Grand Arena Championships – GP Divisions [MEGA]

Replies

  • Stud3099
    555 posts Member
    edited June 26
    Matchmaking should not be across divisions ever. Keep it simple CG. Lock a division and do matchmaking off of GP within your Division and League. Create fake accounts that will fill in when a Division/League combination isn't divisible by 8 (don't cross Division/League buckets to fill in the gaps). The matchups will become "more fair" as the championship progresses and people fight others with similar win/loss records (as determined by league progression). This should not have been complicated.

    This recommendation coming from someone who has the highest GP (i.e. "bloated roster") and is still expecting to win the GA.
  • No_Try
    3403 posts Member
    abc127 wrote: »
    (edited typos)

    ... Not complaining, just sharing my feedback...

    I'm 2.755M. Opponent is 3.4. I have better mods and my legendaries are better equipped, but I have only 44 g11/12 to his 51. I am focused farming he is broad. I seem to have a strategic advantage, but he has a brute force advantage.

    GA is my favorite module because it measures the quality of my roster work as a whole. I have pretty good mods, am careful with my zetas, and make my squad choices strong pvp modes... I read a lot, pay attention to smarter players, and work hard to get my roster where it is. I expect to have an advantage in any kind of pvp environment, unless other person is better at it than me, because I try to build a strong roster.

    Someone who goes broad "gets" lots of things. It's their decision to push green pluses, choose random/favorite squads, not make synergy, etc. That's fine, but that isn't conducive for pvp environment with rankings.

    I get the concern about taking mods off, and avoiding upgrades, but It seems to me that I lost my advantage, fighting people my own size and winning on my roster that I built and farmed...

    If I lose or get fewer ranking points because my opponent has many more toons/options, that will make GA less appealing to me, and I love GA. Will wait and see what happens.

    Aside from going back to straight gp, another suggestion might be capping the difference in relevant (ships/toons) gp, or give bonus points for beating someone in a higher division. I don't think it mKes any sense for me to be looking at someone with 20% more GP, regardless of how they got there.

    I would also say he careful with that. Taken to a more extreme, limiting the squad view at similar GP simply pits identical rosters. Rankings will take care of that.

    Going broad doesn't mean that at all. For old players they can easily be both broad and have the same focused top end that you do without doing anything else different than yours including their best team priorities. When you get past 4M gp, almost all the competetive players fit the definition of broad, yet their rosters are super focused as well while carrying lots of gp making stuff with it.

    When a roster is broad and also lacks focus, randomly worked toons lacking synergies, half built teams etc...you should search for the reason on that player, not on the fact that the roster is broad.
  • No_Try
    3403 posts Member
    Neither broad or lean has direct implication on good choices a player makes and how competetive or good players they are. I think it's a good time to let go of this rhetoric as if these 2 stereotypes apply universally.
  • Torr wrote: »
    I found this from dev post.

    If the GP difference across players is great enough, the matchmaking will also default to the lowest-number of defenses required by division between the two players (Note: only the very best-performing low-GP players are likely to encounter this, however). Players who are good enough to end up getting matched with higher-GP players will be able to do so on a more level playing field.

    Except this didn't happen. Sub 4M player required to place 8 defensive squads. Sub 2.7M player required to place 6. In some instances it looks like it's using the lower end, but in two of mine it's using the defensive placement requirement from the higher GP.
  • abc127
    19 posts Member
    edited June 26
    No_Try wrote: »
    Going broad doesn't mean that at all. For old players they can easily be both broad and have the same focused top end that you do without doing anything else different than yours including their best team priorities. When you get past 4M gp, almost all the competetive players fit the definition of broad, yet their rosters are super focused as well while carrying lots of gp making stuff with it.

    When a roster is broad and also lacks focus, randomly worked toons lacking synergies, half built teams etc...you should search for the reason on that player, not on the fact that the roster is broad.

    Fair enough. I was speaking to my specific and surrounding GP. But it definitely means something different at various ages of account.

    I wouldn't want to face a 4M player with my same top end, though. The rest of the roster seems like something I would have no way to combat.
  • evoluza
    2075 posts Member
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    That just shows that almost nobody wants a real challenge in GA.
    This is a sad day for competitive gameplay.

