The more factors you add, the smaller and smaller the available pool gets. You’d create situations where there was no valid match up, or you were playing the same two or three people over and over again.
With static variables as you have described here yes. With ranges that doesn’t happen.
Well, first, "Over 6 feet tall" is a range, not a static value.
But more importantly, what you're saying is that narrowing the ranges increases fairness.
The original point is that if you narrow the range too much, you end up with repetitive matches. But if you don't narrow them enough, you end up with the original complaint still intact.
Just think about it, if narrowing the range increases fairness, then any range contains **some level** of unfairness (since the range could always be narrowed more).
So the "narrow the range" argument has no natural stopping point. What you do is try to claim as much fairness as you can and then stop before the unintended consequences do too much harm to other areas of the game.
But CG has already done this. They've tried to make matchmaking better and more fair, but stopped tinkering before they caused other problems.
You're not saying anything new, you're just saying that you disagree with CG about the exact balance point. And that's fine. There's nothing evil about disagreeing with CG about where that balance point should be set. But let's recognize that this is an opinion, a value judgement. it's not as easy as saying, "Well, a narrower range would be better." Some people feel a narrower range would be better, but other people who volunteer to relic8 or relic9 Ewok Scout or Lobot or Mob Enforcer or CUP or Aayla for the good of their entire guild (while other guild mates r9 a GL and call that their contribution) might have good reason to protest your assessment. They would, after all, be penalized twice: once losing out on the upgrade materials they used on a less useful or even on a terrible toon, then again during GAC matchmaking.
Personally, I think the people who r9 CUP because their guild leader asked them deserves more crystals per day, not less.
So here we are. Neither of us is up in arms, but we disagree on the exact place to balance the fairness of GAC matchmaking.
I think the sensible thing is to just let things ride on the path CG has set.
They're not terrible. You're still guaranteed an overall win rate of 50% over a large enough slice of time. What more do you really want that justifies telling the most helpful members of your guild that they should suck eggs?
There is nothing wrong with the way it is now... You win, you move up, you lose you move down. It is simple, easy to understand and it makes the rewards structure make sense as it rewards the better performers..
The only players having a tough time are the lower GP newer players who get stuck paired up with inactives who may suddenly decide to become active.. A simple way to fix that problem would be to create a new division and shove the inactives in there and make them fight eachother to win their way out...
I respectfully disagree. I’ve been playing since the game first released. My current GAC has players in the 9.7 and 10.4m gp range while I am in 8.4m gp range. Last GAC round had multiple players in the 9.4-9.8 range. I am consistently matched against players with 6+ GL’s. I have 4. This gives them a huge advantage in matches being matched against people with 2 less GL’s. Yes there is the GL counters I could try and go for or invest in trying to get more GL’s to make up. But that is a whole different argument all together. The point is GAC could be made much more fair using a 2 factor system using skill AND gp.
You are describing a situation where you are the odd one out but your opponents match well with eachother. Then you being the odd one out should show you, you are at the limit of where you can climb and your competitors have a better chance at winning. This is perfectly normal to me. After all, matchmaking isn't simply about making each single match as even as possible. It keeps working as an accumulation of match after match.
Again I will have to disagree. GAC was to be a replacement of shard arenas. Which is why they removed crystal payouts from arenas. In the old days I could at least compete for my payouts and achieve number 1. Now I am forcibly matched against people that are out of my league preventing me from actually competing for top payouts.
You are not the only one playing though and by the nature of the thing it simply wasn't possible everyone is winning the top reward on arena. Your disagreement doesn't matter to me much as your idea that would for you on paper, won't work as a system.
I'm perfectly ok, some kind of system to be implemented for the extreme gp differences caused by people dropping too much. But then any solution to that won't effect you. You are simply overreaching your roster's capabilities if the situation is really everyone else at higher gp in your pools while you are still able to maintain your position.
Similarly one would see crazy 9m, even 8 acc.s at the edge of k2 and k1 that are overperforming and I applaud them for that. But their capability to overreach is not unlimited either.
There is nothing wrong with the way it is now... You win, you move up, you lose you move down. It is simple, easy to understand and it makes the rewards structure make sense as it rewards the better performers..
The only players having a tough time are the lower GP newer players who get stuck paired up with inactives who may suddenly decide to become active.. A simple way to fix that problem would be to create a new division and shove the inactives in there and make them fight eachother to win their way out...
