TW - MM and Teams needed [MERGE]

Replies

  • Since I don't want to be entirely negative here, I am going to give an example of one area of matchmaking that is working very well.

    In 5v5 GAC it is possible to get into Chromium after the first round of battles, but it requires one to go 3-0 with full clears and a lot of feats. The resultant group of players is self-selecting and are all very skilled and competitive, to the point where some people deliberately leave feats uncollected to stay in Bronzium for the second round.

    What has affectionately been dubbed "Chromium Week" has by far the best GAC action, competition, and comradery that I have experienced. While all my losses in the last 4 months have come in this scenario, it is far more engaging and fun than beating up on opponents with bad rosters and/or mods.

    I realize roster turnover precludes an identical solution for TW, but perhaps the data from these matches could be mined to help serve up more TWs that are Lakers-Celtics and less that are Globetrotters-Generals.
  • Puk
    15 posts Member
    Why don’t they just make TW sign up automatic like with TB. Then guilds can be matched with similar GP and it will be up to each guilds officers to get their members actually playing, or boot people who don’t bother.

    Guilds in the same bracket can then be matched by number of GLs present. I cannot think of a reason why this wouldn’t work.
  • Imho the worst "inferiority of life" update we ever seen in this game.
    They doubeld the effort for TW and messed up the matchmaking.

    Great work like allways ... :unamused:
  • KParadine91
    26 posts Member
    edited October 2021
    So this is what we are up against.......


    vu8q6d1tl6hz.png
    zf1czxa1n1ac.png
    0fes2rcx295e.png
    rl4fstu18lgn.png




    Great job with the match-up.
    Not!!!
  • So this is what we are up against.......


    vu8q6d1tl6hz.png
    zf1czxa1n1ac.png
    0fes2rcx295e.png
    rl4fstu18lgn.png




    Great job with the match-up.
    Not!!!

    If the amount of teams needed on defence is correct then I see little wrong with this other than they have the High ground. Those stats from DSR are based on max signups.
  • LynxVJ wrote: »
    CG: It has come to our attention that some guilds have cleared TW in less than 24 hours and then have nothing to do after that. So we've adjusted the number of defensive teams to increase player engagement in this game mode. Enjoy!!!

    😂
  • Dear developers,

    thank you very much for your intensive and persistent development work. Every day you give more than 100% to make life a little bit easier for your community and especially for the smaller players who started playing the game.

    Your latest highlight was the introduction of the new divisions and the "matchmaking improvement". Oh, and importantly, non-GL counters have already been eliminated.

    Now I would like to ask you, after I hope the irony has arrived, a question. How do you think matchmaking improves when both guilds are in full force and the opponent has 82 GLs but you only have 29.

    Thank you for ruining one of the most interesting and important game modes.

    Greetings from a very disappointed player.
  • Dont worry the game devs here are resistant to irony and good and healthy game development.

    P2Win games probably have a higher in-App sale rate if people simply loose by force. So your frustration should lead to you going into the shop and buying your way to victory. Its nonsense of course, as an end game roster would cost you above 50k $ which is for most people more than the can effort.
    A good game is never p2win. Maybe has some skins or other small stuff you can buy, but its based on a big buying community to all spend an affordable amount.
    While this game has good gfx and does has many nice things, it lacks permanent added real content (not washed up tw as new content for example). It also lacks a lot and could been in all those years far better, but i guess someone simulated a calculation its better not to do so...
  • Callicles
    9 posts Member
    edited October 2021
    We really need to have an official answer. What is trying to do CG?

    Because what I saw is that the top whales matchup is:
    WP vs gsf alpha (50 v 50)
    Maw 1 vs ti bravo
    Maw 2 vs hothskipatrol (48 on hothskipatrol side)
    Cobra caw vs mc syndication
    Caw patrol vs PvP élite
    Maw 3 vs gsf Omega (50 vs 50)
    SL vanguard vs Clans Mandaloriens (49 on CM side)

    So it's a freeking good matchup for all thoses top whales guilde. For me it's juste working as internaly intended and we are juste beeing fooled by communcation.

    I don't hate whales guilde, I'm totally ok with them, but CG as too choose, if TW are intended to be challenging aor if they are a way to loot unique reward. Because you cant make top guildes figth each other because it should be challenging and in the other hand have so much différence in reward.

    So, make différence between loose and win smaller or rework the mm for real. Make a true ladder like in many other games with reward depending on your final position for uniques like R9 and reward with gear for each TW win/loss
    Post edited by Kyno on
  • BeralCator wrote: »
    Since I don't want to be entirely negative here, I am going to give an example of one area of matchmaking that is working very well.

    In 5v5 GAC it is possible to get into Chromium after the first round of battles, but it requires one to go 3-0 with full clears and a lot of feats. The resultant group of players is self-selecting and are all very skilled and competitive, to the point where some people deliberately leave feats uncollected to stay in Bronzium for the second round.

