Here's a cool one, his over 5 mil account against my near 3 mil account. Now cue the "oh but he doesn't play, oh but 50%, oh but skill rating". Yeah, those are always great responses coming from people who don't have this problem. Yes, a good amount of people don't always attack, but they had to enter gac to be there. And I just got pushed from Carbonite 1 to 2.
So how exactly am i ever supposed work up the ranks as I build if i get put up against accounts like this about once per 3 rounds? And the last two series, they did play. The upper leagues get smaller and we down at the bottom get more and more massive accounts that we have no chance of beating.
You aren't supposed to win all the time. The system's goal is to push a 50% win rate. So you climb the ranks like everyone else: win when you can. It really is that simple.
By definition, a 50% win rate will keep you in the exact same place. There is no "win all the time". Effectively you can never "win" at 50%. That is one step forward, one step back. No one climbs the ranks unless they're progressing faster than average for their placement. Even then however, shrinking upper leagues will make it difficult or impossible for them to progress, by and large.
This system make players tend to a 50% winrate. You don't start with a 50% winrate. If you're stronger (for whatever reasons) than most players at your level you'll go up until you reach your sweet spot. Then you'll hover around a 50% winrate because you'll be around players at your level of play.
The squish at the top only concerns K1 relatively to other Kyber divisions. It doesn't change the Kyber league population so doesn't push down people in lower leagues.
Some players go down the ladder and then hover around the lower leagues for whatever reasons. Could be because they like to smash people, could because they don't play that much. As those players lose as much as they win (if not, they would not be there because they would have climb the ladder), it doesn't really affect the winrate of players they encounter.
However,
even if these weird matches doesn't affect your average rewards during a full gac, no one is denying that these matches are not fun at all. If it could be arranged somehow while still maintaining the global ladder system without putting GP or other roster indicators back in the mix (because it has flaws that motivated the gac changes in the first place), that would be awesome for player's experience, especially at lower leagues.
Here's a cool one, his over 5 mil account against my near 3 mil account. Now cue the "oh but he doesn't play, oh but 50%, oh but skill rating". Yeah, those are always great responses coming from people who don't have this problem. Yes, a good amount of people don't always attack, but they had to enter gac to be there. And I just got pushed from Carbonite 1 to 2.
So how exactly am i ever supposed work up the ranks as I build if i get put up against accounts like this about once per 3 rounds? And the last two series, they did play. The upper leagues get smaller and we down at the bottom get more and more massive accounts that we have no chance of beating.
You aren't supposed to win all the time. The system's goal is to push a 50% win rate. So you climb the ranks like everyone else: win when you can. It really is that simple.
By definition, a 50% win rate will keep you in the exact same place. There is no "win all the time". Effectively you can never "win" at 50%. That is one step forward, one step back. No one climbs the ranks unless they're progressing faster than average for their placement. Even then however, shrinking upper leagues will make it difficult or impossible for them to progress, by and large.
Well, that's not really true. The points per win are different, so at a constant 50% win rate you will move up or down, depending on the order of those wins/losses. And then the squish does what it does.
But that's not really what I was saying. If you're trying, you'll push up until you hit an area of skill rating where your roster isn't good enough, then you'll level out for a bit. Eventually you'll climb again. It's really not complicated, and it won't make it impossible for anyone to climb until they get to K1.
Here's a cool one, his over 5 mil account against my near 3 mil account. Now cue the "oh but he doesn't play, oh but 50%, oh but skill rating". Yeah, those are always great responses coming from people who don't have this problem. Yes, a good amount of people don't always attack, but they had to enter gac to be there. And I just got pushed from Carbonite 1 to 2.
So how exactly am i ever supposed work up the ranks as I build if i get put up against accounts like this about once per 3 rounds? And the last two series, they did play. The upper leagues get smaller and we down at the bottom get more and more massive accounts that we have no chance of beating.
You aren't supposed to win all the time. The system's goal is to push a 50% win rate. So you climb the ranks like everyone else: win when you can. It really is that simple.
By definition, a 50% win rate will keep you in the exact same place. There is no "win all the time". Effectively you can never "win" at 50%. That is one step forward, one step back. No one climbs the ranks unless they're progressing faster than average for their placement. Even then however, shrinking upper leagues will make it difficult or impossible for them to progress, by and large.
True but it is not what plays out at the moment.
As it is now you need more than a 50% win rate to stay where you are. So while the system keeps you in a 50% win rate, you do not keep your position. If you actually were to even climb, you would need even more wins.
To the point of "punching up" and the bigger opponents in A3, I can say it is true that the opponents got bigger. I have 1 GL, my opponents almost always have 3 or more GLs and are in general bigger. I am bouncing between A3/4 eventhough before the squish started to remove points from all Aurodium I had a "steady" position in A3(in the new GAC system). Now however, eventhough my roster grew (4 strong teams more and the Profundity) I have a much harder time to not fall to A5 and my opponents got/get stronger and stronger. One can not say I am punching up, if I fall a lot more and yet my opponents got stronger over time. The whole division seems shifted and it is clear that bigger rosters are now somewhere below where they actually should be.
Given my entire gac history, i would say I've had three matches that had anything to do with skill. 2 were losses, accounts that were plus or minus 1 mil of mine, and where we finished within a relatively close range, and 1 same situation that i won. I've been doing every gac, i missed one week, for a year. Every other match I've done has just been either one side smashes the other, who usually can't even get a full clear, or if they can not on the first try, or they don't play.
If everything is supposed to average out to 50%, there will not be a change. Anecdotally i would say that yes, to even maintain it seems you now have to get better than that.
