Unpopular opinion on the new GAC System

2Next

Replies

  • Number of GLs matters more then GP does.
  • herd_nerfer
    573 posts Member
    edited November 2022
    How about we just go back to the initial seeding strategy every 2-4 months (placement according to GP) and then let skill rating take over again after everyone is re-seeded? That would pull all these high GP players right out of the lower leagues so lower GP players would never have to worry about them (until they too reached a higher GP). By the time the high GP players sank low enough to affect the lower GP players the whole thing would reset. Problem solved!

    edit: Actually that would likely bring us back to the days of 'lean roster = easier opponents' which was never a good thing. Disregard... bad idea is bad.
    F2P since the last time I bought Kyros, Crystals, or the Conquest Pass.
  • Well the old system was like that, but on a monthly bases. So it wouldn't be much difference.

    I'd like to hear good suggestions on how to deal with inactive or sandbagging players. I'm sure that would sort a lot of the issues.
  • Good is subjective. I've seen several ideas over the last year.

    League floor based on GP (not my favorite)

    More sophisticated metric for participation/rewards than 10 banners. Combine that with SR for bracket generation

    Improve rewards and/or reduce penalty for not signing up at all

    Etc
  • Screerider wrote: »
    Datacrons matter more than GP does.
    Not if both players have little to no investment in datacrons.
    Screerider wrote: »
    Number of GLs matters more then GP does.
    Not if neither player has a GL.

    Datacrons, GLs, other key squads, mods, omicrons, datacrons, GP, player skill can all matter. How much each matters depends on the players and rosters involved in a given match.
  • Those sound like good match-ups then.
  • papaofmom
    156 posts Member
    edited November 2022
    For me the competitve aspect has been gone since they have introduced new GAC. Ive been kyber2/3 since like January and I keep my 50% winrate. Its fair in time spend/incesment but the matches are far from fair. I have 3 GLs and Im constantly matched with 6GL+. Whats worse is that my Omnicrons,DCs etc dont matter at all because my enemies keeps progressing as well. The worst thing for me was that ive grinded conquest to get Malgus only to find out that my opponents are using GL vs Malgus they have more so they can afford it. Omnicrons/DCs are turning teams into GL tier as well so its literally impossible to catch up. The only way for me to catch up is to either spend money or they need to stop playing. I dont care about GAC anymore, another grinding thing like everything else. The only competitve thing for me is TW.

    GAC used to be more fair when people where grouped in brackets because 6mln GP couldnt face 10mln GP. I remember I was doing researches, calculating my strat and setting defense based on enemy roster. Most matches after 9-0 were epic and I had loved them. It used to best game mode for me.

    Tldr: GAC isnt fair in terms of matchmaking unless youre kyber 1. Its fair in terms of investment
  • yolkywareagle
    512 posts Member
    edited November 2022
    Technically skill rating should be great (which was probably CG’s intent). This didn’t work out though (obviously) so gp matchmaking would be ok. Then you might say “well this guy sux and has no idea how the heck to mod a character (like me) and doesn’t know how to play the game” even if he has solid gp. Any player can grow their brain and learn counters. I lost a relic squad, fives, anakin, and arc, and on top of that bam, cara dune, and kuiil, and finally beat an omi qui-gon with my bh team. I learned. Now I will know what to do the next time that happens in 3v3 GAC. Any player could learn. Skill rating sounds like a good Idea, but it turns out gp rating could be better
  • I lost a relic squad, fives, anakin, and arc, and on top of that bam, cara dune, and kuiil, and finally beat an omi qui-gon with my bh team.

    Also must add that the omi qui-gin team was all g11 (skull emoji)
  • papaofmom wrote: »
    For me the competitve aspect has been gone since they have introduced new GAC. Ive been kyber2/3 since like January and I keep my 50% winrate. Its fair in time spend/incesment but the matches are far from fair. I have 3 GLs and Im constantly matched with 6GL+. Whats worse is that my Omnicrons,DCs etc dont matter at all because my enemies keeps progressing as well. The worst thing for me was that ive grinded conquest to get Malgus only to find out that my opponents are using GL vs Malgus they have more so they can afford it. Omnicrons/DCs are turning teams into GL tier as well so its literally impossible to catch up. The only way for me to catch up is to either spend money or they need to stop playing. I dont care about GAC anymore, another grinding thing like everything else. The only competitve thing for me is TW.