    What has affectionately been dubbed "Chromium Week" has by far the best GAC action, competition, and comradery that I have experienced. While all my losses in the last 4 months have come in this scenario, it is far more engaging and fun than beating up on opponents with bad rosters and/or mods.

    I realize roster turnover precludes an identical solution for TW, but perhaps the data from these matches could be mined to help serve up more TWs that are Lakers-Celtics and less that are Globetrotters-Generals.

    Idk if it's dubbed chromium week... The groups I hang out with call it the land of the try hards. I avoid it like the plague
  • Kyno wrote: »
    thedrjojo wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    We have been shuffling info to the team. There are too many factors for this information to provide direct answer for each person. They will keep looking at the data.

    They will be monitoring the situation and they will be doing balance changes, as needed.
    dlrr86kqfv2t.jpeg

    This bot is automated.... :anguished:

    How many placements and how many joined (on your end, unless you know both)

    Confirming what army said: we had 49 sign up and 40 spots per zone
  • Kyno wrote: »
    We have been shuffling info to the team. There are too many factors for this information to provide direct answer for each person. They will keep looking at the data.

    They will be monitoring the situation and they will be doing balance changes, as needed.

    What do they need to monitor? They said matchups will be within divisions of the same GP. We are seeing tons of matchups several divisions apart. That’s either not WAI or they lied in the SoG
  • thedrjojo wrote: »
    BeralCator wrote: »
    Since I don't want to be entirely negative here, I am going to give an example of one area of matchmaking that is working very well.

    In 5v5 GAC it is possible to get into Chromium after the first round of battles, but it requires one to go 3-0 with full clears and a lot of feats. The resultant group of players is self-selecting and are all very skilled and competitive, to the point where some people deliberately leave feats uncollected to stay in Bronzium for the second round.

    What has affectionately been dubbed "Chromium Week" has by far the best GAC action, competition, and comradery that I have experienced. While all my losses in the last 4 months have come in this scenario, it is far more engaging and fun than beating up on opponents with bad rosters and/or mods.

    I realize roster turnover precludes an identical solution for TW, but perhaps the data from these matches could be mined to help serve up more TWs that are Lakers-Celtics and less that are Globetrotters-Generals.

    Idk if it's dubbed chromium week... The groups I hang out with call it the land of the try hards. I avoid it like the plague

    That's the beauty of it though. You can opt in to the challenge or stay far away depending on when you collect your feat points. You can also make a different choice each GAC based on how much time you have or how you are feeling that day.

    People play the game differently and have different metrics as to what successful matchmaking is; the GAC example shows a place where the design gives players agency in choosing their level of engagement. Now, it may not have been intentional on the dev's part, but I still think it is worth emulating.
  • Saada
    637 posts Member
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    We have been shuffling info to the team. There are too many factors for this information to provide direct answer for each person. They will keep looking at the data.

    They will be monitoring the situation and they will be doing balance changes, as needed.

    What do they need to monitor? They said matchups will be within divisions of the same GP. We are seeing tons of matchups several divisions apart. That’s either not WAI or they lied in the SoG

    fxydvsqq3pwv.jpg
  • Callicles wrote: »
    We really need to have an official answer. What is trying to do CG?

    Because what I saw is that the top whales matchup is:
    WP vs gsf alpha (50 v 50)
    Maw 1 vs ti bravo
    Maw 2 vs hothskipatrol (48 on hothskipatrol side)
    Cobra caw vs mc syndication
    Caw patrol vs PvP élite
    Maw 3 vs gsf Omega (50 vs 50)
    SL vanguard vs Clans Mandaloriens (49 on CM side)

    So it's a freeking good matchup for all thoses top whales guilde. For me it's juste working as internaly intended and we are juste beeing fooled by **** communcation.

    I don't hate whales guilde, I'm totally ok with them, but CG as too choose, if TW are intended to be challenging aor if they are a way to loot unique reward. Because you cant make top guildes figth each other because it should be challenging and in the other hand have so much différence in reward.

    So, make différence between loose and win smaller or rework the mm for real. Make a true ladder like in many other games with reward depending on your final position for uniques like R9 and reward with gear for each TW win/loss

    Gsf Omega here. We only had 49 join. One guy no showed.
  • JakeD wrote: »
    Just for the record, we didn't sandbag. I need to correct my previous post as we had 48, not 47 sign-ups.

    This match is absolutely insane and ridiculously unfair.

    I was not trying to be accusatory and removed your guild name as to not tarnish it. If you feel i did, my apologies as it was not my intent. I know one of your members is a shard mate of someone in our alliance.

    Also thank you for posting this. It just goes to show how broken this "Upgraded" system is.
  • Ultra wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Yes this is working as designed.