These weird matches absolutely effect my rewards. If every single series of gac, i am facing something like this, and more often than not, they play, then by definition i am losing due to poor matchmaking in that the skill system is incapable of accounting for what seems to be a massive problem. This is all anecdotal however. Sure everyone can read what we're told gac should be like and how it works in theory. But I believe that in reality, were the data and probabilities to be released, that you would find the only way of consistently climbing, outside of the outliers that just stop gac, would be through whaling.
Given my entire gac history, i would say I've had three matches that had anything to do with skill. 2 were losses, accounts that were plus or minus 1 mil of mine, and where we finished within a relatively close range, and 1 same situation that i won. I've been doing every gac, i missed one week, for a year. Every other match I've done has just been either one side smashes the other, who usually can't even get a full clear, or if they can not on the first try, or they don't play.
If everything is supposed to average out to 50%, there will not be a change. Anecdotally i would say that yes, to even maintain it seems you now have to get better than that.
These weird matches absolutely effect my rewards. If every single series of gac, i am facing something like this, and more often than not, they play, then by definition i am losing due to poor matchmaking in that the skill system is incapable of accounting for what seems to be a massive problem. This is all anecdotal however. Sure everyone can read what we're told gac should be like and how it works in theory. But I believe that in reality, were the data and probabilities to be released, that you would find the only way of consistently climbing, outside of the outliers that just stop gac, would be through whaling.
Your last statement is partially true. Whaling is the only surefire way and this is obviously WAI xD. However being somewhat better than average player in roster development will also get you into a slow crawl upwards. By average I specifically mean gaming time, what % of various resources you are able to gather by attendance and nothing related to matching/game knowledge skill. This wouldn't be the case anymore in kyber since average players there are by definition more hardcore (in some manner) than the average player of the entire playerbase or any division below kyber.
Given my entire gac history, i would say I've had three matches that had anything to do with skill.
If everything is supposed to average out to 50%, there will not be a change. Anecdotally i would say that yes, to even maintain it seems you now have to get better than that.
Those two phrases wont add up. If you are winning 50%, there has to be skill involved...because you are certainly playing players with better rosters than yours...and winning around half the times.
I have three usual types of games...and i am guessing this is true for most with 50% stats. 1) A much better roster plays fully and beats me. 2) I manage to beat a usually better roster that is not used to the full potential. 3) The enemy does not play and i win. SOMETIMES I also lose to better players that have a worse roster...but this becomes rarer as i move up the line.
The SKILL is choosing the lineups on Defense and Offense that will give you a fighting chance versus better rosters...not necessarily the playing itself...althought, in really tight matches...manually playing makes a difference.
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
Given my entire gac history, i would say I've had three matches that had anything to do with skill.
If everything is supposed to average out to 50%, there will not be a change. Anecdotally i would say that yes, to even maintain it seems you now have to get better than that.
Those two phrases wont add up. If you are winning 50%, there has to be skill involved...because you are certainly playing players with better rosters than yours...and winning around half the times.
I have three usual types of games...and i am guessing this is true for most with 50% stats. 1) A much better roster plays fully and beats me. 2) I manage to beat a usually better roster that is not used to the full potential. 3) The enemy does not play and i win. SOMETIMES I also lose to better players that have a worse roster...but this becomes rarer as i move up the line.
The SKILL is choosing the lineups on Defense and Offense that will give you a fighting chance versus better rosters...not necessarily the playing itself...althought, in really tight matches...manually playing makes a difference.
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
The issue i have isn't my win rate, although I don't like that but it's not the problem, it's a symptom. The problem is, that as I see it, you have no way of progressing other than roster building faster than the average player/wiser than the average player, as MaruMaru said, most recently. However that then begs the proverbial question, what is average?
What should let you climb the ranks other than roster growth and resource management once you’ve reached the limits of where your skill will let you outplay opponents? I’m curious what else you think should be measured?
Given my entire gac history, i would say I've had three matches that had anything to do with skill.
If everything is supposed to average out to 50%, there will not be a change. Anecdotally i would say that yes, to even maintain it seems you now have to get better than that.
Those two phrases wont add up. If you are winning 50%, there has to be skill involved...because you are certainly playing players with better rosters than yours...and winning around half the times.
I have three usual types of games...and i am guessing this is true for most with 50% stats. 1) A much better roster plays fully and beats me. 2) I manage to beat a usually better roster that is not used to the full potential. 3) The enemy does not play and i win. SOMETIMES I also lose to better players that have a worse roster...but this becomes rarer as i move up the line.
The SKILL is choosing the lineups on Defense and Offense that will give you a fighting chance versus better rosters...not necessarily the playing itself...althought, in really tight matches...manually playing makes a difference.
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
The issue i have isn't my win rate, although I don't like that but it's not the problem, it's a symptom. The problem is, that as I see it, you have no way of progressing other than roster building faster than the average player/wiser than the average player, as MaruMaru said, most recently. However that then begs the proverbial question, what is average?
Given my entire gac history, i would say I've had three matches that had anything to do with skill.
If everything is supposed to average out to 50%, there will not be a change. Anecdotally i would say that yes, to even maintain it seems you now have to get better than that.
Those two phrases wont add up. If you are winning 50%, there has to be skill involved...because you are certainly playing players with better rosters than yours...and winning around half the times.
I have three usual types of games...and i am guessing this is true for most with 50% stats. 1) A much better roster plays fully and beats me. 2) I manage to beat a usually better roster that is not used to the full potential. 3) The enemy does not play and i win. SOMETIMES I also lose to better players that have a worse roster...but this becomes rarer as i move up the line.
The SKILL is choosing the lineups on Defense and Offense that will give you a fighting chance versus better rosters...not necessarily the playing itself...althought, in really tight matches...manually playing makes a difference.
