Will the GP of restricted characters still be factored into the TW matchmaking?

ZagNutts
19 posts Member
edited January 10
Does anyone know if CG will still count the GP of the 20* restricted characters in their TW matchmaking? I may have missed this detail, but if someone has the answer I'd appreciate it!

Replies

  • 3pourr2
    1917 posts Member
    Yes it will still count per moderator dev communication
  • * 20 characters.

    And yes, they are still counted in the GP count. Dumb decision by CG. Kyno asked them yesterday.
  • ZagNutts
    19 posts Member
    edited January 10
    Thanks for the info!

    Carrying the restricted GP for guilds with leaner rosters could be a problem, no? That could hover around 20+ million GP of dead weight.
  • 3pourr2
    1917 posts Member
    If they remove the gp many guilds will likely fall in the rewards rank earning less rewards
  • Sirlagzalott
    842 posts Member
    edited January 10
    ZagNutts wrote: »
    Thanks for the info!

    Carrying the restricted GP for guilds with leaner rosters could be a problem, no? That could hover around 20+ million GP of dead weight.

    Better to carry the dead weight than to drop a reward tier. And theoretically the other team is equally handicapped

  • 3pourr2 wrote: »
    If they remove the gp many guilds will likely fall in the rewards rank earning less rewards

    That's a fair point! Guess we'll see how this thing pans out.
  • ZagNutts wrote: »
    Thanks for the info!

    Carrying the restricted GP for guilds with leaner rosters could be a problem, no? That could hover around 20+ million GP of dead weight.

    Better to carry the dead weight than to drop a reward tier. And theoretically the other team is equally handicapped

    The problem is that the other team isnt equally handicapped... Since each guild have his own playstile and focus on diferent parts of the game, so it can hurt a lot for some guilds and just a bit for others...

  • 3pourr2 wrote: »
    If they remove the gp many guilds will likely fall in the rewards rank earning less rewards

    Well, they can remove the GP AND adjust the rank tiers. But it's just too much work for a poorly planned event.
  • If they remove GP then bigger guilds can fall down in the same rank of other guilds that aren't affected by bans because haven't unlocked yet those characters.
    I think is fair to count the total GP. Everyone stay at the same rank, with the same rewards and the same bans.
  • If they remove GP then bigger guilds can fall down in the same rank of other guilds that aren't affected by bans because haven't unlocked yet those characters.
    I think is fair to count the total GP. Everyone stay at the same rank, with the same rewards and the same bans.

    Refer to my post before. They can modify the ranks to make sure guilds remain in the same bands.

    If a guild drops so much that they go to a lower band, then clearly they are horribly disadvantaged in this TW and should be allocated a guild of similar strength. But right now it is all hidden.
  • Refer to my post before. They can modify the ranks to make sure guilds remain in the same bands.

    If a guild drops so much that they go to a lower band, then clearly they are horribly disadvantaged in this TW and should be allocated a guild of similar strength. But right now it is all hidden.

    This is wrong. Let's assume we have 2 guilds:
    1) GP 140M (who runs all heroic raids and almost all members were able to unlock Revan) where bans cost 40M
    2) GP 110M where bans cost 10M

    Now the result is 100M vs 100M so both guild are in the same rank. CG can modify the brackets but the result is the same.
    This is an extreme scenario but in my work (software developer) I'm usual to think about all strange possibilities.

    In the other hand is obvious that we can have a guild with very high GP member but with no particular character so the opposite guild will have a big disadvantage. This is another extreme scenario but always possible
  • No_Try
    3540 posts Member
    Refer to my post before. They can modify the ranks to make sure guilds remain in the same bands.

    If a guild drops so much that they go to a lower band, then clearly they are horribly disadvantaged in this TW and should be allocated a guild of similar strength. But right now it is all hidden.

    This is wrong. Let's assume we have 2 guilds:
    1) GP 140M (who runs all heroic raids and almost all members were able to unlock Revan) where bans cost 40M
    2) GP 110M where bans cost 10M

    Now the result is 100M vs 100M so both guild are in the same rank. CG can modify the brackets but the result is the same.
    This is an extreme scenario but in my work (software developer) I'm usual to think about all strange possibilities.

    In the other hand is obvious that we can have a guild with very high GP member but with no particular character so the opposite guild will have a big disadvantage. This is another extreme scenario but always possible

    Even in your extreme scenario, you are talking about 2-2.4M worth of GP.

    The extremest scenario would be one guild that has none of the restricted toons, but that has no practical application as it would take 50 headless chickens with zero understanding of useful teams on one side.
  • Refer to my post before. They can modify the ranks to make sure guilds remain in the same bands.

    If a guild drops so much that they go to a lower band, then clearly they are horribly disadvantaged in this TW and should be allocated a guild of similar strength. But right now it is all hidden.

    This is wrong. Let's assume we have 2 guilds:
    1) GP 140M (who runs all heroic raids and almost all members were able to unlock Revan) where bans cost 40M
    2) GP 110M where bans cost 10M

    Now the result is 100M vs 100M so both guild are in the same rank. CG can modify the brackets but the result is the same.
    This is an extreme scenario but in my work (software developer) I'm usual to think about all strange possibilities.

