CheeseEmperor0 wrote:I think the reason I typically lose are not in my control.
You should be losing. We're all losing matches. The system works that no matter how good you are, you're losing around half your matches. I think part of the issue is that you know you're good and you know against similar GP rosters you'd rarely lose. You may think that's fair, I do not.
CheeseEmperor0 wrote:the problem is widespread and people are facing rosters they really shouldn’t be regardless of how good they are at the game or not.
I totally disagree. And we have experience of playing how you're suggesting and I don't want to go back to that. If you're successful you will be paired with rosters that are more developed than your roster. However, you are a perfect case that shows GP is an extremely poor way of match making.
Yes, players in low leagues that are having to face accounts that don't play isn't right. There's no match there. However, in any situation where there is a competitive match up, then in my opinion it's fair.
CheeseEmperor0 wrote:the fact that the matchmaking needs to be revised.
Tweaked yes, revised no. We played under a GP system and it wasn't great. Now, that rewards for GAC are extremely good, playing in a GP system would be awful. Players that have been here several years have had the experience of playing under GP.
Personally, I'm the lowest GP player in my bracket around 50%ish, lowest 3 GP always. I'd initially do very well in a GP system again. I did pretty well before. Usually, winning 10-2/11-1 of my matches (GAC seasons used to be 4 weeks long). It wasn't fair though. Winning all or almost all your matches isn't fair. For every 9-0 player there'd be a 0-9 player that tried to compete.
If we play in a GP match making system, we will have to care about our GP. If we care about our GP, we will min-max. This is a really bad thing for a collection game. Particularly, as we have had several years of not having to care about our GP and can't roll the clock back. Think about every new character that comes out, you won't be able to collect. What's stopping players starting new accounts, having a super effective roster at a low GP and never collecting anything again. Just, sitting waiting for the newbies to swim by, without a clue and destroying them.
If we matched by GP, it'd affect so much of the game. Not just GAC, but how you did everything. And everything you develop, you can't go back on that. How, would that affect players with TB and Raids. On one hand you need to min-max for GAC, on the other you're under extreme pressure from your guilds to 'bulk up bro'. I don't want to live in that world.
You also have to remember, the further a player drops, the smaller the GAC, the less of their GP they can actually use. If you played a 10 million GP account in Kyber, you'd stand very little chance. However, you are proving that if you play them in Carbonite, it's a totally different (holo-table) ball game.
You are a very good example of how GP is not effective at match making and are doing extremely well vs rosters much bigger than you.
If we matched by GP, it'd affect so much of the game.
CheeseEmperor0 wrote:ATM is essentially saying skill matters over GP, which I absolutely believe. I mean I’m facing a 9.9 M GP roster with my 3 m right now and I full-cleared him when he couldn’t do the same to me.
If you can see this, what actually is the issue? I feel your issue is that you think you should be winning more. You've given a proven example that your topical opinion in flawed.
However, I am quite surprised and have had my eyes opened at the diversity of rosters playing in Carbonite. I'm also seeing that it's hard for good players (like you) to climb. We're now seeing 10 GP rosters in Carbonite that regularly play.
It certainly isn't right for new players to experience something like this for their first games. That's extremely off-putting to say the least. I feel it's important that there's an initial league where players can't be demoted. This would help with the initial experience and climatise players to GAC.
After this though, it's more complex. My initial idea is that players with a GP significantly more than the division average should be grouped together in GAC. I still think this is a good idea, but looking at the Carbonite players here previous match ups, shows how diverse Carbonite has become.
There's no black and white anymore. We can't say 'This player is there because they never play'. It could be Frank plays only when he thinks he can win. While Fiona plays weekends and when she has the time. Jean-Pierre however hates 3v3 and is dedicated to playing 5v5 only. Whereas Nigel...............always plays but has no clue and is OK with that.
With so many variables, it's extremely difficult to tweak. However, I do agree there is a 'spirit of the game' that really needs to be considered. Players should enter a GAC match up with a viable way to compete that isn't 'hope my opponent doesn't turn up', this simply is not fun gaming. These match ups need to be culled.
So, possibly as well as grouping accounts that are significantly more GP than the average of the division. We should group those that didn't 'compete' for 2 or more matches of the previous week. That being zero scores or 'one and done'. Probably, a decaying reward system too. Only when they're back to parity would they be allowed back to regular play.
It's not easy....or probably possible to have the perfect system. I do believe the spirit of competitive match ups is important. However, I believe more strongly that GP match making would be extremely detrimental to the game.