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
The issue i have isn't my win rate, although I don't like that but it's not the problem, it's a symptom. The problem is, that as I see it, you have no way of progressing other than roster building faster than the average player/wiser than the average player, as MaruMaru said, most recently. However that then begs the proverbial question, what is average?
This would be impossible to quantify on our end. CG would be able to do that by calculating how fast the rosters are gaining gp in your league vs. you.
My definition is something that comes from experience around the playerbase over the years. It's someone who is able to semi attend everything there is to the game rather than attending all possible modes all the time or most of the time. Not that high of a bar since it's not like everyone is trying their best or are even able to. This is superbly normal since it's not like we are playing competetive sports or there is anything at stake besides enjoyment.
Given my entire gac history, i would say I've had three matches that had anything to do with skill.
If everything is supposed to average out to 50%, there will not be a change. Anecdotally i would say that yes, to even maintain it seems you now have to get better than that.
Those two phrases wont add up. If you are winning 50%, there has to be skill involved...because you are certainly playing players with better rosters than yours...and winning around half the times.
I have three usual types of games...and i am guessing this is true for most with 50% stats. 1) A much better roster plays fully and beats me. 2) I manage to beat a usually better roster that is not used to the full potential. 3) The enemy does not play and i win. SOMETIMES I also lose to better players that have a worse roster...but this becomes rarer as i move up the line.
The SKILL is choosing the lineups on Defense and Offense that will give you a fighting chance versus better rosters...not necessarily the playing itself...althought, in really tight matches...manually playing makes a difference.
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
The issue i have isn't my win rate, although I don't like that but it's not the problem, it's a symptom. The problem is, that as I see it, you have no way of progressing other than roster building faster than the average player/wiser than the average player, as MaruMaru said, most recently. However that then begs the proverbial question, what is average?
“What is average” doesn’t matter. The only thing you can learn from this is if you need to do more, and you can literally skip past this question and get to the same result by asking yourself if there is anything more you can do to grow your roster.
And don’t underestimate growing wisely.
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for life.
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
I wouldn't say this is true. Many players just want to have fun (which is the purpose of playing a game) and have challenging matches where they can test their strategy and skill with opponents in their range. If they lose under those circumstances, I believe most would not complain about the matchmaking. If winning means to pray to RNGesus if the opponent shows up then there is no fun and no option to test out your roster, which is what many people here and elsewhere already explained many times.
I also would like to add that given the fact that winning 50% does not keep you in your place imho it is also understandable -if- there are players whom want to win more than 50% because they know otherwise they will drop. That is the biggest issue I have with the system as it is at the moment. We are artificially kept in a 50/50 system that requires us to actually win more than 50% to keep our position. It is contradictory.
You (CG) can not expect players to be ok with a system that is programmed to let them lose half their matches when you on the other hand have it coded in a way that requires them to actually win more than half their matches.
I personally would have no problem with the 50/50 system if it would not require me to win more just to keep my position if my roster develops in a normal way (without whaling), if the system would make sure sandbagging (no matter if it is because of inactivity or other reasons) can not happen in such a way and if it would not push down more and more higher accounts (shrinking of Kyber 1 and the dominoeffect, squish, etc.).
I think you may be misunderstanding how the squish/domino effect/etc is actually impacting most people’s rankings. For the bulk of the player base, going a steady .500 would mean they slowly climb month over month. That’s because for most players the squish is bonus points and would slowly push them up the ladder.
The main exceptions are Aurodium and Kyber. Players in Aurodium that consistently went .500 would be eventually start bouncing around low Aurodium/high Chromium because you get a boost in high Chromium to push you up, and get **** back to Chromium once you make it up again. Anyone going .500 in Kyber will end up low Division 3 because that’s the break even point for the Kyber squish.
There is no domino effect outside of high Kyber, because people aren’t getting moved downward out of leagues consistently. If you’re in K2 you’re seeing tougher rosters because of the squish, but that won’t be the case anywhere else.
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
I wouldn't say this is true. Many players just want to have fun (which is the purpose of playing a game) and have challenging matches where they can test their strategy and skill with opponents in their range. If they lose under those circumstances, I believe most would not complain about the matchmaking. If winning means to pray to RNGesus if the opponent shows up then there is no fun and no option to test out your roster, which is what many people here and elsewhere already explained many times.
I also would like to add that given the fact that winning 50% does not keep you in your place imho it is also understandable -if- there are players whom want to win more than 50% because they know otherwise they will drop. That is the biggest issue I have with the system as it is at the moment. We are artificially kept in a 50/50 system that requires us to actually win more than 50% to keep our position. It is contradictory.
You (CG) can not expect players to be ok with a system that is programmed to let them lose half their matches when you on the other hand have it coded in a way that requires them to actually win more than half their matches.
I personally would have no problem with the 50/50 system if it would not require me to win more just to keep my position if my roster develops in a normal way (without whaling), if the system would make sure sandbagging (no matter if it is because of inactivity or other reasons) can not happen in such a way and if it would not push down more and more higher accounts (shrinking of Kyber 1 and the dominoeffect, squish, etc.).
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
I wouldn't say this is true. Many players just want to have fun (which is the purpose of playing a game) and have challenging matches where they can test their strategy and skill with opponents in their range. If they lose under those circumstances, I believe most would not complain about the matchmaking. If winning means to pray to RNGesus if the opponent shows up then there is no fun and no option to test out your roster, which is what many people here and elsewhere already explained many times.
I also would like to add that given the fact that winning 50% does not keep you in your place imho it is also understandable -if- there are players whom want to win more than 50% because they know otherwise they will drop. That is the biggest issue I have with the system as it is at the moment. We are artificially kept in a 50/50 system that requires us to actually win more than 50% to keep our position. It is contradictory.
