Grand Arena Megathread

Replies

  • got a zeta for doing nothing except winning last match

    T4T ill take it!!
  • Slaveen
    479 posts Member
    WTH, I’ve seen some mismatches before but nothing like this...

    I’ve got 12 Zetas, my opponent has 24.

    I’ve got 8 G12 toons, my opponent has 32.

    My next opponent is going to be very similar - I don’t stand a chance. Not fun at all.
  • Slaveen
    479 posts Member
    I know it’s all based on GP but there should be other factors in the algorithm like number of Zetas.
  • Gannon
    1509 posts Member
    edited April 2019
    Slaveen wrote: »
    I know it’s all based on GP but there should be other factors in the algorithm like number of Zetas.

    Honestly, zetas should be the first thing it looks at, since that's the one thing you can't pay for. The two players would have roughly equal time invested.
    Then from there it should match gp..
  • Slaveen
    479 posts Member
    Look I know there are kinks that have to be worked out in any game / mode. But the mismatching in GA has been a consistent and bitter complaint in this thread and forum. Can we get an acknowledgment from CG that they’re at least thinking about possible solutions??

    @CG
  • Gannon
    1509 posts Member
    evoluza wrote: »
    Amusing... When you lose, the matching is unfair. If you win, it's okay...

    I don't get why people always say this. Pretty much everyone knows matchmaking isn't optimal yet, whether they win or lose.

    People don't usually come to forums to complain unless it negatively affects them or someone they know. How is that amusing?
  • Gannon
    1509 posts Member
    evoluza wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    Amusing... When you lose, the matching is unfair. If you win, it's okay...

    I don't get why people always say this. Pretty much everyone knows matchmaking isn't optimal yet, whether they win or lose.

    People don't usually come to forums to complain unless it negatively affects them or someone they know. How is that amusing?

    The fact that people want: zetas, mods and everything else calculated, to get an even opponent and they stand a chance. That's amusing. It's an pvp match after all and it seems most are just not used to losing!
    So desperate to win, that they want everything changed, so they can win...

    yea, I get that. While I haven't had any issue with losing, I can still get behind the idea of factoring zetas. Especially since they removed ship gp to accommodate ship heavy players, it's become much worse for my matchmaking.
    Matching mods and toons and such would be ridiculous. As I've said before, total gp is the best objective way to match players, out of what's currently in game, but gp can be paid for, Zetas can't. Factoring zetas would mean that players with roughly equal time invested would be facing other, similar Activity level players. So a 1 year player would most likely face another 1 year player with a similar activity level.
    This would be much more fair than me stomping casual players when they can't even take one zone down..
  • Rath_Tarr
    4056 posts Member
    Gannon wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    Amusing... When you lose, the matching is unfair. If you win, it's okay...

    I don't get why people always say this. Pretty much everyone knows matchmaking isn't optimal yet, whether they win or lose.

    People don't usually come to forums to complain unless it negatively affects them or someone they know. How is that amusing?

    The fact that people want: zetas, mods and everything else calculated, to get an even opponent and they stand a chance. That's amusing. It's an pvp match after all and it seems most are just not used to losing!
    So desperate to win, that they want everything changed, so they can win...

    yea, I get that. While I haven't had any issue with losing, I can still get behind the idea of factoring zetas. Especially since they removed ship gp to accommodate ship heavy players, it's become much worse for my matchmaking.
    Your roster is seriously squad-heavy so previously you had a significant advantage is usable GP in squad-only GAs. You have now lost that and all those g7/g8 toons are counting against you.
  • Gannon
    1509 posts Member
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    Amusing... When you lose, the matching is unfair. If you win, it's okay...

    I don't get why people always say this. Pretty much everyone knows matchmaking isn't optimal yet, whether they win or lose.

    People don't usually come to forums to complain unless it negatively affects them or someone they know. How is that amusing?

    The fact that people want: zetas, mods and everything else calculated, to get an even opponent and they stand a chance. That's amusing. It's an pvp match after all and it seems most are just not used to losing!
    So desperate to win, that they want everything changed, so they can win...

    yea, I get that. While I haven't had any issue with losing, I can still get behind the idea of factoring zetas. Especially since they removed ship gp to accommodate ship heavy players, it's become much worse for my matchmaking.
    Your roster is seriously squad-heavy so previously you had a significant advantage is usable GP in squad-only GAs. You have now lost that and all those g7/g8 toons are counting against you.

    Yea I know, now my opponents (in toon only) are like 4 mil players who focused mostly on ships and didn't push their toons hard, so they have more zetas and longer playing time, but are still at a disadvantage.