    I disagree. I do think people want a challenge - I just think they also want a fair fight. There are situations where 2 guys with both Revans are in the same bracket with 2 guys who have neither. That's not a "challenge" for either side (unless they only faced each other, which to win, isn't possible).

    A matchup algorithim that can't seem to account for the two most meta dominant characters in the game's history seems to need "retweaking".

    Or you call it what it is,an advantage.
    A deserved one, if you farmed/speng accordingly.
    People without revan don't win or win with an good counter and other good teams.
  • No_Try
    3403 posts Member
    abc127 wrote: »
    No_Try wrote: »
    Going broad doesn't mean that at all. For old players they can easily be both broad and have the same focused top end that you do without doing anything else different than yours including their best team priorities. When you get past 4M gp, almost all the competetive players fit the definition of broad, yet their rosters are super focused as well while carrying lots of gp making stuff with it.

    When a roster is broad and also lacks focus, randomly worked toons lacking synergies, half built teams etc...you should search for the reason on that player, not on the fact that the roster is broad.

    Fair enough. I was speaking to my specific and surrounding GP. But it definitely means something different at various ages of account.

    I wouldn't want to face a 4M player with my same top end, though. The rest of the roster seems like something I would have no way to combat.

    I agree and you shouldn't be facing them either if...CG backs out of this 2nd try and proceeds with their announced new MM.
  • Nikoms565
    10967 posts Member
    evoluza wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    That just shows that almost nobody wants a real challenge in GA.
    This is a sad day for competitive gameplay.

    I disagree. I do think people want a challenge - I just think they also want a fair fight. There are situations where 2 guys with both Revans are in the same bracket with 2 guys who have neither. That's not a "challenge" for either side (unless they only faced each other, which to win, isn't possible).

    A matchup algorithim that can't seem to account for the two most meta dominant characters in the game's history seems to need "retweaking".

    Or you call it what it is,an advantage.
    A deserved one, if you farmed/speng accordingly.
    People without revan don't win or win with an good counter and other good teams.

    Except CG has stated in several places that the intent of the GAC matchmaking rework was, at least in theory, that "players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them. The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent."

    In other words, that advantage is supposed to help in arena, TW, TB and raids - but GAC is supposed to have matchups of rosters that are more evenly matched. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework for GAC is off base, or the matchup algorithm seems to be. And since CG has remained silent on the point for the past 24 hours, we don't know which is the case.
    In game name: Lucas Gregory - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • No_Try
    3403 posts Member
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    evoluza wrote: »
    That just shows that almost nobody wants a real challenge in GA.
    This is a sad day for competitive gameplay.

    I disagree. I do think people want a challenge - I just think they also want a fair fight. There are situations where 2 guys with both Revans are in the same bracket with 2 guys who have neither. That's not a "challenge" for either side (unless they only faced each other, which to win, isn't possible).

    A matchup algorithim that can't seem to account for the two most meta dominant characters in the game's history seems to need "retweaking".

    Or you call it what it is,an advantage.
    A deserved one, if you farmed/speng accordingly.
    People without revan don't win or win with an good counter and other good teams.

    Except CG has stated in several places that the intent of the GAC matchmaking rework was, at least in theory, that "players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them. The change won’t be drastic – in most cases, players should still have GP that is pretty close to that of their opponent."

    In other words, that advantage is supposed to help in arena, TW, TB and raids - but GAC is supposed to have matchups of rosters that are more evenly matched. Either CG's statements about the matchmaking rework for GAC is off base, or the matchup algorithm seems to be. And since CG has remained silent on the point for the past 24 hours, we don't know which is the case.

    We do know, they don't need to come out and say anything right now as there are no emergencies/malfunctions in the game. It's explained right in the game how it works right now. And that explanation simply can not give you the result that you expect from the new matchmaking announcement. There's no magic that will simply give you even match-ups.
  • These matchups are kinda ridiculous. Huge discrepancies in GP which leads to huge discrepancies in Zetas/G12s/6 E Mods... as accounts of much different 'ages' are paired up against each other. One of my guildies is getting pretty screwed with a big gap
  • Mikayas
    82 posts Member
    You can’t have different divisions playing each other when those divisions require a different number of squads set. The more squads, the more “possible points”, and so the greater advantage to climb to Kyber. This doesn’t take even average intelligence to see.
  • Mikayas wrote: »
    You can’t have different divisions playing each other when those divisions require a different number of squads set. The more squads, the more “possible points”, and so the greater advantage to climb to Kyber. This doesn’t take even average intelligence to see.