You (CG) can not expect players to be ok with a system that is programmed to let them lose half their matches when you on the other hand have it coded in a way that requires them to actually win more than half their matches.
I personally would have no problem with the 50/50 system if it would not require me to win more just to keep my position if my roster develops in a normal way (without whaling), if the system would make sure sandbagging (no matter if it is because of inactivity or other reasons) can not happen in such a way and if it would not push down more and more higher accounts (shrinking of Kyber 1 and the dominoeffect, squish, etc.).
I think you may be misunderstanding how the squish/domino effect/etc is actually impacting most people’s rankings. For the bulk of the player base, going a steady .500 would mean they slowly climb month over month. That’s because for most players the squish is bonus points and would slowly push them up the ladder.
The main exceptions are Aurodium and Kyber. Players in Aurodium that consistently went .500 would be eventually start bouncing around low Aurodium/high Chromium because you get a boost in high Chromium to push you up, and get **** back to Chromium once you make it up again. Anyone going .500 in Kyber will end up low Division 3 because that’s the break even point for the Kyber squish.
There is no domino effect outside of high Kyber, because people aren’t getting moved downward out of leagues consistently. If you’re in K2 you’re seeing tougher rosters because of the squish, but that won’t be the case anywhere else.
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
I wouldn't say this is true. Many players just want to have fun (which is the purpose of playing a game) and have challenging matches where they can test their strategy and skill with opponents in their range. If they lose under those circumstances, I believe most would not complain about the matchmaking. If winning means to pray to RNGesus if the opponent shows up then there is no fun and no option to test out your roster, which is what many people here and elsewhere already explained many times.
I also would like to add that given the fact that winning 50% does not keep you in your place imho it is also understandable -if- there are players whom want to win more than 50% because they know otherwise they will drop. That is the biggest issue I have with the system as it is at the moment. We are artificially kept in a 50/50 system that requires us to actually win more than 50% to keep our position. It is contradictory.
You (CG) can not expect players to be ok with a system that is programmed to let them lose half their matches when you on the other hand have it coded in a way that requires them to actually win more than half their matches.
I personally would have no problem with the 50/50 system if it would not require me to win more just to keep my position if my roster develops in a normal way (without whaling), if the system would make sure sandbagging (no matter if it is because of inactivity or other reasons) can not happen in such a way and if it would not push down more and more higher accounts (shrinking of Kyber 1 and the dominoeffect, squish, etc.).
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
I wouldn't say this is true. Many players just want to have fun (which is the purpose of playing a game) and have challenging matches where they can test their strategy and skill with opponents in their range. If they lose under those circumstances, I believe most would not complain about the matchmaking. If winning means to pray to RNGesus if the opponent shows up then there is no fun and no option to test out your roster, which is what many people here and elsewhere already explained many times.
I also would like to add that given the fact that winning 50% does not keep you in your place imho it is also understandable -if- there are players whom want to win more than 50% because they know otherwise they will drop. That is the biggest issue I have with the system as it is at the moment. We are artificially kept in a 50/50 system that requires us to actually win more than 50% to keep our position. It is contradictory.
You (CG) can not expect players to be ok with a system that is programmed to let them lose half their matches when you on the other hand have it coded in a way that requires them to actually win more than half their matches.
I personally would have no problem with the 50/50 system if it would not require me to win more just to keep my position if my roster develops in a normal way (without whaling), if the system would make sure sandbagging (no matter if it is because of inactivity or other reasons) can not happen in such a way and if it would not push down more and more higher accounts (shrinking of Kyber 1 and the dominoeffect, squish, etc.).
Of course there is a dominoeffect.
Kyber 1 shrinks, those people land in Kyber 2, in turn pushing down others to Kyber 3 etc.
You are mistaken if you think that most players get points added. It is roughly half the playerbase while the other half gets points taken. That is not the bulk.
In Aurodium for example everyone gets squished down so yes, every new season every Aurodium player has to win more to maintain their position because they get points taken away. I am in Aurodium and I have shown here in the past how many points since July last year I lost "just" because of the squish. Never once have I gotten points added. Taliana's posts on the squish have provided lots of information about that subject.
My point still stands. If you have a 50/50 system you can not code it at the same time to require more wins to keep a position.
While I am happy for everyone in Carbonite that gets squished up permanently, it does in no way help me when all of Aurodium gets squished down. Forgive me if I am not ok with that!
And to add to my previous post:
Ever since Kyber is shrinking more and more of my opponents are players that belong in Kyber. The dominoeffect does not end in Kyber and those players do not magically stay in Kyber.
Just look at the infos in Taliana's posts and elsewhere how the GP in the Leagues changed and you can see that the average GP grew and keeps growing in a rate that suggests very well, that higher accounts landed there.
And to add to my previous post:
Ever since Kyber is shrinking more and more of my opponents are players that belong in Kyber. The dominoeffect does not end in Kyber and those players do not magically stay in Kyber.
Just look at the infos in Taliana's posts and elsewhere how the GP in the Leagues changed and you can see that the average GP grew and keeps growing in a rate that suggests very well, that higher accounts landed there.
Taliana's posts doesn't show all kyber as shrinking though. There was an expected large change at the time they launched it. After a while kyber population stabilised. It's the division distributions that's borked.
The Kyber league is not shrinking and hasn’t been shrinking since August. People don’t get pushed out of K2 by people falling from K1 because K2 is growing by about the same amount as K1 is shrinking, and K3 is growing even more than that.
You can do the math pretty easily to figure out how many get more points and how many get less from the squish. And because the upward squish is in the largest leagues, it’s significantly more gaining than losing.
