"shaun51422;c-2185278" wrote:
"DarkHelmet1138;c-2185018" wrote:
"shaun51422;c-2185010" wrote:
"Waqui;c-2184561" wrote:
"shaun51422;c-2184489" wrote:
"Waqui;c-2184292" wrote:
Apparently they developed strong enough teams and tactics to gain top ranks. And you call their rosters useless?
The leader boards rank players by GAC score - not by roster strength. It's all it is. I wouldn't worry too much about how strong (or weak) the top ranking players' rosters are.
The point is that if they were going against the other good teams in the division they wouldn't win a match.
The point is that they were matched against players with similar matchmaking GP and won.
Exactly - they matched the teams that can't put together a decent team of 5 against other teams that can't put together a decent team of 5. They have the GP, so if they didn't use their resources well then they should have to deal with it.
They matched them to others that have a similar top 80 go (or top 60 or 40 or whatever for lower division). Ability to put teams together isn't taken into account fo rrc matchmaking.
Either way, that is my point. It should be random throughout the division. Or at least some sort of weighted distribution so that the weaker players (aka "similar") only play other weaker players.
It is set up so that the "weaker players" are matched against those with similar to 40 go. So they are matched against each other. The leader boards are based on number of banners won though. So if two "weaker players" fight each other and two "stronger players" fight each other the players that win those matches receive the same banners for the win. Even though if the weaker player was matched against the stronger player, they would likly lose.
So which is it. Should it be random in th ef division (which leads to very uneven matches in some cases) or weighted as it is now (which leads to "weaker players" occasionally placing high on the leader boards)?
