well of course it would not be perfect... but there seem to be no perfect... and its better then what we have now
The only problem I see with what we have now is high roster players falling down the ranks due to inactivity then suddenly becoming active and annihilating folks in the lower brackets....
As I said earlier, the easiest way to fix that problem is to boot them into their own division and make them fight each other to get out and earn better rewards... The only struggle I see with this is how to determine whether or not someone had been "inactive" since pretty much everybody does the bare minimum to get the 10 banners required for free handouts...
the best solution would be to introduce something like a GP based "Class" system.
Like for boxing... there is light , middle and heavy size
lets say 4M GP and below is light
8M and below middle
more then 8M is heavy
then you could reach Kyber 1 in light... while never have to fight 9M GP people
that takes away some of the money based matchmaking aspects.
That would be the mist fair for everyone.
Currently the matchmaking is like... if 3M GP has to face 7M... thats like letting a good "light" boxer fighting a mediocre "heavy boxer"... the heavy boxer may win or loose... but he had the bettet chances no question...
and you have NO chance to get to kyber with 3M GP in the old money based matchmaking... because no matter how good the light boxer is... he cant make a tiny dent against a good heavy boxer
Is it “fair” to be a 4M no-GL account and to face another 4M account with JMK and SLKR? Because that’s what happened fairly often in the old GP matchmaking system, and what would happen here until all the 4M multi-GL accounts congregated in Kyber until they break into the next bracket and get squashed by 7M accounts.
I don’t know if there is a way to solve these. Win/Loss seems to be the best way in a series of bad ways.
I agree with BubbaFett. The only real problem is rarely active big accounts dropping a long way. Small accounts that climb into Aurodium or Kyber should expect to see bigger accounts - they are good players, and their opponents need better toons to compensate for their lack of skill. If the small players don't want to face bigger players, stop winning.
But as for the big accounts dropping into lower leagues, it would be better if they could be shunted into a low-activity purgatory, where they only face each other. As it stands, those matches have no chance of being fun, they are decided entirely based on whether the big guy shows up, with game play being irrelevant.
It seems to me from reading through the multiple of threads discussing this topic that a lot of people's definition of "fair" and mine are different....
Unless you are facing someone with a much bigger roster because they coasted downwards into your division / skill rating it is perfectly "fair" to be matched up against a higher roster....
It's a competition and people who worked hard for their rosters and learned kits and abilities and take time to focus on their strategy deserve to win... And, before it comes up, yes people who pay to win deserve to win...
I agree with BubbaFett. The only real problem is rarely active big accounts dropping a long way. Small accounts that climb into Aurodium or Kyber should expect to see bigger accounts - they are good players, and their opponents need better toons to compensate for their lack of skill. If the small players don't want to face bigger players, stop winning.
But as for the big accounts dropping into lower leagues, it would be better if they could be shunted into a low-activity purgatory, where they only face each other. As it stands, those matches have no chance of being fun, they are decided entirely based on whether the big guy shows up, with game play being irrelevant.
I mostly agree with this, but even solving the second problem is difficult. How do you define low-activity? If it’s 0 attacks, sure it could help. If it’s 1-2 or some low number of attacks, you might run into issues where the lower-league account matched with the big one is limited to 1-2 attacks by nature of being unable to break a team, so they either have to fruitlessly throw everything they have at a team they can’t beat or be penalized for “inactivity”.
And even then, eventually the big guy will actually show up and start climbing again. I don’t think there’s any permanent solution to that. Maybe some kind of Win Streak bonus where the more you win the faster you climb the ladder, but you would have to deal with people intentionally breaking it.
I have similar issues I am currently in a 0-6 win loss rate. I don't have the teams for what they are asking of me. I constantly face full relic defenses and they still have enough for a full relic offense. Where I can have either a full offense relic squad or full defense relic squad but not both. I try and mix it up a bit but it's kind of pointless that this point I am almost ready to give up on GA as a whole.
While I say 0 to 6 it may be more. I got lucky in 1 round in previous attempts and the guy didn't attack. But that was like 3 arena ago.
This is another reason I welcome 3v3. I can actually have decent teams for both defense and offense.
I have similar issues I am currently in a 0-6 win loss rate. I don't have the teams for what they are asking of me. I constantly face full relic defenses and they still have enough for a full relic offense. Where I can have either a full offense relic squad or full defense relic squad but not both. I try and mix it up a bit but it's kind of pointless that this point I am almost ready to give up on GA as a whole.
While I say 0 to 6 it may be more. I got lucky in 1 round in previous attempts and the guy didn't attack. But that was like 3 arena ago.
This is another reason I welcome 3v3. I can actually have decent teams for both defense and offense.
