No reason to be eloquent when people just want to argue semantics.
And no, I won't provide my ally code. Maybe you could not be disrespectful in assuming off rip that others don't know what they're talking about. If I can make it to Kyber under 7M GP and with only 1 GL, I probably have some idea, and I'm not going to feed the endless deflections. We can either talk about how to improve the GAC experience in a meaningful way, or not.
If you disagree with my proposed alterations, we can discuss that. We can agree to disagree, that's fine. Many here have proposed solutions that I think are good. So let's focus on what can be done to improve the experience further, instead of whether or not I have the ability to accurately relate my experience playing the game.
Hint: I briefly scanned Lumiya's account and it's pretty similar. So just take that as representative.
And no, I won't provide my ally code. Maybe you could not be disrespectful in assuming off rip that others don't know what they're talking about. If I can make it to Kyber under 7M GP and with only 1 GL, I probably have some idea, and I'm not going to feed the endless deflections. We can either talk about how to improve the GAC experience in a meaningful way, or not.
… wait, you’re in Kyber with 7M GP and 1 GL? And you think it’s unfair that you’re being matched with players with more GP than you?
If you don't keep the soup stirred, it'll burn on the bottom and skin on the top!
In all seriousness, what I want is a system that:
1) Rewards progression (both in skill and roster development)
2) Doesn't create incredibly unbalanced matches (or does so as infrequently as possible)
That doesn't have anything to do with how much I, personally, win or lose.
If instead of addressing those concerns you - or anyone else - chooses to instead try to read between the lines and find hidden motives rather than what I've explicitly stated, continuously misrepresent my statements, claim I'm being disingenuous, or that I'm misrepresenting my experience, then yeah, it's on you....
No reason to be eloquent when people just want to argue semantics.
And no, I won't provide my ally code. Maybe you could not be disrespectful in assuming off rip that others don't know what they're talking about. If I can make it to Kyber under 7M GP and with only 1 GL, I probably have some idea, and I'm not going to feed the endless deflections. We can either talk about how to improve the GAC experience in a meaningful way, or not.
If you disagree with my proposed alterations, we can discuss that. We can agree to disagree, that's fine. Many here have proposed solutions that I think are good. So let's focus on what can be done to improve the experience further, instead of whether or not I have the ability to accurately relate my experience playing the game.
Hint: I briefly scanned Lumiya's account and it's pretty similar. So just take that as representative.
Maybe if you posted your ally code it would give some context so people could actually see how often this is happening to players like you?
Without context people will treat the un-evidenced statements of others with reasonable caution.
Sorry you are losing a lot in GAC and want changes.....
This may be on me... I didn't realize when I was responding to you that I was dealing with a fairly new player (3 years)..... and someone that would just pop in once a week to stir the pot, my bad....
And no, I won't provide my ally code. Maybe you could not be disrespectful in assuming off rip that others don't know what they're talking about. If I can make it to Kyber under 7M GP and with only 1 GL, I probably have some idea, and I'm not going to feed the endless deflections. We can either talk about how to improve the GAC experience in a meaningful way, or not.
… wait, you’re in Kyber with 7M GP and 1 GL? And you think it’s unfair that you’re being matched with players with more GP than you?
If you don't keep the soup stirred, it'll burn on the bottom and skin on the top!
In all seriousness, what I want is a system that:
1) Rewards progression (both in skill and roster development)
2) Doesn't create incredibly unbalanced matches (or does so as infrequently as possible)
That doesn't have anything to do with how much I, personally, win or lose.
If instead of addressing those concerns you - or anyone else - chooses to instead try to read between the lines and find hidden motives rather than what I've explicitly stated, continuously misrepresent my statements, claim I'm being disingenuous, or that I'm misrepresenting my experience, then yeah, it's on you....
No reason to be eloquent when people just want to argue semantics.
And no, I won't provide my ally code. Maybe you could not be disrespectful in assuming off rip that others don't know what they're talking about. If I can make it to Kyber under 7M GP and with only 1 GL, I probably have some idea, and I'm not going to feed the endless deflections. We can either talk about how to improve the GAC experience in a meaningful way, or not.