I respectfully disagree. I’ve been playing since the game first released. My current GAC has players in the 9.7 and 10.4m gp range while I am in 8.4m gp range. Last GAC round had multiple players in the 9.4-9.8 range. I am consistently matched against players with 6+ GL’s. I have 4. This gives them a huge advantage in matches being matched against people with 2 less GL’s. Yes there is the GL counters I could try and go for or invest in trying to get more GL’s to make up. But that is a whole different argument all together. The point is GAC could be made much more fair using a 2 factor system using skill AND gp.
May I ask what division you are in?
I am currently bouncing between kyber 3 and 2 depending on who CG matches me with. At this moment I am kyber 2. If I lose this match I drop to 3.
Ok, so you and I are at about the same level (I am firmly in K3)...
1- It sounds like you are doing well, your combination of skill and roster have put you in a place where you are competing against some players that have higher rosters than yours but are less adept at using them... I face similar most GAC and do fairly well... This is how the system is supposed to work, if you want to surpass these guys you need to build a bigger roster and / or gain more skill to advance to greater rewards (lets face it, K2 and K3 rewards are already pretty good)...
2- Your GP proposal doesn't work for a couple of reasons... It would punish people just like the old GA mode did because no matter how you slice it, if you factor in GP, people with the same or similar SR who have no "fluff" in their roster will get the short end of the stick... R7'd that Logray for platoons? Too bad so sad! Plus, how would rewards be dolled out?
3- You brought up "shard arena"... It's actually squad arena and was completely flawed because of the payout nonsense... People don't want to spend payout hour every day glued to their devices trying to get max payout... Lets not even get started on some of the malicious shard chat mafias that would only even let certain people in their "club" get payouts... At least this way folks all have an equal shot...
People really expect CG to put in any amount of extra work, when they can't/won't even check the dragon raid bugs for max 5 possible teams?
****, wish i would still have an ounce of trust or faith like you guys do. Trusting that they would do tests, drop new content, monitor if it works as intended and fix if needed be in resonable timeframe.
Friendly reminder that Tie Defenders is still bugged since day 1 (January 27th?) and it's been in-game for, dunno, 100 days?
It's a Dark Side Empire Attacker ship that is treated as a crewless droid ship by Executor fleet (a very underused and rare fleet), but not the Executor since it's a Empire dude.
So every BH can just target whoever they wish, since Iden is not piloting that ship and the "Droid and crewless ships" are ignored by bounty hunters as the Executors toolkit says.
People really expect CG to put in any amount of extra work, when they can't/won't even check the dragon raid bugs for max 5 possible teams?
****, wish i would still have an ounce of trust or faith like you guys do. Trusting that they would do tests, drop new content, monitor if it works as intended and fix if needed be in resonable timeframe.
Friendly reminder that Tie Defenders is still bugged since day 1 (January 27th?) and it's been in-game for, dunno, 100 days?
It's a Dark Side Empire Attacker ship that is treated as a crewless droid ship by Executor fleet (a very underused and rare fleet), but not the Executor since it's a Empire dude.
So every BH can just target whoever they wish, since Iden is not piloting that ship and the "Droid and crewless ships" are ignored by bounty hunters as the Executors toolkit says.
Quite the non-sequitur. Also, you’re wrong, it’s not a bug. BH under executor ignore taunt on droid and crewless ships. TIE/D doesn’t taunt.
Whether it’s an intended interaction is another issue, but given the length of time it seems reasonable to assume CG are happy with how it works.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
The effects it would have on limiting GP, and the knock-on to TB/TW is the biggest reason why I wouldn't want to see GP reintroduced to matchmaking. No matter the intention it would inevitably be open to abuse. Do I accept that this probably limits me to bouncing between A2 and K4? Yes, and that's a sacrifice I'm happy to make to keep TB and TW so open to GP increase.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
There is nothing wrong with the way it is now... You win, you move up, you lose you move down. It is simple, easy to understand and it makes the rewards structure make sense as it rewards the better performers..
The only players having a tough time are the lower GP newer players who get stuck paired up with inactives who may suddenly decide to become active.. A simple way to fix that problem would be to create a new division and shove the inactives in there and make them fight eachother to win their way out...