    Your logic went completely over the head of 80% of players here. I mean I get it, but I'm not so sure about others.
  • 3pourr2
    1871 posts Member
    Im just curious how 6 people in my division set one extra team earning them 90 extra points
  • 3pourr2 wrote: »
    Im just curious how 6 people in my division set one extra team earning them 90 extra points

    They got matched vs someone in a higher division therefore getting more opportunities to score points.

    There's nothing you can do to outscore them in your division. your essentially battle limited.

    Rng (matchmaking) determines who even has the opportunity to compete for the top of each division.

    If your one of the lucky ones who fights up a division you have a shot at winning the division because you can place more teams than anyone else in your division.... Of course u need 3 rounds if fighting up a division so rng X3.

    The other 99% of players in every division have lost any shot at winning the division as soon as they were matched against someone in their own division or one division lower and not up one level.

    Pray for rng to match you up a level, then you need that rng luck 3x in a row, then win all your combat 3x and you can be a division champ.

    Cg now controls who has a shot at winning the division. we should maybe trust them that It's Wai.

    they do thousands of hours of testing and can run an algorithm to tell them if your roster is strong enough to have a shot at winning. If you fail the matchmaking algorithm rng, you lose. But they have the data they know best.
  • 3pourr2
    1871 posts Member
    3pourr2 wrote: »
    Im just curious how 6 people in my division set one extra team earning them 90 extra points

    They got matched vs someone in a higher division therefore getting more opportunities to score points.

    There's nothing you can do to outscore them in your division. your essentially battle limited.

    Rng (matchmaking) determines who even has the opportunity to compete for the top of each division.

    If your one of the lucky ones who fights up a division you have a shot at winning the division because you can place more teams than anyone else in your division.... Of course u need 3 rounds if fighting up a division so rng X3.

    The other 99% of players in every division have lost any shot at winning the division as soon as they were matched against someone in their own division or one division lower and not up one level.

    Pray for rng to match you up a level, then you need that rng luck 3x in a row, then win all your combat 3x and you can be a division champ.

    Cg now controls who has a shot at winning the division. we should maybe trust them that It's Wai.

    they do thousands of hours of testing and can run an algorithm to tell them if your roster is strong enough to have a shot at winning. If you fail the matchmaking algorithm rng, you lose. But they have the data they know best.

    I agree with everything except that thousands of hours of testing
  • I'm so disappointed this is actually happening lol. All the work i've put into my collection you simply **** on it by unfair matchmaking. I really thought this event is going to be something beautiful. All it produced was anger and hate in me. I truly hope a dev sees this and understands what he has done to many of us, because I know i'm not the only one.
  • No_Try
    3403 posts Member
    Is it against to ToS to wish herpes on the entire CG staff? Assuming they don't already have herpes.

    You can wish on a star, you are not entitled to anything from cg or the universe though.
  • Tjis match up its really silly . Players from my top division where smashed by me in last GA s and i have no chance to reach them . They will go in next league with 40 g12 chars while i was forced to fight against players with twice my g12 (140÷150 g12 chars) . Tx a lot EA
  • As this seems to be the right place - right now in div 3 it is impossible for me to be top in the division. The leader has 2076 points, and my maximum theoretical is 2001 (540 def + 660 conquer + 456 (6x 1-man team wins) + 345 max feats).

    So someone in my division is allowed to place and fight more teams than me.

    I'm fine with the matchmaking. Not fine with an uneven playing field.
  • Dk_rek
    3124 posts Member
    Does it matter95% of the player base is always going to be in the 500+ caregory

    We all want best finish possible but even top players gonna find themselves in +500 bottom it seems even on full
    Clears
  • Dk_rek
    3124 posts Member
    edited June 26
    Too bad people can be dishonest or else you would see a ton of chat deal
    Making..... “ok i cant win can you let me clear 7.5 areas for banners and u take the win”

    Not enough trust for that to go around lol

    EDIT not encouraging this i made a thread once saying chat should be removed from GA to prevent collusion but i was wrong in the end that or ppl hush hush lol

  • No doubt. It would be shard chats 2.0.
  • Dk_rek
    3124 posts Member
    Glauron wrote: »
    No doubt. It would be shard chats 2.0.