If you disagree with my proposed alterations, we can discuss that. We can agree to disagree, that's fine. Many here have proposed solutions that I think are good. So let's focus on what can be done to improve the experience further, instead of whether or not I have the ability to accurately relate my experience playing the game.
Hint: I briefly scanned Lumiya's account and it's pretty similar. So just take that as representative.
Maybe if you posted your ally code it would give some context so people could actually see how often this is happening to players like you?
Without context people will treat the un-evidenced statements of others with reasonable caution.
Sorry you are losing a lot in GAC and want changes.....
This may be on me... I didn't realize when I was responding to you that I was dealing with a fairly new player (3 years)..... and someone that would just pop in once a week to stir the pot, my bad....
But to your point 2, no one has, as yet, provided evidence that these imbalanced matchups are happening more regularly than they should do for a division/SR combination.
In fact, all of the evidence from players who have shared their ally codes (mine is in my signature, I really don’t know why you’re insisting on hiding yours and I’m not just going to take your word that your account is like someone else’s) is that while very unbalanced matchups can occur in brackets they are still indicative of the distributions of players in SR/division combinations, and so would appear to be fairly… fair. Especially at a larger level.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
Lots and lots of forumers have posted about matchups that are horrendously unfair and lead to them losing all the time, and in many cases their claims have been completely false.
There are at least 2 people in this thread concealing their in-game identity whilst making grand claims about the state of matchmaking game-wide.
Difficult to take these claims seriously when many others don’t share this experience and there’s no way of verifying that the posters themselves are even experiencing what they claim is happening to everyone.
I definitely don’t lose all the time, or I wouldn’t be able to make it into Kyber in the first place. My main point is that the system could be improved to lead to better quality of matches for a portion of the player base. I can’t speak to the exact scope of matches of that are “unbalanced”, but there are enough complaints across the spectrum of the game community, that I feel it warrants a closer look, and I will continue to advocate for that whether you choose to believe me or no.
But thank you both, for actually engaging in respectful dialogue, instead of passive aggressive condescension.
Lots and lots of forumers have posted about matchups that are horrendously unfair and lead to them losing all the time, and in many cases their claims have been completely false.
There are at least 2 people in this thread concealing their in-game identity whilst making grand claims about the state of matchmaking game-wide.
Difficult to take these claims seriously when many others don’t share this experience and there’s no way of verifying that the posters themselves are even experiencing what they claim is happening to everyone.
Monthly reminder of my suggestion to require forum accounts to be linked to an ally code at sign up for all to see.
Lots and lots of forumers have posted about matchups that are horrendously unfair and lead to them losing all the time, and in many cases their claims have been completely false.
There are at least 2 people in this thread concealing their in-game identity whilst making grand claims about the state of matchmaking game-wide.
Difficult to take these claims seriously when many others don’t share this experience and there’s no way of verifying that the posters themselves are even experiencing what they claim is happening to everyone.
Monthly reminder of my suggestion to require forum accounts to be linked to an ally code at sign up for all to see.
In all seriousness, what I want is a system that:
1) Rewards progression (both in skill and roster development)
2) Doesn't create incredibly unbalanced matches (or does so as infrequently as possible)
That doesn't have anything to do with how much I, personally, win or lose.
THIS is just it...IT DOES HAVE. Any system where you (or any player) is always winning (or losing) it is not "balanced". It is skewed in the favor of that specific type of player.
The present system is apparently FAIR and actually follows your 2 points. A player has ROSTER+SKILL+TIME and you rise to the point where THE SUM of those factors is roughly equivalent to your opponents. If you have MORE SKILL you will end up playing agaisnt better rosters, sooner or later.
I sincerely dont see HOW it can be improved without making it possible for some player to "abuse" any correction formula they add.
BTW...i dropped 3 divisions last month...i am now facing players with much more similar rosters...i had climbed higher than i should, mostly due to an above average couple of tournaments.BUT i expect to climb again, until i start losing again.
