I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides
Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.
Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)
Terrible idea.
No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.
The current MM is performance based - not skill based. Don't get too hung up on the term "skill rating". It rates your actual performance - not skill. You ARE matched with opponents who are close - close in past performance.
not true
i start in k5 and keep winning
someone starts in k1 and keeps losing
our past performance could not be more different but we will potentially match eventually
Yes, the initial seeding was by roster GP. From there on rating changes are based on performance - not skill. As time goes by the initial seeding becomes less and less significant and the performance part becomes more and more significant for your rating. Fingolfin's assumption that MM is skill based is wrong.
I think what needs to happen is there needs to be a GP limit per bracket. There are people purposely losing just to battle opponents with millions of GP less than them.
They should just limit the toons you can use in both offense and defense. Pick 100 or 120 toons, and no one else can be used. The problem is that roster bloat becomes the difference maker when someone can whittle down your defense because they have more teams when they have 1.5M - 2M more GP. Level the playing field by limiting how much of our rosters can actually be used. Then GP doesn’t matter, and it really would be about how you skillfully play the slots you’re given.
I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides
Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.
Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)
Terrible idea.
No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.
The current MM is performance based - not skill based. Don't get too hung up on the term "skill rating". It rates your actual performance - not skill. You ARE matched with opponents who are close - close in past performance.
Splitting hairs here. The performance you reference is rooted in skill, just not merely skill. For you perform can be directly tied to how skilled you are as a player, so your statement carries little to no significance
I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides
Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.
Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)
Terrible idea.
No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.
The current MM is performance based - not skill based. Don't get too hung up on the term "skill rating". It rates your actual performance - not skill. You ARE matched with opponents who are close - close in past performance.
Splitting hairs here. The performance you reference is rooted in skill, just not merely skill. For you perform can be directly tied to how skilled you are as a player, so your statement carries little to no significance
Not really. You can have less skill, but win because an opponent doesn't show up, gets a game crash, or another reason that costs them them the match. You will have performed better (as measured by win/loss) without being more skilled.
I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides
Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.
Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)
Terrible idea.
No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.
The current MM is performance based - not skill based. Don't get too hung up on the term "skill rating". It rates your actual performance - not skill. You ARE matched with opponents who are close - close in past performance.
Splitting hairs here. The performance you reference is rooted in skill, just not merely skill. For you perform can be directly tied to how skilled you are as a player, so your statement carries little to no significance
You're completely wrong, mate. The most skilled player in the game could be putting only little effort into their GACs or only participating in half of the GAs, so:
No, your performance is in no way directly tied to your skill.
Again:
The rating is based on your performance (round wins/losses) - not skill, like you claim.
I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides
Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.
Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)
Terrible idea.
No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.
The current MM is performance based - not skill based. Don't get too hung up on the term "skill rating". It rates your actual performance - not skill. You ARE matched with opponents who are close - close in past performance.
Splitting hairs here. The performance you reference is rooted in skill, just not merely skill. For you perform can be directly tied to how skilled you are as a player, so your statement carries little to no significance
You're completely wrong, mate. The most skilled player in the game could be putting only little effort into their GACs or only participating in half of the GAs, so:
No, your performance is in no way directly tied to your skill.
Again:
The rating is based on your performance (round wins/losses) - not skill, like you claim.
I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides
Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.
Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)
Terrible idea.
No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.
The current MM is performance based - not skill based. Don't get too hung up on the term "skill rating". It rates your actual performance - not skill. You ARE matched with opponents who are close - close in past performance.
Splitting hairs here. The performance you reference is rooted in skill, just not merely skill. For you perform can be directly tied to how skilled you are as a player, so your statement carries little to no significance
You're completely wrong, mate. The most skilled player in the game could be putting only little effort into their GACs or only participating in half of the GAs, so:
No, your performance is in no way directly tied to your skill.
Again:
The rating is based on your performance (round wins/losses) - not skill, like you claim.
What, you didn't like my version 😜
Actually, I did — even before I gave my own version :-)
I have to say it. The argument that this matchmaking "works" just is plain wrong.
I've been dropping in skill rating because of massive mismatch after massive mismatch.
Have my opponents had worse rosters? Nope.