With all due respect, I would say 3v3 is a huge part of the problem..... I am in kyber and I stay active and do my best during 3v3, but I absolutely rely on that to stay where I am and get great rewards....
3v3 really ruins the match making, when it was 3 months of 5v5 and than 1 month 3v3 it kept things fun and pervented burn out, at the moment they are so many people who do not engage in 3v3 and fall down, only to smack lower players on the way back to kyber. 3v3 should have its frequency reduced by a month imo, 2 5v5 1 3v3 would balance it out.
But that wont happen and the same post will keep on coming in about match making lol.
I personally dont mind the current match making system, infact I rather have an extra week of GAC, anyone that says thats too much clearly didn't spend time every day to climb to first place to earn their crystal payout
I agree with BubbaFett. The only real problem is rarely active big accounts dropping a long way. Small accounts that climb into Aurodium or Kyber should expect to see bigger accounts - they are good players, and their opponents need better toons to compensate for their lack of skill. If the small players don't want to face bigger players, stop winning.
But as for the big accounts dropping into lower leagues, it would be better if they could be shunted into a low-activity purgatory, where they only face each other. As it stands, those matches have no chance of being fun, they are decided entirely based on whether the big guy shows up, with game play being irrelevant.
I mostly agree with this, but even solving the second problem is difficult. How do you define low-activity? If it’s 0 attacks, sure it could help. If it’s 1-2 or some low number of attacks, you might run into issues where the lower-league account matched with the big one is limited to 1-2 attacks by nature of being unable to break a team, so they either have to fruitlessly throw everything they have at a team they can’t beat or be penalized for “inactivity”.
And even then, eventually the big guy will actually show up and start climbing again. I don’t think there’s any permanent solution to that. Maybe some kind of Win Streak bonus where the more you win the faster you climb the ladder, but you would have to deal with people intentionally breaking it.
Low activity doesn't need to be defined. Just make a lowest league a given gp can fall to. If it's by inactivity or just being bad, what does that matter? The big account of a terrible player can still be impossible to beat if it falls far enough.
I've said this before but here we go anyway:
Make a basement division in each league that has a lowest limit of 400 skill points lower than div4 entry (div4 because div5 entry is from previous div1, not a given skill rating). Players over the gp threshold don't lose any more skill rating than this -400 level. They just sit in this basement league, only seeing each other, unless they start winning all the time. After a GAC month of trying hard they could climb to the div5 area, and continue climbing if they want/can.
Basement players don't get in the way of active players. Restarting playing does not involve stomping your way through a bunch of people who did nothing to deserve it. A player Restarting can get back to being competitive in a month or 2.
Div5+ of every league will only have active players.
Rewards for basement division would be the same as div1 of the next league down. So all inactive players are getting at least what they would have before this change, but most likely more.
This gives is a reward for just growing your roster in any way. Crossing a threshold gives a new guaranteed reward level. CG likes people growing their rosters.
The newest players in the lowest leagues get a better experience, encouraging staying in the game. CG likes people staying in the game.
There would be a higher total of rewards given out though. CG don't like that so much, but maybe the positives of this would make it worth it?
The newest players in the lowest leagues get a better experience, encouraging staying in the game. CG likes people staying in the game.
There would be a higher total of rewards given out though. CG don't like that so much, but maybe the positives of this would make it worth it?
The general idea of basement divisions is nice, but this always ends up being the crux of the problem. I don’t see CG potentially changing their crystal payouts significantly in a way that is more beneficial for the players. Also you have to consider that if there was a way to penalise ‘inactive’ players in GAC those players may then just start playing again, and lower GP players will still be no better off.
Resource management:
Rewards vs enjoyment.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
I remember one of the first iterations of GAC when divisions were srtictly based on GP range. If your GP was close to upper line you are the boss, if to lower - everyone will bulldozer over you. So the very important trick was to lower you GP as much as you can so you don't cross that horrible line between being the biggest and the smallest: not to activate toons, not to gear them, even to remove mods from any toon you are not using - everything to keep GP as low as you can. The problem is though - Territory Battles. Where the bigger GP the better and you need some useless toons for platoons/missions. And more you helping guild the more you punished on GAC.
So I am very happy that "your division is based on your GP" is removed - it was a pain to make people gear toons needed for guild content.
But even now with system long changed I periodically see people saying that they won't gear something because it will "overblow" their accounts and harm their GAC:(
And all talks about dividing people on "casual" and "not casual"... I presume the line is: "everyone better then me are not casual, remove them somewhere from me, so I dominate the rest"
There always be someone better: with better mods, more relics, more GL's, more omicrones, more datacrons...