I would disagree that it actually meets criteria 2 across the board. In my case, you could definitely argue I’m way higher than I “should” be based on comparative roster alone, but what about large accounts falling into the lower divisions? Even many people who have disagreed with my proposals, have suggested doing something to sequester these larger accounts from falling too far, so please don’t get caught up in hyperfocusing on MY specific situation. I’m just adding my voice to those who think the system could be improved.
Let me put it this way: perhaps what would help with that is a mechanism to somewhat slow the rate of fall/climb, and/or periodically resetting the system, as I think Darjelo suggested. Maybe it’s just that people are climbing/falling too fast.
But without any understanding of how regularly this actually impacts players, which can’t be known unless players provide ally codes so others can see the extent of the “issue”, there’s no way that players can effectively debate whether it is in fact a significant issue in the first place.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
Let me put it this way: perhaps what would help with that is a mechanism to somewhat slow the rate of fall/climb, and/or periodically resetting the system, as I think Darjelo suggested. Maybe it’s just that people are climbing/falling too fast.
What could this sort of system look like, what are the downside risks it could introduce, and how could they be addressed?
Let me put it this way: perhaps what would help with that is a mechanism to somewhat slow the rate of fall/climb, and/or periodically resetting the system, as I think Darjelo suggested. Maybe it’s just that people are climbing/falling too fast.
What could this sort of system look like, what are the downside risks it could introduce, and how could they be addressed?
But without any understanding of how regularly this actually impacts players, which can’t be known unless players provide ally codes so others can see the extent of the “issue”, there’s no way that players can effectively debate whether it is in fact a significant issue in the first place.
While it is always nice to discuss and have a conversation with fellow players, this is actually nothing we can do.
This is something that is up to CG. They have all the data, they can read the countless comments and threads on different platforms so they can actually take a look at the numbers and see, how far it is spread and how often it does occur.
For that reason I think it is good to have threads and comments about the topic, simply for the reason that the more people bring this to (CG's) attention, the bigger the chances are (or the hope), that CG might look into it.
Lopsided matches definitely happen in the current system. Of course, they did in the old system as well if one player had a “super efficient” roster by GAC standards and one had a very “inefficient” roster. I do tend to agree that without data, it’s difficult to discuss a topic based on subjective impressions.
I think the best system to address the mentioned issue would be as follows:
- if an account has reached a certain milestone, then it just can't drop from the recommended league.
Example: If you have crossed 4m, you are at least Chromium, if 7m at least Aurodium and at 10m at least Kyber.
Naturally this looks like you are benefitting without any effort, but that is very fine. You have spent effort to reach these milestones, so why not to be rewarded ?
In any way, this would solve the issue once and for all and 7m-account just should not be in Carbonite or Bronze or Chromium. It ruins the fun of others and that is the worst possible outcome. The current system can not prevent such occurences, so simply implement a rule (like my proposal or similar) and done. Moreover such a rule would actually solve the issue without hurting anybody. It is a win-win and this is exactly how it should be in the best of all worlds.
I think the best system to address the mentioned issue would be as follows:
- if an account has reached a certain milestone, then it just can't drop from the recommended league.
Example: If you have crossed 4m, you are at least Chromium, if 7m at least Aurodium and at 10m at least Kyber.
Naturally this looks like you are benefitting without any effort, but that is very fine. You have spent effort to reach these milestones, so why not to be rewarded ?
In any way, this would solve the issue once and for all and 7m-account just should not be in Carbonite or Bronze or Chromium. It ruins the fun of others and that is the worst possible outcome. The current system can not prevent such occurences, so simply implement a rule (like my proposal or similar) and done. Moreover such a rule would actually solve the issue without hurting anybody. It is a win-win and this is exactly how it should be in the best of all worlds.
It’s not actually a down-side free proposal, and has the same issue as every other one which limits the dropping of larger accounts, namely, that it suppresses the upward mobility of smaller accounts.
If you set a hard basement of, say 7m for Aurodium then there will be a limit to the number of sub-7m accounts which can exist in Kyber and Aurodium. That’s not fair on players of 4-7m GP in your system who may be locked out of Aurodium or Kyber by GAC-inactive accounts who just sit and enjoy the rewards from higher leagues without taking part.