    If zetas were factored, all my opponents would be closer to where I am (and similarly focus), and I wouldn't be trampling ppl still.
  • who's stupid idea was it to autofill GA slots??? If I WANTED to place troops, I would. D.A. game
  • Well actually it was done because of people like you signing up and not playing...robbing those of us who enjoy GA of what we signed up for...not for freeloading the rewards but for a challenging battle, testing our squads and strategy...if you don't like the GA, don't sign up.
    Imo, peeps who don't place defense shouldn't be "autofilled", they should be banned.
  • ha ... and that's exactly why I always signed up and never set defense ... to purposely waste people's time! No worries ... just have to alter my plan a tad, and back to wasting people's time!
  • No_Try
    4051 posts Member
    RussianSKS wrote: »
    ha ... and that's exactly why I always signed up and never set defense ... to purposely waste people's time! No worries ... just have to alter my plan a tad, and back to wasting people's time!

    Just place a single unit somewhere to trick the system ;)
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    * auto-deploying contiguously from the top of a player's roster can still result in a pretty strong defense; picking random toons from the whole roster would be better I think - if you don't deploy defense in at least the first round, you really don't deserve any advantage

    But....people have been bleeding their souls and tears saying that defense must be set so they can have a challenge...

    There should be no autodeploy period...but since there is one are you saying that a guy who had to take his kids to the doctors or something should not get that 1 in a 1000 chance of beating you ?... Sure the guy who does not care... actually probably a million people... maybe don't deserve a chance to win...

    But it's what people asked for...... "I want a challenge auto deploy"... "Wait autodeploy is too hard.... wait this is not fair I want my free win back."

    Can't have it both ways..

    As my string of losses gets higher and higher.... I get oh so closer to just dropping one team and walking away...

    Because this game mode matchmaking is the worst thing this game has right now
  • Slaveen
    479 posts Member
    evoluza wrote: »
    Amusing... When you lose, the matching is unfair. If you win, it's okay...

    I’ve won about one third of the GA matches I’ve participated in, so it’s not like I was winning every GA up until this one.

    In all the GA’s to date, I’ve actually had pretty evenly matched matches but I have noticed there always seems to be one or two players who don’t stand a chance against everyone else no matter how much strategic prowess they possess.

    Admittedly, this is the first time I’ve been one of those two players and the first time I’ve said something about it. So there is a degree of truth to your counter but the fact remains that 1-2 players on each GA are grossly outmatched to the degree that they don’t stand a chance against 6-7 of the potential opponents.
  • Ninjah9 wrote: »
    Sevynth wrote: »
    Hi Devs. I think these are great changes but I would like to provide some feedback on what is missing to make these more effective.
    1st, trying to manage mods between PVP and PVE is very time consuming, even with load-outs. If you could create a roster toggle for PVP/PVE it would be great. It would only need to track the location of mods. That way we can build our teams and keep them ready for any event. Any PVP events would default to the PVP roster when player locking.
    2nd, there is not a good way to practice. You are putting us into game time events with no ability to test. Why not let players engage in private deck battles. Like GA but faster and it doesn't need rewards. The first player set defense then it notifies the next other player that they can attack and then they set a defense. It just keeps going with no 24hr delays. We could battle with our guild mates and help provide feedback to each other to make our guilds stronger.

    Thank you, I second this! If you can believe it I ran into a group of trolls a while back who said you aren't even supposed to move mods, lol. And one was a moderator! Yes having an easier way to set mods for events without waiting for a 24hr time period would be awesome. ESPECIALLY with an increase in events.

    This sounds like a great idea
  • The economics of GA is still broken. Don't get me wrong, I really like this aspect of the game. However my last two opponents have even tried to set their own defense or attack. Sure, nice easy wins, but it isn't very fun or satisfying. If people aren't trying in GA it is because the incentives are not worth the time for them. This is a simple economics problem, make the rewards for the top two tiers much better, make the rewards for last place much worse. People will then have more incentive and hopefully more people set up and truly participate in GA.
  • From my point of view, as non Revan owner, matchmaking should take into the equation if players have unlocked Revan or not.
    The reason is quite simple and obvious, if my GA opponent sets his Revan in deff, i've already lost, unless he doesn't attack and i manage to kill 1 team, what didn't happen to me until now.

    I can still live with Trayas and others in deff (still quite hard to beat), but facing a unkillable team like Revan is just frustrating in a event where only my roaster can be used.