Its not one or two time I saw something like "why my opponent have datacrons, I don't have them, let people with datacrons fight with each other! "
People will always be dissatisfied with matchmaking
P.s. I usually face people with more GP and 3-5 GL's more then I have. This round I lost all 3 to such people. Last round I won all 3 because my opponent's either didn't come or hit for a minimum...
It may seem unfair, but you face people with higher GPs because you beat most of the people with similar GPs. You beat them, you moved up and face tougher opponents. You lose, you drop down and face similar GP opponents again.
There seems to be a mentality in people that they should only face similar sized opponents all the way from carbonite to kyber, which is statistically impossible. It’s not a git gud situation, because you are already punching up. It’s a keep growing your account situation, and if you jump into a tier where you are matching against much stronger accounts (in your opinion), then consider that it means you are better than 99% of the accounts at your GP and need tougher opponents.
This ^^^
If you are routinely not seeing players around your GP, that’s because you have already shown yourself to be better than the majority of players at your GP. You’ve run out of similar GP matches. Players with a similar SR but higher GP will now be your opponents.
As was also said, GP bracket matchmaking was flawed in so many ways that have been discussed in other threads… at length.
Yeah, the OP has been outperforming their GP, and their opponent has not been performing up to their GP.
Just try the best you can. The top ranked players will be those that have played a lot AND have lots of skill AND have spent a lot of money.
I have similar issues I am currently in a 0-6 win loss rate. I don't have the teams for what they are asking of me. I constantly face full relic defenses and they still have enough for a full relic offense. Where I can have either a full offense relic squad or full defense relic squad but not both. I try and mix it up a bit but it's kind of pointless that this point I am almost ready to give up on GA as a whole.
While I say 0 to 6 it may be more. I got lucky in 1 round in previous attempts and the guy didn't attack. But that was like 3 arena ago.
This is another reason I welcome 3v3. I can actually have decent teams for both defense and offense.
I have similar issues I am currently in a 0-6 win loss rate. I don't have the teams for what they are asking of me. I constantly face full relic defenses and they still have enough for a full relic offense. Where I can have either a full offense relic squad or full defense relic squad but not both. I try and mix it up a bit but it's kind of pointless that this point I am almost ready to give up on GA as a whole.
While I say 0 to 6 it may be more. I got lucky in 1 round in previous attempts and the guy didn't attack. But that was like 3 arena ago.
This is another reason I welcome 3v3. I can actually have decent teams for both defense and offense.
How can you be 0-6 at the end of a season?
I am referring to my most recent streak. I don't recall how many matches there were but I do recall winning one match in the prior one and I think one before that.
I agree that 3v3 may be part of the issue as I do better in 3v3 which pushes me up. Then 5v5 pushes me down. If they could find a way to seperate the two it could be better. But that seems like a real challenge given the crystal rewards. I mean unless it took the average of the 2 and gave you that but that's complicated and likely confusing for people.
It really doesn't help that I have 5 million gp and 1 gl. This is because I stopped playing the game for like 2 years maybe 3. When I left revan wasn't even in the game, but g12 was. As a result I remember building gear 8 teams for territory wars, which now add to my gp but don't help much in either tw or ga.
It really doesn't help that I have 5 million gp and 1 gl. This is because I stopped playing the game for like 2 years maybe 3. When I left revan wasn't even in the game, but g12 was. As a result I remember building gear 8 teams for territory wars, which now add to my gp but don't help much in either tw or ga.
NO...the PRESENT system helps you as IT DOESNT CARE about yout GP. If you have useless units someplace they are irrelevant.
Only your wins/losses count...and these depend on THE UNITS YOU ACTUALLY USE.
I agree with BubbaFett. The only real problem is rarely active big accounts dropping a long way. Small accounts that climb into Aurodium or Kyber should expect to see bigger accounts - they are good players, and their opponents need better toons to compensate for their lack of skill. If the small players don't want to face bigger players, stop winning.
But as for the big accounts dropping into lower leagues, it would be better if they could be shunted into a low-activity purgatory, where they only face each other. As it stands, those matches have no chance of being fun, they are decided entirely based on whether the big guy shows up, with game play being irrelevant.
I mostly agree with this, but even solving the second problem is difficult. How do you define low-activity? If it’s 0 attacks, sure it could help. If it’s 1-2 or some low number of attacks, you might run into issues where the lower-league account matched with the big one is limited to 1-2 attacks by nature of being unable to break a team, so they either have to fruitlessly throw everything they have at a team they can’t beat or be penalized for “inactivity”.
And even then, eventually the big guy will actually show up and start climbing again. I don’t think there’s any permanent solution to that. Maybe some kind of Win Streak bonus where the more you win the faster you climb the ladder, but you would have to deal with people intentionally breaking it.