Crucially, how often is this actually happening? Does it affect 5%, 1%, 0.01% of carbonite, bronzium, chromium players every bracket or season? I’ve not yet seen any evidence to suggest it’s affecting a significant proportion of the player base in those divisions.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
Crucially, how often is this actually happening? Does it affect 5%, 1%, 0.01% of carbonite, bronzium, chromium players every bracket or season? I’ve not yet seen any evidence to suggest it’s affecting a significant proportion of the player base in those divisions.
THIS^^
I play all GACs...on occasion i find a very high level player...and i lose if he plays. But it is NOT the norm...and not frequent to meet two such players on same match...
AFAIK the system works ok-ish. I got demoted a few levels and i started winning more...
In my case, climbing seems to be much slower than dropping...but the overall experience works...most matches are "winable"...until i climb too much and they become harder. Makes sense to me.
There are oddities SOMETIMES...but (as said above) not so frequent...and not easy to avoid, as most "fixes" have other issues.
I don't think it's possible for CG to implement a system that makes everyone happy. There are always going to be scenarios, regardless of the system where someone is going to end up out-matched OR be disincentivized from growing their roster. Neither of those situations is necessarily good for the players or good for the game.
F2P since the last time I bought Kyros, Crystals, or the Conquest Pass.
I don't think it's possible for CG to implement a system that makes everyone happy. There are always going to be scenarios, regardless of the system where someone is going to end up out-matched OR be disincentivized from growing their roster. Neither of those situations is necessarily good for the players or good for the game.
They just need to make me, the protagonist, happy.
My new account is 1.1 million gp. I rarely get matched against someone with a roster similar to mine. GAC is simply not enjoyable for this account. Win by taking 10 points in a loss with the opponent not interacting.
My new account is 1.1 million gp. I rarely get matched against someone with a roster similar to mine. GAC is simply not enjoyable for this account. Win by taking 10 points in a loss with the opponent not interacting.
Agree with this OP's sentiment 109%.
Well it would be really helpful if you could share your allycode so we can all see how often this issue affects you, and what sort of mismatches are occurring.
Account started June 2020. 100% FTP. 8.2m GP. JMK, JML, SLKR, and SEE. Exe and Levi. Ally code 117-269-921. Swgoh.gg
Replies
And no, I won't provide my ally code. Maybe you could not be disrespectful in assuming off rip that others don't know what they're talking about. If I can make it to Kyber under 7M GP and with only 1 GL, I probably have some idea, and I'm not going to feed the endless deflections. We can either talk about how to improve the GAC experience in a meaningful way, or not.
If you disagree with my proposed alterations, we can discuss that. We can agree to disagree, that's fine. Many here have proposed solutions that I think are good. So let's focus on what can be done to improve the experience further, instead of whether or not I have the ability to accurately relate my experience playing the game.
Hint: I briefly scanned Lumiya's account and it's pretty similar. So just take that as representative.
… wait, you’re in Kyber with 7M GP and 1 GL? And you think it’s unfair that you’re being matched with players with more GP than you?
In all seriousness, what I want is a system that:
1) Rewards progression (both in skill and roster development)
2) Doesn't create incredibly unbalanced matches (or does so as infrequently as possible)
That doesn't have anything to do with how much I, personally, win or lose.
If instead of addressing those concerns you - or anyone else - chooses to instead try to read between the lines and find hidden motives rather than what I've explicitly stated, continuously misrepresent my statements, claim I'm being disingenuous, or that I'm misrepresenting my experience, then yeah, it's on you....
1) I said *under* 7. Closer to 6.4.
2) I didn't say anything about fairness.
But to your point 2, no one has, as yet, provided evidence that these imbalanced matchups are happening more regularly than they should do for a division/SR combination.
In fact, all of the evidence from players who have shared their ally codes (mine is in my signature, I really don’t know why you’re insisting on hiding yours and I’m not just going to take your word that your account is like someone else’s) is that while very unbalanced matchups can occur in brackets they are still indicative of the distributions of players in SR/division combinations, and so would appear to be fairly… fair. Especially at a larger level.