    In the other hand is obvious that we can have a guild with very high GP member but with no particular character so the opposite guild will have a big disadvantage. This is another extreme scenario but always possible

    Thanks for supporting my argument. That’s clearly what i’m proposing. A weaker guild gets bumped up the rewards ladder with restructured rewards table, while the originally stronger guild gets dialed down to reflect the actual roster power.

    Right now what we are having is possibly two 130m gp guilds, but one has 20m of banned gp while another has only 5m of banned gp. It leads to a very large gp gap which is clearly unfair to begin with.
  • No_Try
    3540 posts Member
    Refer to my post before. They can modify the ranks to make sure guilds remain in the same bands.

    If a guild drops so much that they go to a lower band, then clearly they are horribly disadvantaged in this TW and should be allocated a guild of similar strength. But right now it is all hidden.

    This is wrong. Let's assume we have 2 guilds:
    1) GP 140M (who runs all heroic raids and almost all members were able to unlock Revan) where bans cost 40M
    2) GP 110M where bans cost 10M

    Now the result is 100M vs 100M so both guild are in the same rank. CG can modify the brackets but the result is the same.
    This is an extreme scenario but in my work (software developer) I'm usual to think about all strange possibilities.

    In the other hand is obvious that we can have a guild with very high GP member but with no particular character so the opposite guild will have a big disadvantage. This is another extreme scenario but always possible

    Thanks for supporting my argument. That’s clearly what i’m proposing. A weaker guild gets bumped up the rewards ladder with restructured rewards table, while the originally stronger guild gets dialed down to reflect the actual roster power.

    Right now what we are having is possibly two 130m gp guilds, but one has 20m of banned gp while another has only 5m of banned gp. It leads to a very large gp gap which is clearly unfair to begin with.

    In any actual case the difference in banned characters will be much much less, within the realm of few M GPs even in extreme. One guild with 50 Trayas vs another with no Trayas results in a bit less than 1.2M GP difference.
  • No_Try wrote: »
    Refer to my post before. They can modify the ranks to make sure guilds remain in the same bands.

    If a guild drops so much that they go to a lower band, then clearly they are horribly disadvantaged in this TW and should be allocated a guild of similar strength. But right now it is all hidden.

    This is wrong. Let's assume we have 2 guilds:
    1) GP 140M (who runs all heroic raids and almost all members were able to unlock Revan) where bans cost 40M
    2) GP 110M where bans cost 10M

    Now the result is 100M vs 100M so both guild are in the same rank. CG can modify the brackets but the result is the same.
    This is an extreme scenario but in my work (software developer) I'm usual to think about all strange possibilities.

    In the other hand is obvious that we can have a guild with very high GP member but with no particular character so the opposite guild will have a big disadvantage. This is another extreme scenario but always possible

    Thanks for supporting my argument. That’s clearly what i’m proposing. A weaker guild gets bumped up the rewards ladder with restructured rewards table, while the originally stronger guild gets dialed down to reflect the actual roster power.

    Right now what we are having is possibly two 130m gp guilds, but one has 20m of banned gp while another has only 5m of banned gp. It leads to a very large gp gap which is clearly unfair to begin with.

    In any actual case the difference in banned characters will be much much less, within the realm of few M GPs even in extreme. One guild with 50 Trayas vs another with no Trayas results in a bit less than 1.2M GP difference.

    I believe there are 20 banned toons in total. This means there’s a possible gap of 0-10mil in gp, large enough to have an impact.
  • No_Try
    3540 posts Member
    No_Try wrote: »
    Refer to my post before. They can modify the ranks to make sure guilds remain in the same bands.

    If a guild drops so much that they go to a lower band, then clearly they are horribly disadvantaged in this TW and should be allocated a guild of similar strength. But right now it is all hidden.

    This is wrong. Let's assume we have 2 guilds:
    1) GP 140M (who runs all heroic raids and almost all members were able to unlock Revan) where bans cost 40M
    2) GP 110M where bans cost 10M

    Now the result is 100M vs 100M so both guild are in the same rank. CG can modify the brackets but the result is the same.
    This is an extreme scenario but in my work (software developer) I'm usual to think about all strange possibilities.

    In the other hand is obvious that we can have a guild with very high GP member but with no particular character so the opposite guild will have a big disadvantage. This is another extreme scenario but always possible

    Thanks for supporting my argument. That’s clearly what i’m proposing. A weaker guild gets bumped up the rewards ladder with restructured rewards table, while the originally stronger guild gets dialed down to reflect the actual roster power.

    Right now what we are having is possibly two 130m gp guilds, but one has 20m of banned gp while another has only 5m of banned gp. It leads to a very large gp gap which is clearly unfair to begin with.

    In any actual case the difference in banned characters will be much much less, within the realm of few M GPs even in extreme. One guild with 50 Trayas vs another with no Trayas results in a bit less than 1.2M GP difference.

    I believe there are 20 banned toons in total. This means there’s a possible gap of 0-10mil in gp, large enough to have an impact.

    That's just a theoratical threshold, no real case will involve it.

    "The extremest scenario would be one guild that has none of the restricted toons, but that has no practical application as it would take 50 headless chickens with zero understanding of useful teams on one side. "
Sign In or Register to comment.