Low activity doesn't need to be defined. Just make a lowest league a given gp can fall to. If it's by inactivity or just being bad, what does that matter? The big account of a terrible player can still be impossible to beat if it falls far enough.
I've said this before but here we go anyway:
Make a basement division in each league that has a lowest limit of 400 skill points lower than div4 entry (div4 because div5 entry is from previous div1, not a given skill rating). Players over the gp threshold don't lose any more skill rating than this -400 level. They just sit in this basement league, only seeing each other, unless they start winning all the time. After a GAC month of trying hard they could climb to the div5 area, and continue climbing if they want/can.
Basement players don't get in the way of active players. Restarting playing does not involve stomping your way through a bunch of people who did nothing to deserve it. A player Restarting can get back to being competitive in a month or 2.
Div5+ of every league will only have active players.
Rewards for basement division would be the same as div1 of the next league down. So all inactive players are getting at least what they would have before this change, but most likely more.
This gives is a reward for just growing your roster in any way. Crossing a threshold gives a new guaranteed reward level. CG likes people growing their rosters.
The newest players in the lowest leagues get a better experience, encouraging staying in the game. CG likes people staying in the game.
There would be a higher total of rewards given out though. CG don't like that so much, but maybe the positives of this would make it worth it?
This feels like it could help, maybe, but it runs into the same issue - where do you put the GP thresholds?
Just got a massive demote from Auridium5 to Chromium4...effect of losing a lot in my last seasons in Auridium.
I see this in a positive light...i will now have better chances of winning and come back up...and during a "long" while i actually got better rewards than my roster should provide...
I did have a few uniwinnable matches...but i can live with it
Just got a massive demote from Auridium5 to Chromium4...effect of losing a lot in my last seasons in Auridium.
I see this in a positive light...i will now have better chances of winning and come back up...and during a "long" while i actually got better rewards than my roster should provide...
I did have a few uniwinnable matches...but i can live with it
I guess I should have the same attitude as I got knocked pretty far. 115 crystals a day to 95. But my chances of winning may increase.
most of my days in GAC are just spent waiting for the next round knowing I can’t do anything.
Disclaimer...i have ONE GL and my last match was versus a guy with 6...that smashed me, of course. So I GET THE POINT.
THAT SAID...i am NOT "waiting for the next round"...i still either win about 50% and keep my level...or when i get a losing streak (3 or 6 in a row) i go down to where i can start wiining 75% again...and move back up.
I CAN UNDERSTAND the "not fun" matches...i have plenty of these...but many ROUNDs i have 1 or 2 i can win...and seesaw in levels...
JUST SAYING...you cant complain you ALWAYS lose to higher GPs...it is simply not possible...
What league are you on? I am in Auridium 5 right now, will go down next round for sure...but expect a couple close matches when i drop...
That’s what I’m saying aurodium and bronzium are 2 totally different tiers. If you’re in aurodium you should have a pretty decent roster to take on decent GP. If you’re in bronzium like myself you regularly face 5-8m GP accounts and 65% of the time at least for me they are active. No amount of strategy that I think of will earn me a win. Like I said before I’m not seeking a 100% win rate. Even with people who are my go can still win against me. But it’s just not fair to lose to someone that is physically impossible to win against. There’s just no point in playing except maybe for practice.
the best solution would be to introduce something like a GP based "Class" system.
Like for boxing... there is light , middle and heavy size
lets say 4M GP and below is light
8M and below middle
more then 8M is heavy
then you could reach Kyber 1 in light... while never have to fight 9M GP people
that takes away some of the money based matchmaking aspects.
That would be the mist fair for everyone.
Currently the matchmaking is like... if 3M GP has to face 7M... thats like letting a good "light" boxer fighting a mediocre "heavy boxer"... the heavy boxer may win or loose... but he had the bettet chances no question...
and you have NO chance to get to kyber with 3M GP in the old money based matchmaking... because no matter how good the light boxer is... he cant make a tiny dent against a good heavy boxer
Except we aren't boxing and we are all playing the exact same game... People with bigger rosters deserve to get bigger rewards, if they didn't then what would be the point of building up your roster?
Some of these people don’t care about rewards. They purposely drop down because they know they can’t win in the above tiers. These are the kind of people that have 7m account that is in a guild with 80m GP who are still doing Hoth TB battles. They don’t care about rewards they just want to win.
the best solution would be to introduce something like a GP based "Class" system.
Like for boxing... there is light , middle and heavy size
lets say 4M GP and below is light
8M and below middle
more then 8M is heavy
then you could reach Kyber 1 in light... while never have to fight 9M GP people
that takes away some of the money based matchmaking aspects.
That would be the mist fair for everyone.
