TW - MM and Teams needed [MERGE]

Replies

  • Kyno wrote: »
    JakeD wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    capsular wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    I would think a reasonable person would thing cross division matching to mean across division lines...... which is what we are seeing.

    What we are seeing is sandbagging on a gross scale that not even the shadiest guilds could have attempted in the past.

    Stop trying to defend them when they're gonna come out and say it's broken anyways, just because you have the "dialogue" to justify your ridiculous statements.

    What most are calling sandbagging and seeing what look like off matches has more to do with the record of the guilds involved than the number of players.

    They are not saying this is entirely the way it should be, they are saying they will monitor it and adjust the parameters to tighten things up over time.

    I am in the guild that has the most lopsided matchup we've seen in this thread. 351M with opponent at 287M. Our TW record since August is 5-3 and we were 2-2 in September. I grant we are on a 2 loss streak currently due to severe underdog status in the most recent two wars.

    None of that excuses the matchup CG created for us this war

    It's a new system that needs to be adjusted. The whole point of the new system wasnt that it was going to be 100%, right out of the gate. The point was that it's easier for them to adjust it in many ways to account for and counter elements we have seen throughout TW.

    Then why didn't they get it to 100% before they tied R9 to it.
  • Ultra wrote: »
    lukeb74 wrote: »
    Ultra wrote: »
    lukeb74 wrote: »
    Well done. 360M with 49 subscribed and 39 teams req here. My TW officers got a heart attack and we're warming up jawas, ewoks and tuskens from the bench.
    Your opponents are in the same boat as you are

    Yeah indeed. Besides the unbalanced GL number plus a consistent GP gap in their favour...

    GL ratio 1:1 is unreasonable to expect

    1:1 sure fine. I would imagine everyone knows that. Awesome.

    What is then? Because what is reasonable to expect is pretty important. We're talking numbers here so give us one.
    My matchup would be somewhere around 1:1.4 giving us around 70 more GLs (amongst other significant advantages)

    You know what Guilds talk about when discussing matchups? Well Galactic Legends are mentioned here and there.

  • To be honest, this new territory war format is horrible!

    50/territory is way too much. Poor officers having to gather everyone in attacking so many times.

    CG please reconsider this format and the rewards screwed towards victory.
  • Of course they test these updates guys, that’s not the problem.

    It’s that they are being forced to release buggy content that isn’t yet ready for the wild.

    That, along with the perceived push for monetization, is a risky combination.

    The higher-ups really need to sit back and consider the negative impact this is having on the player base. Please don’t kill our game.
  • Range1974
    706 posts Member
    edited October 2021
    People complaining about 39 per zone. How about 49? We spent 5 hours in chat last night trying to figure that out. It’s 16-20 squads per player for offense and defense assuming we are having to clean up a lot of battles like we are so far. 46ny2cus1hah.jpeg
    Don’t even think about trying to fight all that in 24 hours. I guess CG don’t have families, other hobbies, responsibilities.
    yzklajcybxdg.png


    Post edited by Range1974 on
  • Hmmm. If TWs are going to involve twice as many battles then perhaps we should have twice as long for the attack phase: 48 hrs instead of 24.
  • JibberJabber
    99 posts Member
    edited October 2021
    Have to give it up for the “moderators” who have to figure out how to spin this giant pile of poop as being good for the game/community.

    Guild morales are already low due to a number of player unfriendly changes and they release an event that requires basically all guild members to participate. No one wants to sit around/spend time on this slog fest that was released. It was hard enough to to get participation when it was 20 fights per zone and now this…………….

    So now you want people to log in for guild events, grand arena, conquest, squad arena, ship arena and now territory wars. How much time do you think people want to play a mobile game on a daily basis?

    Many whales pay, because they don’t want to invest time into the game, they want to be able to collect rewards with minimal effort.
  • Rath_Tarr wrote: »
    Hmmm. If TWs are going to involve twice as many battles then perhaps we should have twice as long for the attack phase: 48 hrs instead of 24.
    Still leaves the problem of having to fight twice as many battles as before though and does not address the elephant in the room:

    Most guilds' members do not and in many cases cannot participate evenly.

    Some favor defense, some do little of anything, some genuinely try but aren't very good.

    So the burden tends to fall disproportionately on the good players and of course the organizers and that burden just got doubled.
  • Ultra
    10017 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    BeralCator wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    JakeD wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    capsular wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    I would think a reasonable person would thing cross division matching to mean across division lines...... which is what we are seeing.

    What we are seeing is sandbagging on a gross scale that not even the shadiest guilds could have attempted in the past.

    Stop trying to defend them when they're gonna come out and say it's broken anyways, just because you have the "dialogue" to justify your ridiculous statements.

    What most are calling sandbagging and seeing what look like off matches has more to do with the record of the guilds involved than the number of players.