I went from upper K3 all the way to upper K4.
Upper K3, my average opponent was 6.8M.
Upper K4, my average opponent is now... 7.8M.
Because I had an unfortunate matchup against several new whales with a 100% reliced roster (zero characters geared that weren't reliced), I dropped like 150 SR. My next round, instead of being weaker opponents, was like 400k higher average GP per fight.
This, of course, caused me to drop further.
And then the next round was again, around 400-500k GP higher average per fight.
This. Doesn't. Work.
I understand how it's SUPPOSED to work.
But it doesn't work.
I lost this last match not because I'm a worse player, but simply because my opponent was able to put more teams on defense than I have invested teams, period, and still field enough to full clear my defenses, because he had, oh, y'know, 1.8M more GP than me.
I cleared his ships. He didn't even have Executor unlocked. I've done everything right. I arguably even had the better roster FOR my GP. But it just... doesn't matter when the opponent you're facing is THAT much higher in GP than you are.
I'm better with my defenses than almost all of my opponents.
I've chosen way better meta teams than almost all of my opponents.
I have better mods than like 75% of my opponents.
All despite the fact that I've faced maybe 4 total opponents with similar or less GP than me since the matchmaking change.
But none of that matters, because they can just go "set 3 GLs here, set full R7 meta teams here, and... I win"
No matter how well I USE my roster, I just automatically lose, so long as they decide to actually play.
No competitive system in any other game I've ever played has felt as utterly pointless as GAC has felt over the past month.
"just work on improving your roster!" - Yeah, I'm not spending thousands to improve my roster in a week.
It takes time to get more GLs. It takes time to get more full relic teams.
This just... doesn't work. Dropping in skill rating shouldn't be putting me against HARDER opponents.
I think it’s working fine personally. I started in kyber 2 and I’m still there. I made the cusp of kyber 1 then fell away. It’s getting harder now because the poorer players are dropping to my level but outgun me 5/6 gl’s to 3. And the lower gp players with better rosters are moving up to my level. But I’m still staying afloat. So in my experience it’s working as planned.
There’s clearly issues at lower gp levels, but I don’t know what the solution is. Certainly not going back to gp brackets or matching by gl’s that people have took the time and effort to farm.
I think it’s working fine personally. I started in kyber 2 and I’m still there. I made the cusp of kyber 1 then fell away. It’s getting harder now because the poorer players are dropping to my level but outgun me 5/6 gl’s to 3. And the lower gp players with better rosters are moving up to my level. But I’m still staying afloat. So in my experience it’s working as planned.
There’s clearly issues at lower gp levels, but I don’t know what the solution is. Certainly not going back to gp brackets or matching by gl’s that people have took the time and effort to farm.
Works fine in Kyber 1/2, sux for the rest of you. This is why it won’t change. K1/2 is where all the $$ is. CG will happily make a crap experience for 95% of its player base to keep the top 5% a’whalin. I just won 10-0 in carbonite 3 against an account with 5M GP to my 1.3M. Wheee. Look how skilled I am. Sigh. Hope my next match is reasonable.
I think it’s working fine personally. I started in kyber 2 and I’m still there. I made the cusp of kyber 1 then fell away. It’s getting harder now because the poorer players are dropping to my level but outgun me 5/6 gl’s to 3. And the lower gp players with better rosters are moving up to my level. But I’m still staying afloat. So in my experience it’s working as planned.
There’s clearly issues at lower gp levels, but I don’t know what the solution is. Certainly not going back to gp brackets or matching by gl’s that people have took the time and effort to farm.
Works fine in Kyber 1/2, sux for the rest of you. This is why it won’t change. K1/2 is where all the $$ is. CG will happily make a crap experience for 95% of its player base to keep the top 5% a’whalin. I just won 10-0 in carbonite 3 against an account with 5M GP to my 1.3M. Wheee. Look how skilled I am. Sigh. Hope my next match is reasonable.
That's the part I'm confused on. According to matchmaking isn't your last opponent at the same Skill Rating as you - thus why youre battling each other? After the initial seeding using GP isn't skill rating 100% what determined that match so...isnt he equally "skilled" as you? If that's true how do you stand a chance vs that roster if you're evenly skilled?