Currently the matchmaking is like... if 3M GP has to face 7M... thats like letting a good "light" boxer fighting a mediocre "heavy boxer"... the heavy boxer may win or loose... but he had the bettet chances no question...
and you have NO chance to get to kyber with 3M GP in the old money based matchmaking... because no matter how good the light boxer is... he cant make a tiny dent against a good heavy boxer
Except we aren't boxing and we are all playing the exact same game... People with bigger rosters deserve to get bigger rewards, if they didn't then what would be the point of building up your roster?
Some of these people don’t care about rewards. They purposely drop down because they know they can’t win in the above tiers. These are the kind of people that have 7m account that is in a guild with 80m GP who are still doing Hoth TB battles. They don’t care about rewards they just want to win.
Think about what you are saying here "they just want to win".... Do you have any idea how much losing an account that high has to do to land in Bronzium? ... They don't just want to win, they only want to win when it is easy because, as you said, they are lazy.... They aren't "purposely dropping down", they just can't be bothered playing unless they are guaranteed a win (and sometimes not even then)....
Like I said, the only real solution is to toss these lazy accounts into another division and make them fight themselves to get out (I just don't have the solution as to how to separate them).....
And again, I don't see any threads on here of people complaining they won over an inactive account...
If you’re in bronzium like myself you regularly face 5-8m GP accounts and 65% of the time at least for me they are active.
Well...this is not what i would expect. I am below 6M and climbed to auridium...but whenever i get there i am kicked back down...seems ok.
Having 8M in Bronzium is more peculiar...particularly if they are "regular"...not sure if some unawanted effect of low activity players...
Cant you climb through...i mean, lose vs them, but win enough (vs others) to climb?
It may seem unfair, but you face people with higher GPs because you beat most of the people with similar GPs. You beat them, you moved up and face tougher opponents. You lose, you drop down and face similar GP opponents again.
There seems to be a mentality in people that they should only face similar sized opponents all the way from carbonite to kyber, which is statistically impossible. It’s not a git gud situation, because you are already punching up. It’s a keep growing your account situation, and if you jump into a tier where you are matching against much stronger accounts (in your opinion), then consider that it means you are better than 99% of the accounts at your GP and need tougher opponents.
This ^^^
If you are routinely not seeing players around your GP, that’s because you have already shown yourself to be better than the majority of players at your GP. You’ve run out of similar GP matches. Players with a similar SR but higher GP will now be your opponents.
As was also said, GP bracket matchmaking was flawed in so many ways that have been discussed in other threads… at length.
I don't know about all that. I'll say this though.
I blew ONE GA. I was really busy and missed the start. Because they don't notify you too well about subsequent starts in a GA session, i missed the rest of them as well. So, i pulled an ofer for the whole thing and it tanked me down like 3 levels. I went from punching a bit above my weight to punching down when i signed of up for the next one. The weirdest part was i went 9-0 in the last GA. I never moved up a class. Not once. Then, post event i jumped up 4.
It fluctuates A LOT. You can be on vacation and/or really busy and fall pretty quickly. Same I suppose if you get bored with it. I have gotten bored with GA for the reasons you state and the example i give. Simple fact, someone who's pretty good, or even really good with a 2.5M account, is going to get curb-stomped by someone with a 7.5M account who's competent as long as they're trying. I don't care how good a shot you are, if you have a BB gun and i have an RPG, who's winning that fight?
Get good holds water when it's maybe 10M vs 6M. You're still massively outmatched, but you should have a decent roster to work with if the other guy sucks. Thing is, people who've spent that much generally don't flat out suck. They may not be good, but as noted, it's going to be a tough task to beat a competent player who can massively overpower you. Doesn't matter how good you are.
That is something that doesn't seem to factor into the equation. Perhaps something like, people shouldn't fall in class for non-participation? or not trying? Don't give them the crystal payout if they aren't actually playing it. If you wanna disappear for 2 months and you were K1, don't drop that guy to C5 on his return where he'll nuke whoever he runs across. Limit the fall somehow in those scenarios and don't award credits. Now, i'm not saying do that, that's thinking out loud. Maybe that doesn't work, I don't know. As far as the complaint of not dropping them would keep other people from moving up, no it wouldn't. You can set your event by the number of K1's or whatever that sign up for the event. A level doesn't need a hard limit of 100 (used for simple math, i know it's more than 100). It just needs to know how many people signed up.
This is my first matchup this week. I honestly just can’t play GAC anymore. I know no matter what I do I can’t beat this guy. GAC is now my least favorite game mode and honestly I think GAC is the only thing holding this game together. This is just outrageous. And for those of you who will say “just means you have hit your ceiling”. I’m in carbonite (don’t know why I said bronzium in OP). You literally can’t go any lower than carbonite. I cannot progress into the other tiers of GAC until my account has grown to over 7m+. If you are in carbonite the lowest ranking GAC tier you are literally trapped for years. This is the **** idea CG has come up with thus far. I bet more than half the people commenting that this idea is good are the ones who are matched up with similar GP and they are not in carbonite. You cannot understand a lower GP player because you are not one.