There are at least 2 people in this thread concealing their in-game identity whilst making grand claims about the state of matchmaking game-wide.
Difficult to take these claims seriously when many others don’t share this experience and there’s no way of verifying that the posters themselves are even experiencing what they claim is happening to everyone.
But thank you both, for actually engaging in respectful dialogue, instead of passive aggressive condescension.
Monthly reminder of my suggestion to require forum accounts to be linked to an ally code at sign up for all to see.
It’s a bad idea because it opens the door to in-game harassment.
The present system is apparently FAIR and actually follows your 2 points. A player has ROSTER+SKILL+TIME and you rise to the point where THE SUM of those factors is roughly equivalent to your opponents. If you have MORE SKILL you will end up playing agaisnt better rosters, sooner or later.
I sincerely dont see HOW it can be improved without making it possible for some player to "abuse" any correction formula they add.
BTW...i dropped 3 divisions last month...i am now facing players with much more similar rosters...i had climbed higher than i should, mostly due to an above average couple of tournaments.BUT i expect to climb again, until i start losing again.
Let me put it this way: perhaps what would help with that is a mechanism to somewhat slow the rate of fall/climb, and/or periodically resetting the system, as I think Darjelo suggested. Maybe it’s just that people are climbing/falling too fast.
Maybe the simplest approach, would be to just lower the amount of SR points awarded or lost after each match?
While it is always nice to discuss and have a conversation with fellow players, this is actually nothing we can do.
This is something that is up to CG. They have all the data, they can read the countless comments and threads on different platforms so they can actually take a look at the numbers and see, how far it is spread and how often it does occur.
For that reason I think it is good to have threads and comments about the topic, simply for the reason that the more people bring this to (CG's) attention, the bigger the chances are (or the hope), that CG might look into it.
Now i have to butcher some 800k Accounts with my 7M GP - 4GL Roster
Until im back in my supposed League... this will create several unfair matchups for my enemys.
Allycode: 498294819
- if an account has reached a certain milestone, then it just can't drop from the recommended league.
Example: If you have crossed 4m, you are at least Chromium, if 7m at least Aurodium and at 10m at least Kyber.
Naturally this looks like you are benefitting without any effort, but that is very fine. You have spent effort to reach these milestones, so why not to be rewarded ?
In any way, this would solve the issue once and for all and 7m-account just should not be in Carbonite or Bronze or Chromium. It ruins the fun of others and that is the worst possible outcome. The current system can not prevent such occurences, so simply implement a rule (like my proposal or similar) and done. Moreover such a rule would actually solve the issue without hurting anybody. It is a win-win and this is exactly how it should be in the best of all worlds.
It’s not actually a down-side free proposal, and has the same issue as every other one which limits the dropping of larger accounts, namely, that it suppresses the upward mobility of smaller accounts.
If you set a hard basement of, say 7m for Aurodium then there will be a limit to the number of sub-7m accounts which can exist in Kyber and Aurodium. That’s not fair on players of 4-7m GP in your system who may be locked out of Aurodium or Kyber by GAC-inactive accounts who just sit and enjoy the rewards from higher leagues without taking part.
Crucially, how often is this actually happening? Does it affect 5%, 1%, 0.01% of carbonite, bronzium, chromium players every bracket or season? I’ve not yet seen any evidence to suggest it’s affecting a significant proportion of the player base in those divisions.
I play all GACs...on occasion i find a very high level player...and i lose if he plays. But it is NOT the norm...and not frequent to meet two such players on same match...
AFAIK the system works ok-ish. I got demoted a few levels and i started winning more...
In my case, climbing seems to be much slower than dropping...but the overall experience works...most matches are "winable"...until i climb too much and they become harder. Makes sense to me.
There are oddities SOMETIMES...but (as said above) not so frequent...and not easy to avoid, as most "fixes" have other issues.
They just need to make me, the protagonist, happy.
Agree with this OP's sentiment 109%.
Well it would be really helpful if you could share your allycode so we can all see how often this issue affects you, and what sort of mismatches are occurring.