    No it is "not as intended", there will be changes to the MM values to dial this all in over time.

    Good thing all us are the BETA testers, since CG apparently does not test anything before it’s release.

    Sometimes you need production data (large scale) to perfect some issues

    Anyone who knows anything about servers knows they are backed up. Would have been easy to mirror a backup and run an algorithm and see what the results were. Problem is that would have cost them money. I run a medium size business and it would mortify me to test what i do on my customers.
  • Joebo720 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Some better information to provide is the number of players that signed up and the each guilds GP.

    First of all no one knows how many signed up without contacting the other guild. CG does not share that information in the MM process.

    Also can we just stop with the GP thing? GP IS IRRELEVANT BECACUSE CG MADE IT IRRELEVANT.

    Counters were nerfed. The only thing relevant now is number of GLs. GP is a useless number at this point in the game.

    I completely disagree. We are 98 vs 98 GL. The outcome of the fight will be based on the GP, on the non GL teams, where they have more and better of everything.
  • Joebo720
    417 posts Member
    edited October 2021
    pånøs wrote: »
    I completely disagree. We are 98 vs 98 GL. The outcome of the fight will be based on the GP, on the non GL teams, where they have more and better of everything.

    While i am glad the MM blind squirrel got a nut in your case, in mine it is 178 GLs vs 58. Matches should first be determined by number of GLs and then by GP. Can't understand why they can't figure that out.
  • Joebo720 wrote: »
    pånøs wrote: »
    I completely disagree. We are 98 vs 98 GL. The outcome of the fight will be based on the GP, on the non GL teams, where they have more and better of everything.

    While i am glad the MM blind squirrel got a nut in your case, in mine it is 178 GLs vs 58. Matches should first be determined by number of GLs and then by GP. Can't understand why they can't figure that out.

    Don't get me wrong, MM sucks. We have a minus 50m gp with opponent, while we have to set 37 teams for def and 37 for attack for a 263M active gp.
  • jedilord
    331 posts Member
    edited October 2021
    i would say, time for compensation... but ...

    oh wait i´ve forgot... we are the alpha tester (not beta, cause beta would mean testing before) but never get anything... not even lousy chewie shards... thx for nothing, and thx for screwing everything up... all the nerf and buffs (starting with the tripple buff with GL kylo)

    i don´t recall the last time we had anything as compensation for anything... also years ago the big nightsister nerf, or the release of the AAT raid... we had to fight a month or longer on only one raid... we got never anything^^
    no problem at all that we are the alpha testers for everything, but no rewards for this work is more than greedy from you^^

    how good that it's just a game, in the real world with company / customer relationships you would have been bankrupt long ago
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Yes this is working as designed.

    No it is "not as intended", there will be changes to the MM values to dial this all in over time.

    Good thing all us are the BETA testers, since CG apparently does not test anything before it’s release.

    Sometimes you need production data (large scale) to perfect some issues

    Cmon ultra, you mean to tell me that they couldn’t tell that after the nerfs against GL’s? They shouldn’t have made it that extensive.

    Also, if they say matchups will be within divisions, then people that get matched up 3 or 4 divisions apart isn’t WAI. This wasn’t tested properly

    Hence the monitor and adjustment stance of the MM parameters.
  • and the most annyoing thing:
    you always change something on a friday... you don´t get anything right on first time, so why always changing something on a friday? i don´t get it^^
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Yes this is working as designed.

    No it is "not as intended", there will be changes to the MM values to dial this all in over time.

    Good thing all us are the BETA testers, since CG apparently does not test anything before it’s release.

    Sometimes you need production data (large scale) to perfect some issues

    Cmon ultra, you mean to tell me that they couldn’t tell that after the nerfs against GL’s? They shouldn’t have made it that extensive.

    Also, if they say matchups will be within divisions, then people that get matched up 3 or 4 divisions apart isn’t WAI. This wasn’t tested properly

    Hence the monitor and adjustment stance of the MM parameters.

    Do you seriously believe in this? Isnt it more like someone selling magic stones to some fools believing in his/her words? Its just business in the end for them. MM is proven to not work by thousands of examples and now dishing out the high end material in a pvp mode will have a huge negative impact.

    TW must be won now or you get basically either nothing or a carrot on a stick.

    TW specialised guilds will faceroll soon everyone (all GLs r9 + piett vs 1-2 r9 that match will be superb)
    TW will get a huge amount of sandbagging for x2-x4 reward
    TW will get a huge increase in cheating
    TW will get a huge amount of drama and pressure on the organising teams due to the extreme win/loose reward
    TW will fail with every bad MM and people will be extremely unhappy not getting the good stuff (Raid & TBs didnt had all of those issues...now its literally rng if you can win or will instantly loose determined by your code - people will be happy *irony*)
This discussion has been closed.