This is my first matchup this week. I honestly just can’t play GAC anymore. I know no matter what I do I can’t beat this guy. GAC is now my least favorite game mode and honestly I think GAC is the only thing holding this game together. This is just outrageous. And for those of you who will say “just means you have hit your ceiling”. I’m in carbonite (don’t know why I said bronzium in OP). You literally can’t go any lower than carbonite. I cannot progress into the other tiers of GAC until my account has grown to over 7m+. If you are in carbonite the lowest ranking GAC tier you are literally trapped for years. This is the **** idea CG has come up with thus far. I bet more than half the people commenting that this idea is good are the ones who are matched up with similar GP and they are not in carbonite. You cannot understand a lower GP player because you are not one.
Right, but what is your ally code? No one can comment fairly on this without knowing your average GAC win/loss ratio. If you're hitting a 50/50 ratio then you may well be hitting your ceiling, and it doesn't matter really if your 50% of losses come from players who are 1M or 5M larger than you.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
This is my first matchup this week. I honestly just can’t play GAC anymore. I know no matter what I do I can’t beat this guy. You cannot understand a lower GP player because you are not one.
That is odd...i am "skeptical" that this is your normal adversary in Carbonite...
I dropped from Auridium to Chromium...and my bracket became acceptable.
I have 1 GL, 5 opponents also have 1 GL, all with similar GP.
ONE opponent has 3 GLs...he will either 1)not play, 2) be bad player, 3) win easily and move up...either way i have the possibility to get 2 wins.
(BTW...one opponent i cant see data in swogh.gg)
Either you are using a BAD matchup as an argument...but you get much easier opps most times...or there is indeed some issue that makes players with 3 GLs go play in Carbonite...
Can you link or describe your bracket (you can see the entire bracket in swgoh.gg)
It's absolutely possible to implement a system that takes into account win/loss record AND roster composition, giving you matchups within a range of theoretically beatable opponents of similar skill. GAC would be WAY more interesting and engaging with this approach, over the false dichotomy of "one or the other".
BUT, CG will never implement it, because they're far too lazy to put forth the effort on something that would be positive for the player base and not really yield any direct, fiscal reward. (We could talk about indirects, but I don't think CG is sophisticated enough to entertain of that line of inquiry.)
Replies
The only problem I see with what we have now is high roster players falling down the ranks due to inactivity then suddenly becoming active and annihilating folks in the lower brackets....
As I said earlier, the easiest way to fix that problem is to boot them into their own division and make them fight each other to get out and earn better rewards... The only struggle I see with this is how to determine whether or not someone had been "inactive" since pretty much everybody does the bare minimum to get the 10 banners required for free handouts...
Is it “fair” to be a 4M no-GL account and to face another 4M account with JMK and SLKR? Because that’s what happened fairly often in the old GP matchmaking system, and what would happen here until all the 4M multi-GL accounts congregated in Kyber until they break into the next bracket and get squashed by 7M accounts.
I don’t know if there is a way to solve these. Win/Loss seems to be the best way in a series of bad ways.
But as for the big accounts dropping into lower leagues, it would be better if they could be shunted into a low-activity purgatory, where they only face each other. As it stands, those matches have no chance of being fun, they are decided entirely based on whether the big guy shows up, with game play being irrelevant.
Unless you are facing someone with a much bigger roster because they coasted downwards into your division / skill rating it is perfectly "fair" to be matched up against a higher roster....
It's a competition and people who worked hard for their rosters and learned kits and abilities and take time to focus on their strategy deserve to win... And, before it comes up, yes people who pay to win deserve to win...
I mostly agree with this, but even solving the second problem is difficult. How do you define low-activity? If it’s 0 attacks, sure it could help. If it’s 1-2 or some low number of attacks, you might run into issues where the lower-league account matched with the big one is limited to 1-2 attacks by nature of being unable to break a team, so they either have to fruitlessly throw everything they have at a team they can’t beat or be penalized for “inactivity”.
And even then, eventually the big guy will actually show up and start climbing again. I don’t think there’s any permanent solution to that. Maybe some kind of Win Streak bonus where the more you win the faster you climb the ladder, but you would have to deal with people intentionally breaking it.
While I say 0 to 6 it may be more. I got lucky in 1 round in previous attempts and the guy didn't attack. But that was like 3 arena ago.
This is another reason I welcome 3v3. I can actually have decent teams for both defense and offense.