I think it’s working fine personally. I started in kyber 2 and I’m still there. I made the cusp of kyber 1 then fell away. It’s getting harder now because the poorer players are dropping to my level but outgun me 5/6 gl’s to 3. And the lower gp players with better rosters are moving up to my level. But I’m still staying afloat. So in my experience it’s working as planned.
There’s clearly issues at lower gp levels, but I don’t know what the solution is. Certainly not going back to gp brackets or matching by gl’s that people have took the time and effort to farm.
Works fine in Kyber 1/2, sux for the rest of you. This is why it won’t change. K1/2 is where all the $$ is. CG will happily make a crap experience for 95% of its player base to keep the top 5% a’whalin. I just won 10-0 in carbonite 3 against an account with 5M GP to my 1.3M. Wheee. Look how skilled I am. Sigh. Hope my next match is reasonable.
That's the part I'm confused on. According to matchmaking isn't your last opponent at the same Skill Rating as you - thus why youre battling each other? After the initial seeding using GP isn't skill rating 100% what determined that match so...isnt he equally "skilled" as you? If that's true how do you stand a chance vs that roster if you're evenly skilled?
people need to stop using the word skill regardles of it being called that
I think it’s working fine personally. I started in kyber 2 and I’m still there. I made the cusp of kyber 1 then fell away. It’s getting harder now because the poorer players are dropping to my level but outgun me 5/6 gl’s to 3. And the lower gp players with better rosters are moving up to my level. But I’m still staying afloat. So in my experience it’s working as planned.
There’s clearly issues at lower gp levels, but I don’t know what the solution is. Certainly not going back to gp brackets or matching by gl’s that people have took the time and effort to farm.
Works fine in Kyber 1/2, sux for the rest of you. This is why it won’t change. K1/2 is where all the $$ is. CG will happily make a crap experience for 95% of its player base to keep the top 5% a’whalin. I just won 10-0 in carbonite 3 against an account with 5M GP to my 1.3M. Wheee. Look how skilled I am. Sigh. Hope my next match is reasonable.
That's the part I'm confused on. According to matchmaking isn't your last opponent at the same Skill Rating as you - thus why youre battling each other? After the initial seeding using GP isn't skill rating 100% what determined that match so...isnt he equally "skilled" as you? If that's true how do you stand a chance vs that roster if you're evenly skilled?
people need to stop using the word skill regardles of it being called that
Explain it then please. Thus the use of the word "confused"
I think it’s working fine personally. I started in kyber 2 and I’m still there. I made the cusp of kyber 1 then fell away. It’s getting harder now because the poorer players are dropping to my level but outgun me 5/6 gl’s to 3. And the lower gp players with better rosters are moving up to my level. But I’m still staying afloat. So in my experience it’s working as planned.
There’s clearly issues at lower gp levels, but I don’t know what the solution is. Certainly not going back to gp brackets or matching by gl’s that people have took the time and effort to farm.
Works fine in Kyber 1/2, sux for the rest of you. This is why it won’t change. K1/2 is where all the $$ is. CG will happily make a crap experience for 95% of its player base to keep the top 5% a’whalin. I just won 10-0 in carbonite 3 against an account with 5M GP to my 1.3M. Wheee. Look how skilled I am. Sigh. Hope my next match is reasonable.
That's the part I'm confused on. According to matchmaking isn't your last opponent at the same Skill Rating as you - thus why youre battling each other? After the initial seeding using GP isn't skill rating 100% what determined that match so...isnt he equally "skilled" as you? If that's true how do you stand a chance vs that roster if you're evenly skilled?
people need to stop using the word skill regardles of it being called that
Explain it then please. Thus the use of the word "confused"
Skill Rating is just an expression of your win:loss ratio.
Win loss record itself is NOT skill. It takes more skill to be outclassed by 3M GP and lose by 10 than it does to outclass someone by 3M and win by 10. But, from what people say, all that matters is the win.
FFS, I was outclassed at the end of the last round by 1M-3M in every fight. The last being 3M. 3 GLs to 1 (effectively) and I only saw one in his defense. But every other team on defense was 120K+. I did OK, i got into ships as I recall, but I had no chance. That's not really a complaint - I know I got promoted way to far. Going 7-5 in the prior season in no way should have vaulted me up 2 divisions, but that's another issue.