And of course GP is climbing in each league. If not a single person ever changed rank, GP would always be climbing. It’s insane to claim that’s because of the squish. I get it’s a complex system, but you’re simply not understanding how the total system works. Stop trying to apply the very real problems in K1/K2 to the rest of GAC. It doesn’t work that way.
And to add to my previous post:
Ever since Kyber is shrinking more and more of my opponents are players that belong in Kyber. The dominoeffect does not end in Kyber and those players do not magically stay in Kyber.
Just look at the infos in Taliana's posts and elsewhere how the GP in the Leagues changed and you can see that the average GP grew and keeps growing in a rate that suggests very well, that higher accounts landed there.
So one thing that hasn’t been brought up is that 5 gls isn’t all that impressive anymore. There are over 130k and as much as 148k each of jml slkr see. 110k jmk 71k rey 48k Vader and 20k jabbas.
Can I offer a theory? Let’s just call it Santa’s Singles coefficient:
There is an inverse correlation between the amount one cares about how and why a particular opponent is facing you in any particular contest and the amount of fun you’re likely to experience having a tonk with them.
This also seems to be the case in singles bars. The more you wonder about the sordid tale of woe that has led that person across from you to the bar (or for that matter, ditto yourself), the less fun you’re likely to have - and the less self esteem you are likely to be left with after the inevitable disappointment.
And to add to my previous post:
Ever since Kyber is shrinking more and more of my opponents are players that belong in Kyber. The dominoeffect does not end in Kyber and those players do not magically stay in Kyber.
Just look at the infos in Taliana's posts and elsewhere how the GP in the Leagues changed and you can see that the average GP grew and keeps growing in a rate that suggests very well, that higher accounts landed there.
I went 6-3 last season and still sat right in K2 where I started. I bumped up for a couple matches to K1, but then went right back down into K2.
Sure would be nice if CG actually discussed the reason for the K1 squishening. Speculation is aplenty, though I do think that "4th week" their math doesn't account for seems fairly logical. I'd give it a 50/50 between that and making K1 smaller so they don't have to give so many crystals away.
And to add to my previous post:
Ever since Kyber is shrinking more and more of my opponents are players that belong in Kyber. The dominoeffect does not end in Kyber and those players do not magically stay in Kyber.
Just look at the infos in Taliana's posts and elsewhere how the GP in the Leagues changed and you can see that the average GP grew and keeps growing in a rate that suggests very well, that higher accounts landed there.
I went 6-3 last season and still sat right in K2 where I started. I bumped up for a couple matches to K1, but then went right back down into K2.
Sure would be nice if CG actually discussed the reason for the K1 squishening. Speculation is aplenty, though I do think that "4th week" their math doesn't account for seems fairly logical. I'd give it a 50/50 between that and making K1 smaller so they don't have to give so many crystals away.
Given how many more crystals they gave out to K1 once they moved the crystals out of arena, for once I agree with you...at least, it's certainly possible that they are correcting for it now.
The same opponent i referenced yesterday, attacked while I slept. 845, which I'm not mistaken means he sent 1 character against each of my teams and got max banners. And he's got a gl on defense. So yes, please everyone sitting in the upper leagues tell me how these players aren't a serious problem. That's a loss, and the other day i faced another account that had no good reason to be in carb 1, which knocked me down to 2. That means through no fault of my own, yes, i get knocked down. Yes, i lose rewards, because of a league change and because I have no chance of winning 1st because mAtChMaKiNG
The same opponent i referenced yesterday, attacked while I slept. 845, which I'm not mistaken means he sent 1 character against each of my teams and got max banners. And he's got a gl on defense. So yes, please everyone sitting in the upper leagues tell me how these players aren't a serious problem. That's a loss, and the other day i faced another account that had no good reason to be in carb 1, which knocked me down to 2. That means through no fault of my own, yes, i get knocked down. Yes, i lose rewards, because of a league change and because I have no chance of winning 1st because mAtChMaKiNG
If the player keep winning you will never see them again and the problem will solve itself. If they come back, it means people around your gp will beat them, dropping them down the ranks again, meaning they’re beatable by rosters like yours (for whatever reason).
As you tend to 50%, because the higher you climb the stronger your opponent until you reach 1st place in global rankings (unlikely) or someone stronger than you (likely), you’re doomed to lose. So losing now or later doesn’t change your overall rewards. It does impact your experience though, because not having a say if you will win or lose clearly isn’t fun.
The same opponent i referenced yesterday, attacked while I slept. 845, which I'm not mistaken means he sent 1 character against each of my teams and got max banners. And he's got a gl on defense. So yes, please everyone sitting in the upper leagues tell me how these players aren't a serious problem. That's a loss, and the other day i faced another account that had no good reason to be in carb 1, which knocked me down to 2. That means through no fault of my own, yes, i get knocked down. Yes, i lose rewards, because of a league change and because I have no chance of winning 1st because mAtChMaKiNG
If the player keep winning you will never see them again and the problem will solve itself. If they come back, it means people around your gp will beat them, dropping them down the ranks again, meaning they’re beatable by rosters like yours (for whatever reason).
As you tend to 50%, because the higher you climb the stronger your opponent until you reach 1st place in global rankings (unlikely) or someone stronger than you (likely), you’re doomed to lose. So losing now or later doesn’t change your overall rewards. It does impact your experience though, because not having a say if you will win or lose clearly isn’t fun.
I'm not arguing against the 50%, i have a slightly higher than 50% win rating and am slowly climbing. The issue is that yes, these accounts absolutely hurt my rewards. I would be in carb 1 right now if it wasn't for an account like this in my last battle. And this one is a loss so I'll fall further. Should someone really be in Carbonite 2 with 2 GLs? It's simple, don't play, no rewards, period. Nothing from the current match at all, and either nothing or reduced daily rewards. Earn your rewards or don't get them. This would solve the problem with little downside, that i see. To account for people's lives, they could even do a 1 missed battle grace, per gac.