    GAC used to be more fair when people where grouped in brackets because 6mln GP couldnt face 10mln GP. I remember I was doing researches, calculating my strat and setting defense based on enemy roster. Most matches after 9-0 were epic and I had loved them. It used to best game mode for me.

    Tldr: GAC isnt fair in terms of matchmaking unless youre kyber 1. Its fair in terms of investment

    If you’ve stayed in kyber 2 with 3 gl’s you’re massively punching above your weight. That’s why your matches are so “bad”. Well done.
  • Kard_1986 wrote: »
    If you’ve stayed in kyber 2 with 3 gl’s you’re massively punching above your weight. That’s why your matches are so “bad”. Well done.

    Well yeah Im aware of that but it doesnt taste good. You can imagine that when I win its because my opponent didnt play at all or is not really good. I dont think like Im winning or loosing because of my skill anymore
  • Technically skill rating should be great (which was probably CG’s intent). This didn’t work out though (obviously) so gp matchmaking would be ok.

    It's not obvious at all. Your account is fairly new yes? You didn't have any or much experience under the old system.

    Most people complaining about it, never played the old system much/enough to compare the differences.

    I win a lot less now, but if we went back to GP match making now...........I'd think about quitting the game. I really don't want to build my roster like that again.......especially as I've been allowed to build normally for a year.

  • Technically skill rating should be great (which was probably CG’s intent). This didn’t work out though (obviously) so gp matchmaking would be ok.

    It's not obvious at all. Your account is fairly new yes? You didn't have any or much experience under the old system.

    Most people complaining about it, never played the old system much/enough to compare the differences.

    I win a lot less now, but if we went back to GP match making now...........I'd think about quitting the game. I really don't want to build my roster like that again.......especially as I've been allowed to build normally for a year.

    I think it depends on how you build your roster before the change, doesnt it?

    I focused my roster for 2 GLs when the change hit, and suddenly facing opponents with the same legends AND x GP more in meta teams seems kinda ungrateful to me. Especially when i have to hope that they dont play in order for me winning the round. I dont mind winning or losing but it builds up a certain kind of attitude before the match has even started.

    The other way around, one with tons of different teams might get a raise in their winrate. For them its cool

    As every change, those who benefit dont complain. Those that dont will
  • I_JnK_I wrote: »

    As every change, those who benefit dont complain. Those that dont will
    Harvestmouse and many others have regularly stated that they win less in the new system but still think it's better than what we had before. So some of those that don't benefit still recognise the new system as better for the game overall.
  • I_JnK_I wrote: »

    As every change, those who benefit dont complain. Those that dont will

    I honestly feel that I'm looking at it objectively. I do really believe in this style of system though, no matter what game. So I guess that's a little subjective, but not how well I'm personally doing compared to before. As Darjelo pointed out, I was more successful under the old system.

    I'm a little disappointed that players' inactivity has caused flaws, but the cries of 'We need to factor in GP!' feels like getting a sledgehammer to deal with a bed bug problem.

    Hand on heart, I'm genuinely considering everyone when I think the current system (with minor tweaks) is best for all.

  • I_JnK_I wrote: »

    As every change, those who benefit dont complain. Those that dont will
    Harvestmouse and many others have regularly stated that they win less in the new system but still think it's better than what we had before. So some of those that don't benefit still recognise the new system as better for the game overall.

    Yeah i feel like i stated this upside down. I didnt mean to say like "all that dont benefit are complaining" but more like "most of them that are complaining are those who are not benefitting of the new system"
  • I'm curious how the skill rating is calculated. Does it account for the difference of banners in each battle? How many battles are taken into account and how does time affect the weight of those battles? What about when players throw the battle or don't show up? Should the "win" be as meaningful? When a player doesn't show up, should their rank always go down? Maybe they were just busy but their skill is the same. Does punishing players that don't show up make the experience better for those in lower leagues? Should a players highest rank (over a period of time) be considered? Should a player in Kyber ever be allowed to drop to Bronzium? If their skill got them that high, could they ever be considered at that low a level?

    Skill ratings are hard. I hope CG is looking at the data and considering how changes in the algorithm can make the skill rating better.
  • It's pretty straight-forward. You were assigned a Skill Rating when you entered the new system (old accounts based on GP, new accounts based on ???). Each season of GAC starts with a round that has 42 Skill Rating points up for grabs. Win, you get 42 points. Lose, you lose 42 points. The next Round has 41 points, then 40, and so on. When the season is over, there's a point normalizing that occurs, dubbed "The Squish", so that the 42, 41, 40, etc. rewards are still meaningful.
  • harvestmouse
    890 posts Member
    edited November 2022
    I think new accounts still start based on GP. I saw some player jump in at Carbonite 3 recently; who had more GP than the average starter.