The fact of the matter is it took more sill on my part to at least make it look competitive that it did for someone who vastly overpowers me to stomp me. But, if you're not factoring the score, any effort made in a loss doesn't count - which would be the antithesis of 'skill'. Skill, is being the better player, it is not having the better roster. If they want to rename it Victory Rating, great. But if only win/loss is considered, it has nothing really to do with actual skill.
SR is a function of one's past win/loss record. All it means is that when two players with the same SR are matched up, either of them would have 50% math expectation to win (which is, by the way, the definition of "fair game" in game theory). That is obviously not true in all cases, but a prediction based on the players' histories. Since the underlying model is Bayesian, the more battle results an SR has incorporated into, the better the prediction is.
This system is unbelievably flawed. I'm sitting at 3.6m GP and my past two opponents this season have had 6.3m GP and 5.8m GP respectively. Yes, I know "yOu'rE aT tHe SaME SKilL lEveL". It doesn't matter if my strategy is better when they put down a GL on each side in the front line along with other top tier teams. GA was basically the only thing in the game outside of TW that was still enjoyable but now I go into it, lose one battle, and instantly know I can't win. It's boring and lame on all levels. It's just going to be a constant cycle of losing 3 in a row, being relegated to a lower rating, winning, and then rinsing and repeating. There should still be brackets based on GP while ALSO including skill ratings. I should be facing people around 3.3m GP to 4.2m GP that share a similar skill rating as myself, making for the most fair matchups possible. It isn't something that should be hard to integrate, they've used both systems, just combine and refine.
The high-loss high-GP players just fall out of K1/K2 faster, so the experience up there is evening out quicker. Those players will continue to fall, making lower Divisions feel the effect longer. Ultimately, the system will work itself out, but I can see how it will take longer at the lower levels.
Before i start, just wanna let u guys know I agree on what is stated in OP's opening.
1. Please understand that there is no such thing as an even match up
I'm K1 I have a 4GL person vs us having 6 GL. I won by the amount of toons that I have over that fellow. But if you are saying that my opponent is a push over ... U will be complaining if u meet him in his GP bracket. Because his mods are way better then mine (He is the last person on the right and I have great respect for him)
2. Work for your GL. Especially for those lower tiers. Like it or not, some people will have slimmer and better roster even at similar GP.
3. Be ok with a lose. 2Mil GP and up is a very bad match up. Move on, there are 2 other battles to win. And like what was posted previously, if you are fighting against high GP pp consistently, means you are very good at ur game to fight at their bracket.
4. There will always be people whom play with the system. Don't be bothered with them. Work on urself and get better.
Let me save you some time. Here is how it actually works. For example in Kyber 2 most people only attack or try to win against opponents that are way below their roster. Because that is their only chance to win. So if they are facing similar roster, they don't really put much effort in. Let's say they have 8 mil GP and 6 GLs - basically a complete roster. They only attack an opponent with 3 GLs, because the chance to win there is higher. Just like in squad arena before where you could've picked easier and faster battles to climb. This is what's happening in GAC now.
Let me save you some time. Here is how it actually works. For example in Kyber 2 most people only attack or try to win against opponents that are way below their roster. Because that is their only chance to win. So if they are facing similar roster, they don't really put much effort in. Let's say they have 8 mil GP and 6 GLs - basically a complete roster. They only attack an opponent with 3 GLs, because the chance to win there is higher. Just like in squad arena before where you could've picked easier and faster battles to climb. This is what's happening in GAC now.
Must be nice to be privy to all that data the rest of us don't have.
Let me save you some time. Here is how it actually works. For example in Kyber 2 most people only attack or try to win against opponents that are way below their roster. Because that is their only chance to win. So if they are facing similar roster, they don't really put much effort in. Let's say they have 8 mil GP and 6 GLs - basically a complete roster. They only attack an opponent with 3 GLs, because the chance to win there is higher. Just like in squad arena before where you could've picked easier and faster battles to climb. This is what's happening in GAC now.
Must be nice to be privy to all that data the rest of us don't have.
