CGs algorithm fails again

"KwikShotaAce;c-2455538" wrote:

"Notthatguyfrombefore;c-2454620" wrote:

"KwikShotaAce;c-2454607" wrote:
37 signed up. That's why I subtracted 13 from 50. So it's still vastly unbalanced.

You’re right, if only 37 of their players signed up, then they have 387m GP to your 444m. On top of that you have almost the same number of GLs and more of all of the top fleets. You should have walked all over them, so I can see why you’re upset at such an easy win.

For clarity I assumed that all of their 13 players who didn’t sign up had 8GLs and the three top fleets. I think that’s as fair an assumption as the ones you’ve made.

That doesn't make sense. We each had the same amount signed up. Plus they still averaged vastly more GLs which they dropped on front 4 walls. They still vastly out powered us.

Same amount of what signed up? Players? GP?

If it’s the same amount of players then I’m going to assume their GP distribution is top heavy and they had mostly larger players, with all GLs who didn’t sign up, while it was your weakest ones who didn’t sign up making it a fair match up still. Can you post your TW record from swgoh.gg which actually shows active GP, as without that this is not going to prove your point in the slightest.

So the difference in active GP is less than 10%. Seems like a good enough matchup to me, and certainly a lot closer than some of the ones which we’ve won recently.

"KwikShotaAce;d-267839" wrote:
At this point, CGs failure are truly insurmountable. You can't keep up with the failures but can with the successes...which is probably as many as fingers average humans have.
So what I mean...is being placed against a guild that's over 79 million points stronger with a 2 million more average GP....
Way to keep the excellent work up. CG...you guys truly know how to make a game fun....(sarcasm)

Except that this isn't actually a relevant comparison. How many of their players signed up? What is the active GP in TW on both sides?

"Notthatguyfrombefore;c-2454601" wrote:

"KwikShotaAce;d-267839" wrote:
At this point, CGs failure are truly insurmountable. You can't keep up with the failures but can with the successes...which is probably as many as fingers average humans have.
So what I mean...is being placed against a guild that's over 79 million points stronger with a 2 million more average GP....
Way to keep the excellent work up. CG...you guys truly know how to make a game fun....(sarcasm)

Except that this isn't actually a relevant comparison. How many of their players signed up? What is the active GP in TW on both sides?

Except that it is....at absolute best or worst, however you wanna look at it, you can subtract 13 from their GL numbers...and still averages about to 1.4 million more GP.

37 signed up. That's why I subtracted 13 from 50. So it's still vastly unbalanced.

"KwikShotaAce;c-2454607" wrote:
37 signed up. That's why I subtracted 13 from 50. So it's still vastly unbalanced.

You’re right, if only 37 of their players signed up, then they have 387m GP to your 444m. On top of that you have almost the same number of GLs and more of all of the top fleets. You should have walked all over them, so I can see why you’re upset at such an easy win.

For clarity I assumed that all of their 13 players who didn’t sign up had 8GLs and the three top fleets. I think that’s as fair an assumption as the ones you’ve made.

Comment was posted twice

"Notthatguyfrombefore;c-2454620" wrote:

"KwikShotaAce;c-2454607" wrote:
37 signed up. That's why I subtracted 13 from 50. So it's still vastly unbalanced.

You’re right, if only 37 of their players signed up, then they have 387m GP to your 444m. On top of that you have almost the same number of GLs and more of all of the top fleets. You should have walked all over them, so I can see why you’re upset at such an easy win.

For clarity I assumed that all of their 13 players who didn’t sign up had 8GLs and the three top fleets. I think that’s as fair an assumption as the ones you’ve made.

That doesn't make sense. We each had the same amount signed up. Plus they still averaged vastly more GLs which they dropped on front 4 walls. They still vastly out powered us.

"Notthatguyfrombefore;c-2455642" wrote:

"KwikShotaAce;c-2455538" wrote:

"Notthatguyfrombefore;c-2454620" wrote:

"KwikShotaAce;c-2454607" wrote:
37 signed up. That's why I subtracted 13 from 50. So it's still vastly unbalanced.

You’re right, if only 37 of their players signed up, then they have 387m GP to your 444m. On top of that you have almost the same number of GLs and more of all of the top fleets. You should have walked all over them, so I can see why you’re upset at such an easy win.

For clarity I assumed that all of their 13 players who didn’t sign up had 8GLs and the three top fleets. I think that’s as fair an assumption as the ones you’ve made.

That doesn't make sense. We each had the same amount signed up. Plus they still averaged vastly more GLs which they dropped on front 4 walls. They still vastly out powered us.

Same amount of what signed up? Players? GP?

If it’s the same amount of players then I’m going to assume their GP distribution is top heavy and they had mostly larger players, with all GLs who didn’t sign up, while it was your weakest ones who didn’t sign up making it a fair match up still. Can you post your TW record from swgoh.gg which actually shows active GP, as without that this is not going to prove your point in the slightest.

Why would I say same amount of gp if we have different gps....smh