    "Does it account for the difference of banners in each battle?"

    No, it does not. The issue here would be how difficult a defence your opponent has set. Some set more difficult defences (therefore expect a lower scoring game) than others.

    "What about when players throw the battle or don't show up? Should the "win" be as meaningful?"

    You can only play your game. You shouldn't be penalized for another's actions. It is a league system after all. Also the defences are not altered from what you last set (unless you alter them manually). So a player can't actually throw matches.

    "Does punishing players that don't show up make the experience better for those in lower leagues?"

    Yes, this is a big issue. There appears to be a not small proportion of players doing the minimum to collect rewards falling down the leagues and creating unintended match ups. The wins are then determined on whether they play or not.

    "Should a players highest rank (over a period of time) be considered?"

    Hmmmmmmmmmm interesting thought. However, at what period of time do you take that 'highest rank'. If from the start, you're just taking GP into account and basically resetting the leagues. This is unfair on the more casual players that legitimately have fallen leagues/divisions and are now playing more balanced games.

    Then what happens to players of lower GP that have risen up the leagues? The leagues/divisions have a set amount of players. So if you move some back up (taking into account their highest rank) you need to move some down. However, that would move them below their highest rank.

    So this would cause a 'top heavy' system and not the balanced league numbers CG wish to maintain. So, I don't think this would work.

    "Should a player in Kyber ever be allowed to drop to Bronzium?"

    A sport I like is cycling. Cycling has a 'starter' category. You start in this category and when you leave it, you can never go back into it. I think that would definitely benefit GAC; the low Carbonites should be sacred I think.

    However, rewards are based off of your division/league. So by not allowing a Kyber to drop is rewarding them. If a Kyber player doesn't play and doesn't drop and still get good rewards. You're punishing those that try hard.........or rewarding those that don't try hard. It's a difficult issue.

    "If their skill got them that high, could they ever be considered at that low a level?"

    Well 'Skill Rating' is a stupid name. It's more of a 'GAC Power Rating' or actually just your League Position on a perpetually rolling system. Initially your GP was the only factor in making your 'Skill Rating', since then it has solely been based off of success. So initial rankings had nothing to do with skill, just weight. As time has gone on, success has become more of an influence over the initial weight.

    So some Kyber players had a lot of weight have legitimately fallen into Aurodium and probably the least skillful into Chromium. However, due to inactivity some have fallen like a stone much further down. Eventually, some 8 million GP accounts have fallen all the way to the bottom of Carbonite apparently. This means a brand new player to GAC could potentially be drawn against an 8 million plus GP account.

    "I hope CG is looking at the data and considering how changes in the algorithm can make the skill rating better."


    Well for a lot of issues, is there a consensus agreement? I think everybody would agree a lower league player shouldn't have to face a high GP player that only plays once or twice a season. The win determined on whether the higher GP player decides to play for the win or not.

    Other issues...........do players agree, or/and do CG think it's an issue? Kyber is shrinking significantly. Is this an issue? Is it being done on purpose? Is there really a need for squish? Why can't promotions/relegations be more transparent? Why skill points on diminishing returns as the season goes on? Why are we using 1 ranking for 2 different formats (3v3/5v5)? Why are players caught in a whirlpool/magnet system? Why are league promotions/relegations treated differently to divisions?

    All issues for me, but probably not for CG or other players.
  • "Should a player in Kyber ever be allowed to drop to Bronzium?"

    A sport I like is cycling. Cycling has a 'starter' category. You start in this category and when you leave it, you can never go back into it. I think that would definitely benefit GAC; the low Carbonites should be sacred I think.

    However, rewards are based off of your division/league. So by not allowing a Kyber to drop is rewarding them. If a Kyber player doesn't play and doesn't drop and still get good rewards. You're punishing those that try hard.........or rewarding those that don't try hard. It's a difficult issue.

    Or, if it is rewarding then for not dropping (yes, I think it is), then they should
    drop one league, and not be able to go past that league, at least for a certain amount of time after their initial drop.
  • A sport I like is cycling. Cycling has a 'starter' category. You start in this category and when you leave it, you can never go back into it. I think that would definitely benefit GAC; the low Carbonites should be sacred I think.

Sign In or Register to comment.