I respectfully disagree. I’ve been playing since the game first released. My current GAC has players in the 9.7 and 10.4m gp range while I am in 8.4m gp range. Last GAC round had multiple players in the 9.4-9.8 range. I am consistently matched against players with 6+ GL’s. I have 4. This gives them a huge advantage in matches being matched against people with 2 less GL’s. Yes there is the GL counters I could try and go for or invest in trying to get more GL’s to make up. But that is a whole different argument all together. The point is GAC could be made much more fair using a 2 factor system using skill AND gp.
And then "why I matched with people with similar GP, but more GL's? Why they have that advantage? Amount of GL's must be added to matchmaking"
And then" why I was matched with people with more R9 characters? Why they have that advantage? Amount of R9's must be added to matchmaking"
And then "why I matched with people with more relics at all? Their account is better then mine, the amount of relics must be added to matchmaking! "...
The more factors you add to equation the more complicated things became and harder to find an opponent.
And it still won't be ideal and someone will always have dis(advantage).
There is nothing wrong with the way it is now... You win, you move up, you lose you move down. It is simple, easy to understand and it makes the rewards structure make sense as it rewards the better performers..
The only players having a tough time are the lower GP newer players who get stuck paired up with inactives who may suddenly decide to become active.. A simple way to fix that problem would be to create a new division and shove the inactives in there and make them fight eachother to win their way out...
I respectfully disagree. I’ve been playing since the game first released. My current GAC has players in the 9.7 and 10.4m gp range while I am in 8.4m gp range. Last GAC round had multiple players in the 9.4-9.8 range. I am consistently matched against players with 6+ GL’s. I have 4. This gives them a huge advantage in matches being matched against people with 2 less GL’s. Yes there is the GL counters I could try and go for or invest in trying to get more GL’s to make up. But that is a whole different argument all together. The point is GAC could be made much more fair using a 2 factor system using skill AND gp.
You are describing a situation where you are the odd one out but your opponents match well with eachother. Then you being the odd one out should show you, you are at the limit of where you can climb and your competitors have a better chance at winning. This is perfectly normal to me. After all, matchmaking isn't simply about making each single match as even as possible. It keeps working as an accumulation of match after match.
Again I will have to disagree. GAC was to be a replacement of shard arenas. Which is why they removed crystal payouts from arenas. In the old days I could at least compete for my payouts and achieve number 1. Now I am forcibly matched against people that are out of my league preventing me from actually competing for top payouts.
So you want to earn the same rewards as the top 5 in kyber 1 without having the roster they do or doing the spending to get to what they have....
Yes I am taking one comment out of this, it is what I think the many of the complaints of the outmatched players feel. "I was getting top 5 in arena, now I am not."
Quite the non-sequitur. Also, you’re wrong, it’s not a bug. BH under executor ignore taunt on droid and crewless ships. TIE/D doesn’t taunt.
Whether it’s an intended interaction is another issue, but given the length of time it seems reasonable to assume CG are happy with how it works.
Dunno man, CG does have a odd history of ship related problems.
Executor on lunch week was weak-sauce being styled on by Mace Windu, no-assists on buzzy droids from Vulture droids (real one and summoned) and the immortality with unending loyalty were the loudest ones i know of.
The effects it would have on limiting GP, and the knock-on to TB/TW is the biggest reason why I wouldn't want to see GP reintroduced to matchmaking. No matter the intention it would inevitably be open to abuse. Do I accept that this probably limits me to bouncing between A2 and K4? Yes, and that's a sacrifice I'm happy to make to keep TB and TW so open to GP increase.
In my guild there has been zero improvments in TW area of the game.
Neither in 60m gp or 120m gp range or 25-38 signups (if that even affects anything).
We get one sided beatdowns in our favor, all year long with 1 outliner.
Back-to-back in our two previous TWs , enemy didn't even have full deployment on defense.
If winning on second 0 of TW/GAC match is a improvment, i would hate to see how things wpuld be if the gane regress.
The effects it would have on limiting GP, and the knock-on to TB/TW is the biggest reason why I wouldn't want to see GP reintroduced to matchmaking. No matter the intention it would inevitably be open to abuse. Do I accept that this probably limits me to bouncing between A2 and K4? Yes, and that's a sacrifice I'm happy to make to keep TB and TW so open to GP increase.
In my guild there has been zero improvments in TW area of the game.
Neither in 60m gp or 120m gp range or 25-38 signups (if that even affects anything).
We get one sided beatdowns in our favor, all year long with 1 outliner.
Back-to-back in our two previous TWs , enemy didn't even have full deployment on defense.