Let me save you some time. Here is how it actually works. For example in Kyber 2 most people only attack or try to win against opponents that are way below their roster. Because that is their only chance to win. So if they are facing similar roster, they don't really put much effort in. Let's say they have 8 mil GP and 6 GLs - basically a complete roster. They only attack an opponent with 3 GLs, because the chance to win there is higher. Just like in squad arena before where you could've picked easier and faster battles to climb. This is what's happening in GAC now.
Must be nice to be privy to all that data the rest of us don't have.
This is what I got when I spoke to my opponents.
What percentage of the players do you suppose you've spoken to?
Let me save you some time. Here is how it actually works. For example in Kyber 2 most people only attack or try to win against opponents that are way below their roster. Because that is their only chance to win. So if they are facing similar roster, they don't really put much effort in. Let's say they have 8 mil GP and 6 GLs - basically a complete roster. They only attack an opponent with 3 GLs, because the chance to win there is higher. Just like in squad arena before where you could've picked easier and faster battles to climb. This is what's happening in GAC now.
I am at the top of K2 since beginning of gac 2.0, basically. None (maybe one and i don’t remember) of my opponents ever fold the match against me; i’ve faced lower gp, similar gp and higher gp. And i lost against lower gp, similar gp and higer gp. Trying your best each round whatever roster you face is the meta imo.
Let me save you some time. Here is how it actually works. For example in Kyber 2 most people only attack or try to win against opponents that are way below their roster. Because that is their only chance to win. So if they are facing similar roster, they don't really put much effort in. Let's say they have 8 mil GP and 6 GLs - basically a complete roster. They only attack an opponent with 3 GLs, because the chance to win there is higher. Just like in squad arena before where you could've picked easier and faster battles to climb. This is what's happening in GAC now.
So, you're saying that in case of even or nearly even matches where there's a higher chance that their efforts will change/affect the outcome of the round noone really makes an effort to win? And you believe that's plausible?!
Let me save you some time. Here is how it actually works. For example in Kyber 2 most people only attack or try to win against opponents that are way below their roster. Because that is their only chance to win. So if they are facing similar roster, they don't really put much effort in. Let's say they have 8 mil GP and 6 GLs - basically a complete roster. They only attack an opponent with 3 GLs, because the chance to win there is higher. Just like in squad arena before where you could've picked easier and faster battles to climb. This is what's happening in GAC now.
"Most people in K2" would likely be matched up with other "most people in K2". I guess whoever decides to not play by that rule would win?
Replies
Yes, the initial seeding was by roster GP. From there on rating changes are based on performance - not skill. As time goes by the initial seeding becomes less and less significant and the performance part becomes more and more significant for your rating. Fingolfin's assumption that MM is skill based is wrong.
ew no
[sarcasm on] what a brilliant tactic...
Splitting hairs here. The performance you reference is rooted in skill, just not merely skill. For you perform can be directly tied to how skilled you are as a player, so your statement carries little to no significance
Not really. You can have less skill, but win because an opponent doesn't show up, gets a game crash, or another reason that costs them them the match. You will have performed better (as measured by win/loss) without being more skilled.
You're completely wrong, mate. The most skilled player in the game could be putting only little effort into their GACs or only participating in half of the GAs, so:
No, your performance is in no way directly tied to your skill.
Again:
The rating is based on your performance (round wins/losses) - not skill, like you claim.
What, you didn't like my version 😜
Actually, I did — even before I gave my own version :-)
I've been dropping in skill rating because of massive mismatch after massive mismatch.
Have my opponents had worse rosters? Nope.
I went from upper K3 all the way to upper K4.
Upper K3, my average opponent was 6.8M.
Upper K4, my average opponent is now... 7.8M.
Because I had an unfortunate matchup against several new whales with a 100% reliced roster (zero characters geared that weren't reliced), I dropped like 150 SR. My next round, instead of being weaker opponents, was like 400k higher average GP per fight.
This, of course, caused me to drop further.
And then the next round was again, around 400-500k GP higher average per fight.
This. Doesn't. Work.
I understand how it's SUPPOSED to work.
But it doesn't work.
I lost this last match not because I'm a worse player, but simply because my opponent was able to put more teams on defense than I have invested teams, period, and still field enough to full clear my defenses, because he had, oh, y'know, 1.8M more GP than me.