With all due respect, I would say 3v3 is a huge part of the problem..... I am in kyber and I stay active and do my best during 3v3, but I absolutely rely on that to stay where I am and get great rewards....
But that wont happen and the same post will keep on coming in about match making lol.
I personally dont mind the current match making system, infact I rather have an extra week of GAC, anyone that says thats too much clearly didn't spend time every day to climb to first place to earn their crystal payout
Low activity doesn't need to be defined. Just make a lowest league a given gp can fall to. If it's by inactivity or just being bad, what does that matter? The big account of a terrible player can still be impossible to beat if it falls far enough.
I've said this before but here we go anyway:
Make a basement division in each league that has a lowest limit of 400 skill points lower than div4 entry (div4 because div5 entry is from previous div1, not a given skill rating). Players over the gp threshold don't lose any more skill rating than this -400 level. They just sit in this basement league, only seeing each other, unless they start winning all the time. After a GAC month of trying hard they could climb to the div5 area, and continue climbing if they want/can.
Basement players don't get in the way of active players. Restarting playing does not involve stomping your way through a bunch of people who did nothing to deserve it. A player Restarting can get back to being competitive in a month or 2.
Div5+ of every league will only have active players.
Rewards for basement division would be the same as div1 of the next league down. So all inactive players are getting at least what they would have before this change, but most likely more.
This gives is a reward for just growing your roster in any way. Crossing a threshold gives a new guaranteed reward level. CG likes people growing their rosters.
The newest players in the lowest leagues get a better experience, encouraging staying in the game. CG likes people staying in the game.
There would be a higher total of rewards given out though. CG don't like that so much, but maybe the positives of this would make it worth it?
The general idea of basement divisions is nice, but this always ends up being the crux of the problem. I don’t see CG potentially changing their crystal payouts significantly in a way that is more beneficial for the players. Also you have to consider that if there was a way to penalise ‘inactive’ players in GAC those players may then just start playing again, and lower GP players will still be no better off.
Resource management:
Rewards vs enjoyment.
So I am very happy that "your division is based on your GP" is removed - it was a pain to make people gear toons needed for guild content.
But even now with system long changed I periodically see people saying that they won't gear something because it will "overblow" their accounts and harm their GAC:(
And all talks about dividing people on "casual" and "not casual"... I presume the line is: "everyone better then me are not casual, remove them somewhere from me, so I dominate the rest"
There always be someone better: with better mods, more relics, more GL's, more omicrones, more datacrons...
Its not one or two time I saw something like "why my opponent have datacrons, I don't have them, let people with datacrons fight with each other! "
People will always be dissatisfied with matchmaking
P.s. I usually face people with more GP and 3-5 GL's more then I have. This round I lost all 3 to such people. Last round I won all 3 because my opponent's either didn't come or hit for a minimum...
Yeah, the OP has been outperforming their GP, and their opponent has not been performing up to their GP.
Just try the best you can. The top ranked players will be those that have played a lot AND have lots of skill AND have spent a lot of money.
How can you be 0-6 at the end of a season?
I agree that 3v3 may be part of the issue as I do better in 3v3 which pushes me up. Then 5v5 pushes me down. If they could find a way to seperate the two it could be better. But that seems like a real challenge given the crystal rewards. I mean unless it took the average of the 2 and gave you that but that's complicated and likely confusing for people.
It really doesn't help that I have 5 million gp and 1 gl. This is because I stopped playing the game for like 2 years maybe 3. When I left revan wasn't even in the game, but g12 was. As a result I remember building gear 8 teams for territory wars, which now add to my gp but don't help much in either tw or ga.
Only your wins/losses count...and these depend on THE UNITS YOU ACTUALLY USE.
This feels like it could help, maybe, but it runs into the same issue - where do you put the GP thresholds?
I see this in a positive light...i will now have better chances of winning and come back up...and during a "long" while i actually got better rewards than my roster should provide...
I did have a few uniwinnable matches...but i can live with it
I guess I should have the same attitude as I got knocked pretty far. 115 crystals a day to 95. But my chances of winning may increase.
That’s what I’m saying aurodium and bronzium are 2 totally different tiers. If you’re in aurodium you should have a pretty decent roster to take on decent GP. If you’re in bronzium like myself you regularly face 5-8m GP accounts and 65% of the time at least for me they are active. No amount of strategy that I think of will earn me a win. Like I said before I’m not seeking a 100% win rate. Even with people who are my go can still win against me. But it’s just not fair to lose to someone that is physically impossible to win against. There’s just no point in playing except maybe for practice.
Some of these people don’t care about rewards. They purposely drop down because they know they can’t win in the above tiers. These are the kind of people that have 7m account that is in a guild with 80m GP who are still doing Hoth TB battles. They don’t care about rewards they just want to win.