If winning on second 0 of TW/GAC match is a improvment, i would hate to see how things wpuld be if the gane regress.
I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to say? Are you saying that your matchmaking in TW isn’t very good? That may be the case, but you should be able to enter higher GP brackets, which means that, win or lose, you’ll be getting better rewards which might not be the case if keeping GP low was still beneficial in GAC.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
There is nothing wrong with the way it is now... You win, you move up, you lose you move down. It is simple, easy to understand and it makes the rewards structure make sense as it rewards the better performers..
The only players having a tough time are the lower GP newer players who get stuck paired up with inactives who may suddenly decide to become active.. A simple way to fix that problem would be to create a new division and shove the inactives in there and make them fight eachother to win their way out...
I respectfully disagree. I’ve been playing since the game first released. My current GAC has players in the 9.7 and 10.4m gp range while I am in 8.4m gp range. Last GAC round had multiple players in the 9.4-9.8 range. I am consistently matched against players with 6+ GL’s. I have 4. This gives them a huge advantage in matches being matched against people with 2 less GL’s. Yes there is the GL counters I could try and go for or invest in trying to get more GL’s to make up. But that is a whole different argument all together. The point is GAC could be made much more fair using a 2 factor system using skill AND gp.
And then "why I matched with people with similar GP, but more GL's? Why they have that advantage? Amount of GL's must be added to matchmaking"
And then" why I was matched with people with more R9 characters? Why they have that advantage? Amount of R9's must be added to matchmaking"
And then "why I matched with people with more relics at all? Their account is better then mine, the amount of relics must be added to matchmaking! "...
The more factors you add to equation the more complicated things became and harder to find an opponent.
And it still won't be ideal and someone will always have dis(advantage).
I agree with the "complication factor" standpoint..... I'd also add that you aren't supposed to be handed a tailor-made matchup so that you have a chance to win, it's a game-wide tournament that all SWGOH players are entered in... The better you get (SR) the tougher your opponents will be and the bigger the prize for winning is...
There is nothing wrong with the way it is now... You win, you move up, you lose you move down. It is simple, easy to understand and it makes the rewards structure make sense as it rewards the better performers..
The only players having a tough time are the lower GP newer players who get stuck paired up with inactives who may suddenly decide to become active.. A simple way to fix that problem would be to create a new division and shove the inactives in there and make them fight eachother to win their way out...
I respectfully disagree. I’ve been playing since the game first released. My current GAC has players in the 9.7 and 10.4m gp range while I am in 8.4m gp range. Last GAC round had multiple players in the 9.4-9.8 range. I am consistently matched against players with 6+ GL’s. I have 4. This gives them a huge advantage in matches being matched against people with 2 less GL’s. Yes there is the GL counters I could try and go for or invest in trying to get more GL’s to make up. But that is a whole different argument all together. The point is GAC could be made much more fair using a 2 factor system using skill AND gp.
And then "why I matched with people with similar GP, but more GL's? Why they have that advantage? Amount of GL's must be added to matchmaking"
And then" why I was matched with people with more R9 characters? Why they have that advantage? Amount of R9's must be added to matchmaking"
And then "why I matched with people with more relics at all? Their account is better then mine, the amount of relics must be added to matchmaking! "...
The more factors you add to equation the more complicated things became and harder to find an opponent.
And it still won't be ideal and someone will always have dis(advantage).
I agree with the "complication factor" standpoint..... I'd also add that you aren't supposed to be handed a tailor-made matchup so that you have a chance to win, it's a game-wide tournament that all SWGOH players are entered in... The better you get (SR) the tougher your opponents will be and the bigger the prize for winning is...
I think that’s sort of the point I am getting at. It’s not putting you against a better skilled opponent, it’s putting you against an opponent simply with more roster. Like having a middle school sports team play against a professional league. Just doesn’t feel like a fair fight.
There is nothing wrong with the way it is now... You win, you move up, you lose you move down. It is simple, easy to understand and it makes the rewards structure make sense as it rewards the better performers..
The only players having a tough time are the lower GP newer players who get stuck paired up with inactives who may suddenly decide to become active.. A simple way to fix that problem would be to create a new division and shove the inactives in there and make them fight eachother to win their way out...
