GP to your account quite quickly)
    - New capital ships requiring a bunch of characters and ships and Relics on those characters, some of them at R8 and R9 (again lots of GP added to your account)

    Just to name a few examples what I meant with changes


    - If you keep your GP low on purpose for GAC you only hurt yourself now, as I mentioned before. Please keep in mind there are not only 7M+ GP players. Someone under 4M GP keeping their GP low to sandbag, might be successful in GAC to a degree, but will limit themselves in other areas. No hard Conquest, meaning worse rewards and they will deprive themselves also of the Conquest units. No Proving grounds either, again no access to those Conquest units again.

    - Getting those new Characters like Starkiller or the Inquisitor might also prove difficult if you need 4-5 R5 toons just to get them if you want to keep your GP slim.
    - Getting the Executor or Profundity again might make the decision difficult for you again if you want to keep your GP slim.

    - Next is the limitation of the GAC system when it comes to wins... because of the 50/50 ratio. So "rigging" the system as before is alone for that very reason not possible anymore, because the system is not designed that way. No more winning all match ups for the whole season, no more getting the highest rewards all the time. So you will limit yourself there again. It doesn't even matter if you keep your roster slim, you will still not win all the time. Sooner or later the system will match you with someone also winning as much which then very likely will be someone else also trying to work the system. At least this way we might even get those people to see that it is not worth it, because sooner or later they will lose anyway when they face each other.



    We are all made of star-stuff
  • To folks who would like to bring GP back into matchmaking, datacrons are not accounted for in GP, at all. Take a moment and let that sink in.

    And "datacrons should be removed" won't be a valid counter argument here, because they are here to stay regardless of how we feel about them.
Sign In or Register to comment.