    My 2 cents
    Swiss Garde Officer, drop me a message if you're interested joining
  • TideWarrior
    90 posts Member
    edited April 2019
    evoluza wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    Amusing... When you lose, the matching is unfair. If you win, it's okay...

    I don't get why people always say this. Pretty much everyone knows matchmaking isn't optimal yet, whether they win or lose.

    People don't usually come to forums to complain unless it negatively affects them or someone they know. How is that amusing?

    The fact that people want: zetas, mods and everything else calculated, to get an even opponent and they stand a chance. That's amusing. It's an pvp match after all and it seems most are just not used to losing!
    So desperate to win, that they want everything changed, so they can win...

    I am indifferent and could care less about winning or losing but I thought this aspect of the game would provide an engaging opportunity to keep me interested and has yet to do that.

    But my disagreement with your statement is this is PvP and it is not. This game does not have a true PvP format. It is player vs. AI where RNG, turn meter, and luck prevail moreso then not. Here the goal is to have squads to counter specific squads that you come up against but at no time are you playing against another player. I have been playing MMOs for over 20 years now and in PvP I never concerned myself with what the squad makeup was I encountered nor ever had to wait my turn to attack due to turn meter queue.

    So yes to using different variables to determine matchmaking may be the way in the future. And in regards to your other comment it also seems the ones that like the current match making are the ones that are so desperate to win they like having the overpowering match up as it gives them easy wins without having to use strategy. Just saying
    Post edited by TideWarrior on
  • Naw
    969 posts Member
    Manumicio wrote: »
    From my point of view, as non Revan owner, matchmaking should take into the equation if players have unlocked Revan or not.

    Um, how about not? Git gud.
  • Just went in against carth/ordo in GA, and Ordo fired well over 10 times in a row against me. Whats the deal with that??

    He was channeling his inner raid boss Traya.
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    evoluza wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    Amusing... When you lose, the matching is unfair. If you win, it's okay...

    I don't get why people always say this. Pretty much everyone knows matchmaking isn't optimal yet, whether they win or lose.

    People don't usually come to forums to complain unless it negatively affects them or someone they know. How is that amusing?

    The fact that people want: zetas, mods and everything else calculated, to get an even opponent and they stand a chance. That's amusing. It's an pvp match after all and it seems most are just not used to losing!
    So desperate to win, that they want everything changed, so they can win...

    except for being wrong this is a good post.

    I lost 90% of all my GA matches so far.... most of them squash matches... ZERO percent chance... today actually is my first squash match.... I have 30 G12 on my opponent....

    I don't think anyone cares if the matchup contains the following.

    Wow this is bad...it's not gonna be pretty but there is a chance.
    OUCH...this is tough let's rock
    He got me by a little but should be a good match
    Wow pretty even
    I have him outmodded but toons are even
    I got this guy beat but you never know he could outplace me.

    All people really don't want is the following

    HOLY MARY.... 40 MORE G12 !!!! 50 more 6* mods 300+ speed mods 29 more zetas.... this is stupid... I have zero chance there is no point playing....I SHOULD just not set a defense.... the heck with this guy and the heck with the dumb matchmaking...

    PRETTY sure there evoliza no one demands mirror matches..... it's not cause OMG I lost.... people just dont' want squash matches....really REALLY not that hard a concept my dude
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    evoluza wrote: »
    Gannon wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    Amusing... When you lose, the matching is unfair. If you win, it's okay...

    I don't get why people always say this. Pretty much everyone knows matchmaking isn't optimal yet, whether they win or lose.

    People don't usually come to forums to complain unless it negatively affects them or someone they know. How is that amusing?

    The fact that people want: zetas, mods and everything else calculated, to get an even opponent and they stand a chance. That's amusing. It's an pvp match after all and it seems most are just not used to losing!
    So desperate to win, that they want everything changed, so they can win...

    I am indifferent and could care less about winning or losing but I thought this aspect of the game would provide an engaging opportunity to keep me interested and has yet to do that.

    But my disagreement with your statement is this is PvP and it is not. This game does not have a true PvP format. It is player vs. AI where RNG, turn meter, and luck prevail moreso then not. Here the goal is to have squads to counter specific squads that you come up against but at no time are you playing against another player. I have been playing MMOs for over 20 years now and in PvP I never concerned myself with what the squad makeup was I encountered nor ever had to wait my turn to attack due to turn meter queue.