I respectfully disagree. I’ve been playing since the game first released. My current GAC has players in the 9.7 and 10.4m gp range while I am in 8.4m gp range. Last GAC round had multiple players in the 9.4-9.8 range. I am consistently matched against players with 6+ GL’s. I have 4. This gives them a huge advantage in matches being matched against people with 2 less GL’s. Yes there is the GL counters I could try and go for or invest in trying to get more GL’s to make up. But that is a whole different argument all together. The point is GAC could be made much more fair using a 2 factor system using skill AND gp.
And then "why I matched with people with similar GP, but more GL's? Why they have that advantage? Amount of GL's must be added to matchmaking"
And then" why I was matched with people with more R9 characters? Why they have that advantage? Amount of R9's must be added to matchmaking"
And then "why I matched with people with more relics at all? Their account is better then mine, the amount of relics must be added to matchmaking! "...
The more factors you add to equation the more complicated things became and harder to find an opponent.
And it still won't be ideal and someone will always have dis(advantage).
I agree with the "complication factor" standpoint..... I'd also add that you aren't supposed to be handed a tailor-made matchup so that you have a chance to win, it's a game-wide tournament that all SWGOH players are entered in... The better you get (SR) the tougher your opponents will be and the bigger the prize for winning is...
I think that’s sort of the point I am getting at. It’s not putting you against a better skilled opponent, it’s putting you against an opponent simply with more roster. Like having a middle school sports team play against a professional league. Just doesn’t feel like a fair fight.
Well, that's kind of the point of the game really.... Skill, knowledge, roster building, resource management etc...
When the Minnesota Timberwolves play the Lakers the NBA doesn't make the Lakers sit LeBron James so that the game is "fair"....
Like having a middle school sports team play against a professional league. Just doesn’t feel like a fair fight.
It is if the middle school team has been beating other professional teams a lot and/or the professional team has been losing to middle school teams a lot.
Replies
Well, first, "Over 6 feet tall" is a range, not a static value.
But more importantly, what you're saying is that narrowing the ranges increases fairness.
The original point is that if you narrow the range too much, you end up with repetitive matches. But if you don't narrow them enough, you end up with the original complaint still intact.
Just think about it, if narrowing the range increases fairness, then any range contains **some level** of unfairness (since the range could always be narrowed more).
So the "narrow the range" argument has no natural stopping point. What you do is try to claim as much fairness as you can and then stop before the unintended consequences do too much harm to other areas of the game.
But CG has already done this. They've tried to make matchmaking better and more fair, but stopped tinkering before they caused other problems.
You're not saying anything new, you're just saying that you disagree with CG about the exact balance point. And that's fine. There's nothing evil about disagreeing with CG about where that balance point should be set. But let's recognize that this is an opinion, a value judgement. it's not as easy as saying, "Well, a narrower range would be better." Some people feel a narrower range would be better, but other people who volunteer to relic8 or relic9 Ewok Scout or Lobot or Mob Enforcer or CUP or Aayla for the good of their entire guild (while other guild mates r9 a GL and call that their contribution) might have good reason to protest your assessment. They would, after all, be penalized twice: once losing out on the upgrade materials they used on a less useful or even on a terrible toon, then again during GAC matchmaking.
Personally, I think the people who r9 CUP because their guild leader asked them deserves more crystals per day, not less.
So here we are. Neither of us is up in arms, but we disagree on the exact place to balance the fairness of GAC matchmaking.
I think the sensible thing is to just let things ride on the path CG has set.
They're not terrible. You're still guaranteed an overall win rate of 50% over a large enough slice of time. What more do you really want that justifies telling the most helpful members of your guild that they should suck eggs?
You are not the only one playing though and by the nature of the thing it simply wasn't possible everyone is winning the top reward on arena. Your disagreement doesn't matter to me much as your idea that would for you on paper, won't work as a system.
I'm perfectly ok, some kind of system to be implemented for the extreme gp differences caused by people dropping too much. But then any solution to that won't effect you. You are simply overreaching your roster's capabilities if the situation is really everyone else at higher gp in your pools while you are still able to maintain your position.
Similarly one would see crazy 9m, even 8 acc.s at the edge of k2 and k1 that are overperforming and I applaud them for that. But their capability to overreach is not unlimited either.
Ok, so you and I are at about the same level (I am firmly in K3)...
1- It sounds like you are doing well, your combination of skill and roster have put you in a place where you are competing against some players that have higher rosters than yours but are less adept at using them... I face similar most GAC and do fairly well... This is how the system is supposed to work, if you want to surpass these guys you need to build a bigger roster and / or gain more skill to advance to greater rewards (lets face it, K2 and K3 rewards are already pretty good)...