    Lol i could see one or 2 people of 80,000 try to make a GAC discord for his division ppl be crazy lol would not really effect anything but if a guy pulled it off he should get one of those uniqe portraits lol
  • 333freeman wrote: »
    Saada wrote: »
    All my opponents have far greater character gp and overall gp and from div 4 while I'm in div5 but guess what they're all gunna get smashed cause I built strong squads while they're all over the place so get over it guys. You could get matched with me since we would have the same character gp and get smashed anyway.
    c27ky9a4re33.png

    I would be happy to be placed against you and it would be a good battle. At least I would be fighting in my division so we could figure out who is the best in our division. Isn't the point is to move up thru the ranks within your division to become the best. Why should we be punished for farming the right squads.

    And why should I be punished for having played the game longer, so I have all your squads and teams like the jawa meta, so my GP far exceeds yours.
  • 333freeman wrote: »
    Saada wrote: »
    All my opponents have far greater character gp and overall gp and from div 4 while I'm in div5 but guess what they're all gunna get smashed cause I built strong squads while they're all over the place so get over it guys. You could get matched with me since we would have the same character gp and get smashed anyway.
    c27ky9a4re33.png

    I would be happy to be placed against you and it would be a good battle. At least I would be fighting in my division so we could figure out who is the best in our division. Isn't the point is to move up thru the ranks within your division to become the best. Why should we be punished for farming the right squads.

    And why should I be punished for having played the game longer, so I have all your squads and teams like the jawa meta, so my GP far exceeds yours.

    you shouldn't. you should be matched with players like you. current matchmaking only looks at the top X characters and seems to have added 2 defensive placements, at least at my GP. what that fails to take into account is that some of my G12s might be fleet or raid specific (e.g., my G12 FOTP to go along with a bunch of G8 FO). While you might have useful toons that don't show up in the algorithm (your G12 KRU and FOTP which do and G11 Fox FOST Kylo which don't). You have a squad to place or use. I don't, but the algorithm doesn't see that.

    Matchmaking has seemingly gone from one extreme - very dumb looking at only GP - to the other - looking at the minimum number of toons required to field the defensive placement requirement. You could argue that it's picking winners and losers either way. I thought that the concept of Leagues within a division was intended to be the sorting hat, and under the old algorithm this was true. As you progressed through leagues you would face tougher competition.

    I'm taking part in 4 GAs (I know, right?) and I've won the first round in 3 of the 4. The only one in which I had no shot? The best roster among the group, because it was matched up against an account that was 40% older (read better mods), had 350k more toon GP, was asked to place 8 teams instead of 6 (and here I've been building my roster focusing on 12 solid squads, not 16), and highly effective low gear toons under the right leads don't show up in matchmaking (I mean you GR and especially Sep Droids).

    Now, the less effective, lower ranked, worse modded account at a slightly higher GP in the same division is going to be 20,000 ranks ahead because of the matchmaking changes in conjunction with unannounced placement count changes.

    It doesn't make a lot of sense. I thought as we progressed through the championship, we would enter new leagues which would put us in competition with "rosters that looked more like ours". This matchmaking does no such thing. It matches me against rosters that look partially like mine at the top, and a boat load better the further down you go. It does do a really good job of preventing me from getting to a higher league. Essentially, leagues are just a lifetime achievement award, much like character levels. Play long enough and you'll earn enough "points" to get there.

    I understand CG is trying to rectify a strategic error (and that is, creating a game mode which incentivized you NOT to take part in the activity that most directly reflects on revenue - adding GP to your roster), and maybe this ultimately does that. What it appears to do more than anything is reward mediocrity.
  • Dk_rek
    3124 posts Member
    Suggstion : give bonus points for defense even if 1 point to break ties.