I cleared his ships. He didn't even have Executor unlocked. I've done everything right. I arguably even had the better roster FOR my GP. But it just... doesn't matter when the opponent you're facing is THAT much higher in GP than you are.
I'm better with my defenses than almost all of my opponents.
I've chosen way better meta teams than almost all of my opponents.
I have better mods than like 75% of my opponents.
All despite the fact that I've faced maybe 4 total opponents with similar or less GP than me since the matchmaking change.
But none of that matters, because they can just go "set 3 GLs here, set full R7 meta teams here, and... I win"
No matter how well I USE my roster, I just automatically lose, so long as they decide to actually play.
No competitive system in any other game I've ever played has felt as utterly pointless as GAC has felt over the past month.
"just work on improving your roster!" - Yeah, I'm not spending thousands to improve my roster in a week.
It takes time to get more GLs. It takes time to get more full relic teams.
This just... doesn't work. Dropping in skill rating shouldn't be putting me against HARDER opponents.
There’s clearly issues at lower gp levels, but I don’t know what the solution is. Certainly not going back to gp brackets or matching by gl’s that people have took the time and effort to farm.
Works fine in Kyber 1/2, sux for the rest of you. This is why it won’t change. K1/2 is where all the $$ is. CG will happily make a crap experience for 95% of its player base to keep the top 5% a’whalin. I just won 10-0 in carbonite 3 against an account with 5M GP to my 1.3M. Wheee. Look how skilled I am. Sigh. Hope my next match is reasonable.
That's the part I'm confused on. According to matchmaking isn't your last opponent at the same Skill Rating as you - thus why youre battling each other? After the initial seeding using GP isn't skill rating 100% what determined that match so...isnt he equally "skilled" as you? If that's true how do you stand a chance vs that roster if you're evenly skilled?
people need to stop using the word skill regardles of it being called that
Explain it then please. Thus the use of the word "confused"
FFS, I was outclassed at the end of the last round by 1M-3M in every fight. The last being 3M. 3 GLs to 1 (effectively) and I only saw one in his defense. But every other team on defense was 120K+. I did OK, i got into ships as I recall, but I had no chance. That's not really a complaint - I know I got promoted way to far. Going 7-5 in the prior season in no way should have vaulted me up 2 divisions, but that's another issue.
The fact of the matter is it took more sill on my part to at least make it look competitive that it did for someone who vastly overpowers me to stomp me. But, if you're not factoring the score, any effort made in a loss doesn't count - which would be the antithesis of 'skill'. Skill, is being the better player, it is not having the better roster. If they want to rename it Victory Rating, great. But if only win/loss is considered, it has nothing really to do with actual skill.
1. Please understand that there is no such thing as an even match up
I'm K1 I have a 4GL person vs us having 6 GL. I won by the amount of toons that I have over that fellow. But if you are saying that my opponent is a push over ... U will be complaining if u meet him in his GP bracket. Because his mods are way better then mine (He is the last person on the right and I have great respect for him)
2. Work for your GL. Especially for those lower tiers. Like it or not, some people will have slimmer and better roster even at similar GP.
3. Be ok with a lose. 2Mil GP and up is a very bad match up. Move on, there are 2 other battles to win. And like what was posted previously, if you are fighting against high GP pp consistently, means you are very good at ur game to fight at their bracket.
4. There will always be people whom play with the system. Don't be bothered with them. Work on urself and get better.
Must be nice to be privy to all that data the rest of us don't have.
This is what I got when I spoke to my opponents.
What percentage of the players do you suppose you've spoken to?
I am at the top of K2 since beginning of gac 2.0, basically. None (maybe one and i don’t remember) of my opponents ever fold the match against me; i’ve faced lower gp, similar gp and higher gp. And i lost against lower gp, similar gp and higer gp. Trying your best each round whatever roster you face is the meta imo.
So, you're saying that in case of even or nearly even matches where there's a higher chance that their efforts will change/affect the outcome of the round noone really makes an effort to win? And you believe that's plausible?!
"Most people in K2" would likely be matched up with other "most people in K2". I guess whoever decides to not play by that rule would win?