I'm not arguing against the 50%, i have a slightly higher than 50% win rating and am slowly climbing. The issue is that yes, these accounts absolutely hurt my rewards. I would be in carb 1 right now if it wasn't for an account like this in my last battle. And this one is a loss so I'll fall further. Should someone really be in Carbonite 2 with 2 GLs? It's simple, don't play, no rewards, period. Nothing from the current match at all, and either nothing or reduced daily rewards. Earn your rewards or don't get them. This would solve the problem with little downside, that i see. To account for people's lives, they could even do a 1 missed battle grace, per gac.
The problem comes when you don't know why someone has fallen that far (FWIW i'm active every time so not trying to excuse my own behaviour). Maybe a player is only active intermittently, only joining one out of every three/four brackets. Perhaps they hate 3v3 and don't climb enough during 5v5 to get back and overall slip down. Perhaps they took a break from the game for a period of months due to long term illness or just to get away from the game. Should they be banned from climbing again or have their rewards removed just because they've dropped to a lower division? At what point is an account deemed to have 'dropped too far'? Ultimately, that player has, overall, lost out on rewards from being in a higher division over time and so is penalised already.
Also, if that player with 2GLs wasn't there another account would be in their place. You can't guarantee that you would have beaten them, and while your experience might have been better in a closer match-up the outcome with you still in C2 might still be the case. Do CG care that much about player experience?
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
I'm not arguing against the 50%, i have a slightly higher than 50% win rating and am slowly climbing. The issue is that yes, these accounts absolutely hurt my rewards. I would be in carb 1 right now if it wasn't for an account like this in my last battle. And this one is a loss so I'll fall further. Should someone really be in Carbonite 2 with 2 GLs? It's simple, don't play, no rewards, period. Nothing from the current match at all, and either nothing or reduced daily rewards. Earn your rewards or don't get them. This would solve the problem with little downside, that i see. To account for people's lives, they could even do a 1 missed battle grace, per gac.
The problem comes when you don't know why someone has fallen that far (FWIW i'm active every time so not trying to excuse my own behaviour). Maybe a player is only active intermittently, only joining one out of every three/four brackets. Perhaps they hate 3v3 and don't climb enough during 5v5 to get back and overall slip down. Perhaps they took a break from the game for a period of months due to long term illness or just to get away from the game. Should they be banned from climbing again or have their rewards removed just because they've dropped to a lower division? At what point is an account deemed to have 'dropped too far'? Ultimately, that player has, overall, lost out on rewards from being in a higher division over time and so is penalised already.
Also, if that player with 2GLs wasn't there another account would be in their place. You can't guarantee that you would have beaten them, and while your experience might have been better in a closer match-up the outcome with you still in C2 might still be the case. Do CG care that much about player experience?
I never said banned from climbing again. Take a break and come back fine, just don't expect rewards for things you didn't do. The rewards already expire after a certain amount of time as it is. Don't like 3v3? Cool, don't get the rewards from 3v3. I hate certain events, but I do them because I like rewards.
And i don't have any problem losing, i have a problem losing when i had no chance of winning. Otherwise, what's even the point of the level 85 limit? Wouldn't it be fun the smash some 50000 gp accounts?
Sure, the last one could have been a reasonable match that i lost, but it could also have been a reasonable match that i won. But I never even got a chance to try.
Instead, I'm being penalized, missing out on rewards, because I still win more often than not which means I should be a bit higher, but get knocked down by these accounts. And it's my problem that this guy, presumably took a break? They could even make it where if you don't play, you have no rating change. But like i said, no rewards either.
I never said banned from climbing again. Take a break and come back fine, just don't expect rewards for things you didn't do. The rewards already expire after a certain amount of time as it is. Don't like 3v3? Cool, don't get the rewards from 3v3. I hate certain events, but I do them because I like rewards.
But they aren't getting rewards if they aren't active. They have to get 10 points to get match rewards and 20 over all three matches to get the bracket rewards, so that's already being taken in to account.
And i don't have any problem losing, i have a problem losing when i had no chance of winning. Otherwise, what's even the point of the level 85 limit? Wouldn't it be fun the smash some 50000 gp accounts?
Sure, the last one could have been a reasonable match that i lost, but it could also have been a reasonable match that i won. But I never even got a chance to try.
Depending on the quality of the player and roster you might not have a chance against someone with a lower GP than you, depending on how their account is built. Is that a more enjoyable match simply because it 'appears' closer?
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
Instead, I'm being penalized, missing out on rewards, because I still win more often than not which means I should be a bit higher, but get knocked down by these accounts. And it's my problem that this guy, presumably took a break? They could even make it where if you don't play, you have no rating change. But like i said, no rewards either.
You can't know where you would be if not for x,y,z. You don't know the impact of any change overall and just assuming if people that you get matched that you have no chance of winning got replaced by auto-loss bots. I think the only thing we can put solidly is that most doesn't find this particular situation fun at all.
Replies
This system make players tend to a 50% winrate. You don't start with a 50% winrate. If you're stronger (for whatever reasons) than most players at your level you'll go up until you reach your sweet spot. Then you'll hover around a 50% winrate because you'll be around players at your level of play.
The squish at the top only concerns K1 relatively to other Kyber divisions. It doesn't change the Kyber league population so doesn't push down people in lower leagues.
Some players go down the ladder and then hover around the lower leagues for whatever reasons. Could be because they like to smash people, could because they don't play that much. As those players lose as much as they win (if not, they would not be there because they would have climb the ladder), it doesn't really affect the winrate of players they encounter.