2- Your GP proposal doesn't work for a couple of reasons... It would punish people just like the old GA mode did because no matter how you slice it, if you factor in GP, people with the same or similar SR who have no "fluff" in their roster will get the short end of the stick... R7'd that Logray for platoons? Too bad so sad! Plus, how would rewards be dolled out?
3- You brought up "shard arena"... It's actually squad arena and was completely flawed because of the payout nonsense... People don't want to spend payout hour every day glued to their devices trying to get max payout... Lets not even get started on some of the malicious shard chat mafias that would only even let certain people in their "club" get payouts... At least this way folks all have an equal shot...
****, wish i would still have an ounce of trust or faith like you guys do. Trusting that they would do tests, drop new content, monitor if it works as intended and fix if needed be in resonable timeframe.
Friendly reminder that Tie Defenders is still bugged since day 1 (January 27th?) and it's been in-game for, dunno, 100 days?
It's a Dark Side Empire Attacker ship that is treated as a crewless droid ship by Executor fleet (a very underused and rare fleet), but not the Executor since it's a Empire dude.
So every BH can just target whoever they wish, since Iden is not piloting that ship and the "Droid and crewless ships" are ignored by bounty hunters as the Executors toolkit says.
Quite the non-sequitur. Also, you’re wrong, it’s not a bug. BH under executor ignore taunt on droid and crewless ships. TIE/D doesn’t taunt.
Whether it’s an intended interaction is another issue, but given the length of time it seems reasonable to assume CG are happy with how it works.
The effects it would have on limiting GP, and the knock-on to TB/TW is the biggest reason why I wouldn't want to see GP reintroduced to matchmaking. No matter the intention it would inevitably be open to abuse. Do I accept that this probably limits me to bouncing between A2 and K4? Yes, and that's a sacrifice I'm happy to make to keep TB and TW so open to GP increase.
And then "why I matched with people with similar GP, but more GL's? Why they have that advantage? Amount of GL's must be added to matchmaking"
And then" why I was matched with people with more R9 characters? Why they have that advantage? Amount of R9's must be added to matchmaking"
And then "why I matched with people with more relics at all? Their account is better then mine, the amount of relics must be added to matchmaking! "...
The more factors you add to equation the more complicated things became and harder to find an opponent.
And it still won't be ideal and someone will always have dis(advantage).
So you want to earn the same rewards as the top 5 in kyber 1 without having the roster they do or doing the spending to get to what they have....
Yes I am taking one comment out of this, it is what I think the many of the complaints of the outmatched players feel. "I was getting top 5 in arena, now I am not."
Dunno man, CG does have a odd history of ship related problems.
Executor on lunch week was weak-sauce being styled on by Mace Windu, no-assists on buzzy droids from Vulture droids (real one and summoned) and the immortality with unending loyalty were the loudest ones i know of.
In my guild there has been zero improvments in TW area of the game.
Neither in 60m gp or 120m gp range or 25-38 signups (if that even affects anything).
We get one sided beatdowns in our favor, all year long with 1 outliner.
Back-to-back in our two previous TWs , enemy didn't even have full deployment on defense.
If winning on second 0 of TW/GAC match is a improvment, i would hate to see how things wpuld be if the gane regress.
I’m not entirely sure what you’re trying to say? Are you saying that your matchmaking in TW isn’t very good? That may be the case, but you should be able to enter higher GP brackets, which means that, win or lose, you’ll be getting better rewards which might not be the case if keeping GP low was still beneficial in GAC.
I agree with the "complication factor" standpoint..... I'd also add that you aren't supposed to be handed a tailor-made matchup so that you have a chance to win, it's a game-wide tournament that all SWGOH players are entered in... The better you get (SR) the tougher your opponents will be and the bigger the prize for winning is...
I think that’s sort of the point I am getting at. It’s not putting you against a better skilled opponent, it’s putting you against an opponent simply with more roster. Like having a middle school sports team play against a professional league. Just doesn’t feel like a fair fight.
Well, that's kind of the point of the game really.... Skill, knowledge, roster building, resource management etc...
When the Minnesota Timberwolves play the Lakers the NBA doesn't make the Lakers sit LeBron James so that the game is "fair"....
It is if the middle school team has been beating other professional teams a lot and/or the professional team has been losing to middle school teams a lot.