    They are not saying this is entirely the way it should be, they are saying they will monitor it and adjust the parameters to tighten things up over time.

    I am in the guild that has the most lopsided matchup we've seen in this thread. 351M with opponent at 287M. Our TW record since August is 5-3 and we were 2-2 in September. I grant we are on a 2 loss streak currently due to severe underdog status in the most recent two wars.

    None of that excuses the matchup CG created for us this war

    It's a new system that needs to be adjusted. The whole point of the new system wasnt that it was going to be 100%, right out of the gate. The point was that it's easier for them to adjust it in many ways to account for and counter elements we have seen throughout TW.

    The point Kyno is that they never, ever, ever test anything. If they cannot run simulations against the data with the amount of money they have made from this game, then I am sorry, they need to be fired. Any organization with the wealth of data they have been able to collect over the years should be able to do modeling and understand how proposed changes would work and what the results look like. If you are going to suggest thats exactly what they have done, then they should be ashamed of themselves with the results.

    Communication is terrible. Apologists on this forum make excuses for them time and time again.

    The community saying this doesnt not make it true. Yes they do test things.

    Im sure they can and do, but I'm also sure that they realize that changes to the event and reward structure would also change the player side input variables.

    The first company that can predict things like this based solely on data will never have to work again. It's never as simple as "just look at the data".

    You saying this also doesn't make it true.

    If you have evidence that they tested things, please present it. Otherwise, you opinion is as equally valid as everyone else's (which is to say, not very).

    Please feel free to message CG_Doja_Fett and ask about the beta group. They had an open call for that a while back.

    hey

    put in a good word for me
  • Requiring the extra squads is going to pull a lot unused characters off the bench and I think that is fun IF IF IF IF IF there is not a huge mismatch on GP and GLs. Since that was pretty much ignored in the match making (to protect peoples investments) this is a huge fail.
  • 2oatrurswspo.jpeg

    Seems most comments are from high GP guilds that got outmatched. I will throw in a different perspective.

    We are at 173M GP with 48/50 signed up giving us 170M active GP this time. Our opponents has only 40 members and 163M GP. We have 3 times as many GLs as them.

    We are undefeated in TW since we started the guild a year ago. So we have a win record that would warrant us being matched with opponents that are, on paper, better than us.

    We got to set only 15 teams per zone this time. As I understand it that means out opponent only had 30/40 people sign up. So they are only at 75% strenght!

    We have usually been matched with guilds around 200M that have about 40 people signed up. So this was a significant change in the kind of opponent we get and not a change for the better.

    Maybe I shouldnt complain being on the upside of the horrible matchmaking but it is just not fun when you clear the board in under two hours
  • When you think about this quarter, there isn’t much good:

    - nerf making GAC far less interesting at this point
    - Extra TW battles making it a Terrible experience for everyone (we are playing against MAW and even them don’t find it fun)
    - Conquest being grindy
    - TB now bugged over the top
    - Raids being staled and no new one coming

    Good stuff:
    - annnounced sith raid simable: oups not yet implemented
    - Announced reduction in gear crunch: oups not yet implemented

    Overall CG, you get a major FAIL for this quarter. Can’t say for the entire game, but from the small sample that his my world in SWGOH, you are losing a lot of players that weren’t even considering quitting before the quarter started.

    Well done to whoever is leading this charge! We understand it’s your job at CG to play this game, it’s not ours!
  • Mixelplux
    65 posts Member
    edited October 2021
    Edit
    Post edited by Mixelplux on
  • 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)

    We also looked over their placements and found they are 50/50 signed up.
  • Tw match making still sucks
    We drew a whale guild with 2x more gls and a a boat load more piett ships
    Or was over before it started
  • thedrjojo wrote: »
    dlrr86kqfv2t.jpeg

    @Kyno there you go. That's my guild match-up and someone else in our guild went through all the placements, etc. and confirmed they are at 50/50 participating. We had 49/50 enter. So I stand corrected. Looks like you guys may have gotten rid of the sandbagging....of course, this is even worse, now guilds are just getting matched up with 50-60 mil GP difference in participating GP.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    JakeD wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    JakeD wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    capsular wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    I would think a reasonable person would thing cross division matching to mean across division lines...... which is what we are seeing.

    What we are seeing is sandbagging on a gross scale that not even the shadiest guilds could have attempted in the past.

    Stop trying to defend them when they're gonna come out and say it's broken anyways, just because you have the "dialogue" to justify your ridiculous statements.

    What most are calling sandbagging and seeing what look like off matches has more to do with the record of the guilds involved than the number of players.

    They are not saying this is entirely the way it should be, they are saying they will monitor it and adjust the parameters to tighten things up over time.

    I am in the guild that has the most lopsided matchup we've seen in this thread. 351M with opponent at 287M. Our TW record since August is 5-3 and we were 2-2 in September. I grant we are on a 2 loss streak currently due to severe underdog status in the most recent two wars.