    Benefits : under current matchmaking I think there has been a major major shift to setting horrible defenses or weaker defenses in order to get max points (basically trying to out perfect your opponent)

    By adding a bonus to defenses it might encourage people to be more defense strategy instead of the all out kamikaze we are seeing now (of course not all cases)
  • Rewards are completely based on rng of matchmaking.

    No point to spend.

    This will be addressed not sure how tho...
  • Why did I lose my GAC on a tie at 1549. My gp was higher his was lower because he took off all of his mods. He had 35 g12 toons and I only had 28.
  • CCyrilS
    2557 posts Member
    Benchmark wrote: »
    Why did I lose my GAC on a tie at 1549. My gp was higher his was lower because he took off all of his mods. He had 35 g12 toons and I only had 28.

    Read Dev post RE: known issues
  • No_Try
    3403 posts Member
    333freeman wrote: »
    Saada wrote: »
    All my opponents have far greater character gp and overall gp and from div 4 while I'm in div5 but guess what they're all gunna get smashed cause I built strong squads while they're all over the place so get over it guys. You could get matched with me since we would have the same character gp and get smashed anyway.
    c27ky9a4re33.png

    I would be happy to be placed against you and it would be a good battle. At least I would be fighting in my division so we could figure out who is the best in our division. Isn't the point is to move up thru the ranks within your division to become the best. Why should we be punished for farming the right squads.

    And why should I be punished for having played the game longer, so I have all your squads and teams like the jawa meta, so my GP far exceeds yours.

    you shouldn't. you should be matched with players like you. current matchmaking only looks at the top X characters and seems to have added 2 defensive placements, at least at my GP. what that fails to take into account is that some of my G12s might be fleet or raid specific (e.g., my G12 FOTP to go along with a bunch of G8 FO). While you might have useful toons that don't show up in the algorithm (your G12 KRU and FOTP which do and G11 Fox FOST Kylo which don't). You have a squad to place or use. I don't, but the algorithm doesn't see that.

    Matchmaking has seemingly gone from one extreme - very dumb looking at only GP - to the other - looking at the minimum number of toons required to field the defensive placement requirement. You could argue that it's picking winners and losers either way. I thought that the concept of Leagues within a division was intended to be the sorting hat, and under the old algorithm this was true. As you progressed through leagues you would face tougher competition.

    I'm taking part in 4 GAs (I know, right?) and I've won the first round in 3 of the 4. The only one in which I had no shot? The best roster among the group, because it was matched up against an account that was 40% older (read better mods), had 350k more toon GP, was asked to place 8 teams instead of 6 (and here I've been building my roster focusing on 12 solid squads, not 16), and highly effective low gear toons under the right leads don't show up in matchmaking (I mean you GR and especially Sep Droids).

    Now, the less effective, lower ranked, worse modded account at a slightly higher GP in the same division is going to be 20,000 ranks ahead because of the matchmaking changes in conjunction with unannounced placement count changes.

    It doesn't make a lot of sense. I thought as we progressed through the championship, we would enter new leagues which would put us in competition with "rosters that looked more like ours". This matchmaking does no such thing. It matches me against rosters that look partially like mine at the top, and a boat load better the further down you go. It does do a really good job of preventing me from getting to a higher league. Essentially, leagues are just a lifetime achievement award, much like character levels. Play long enough and you'll earn enough "points" to get there.

    I understand CG is trying to rectify a strategic error (and that is, creating a game mode which incentivized you NOT to take part in the activity that most directly reflects on revenue - adding GP to your roster), and maybe this ultimately does that. What it appears to do more than anything is reward mediocrity.

    Thanks for pulling the problem out of dichotomical which one is good/lean-fluff debacle which won't ever lead anyone anywhere. I agree with your points. Both of these algos won't work. They are both brute force GP oriented approaches and will fall prey to their inherent logic just by this fact. GP means nothing no matter from where you slice it. CG needs to go back to their premise -improved matchmaking- announcement and make the algo dependant on multiple factors, instead of something very visible which players will always try to take advantage of. Both algos causes players to act in one way or the other just to have the upper hand on the algo instead of just trying to develop their rosters to the best state possible on all fronts (i.e. mods, zetas etc.).
Sign In or Register to comment.