However,
even if these weird matches doesn't affect your average rewards during a full gac, no one is denying that these matches are not fun at all. If it could be arranged somehow while still maintaining the global ladder system without putting GP or other roster indicators back in the mix (because it has flaws that motivated the gac changes in the first place), that would be awesome for player's experience, especially at lower leagues.
Well, that's not really true. The points per win are different, so at a constant 50% win rate you will move up or down, depending on the order of those wins/losses. And then the squish does what it does.
But that's not really what I was saying. If you're trying, you'll push up until you hit an area of skill rating where your roster isn't good enough, then you'll level out for a bit. Eventually you'll climb again. It's really not complicated, and it won't make it impossible for anyone to climb until they get to K1.
True but it is not what plays out at the moment.
As it is now you need more than a 50% win rate to stay where you are. So while the system keeps you in a 50% win rate, you do not keep your position. If you actually were to even climb, you would need even more wins.
To the point of "punching up" and the bigger opponents in A3, I can say it is true that the opponents got bigger. I have 1 GL, my opponents almost always have 3 or more GLs and are in general bigger. I am bouncing between A3/4 eventhough before the squish started to remove points from all Aurodium I had a "steady" position in A3(in the new GAC system). Now however, eventhough my roster grew (4 strong teams more and the Profundity) I have a much harder time to not fall to A5 and my opponents got/get stronger and stronger. One can not say I am punching up, if I fall a lot more and yet my opponents got stronger over time. The whole division seems shifted and it is clear that bigger rosters are now somewhere below where they actually should be.
If everything is supposed to average out to 50%, there will not be a change. Anecdotally i would say that yes, to even maintain it seems you now have to get better than that.
These weird matches absolutely effect my rewards. If every single series of gac, i am facing something like this, and more often than not, they play, then by definition i am losing due to poor matchmaking in that the skill system is incapable of accounting for what seems to be a massive problem. This is all anecdotal however. Sure everyone can read what we're told gac should be like and how it works in theory. But I believe that in reality, were the data and probabilities to be released, that you would find the only way of consistently climbing, outside of the outliers that just stop gac, would be through whaling.
Your last statement is partially true. Whaling is the only surefire way and this is obviously WAI xD. However being somewhat better than average player in roster development will also get you into a slow crawl upwards. By average I specifically mean gaming time, what % of various resources you are able to gather by attendance and nothing related to matching/game knowledge skill. This wouldn't be the case anymore in kyber since average players there are by definition more hardcore (in some manner) than the average player of the entire playerbase or any division below kyber.
I have three usual types of games...and i am guessing this is true for most with 50% stats. 1) A much better roster plays fully and beats me. 2) I manage to beat a usually better roster that is not used to the full potential. 3) The enemy does not play and i win. SOMETIMES I also lose to better players that have a worse roster...but this becomes rarer as i move up the line.
The SKILL is choosing the lineups on Defense and Offense that will give you a fighting chance versus better rosters...not necessarily the playing itself...althought, in really tight matches...manually playing makes a difference.
I am under the impression that most players complaining about matchmaking would really want to win 80% of the times or more...and will adjust the facts and arguments to justify so...BEAR IN MIND, if GP is used for matchmaking, most players that read and follow forums and net info will win 80% of the times...
The issue i have isn't my win rate, although I don't like that but it's not the problem, it's a symptom. The problem is, that as I see it, you have no way of progressing other than roster building faster than the average player/wiser than the average player, as MaruMaru said, most recently. However that then begs the proverbial question, what is average?
This would be impossible to quantify on our end. CG would be able to do that by calculating how fast the rosters are gaining gp in your league vs. you.
My definition is something that comes from experience around the playerbase over the years. It's someone who is able to semi attend everything there is to the game rather than attending all possible modes all the time or most of the time. Not that high of a bar since it's not like everyone is trying their best or are even able to. This is superbly normal since it's not like we are playing competetive sports or there is anything at stake besides enjoyment.
“What is average” doesn’t matter. The only thing you can learn from this is if you need to do more, and you can literally skip past this question and get to the same result by asking yourself if there is anything more you can do to grow your roster.
And don’t underestimate growing wisely.
I wouldn't say this is true. Many players just want to have fun (which is the purpose of playing a game) and have challenging matches where they can test their strategy and skill with opponents in their range. If they lose under those circumstances, I believe most would not complain about the matchmaking. If winning means to pray to RNGesus if the opponent shows up then there is no fun and no option to test out your roster, which is what many people here and elsewhere already explained many times.
I also would like to add that given the fact that winning 50% does not keep you in your place imho it is also understandable -if- there are players whom want to win more than 50% because they know otherwise they will drop. That is the biggest issue I have with the system as it is at the moment. We are artificially kept in a 50/50 system that requires us to actually win more than 50% to keep our position. It is contradictory.
You (CG) can not expect players to be ok with a system that is programmed to let them lose half their matches when you on the other hand have it coded in a way that requires them to actually win more than half their matches.
I personally would have no problem with the 50/50 system if it would not require me to win more just to keep my position if my roster develops in a normal way (without whaling), if the system would make sure sandbagging (no matter if it is because of inactivity or other reasons) can not happen in such a way and if it would not push down more and more higher accounts (shrinking of Kyber 1 and the dominoeffect, squish, etc.).
The main exceptions are Aurodium and Kyber. Players in Aurodium that consistently went .500 would be eventually start bouncing around low Aurodium/high Chromium because you get a boost in high Chromium to push you up, and get **** back to Chromium once you make it up again. Anyone going .500 in Kyber will end up low Division 3 because that’s the break even point for the Kyber squish.