Think about what you are saying here "they just want to win".... Do you have any idea how much losing an account that high has to do to land in Bronzium? ... They don't just want to win, they only want to win when it is easy because, as you said, they are lazy.... They aren't "purposely dropping down", they just can't be bothered playing unless they are guaranteed a win (and sometimes not even then)....
Like I said, the only real solution is to toss these lazy accounts into another division and make them fight themselves to get out (I just don't have the solution as to how to separate them).....
And again, I don't see any threads on here of people complaining they won over an inactive account...
They have to lose half their matches to stay where they are.
Having 8M in Bronzium is more peculiar...particularly if they are "regular"...not sure if some unawanted effect of low activity players...
Cant you climb through...i mean, lose vs them, but win enough (vs others) to climb?
I don't know about all that. I'll say this though.
I blew ONE GA. I was really busy and missed the start. Because they don't notify you too well about subsequent starts in a GA session, i missed the rest of them as well. So, i pulled an ofer for the whole thing and it tanked me down like 3 levels. I went from punching a bit above my weight to punching down when i signed of up for the next one. The weirdest part was i went 9-0 in the last GA. I never moved up a class. Not once. Then, post event i jumped up 4.
It fluctuates A LOT. You can be on vacation and/or really busy and fall pretty quickly. Same I suppose if you get bored with it. I have gotten bored with GA for the reasons you state and the example i give. Simple fact, someone who's pretty good, or even really good with a 2.5M account, is going to get curb-stomped by someone with a 7.5M account who's competent as long as they're trying. I don't care how good a shot you are, if you have a BB gun and i have an RPG, who's winning that fight?
Get good holds water when it's maybe 10M vs 6M. You're still massively outmatched, but you should have a decent roster to work with if the other guy sucks. Thing is, people who've spent that much generally don't flat out suck. They may not be good, but as noted, it's going to be a tough task to beat a competent player who can massively overpower you. Doesn't matter how good you are.
That is something that doesn't seem to factor into the equation. Perhaps something like, people shouldn't fall in class for non-participation? or not trying? Don't give them the crystal payout if they aren't actually playing it. If you wanna disappear for 2 months and you were K1, don't drop that guy to C5 on his return where he'll nuke whoever he runs across. Limit the fall somehow in those scenarios and don't award credits. Now, i'm not saying do that, that's thinking out loud. Maybe that doesn't work, I don't know. As far as the complaint of not dropping them would keep other people from moving up, no it wouldn't. You can set your event by the number of K1's or whatever that sign up for the event. A level doesn't need a hard limit of 100 (used for simple math, i know it's more than 100). It just needs to know how many people signed up.
This is my first matchup this week. I honestly just can’t play GAC anymore. I know no matter what I do I can’t beat this guy. GAC is now my least favorite game mode and honestly I think GAC is the only thing holding this game together. This is just outrageous. And for those of you who will say “just means you have hit your ceiling”. I’m in carbonite (don’t know why I said bronzium in OP). You literally can’t go any lower than carbonite. I cannot progress into the other tiers of GAC until my account has grown to over 7m+. If you are in carbonite the lowest ranking GAC tier you are literally trapped for years. This is the **** idea CG has come up with thus far. I bet more than half the people commenting that this idea is good are the ones who are matched up with similar GP and they are not in carbonite. You cannot understand a lower GP player because you are not one.
Right, but what is your ally code? No one can comment fairly on this without knowing your average GAC win/loss ratio. If you're hitting a 50/50 ratio then you may well be hitting your ceiling, and it doesn't matter really if your 50% of losses come from players who are 1M or 5M larger than you.
I dropped from Auridium to Chromium...and my bracket became acceptable.
I have 1 GL, 5 opponents also have 1 GL, all with similar GP.
ONE opponent has 3 GLs...he will either 1)not play, 2) be bad player, 3) win easily and move up...either way i have the possibility to get 2 wins.
(BTW...one opponent i cant see data in swogh.gg)
Either you are using a BAD matchup as an argument...but you get much easier opps most times...or there is indeed some issue that makes players with 3 GLs go play in Carbonite...
Can you link or describe your bracket (you can see the entire bracket in swgoh.gg)
It's absolutely possible to implement a system that takes into account win/loss record AND roster composition, giving you matchups within a range of theoretically beatable opponents of similar skill. GAC would be WAY more interesting and engaging with this approach, over the false dichotomy of "one or the other".
BUT, CG will never implement it, because they're far too lazy to put forth the effort on something that would be positive for the player base and not really yield any direct, fiscal reward. (We could talk about indirects, but I don't think CG is sophisticated enough to entertain of that line of inquiry.)