    None of that excuses the matchup CG created for us this war

    It's a new system that needs to be adjusted. The whole point of the new system wasnt that it was going to be 100%, right out of the gate. The point was that it's easier for them to adjust it in many ways to account for and counter elements we have seen throughout TW.

    Dude, you make one claim, I refuted it with, ya know, actual data and then you backpedal into a different excuse.

    Why can't you just say they screwed up, badly, and that be the end of it?

    You're a moderator, not paid shill, right?

    I am just sharing information, I know this may not fit what others want to hear. I am sorry for that, I am just trying to give some perspective from what we see of the other side.

    We fed all the information from here to them, and through that discussion we were told that things need to be adjusted and that the changes they made to the MM system allow them to do this more easily. Nothing they saw from what we produced raised any immediate red flags about how the system works.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    thedrjojo wrote: »
    dlrr86kqfv2t.jpeg

    Kyno there you go. That's my guild match-up and someone else in our guild went through all the placements, etc. and confirmed they are at 50/50 participating. We had 49/50 enter. So I stand corrected. Looks like you guys may have gotten rid of the sandbagging....of course, this is even worse, now guilds are just getting matched up with 50-60 mil GP difference in participating GP.

    Yes this information has been pushed over to the team. At the time we pushed this over we did not have all the info, but they said it seems to follow the loss tracking (but cant tell just based on the image, and we didnt have the other numbers, which is still not everything they would need), but again things need to be dialed in. They have all the data they need on their end and when they look at it they will make adjustments.

    No one is saying this is 100% the goal, and that this is the way it will be. The system was changed in a way they can modify it more easily and they plan to.
  • Our guild has an active TW gp of 288mil. We are matched with a guild with over 340mil. They have 60 more GLs than our entire guild. They are showing their last 8 TWs have all been wins. We have won 3 of our last 8 and the latest was a loss so we are not even on a winning streak. Now sure how the matching system would allow this. Based off GP, GLs, wins whatever the other guild out matches us in all categories. Its an easy R9 mats for this guild as we could only clear 2 zones. Meanwhile we don't even have enough members or GP to get us in the bracket for R9 rewards even if we could have won.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Garou_24 wrote: »
    Our guild has an active TW gp of 288mil. We are matched with a guild with over 340mil. They have 60 more GLs than our entire guild. They are showing their last 8 TWs have all been wins. We have won 3 of our last 8 and the latest was a loss so we are not even on a winning streak. Now sure how the matching system would allow this. Based off GP, GLs, wins whatever the other guild out matches us in all categories. Its an easy R9 mats for this guild as we could only clear 2 zones. Meanwhile we don't even have enough members or GP to get us in the bracket for R9 rewards even if we could have won.

    How many defensive placements?
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Garou_24 wrote: »
    Our guild has an active TW gp of 288mil. We are matched with a guild with over 340mil. They have 60 more GLs than our entire guild. They are showing their last 8 TWs have all been wins. We have won 3 of our last 8 and the latest was a loss so we are not even on a winning streak. Now sure how the matching system would allow this. Based off GP, GLs, wins whatever the other guild out matches us in all categories. Its an easy R9 mats for this guild as we could only clear 2 zones. Meanwhile we don't even have enough members or GP to get us in the bracket for R9 rewards even if we could have won.

    How many defensive placements?

    30 defensive placements
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Garou_24 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Garou_24 wrote: »
    Our guild has an active TW gp of 288mil. We are matched with a guild with over 340mil. They have 60 more GLs than our entire guild. They are showing their last 8 TWs have all been wins. We have won 3 of our last 8 and the latest was a loss so we are not even on a winning streak. Now sure how the matching system would allow this. Based off GP, GLs, wins whatever the other guild out matches us in all categories. Its an easy R9 mats for this guild as we could only clear 2 zones. Meanwhile we don't even have enough members or GP to get us in the bracket for R9 rewards even if we could have won.

    How many defensive placements?

    30 defensive placements

    Not that this makes the situation good, so please understand that I am not defending anything. 30 placements didnt have everyone join.

    They are not at 340 GP and getting matched with you, the active GP is lower, and unless it is above 300M GP they are not going to get r9, which with those records and the numbers we see, it is possible they are not. This also means that while the full guilds is over you by 60 GLs, that is not likely not the case within the match.

    This is just information and not an excuse or defense.
  • Kratos0493
    1 posts Member
    edited October 2021
    Not usually one to complain generally (in life this is my first post) but this match making has been horrible my guild has been matched with a guild that has 14 GL's and we don't have one.

    They put 2 on each front wall and we can't get past them its a certain loss especially with the assinine nerfs that annihilated my guilds counters to them hardly a fair system

    cbk435gfewlp.jpg

    Guild we are up against ordern imperial españa can't seem to find them on swgoh.gg
    Post edited by Kratos0493 on
This discussion has been closed.