There is no domino effect outside of high Kyber, because people aren’t getting moved downward out of leagues consistently. If you’re in K2 you’re seeing tougher rosters because of the squish, but that won’t be the case anywhere else.
Of course there is a dominoeffect.
Kyber 1 shrinks, those people land in Kyber 2, in turn pushing down others to Kyber 3 etc.
You are mistaken if you think that most players get points added. It is roughly half the playerbase while the other half gets points taken. That is not the bulk.
In Aurodium for example everyone gets squished down so yes, every new season every Aurodium player has to win more to maintain their position because they get points taken away. I am in Aurodium and I have shown here in the past how many points since July last year I lost "just" because of the squish. Never once have I gotten points added. Taliana's posts on the squish have provided lots of information about that subject.
My point still stands. If you have a 50/50 system you can not code it at the same time to require more wins to keep a position.
While I am happy for everyone in Carbonite that gets squished up permanently, it does in no way help me when all of Aurodium gets squished down. Forgive me if I am not ok with that!
Ever since Kyber is shrinking more and more of my opponents are players that belong in Kyber. The dominoeffect does not end in Kyber and those players do not magically stay in Kyber.
Just look at the infos in Taliana's posts and elsewhere how the GP in the Leagues changed and you can see that the average GP grew and keeps growing in a rate that suggests very well, that higher accounts landed there.
Taliana's posts doesn't show all kyber as shrinking though. There was an expected large change at the time they launched it. After a while kyber population stabilised. It's the division distributions that's borked.
You can do the math pretty easily to figure out how many get more points and how many get less from the squish. And because the upward squish is in the largest leagues, it’s significantly more gaining than losing.
And of course GP is climbing in each league. If not a single person ever changed rank, GP would always be climbing. It’s insane to claim that’s because of the squish. I get it’s a complex system, but you’re simply not understanding how the total system works. Stop trying to apply the very real problems in K1/K2 to the rest of GAC. It doesn’t work that way.
There is an inverse correlation between the amount one cares about how and why a particular opponent is facing you in any particular contest and the amount of fun you’re likely to experience having a tonk with them.
This also seems to be the case in singles bars. The more you wonder about the sordid tale of woe that has led that person across from you to the bar (or for that matter, ditto yourself), the less fun you’re likely to have - and the less self esteem you are likely to be left with after the inevitable disappointment.
I went 6-3 last season and still sat right in K2 where I started. I bumped up for a couple matches to K1, but then went right back down into K2.
Sure would be nice if CG actually discussed the reason for the K1 squishening. Speculation is aplenty, though I do think that "4th week" their math doesn't account for seems fairly logical. I'd give it a 50/50 between that and making K1 smaller so they don't have to give so many crystals away.
Given how many more crystals they gave out to K1 once they moved the crystals out of arena, for once I agree with you...at least, it's certainly possible that they are correcting for it now.
If the player keep winning you will never see them again and the problem will solve itself. If they come back, it means people around your gp will beat them, dropping them down the ranks again, meaning they’re beatable by rosters like yours (for whatever reason).
As you tend to 50%, because the higher you climb the stronger your opponent until you reach 1st place in global rankings (unlikely) or someone stronger than you (likely), you’re doomed to lose. So losing now or later doesn’t change your overall rewards. It does impact your experience though, because not having a say if you will win or lose clearly isn’t fun.
I'm not arguing against the 50%, i have a slightly higher than 50% win rating and am slowly climbing. The issue is that yes, these accounts absolutely hurt my rewards. I would be in carb 1 right now if it wasn't for an account like this in my last battle. And this one is a loss so I'll fall further. Should someone really be in Carbonite 2 with 2 GLs? It's simple, don't play, no rewards, period. Nothing from the current match at all, and either nothing or reduced daily rewards. Earn your rewards or don't get them. This would solve the problem with little downside, that i see. To account for people's lives, they could even do a 1 missed battle grace, per gac.
The problem comes when you don't know why someone has fallen that far (FWIW i'm active every time so not trying to excuse my own behaviour). Maybe a player is only active intermittently, only joining one out of every three/four brackets. Perhaps they hate 3v3 and don't climb enough during 5v5 to get back and overall slip down. Perhaps they took a break from the game for a period of months due to long term illness or just to get away from the game. Should they be banned from climbing again or have their rewards removed just because they've dropped to a lower division? At what point is an account deemed to have 'dropped too far'? Ultimately, that player has, overall, lost out on rewards from being in a higher division over time and so is penalised already.
Also, if that player with 2GLs wasn't there another account would be in their place. You can't guarantee that you would have beaten them, and while your experience might have been better in a closer match-up the outcome with you still in C2 might still be the case. Do CG care that much about player experience?
I never said banned from climbing again. Take a break and come back fine, just don't expect rewards for things you didn't do. The rewards already expire after a certain amount of time as it is. Don't like 3v3? Cool, don't get the rewards from 3v3. I hate certain events, but I do them because I like rewards.
And i don't have any problem losing, i have a problem losing when i had no chance of winning. Otherwise, what's even the point of the level 85 limit? Wouldn't it be fun the smash some 50000 gp accounts?
Sure, the last one could have been a reasonable match that i lost, but it could also have been a reasonable match that i won. But I never even got a chance to try.
But they aren't getting rewards if they aren't active. They have to get 10 points to get match rewards and 20 over all three matches to get the bracket rewards, so that's already being taken in to account.
Depending on the quality of the player and roster you might not have a chance against someone with a lower GP than you, depending on how their account is built. Is that a more enjoyable match simply because it 'appears' closer?
You can't know where you would be if not for x,y,z. You don't know the impact of any change overall and just assuming if people that you get matched that you have no chance of winning got replaced by auto-loss bots. I think the only thing we can put solidly is that most doesn't find this particular situation fun at all.