    So yes to using different variables to determine matchmaking may be the way in the future. And in regards to your other comment it also seems the ones that like the current match making are the ones that are so desperate to win they like having the overpowering match up as it gives them easy wins without having to use strategy. Just saying

    QFT
  • Slaveen
    479 posts Member
    I love this aspect of the game, don’t get me wrong. Like I said, normally 6-7 of the opponents in GA matches are fairly evenly matched. Meaning- they at least have a chance, even if sometimes it’s only 30-40% chance. I realize perfect 50/50 matches are pretty much impossible unless each player has the exact same roster at the exact same gear level with the exact same zetas.... etc. So whatever algorithm is being used is not worthless- I just want the algorithm to be refined - because 1-2 of those teams do not have a 30-40% chance.

    For example, my first match during this GA was against an opponent who could have allowed the game to automatically set his defense and then auto attack for him (if there was such a feature) and he still would have won. This is why the algorithm needs refinement. I had a less than 5% chance.

    Again, I know it will never be a perfect 50/50. But instead of 6-7 players being matched where the chance of victory is 70/30 or 60/40 in each round, I’d like for all 8 players to have these odds in each round.
  • Dk_rek
    3299 posts Member
    edited April 2019
    Slaveen wrote: »
    I love this aspect of the game, don’t get me wrong. Like I said, normally 6-7 of the opponents in GA matches are fairly evenly matched. Meaning- they at least have a chance, even if sometimes it’s only 30-40% chance. I realize perfect 50/50 matches are pretty much impossible unless each player has the exact same roster at the exact same gear level with the exact same zetas.... etc. So whatever algorithm is being used is not worthless- I just want the algorithm to be refined - because 1-2 of those teams do not have a 30-40% chance.

    For example, my first match during this GA was against an opponent who could have allowed the game to automatically set his defense and then auto attack for him (if there was such a feature) and he still would have won. This is why the algorithm needs refinement. I had a less than 5% chance.

    Again, I know it will never be a perfect 50/50. But instead of 6-7 players being matched where the chance of victory is 70/30 or 60/40 in each round, I’d like for all 8 players to have these odds in each round.

    Simpler would be top 50 % matched with top 50% bottom 50 with bottom 50% in the next GA. And repeat for rhe next GA.

    Assign ranking points for winning which increase Based on GA 1 GA 2 GA 3.

    Ranking system allows the competitive people fight for title... bottom people will have at least a chance to win a GA by the third GA of the month.

    After 3 GA’s reset. Everyone wins except the people benefitting from getting squash brackets and matches. But now they can “prove” their claims its about competition
  • TRanger
    329 posts Member
    edited April 2019
    When GA started I lost every match..except for those who did not set defense or those who did not attack..always out matched by meta toons( reven, treya or Darth Revan) and zata count...my 28-30 zatas we're always matched with those who had 38-44. Now I have have 36 zatas and Darth Raven, 5* treya, and I'm matched against opponents with (all 3 meta toons) and now 46-58 zatas. I call (****) when you preach match making gets better when you get stonger, and eventually you will start winning more. I'm still losing 3 matches..can't get past my opponents defense because I used all my zatas on Defense..or can't penetrate a wall of Trayas and revans with full stars and full Zata squads. I set cheese defense as well trying to keep my zatas for offense but for every Zata used my opponent can have up too, two.

    Either keep matching the same but disallow zatas to be used, or match Zata count with Zata count.

    This one sided matching isnt healthy for a game it is killing player spirit. I have invested tons of capital Into this game, and I'm quickly losing interest in pvp GA TW where I/we have no chance vs overwhelmingly disadvantage squad strength. Yes I spent several hundred dollars to get DR but for want higher GP bracket for more losses. I'm realizing putting cash in this game was a mistake, but a bigger mistake is how PVP is being handled and matchmaking it is Killing player spirit...you have disenfranchise long term players who use too enjoy your game, collecting and spending, You stated you were trying to balance "F2P" and "spender" players for a more enjoyable game everyone would be happy with. Do you really feel this current matchmaking in GA..and TW (expandable argument) has done this? Or have you just created the perfect matchaking algorithm that is so one sided that players start leaving the game in droves In favor of other games (your competition) where they actually give a darn about thier player base and keep it balanced nurturing thier streaming revenues? How much longer do those who constantly lose have to feed players with twice as many zatas, even more zatas for matches they don't need to win? How much longer untill players such as myself start hitting delete and move on? This is currently my state of mind with the matchaking you continuely subject me (us), too. Balance it out, that would go a long way in player appreciation. It would revitalize that player spirit you need to survive another 5 years.
Sign In or Register to comment.