Division 1 Split

"MaruMaru;c-2235532" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235531" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235511" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235505" wrote:
Honestly probably multiple stages/points of information. Brackets are ties to rewards so add new ones means new rewards structure also.

It's not just about how many are there, but also making a new system that doesnt isolate any particular group too much and swing us towards the other problem when some group faces the same people repeatedly.

There is also some discussion that needs to be around the "why".... many of these players do not face each other at all due to matchmaking.

I'm sure there are other points they discuss too.

I mean there's no reason they should diminish what other divisions receive. Add ones with slightly better rewards stashes. The "why" is there is too large a gap for top 80 to compute and effectively matchmake after 5 or so million GP. Another "why" would be so people past 6 million aren't ignoring some relic toons. Expanding the layout for super high GP players would be nice.

Adding rewards is never "simple", especially when adding only to the top end.

I agree, but there is more to the situation then just those points. I would also imagine that saying matchmaking doesnt work after X would probably needs to be validated on their side (another thing that needs analytic run on)

Both MM and GAC divisions have been on the radar for a bit, but the analytics side has been backed up for multiple reasons and things like this are just lower on the list than other things that need to be looked at.

If this is not the data they are looking for, what's the data they are looking for? Their only statement on the topic so far confirms this is the data they are looking for.

They will need to run the data on their end, and I'm sure they will look at more than just that data set there as there are many factors involved in a change like this.

"Kyno;c-2235533" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2235532" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235531" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235511" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235505" wrote:
Honestly probably multiple stages/points of information. Brackets are ties to rewards so add new ones means new rewards structure also.

It's not just about how many are there, but also making a new system that doesnt isolate any particular group too much and swing us towards the other problem when some group faces the same people repeatedly.

There is also some discussion that needs to be around the "why".... many of these players do not face each other at all due to matchmaking.

I'm sure there are other points they discuss too.

I mean there's no reason they should diminish what other divisions receive. Add ones with slightly better rewards stashes. The "why" is there is too large a gap for top 80 to compute and effectively matchmake after 5 or so million GP. Another "why" would be so people past 6 million aren't ignoring some relic toons. Expanding the layout for super high GP players would be nice.

Adding rewards is never "simple", especially when adding only to the top end.

I agree, but there is more to the situation then just those points. I would also imagine that saying matchmaking doesnt work after X would probably needs to be validated on their side (another thing that needs analytic run on)

Both MM and GAC divisions have been on the radar for a bit, but the analytics side has been backed up for multiple reasons and things like this are just lower on the list than other things that need to be looked at.

If this is not the data they are looking for, what's the data they are looking for? Their only statement on the topic so far confirms this is the data they are looking for.

They will need to run the data on their end, and I'm sure they will look at more than just that data set there as there are many factors involved in a change like this.

I don't mean to try and dumb it down, and yes my "after X gp" is more of an assumption, but rosters that deep have way more than 80 useful toons, I do know that.
The rewards ofc will be a hot button topic, but the gear crunch is moving quickly to relic and g12+ as opposed to stun guns. GAC rewards being upped for 2-3 more divisions wouldn't change a ton if they scale it similarly.
That said, what needs to happen for them to parse through this data? Is there anyway to make this known? I know there's more than two people that care about this, and in another few months these percentages will be getting even further out of hand. This may not be the #1 issue, but we shouldn't wait to put this in their crosshairs.

"Jack1210;c-2235544" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235533" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2235532" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235531" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235511" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235505" wrote:
Honestly probably multiple stages/points of information. Brackets are ties to rewards so add new ones means new rewards structure also.

It's not just about how many are there, but also making a new system that doesnt isolate any particular group too much and swing us towards the other problem when some group faces the same people repeatedly.

There is also some discussion that needs to be around the "why".... many of these players do not face each other at all due to matchmaking.

I'm sure there are other points they discuss too.

I mean there's no reason they should diminish what other divisions receive. Add ones with slightly better rewards stashes. The "why" is there is too large a gap for top 80 to compute and effectively matchmake after 5 or so million GP. Another "why" would be so people past 6 million aren't ignoring some relic toons. Expanding the layout for super high GP players would be nice.

Adding rewards is never "simple", especially when adding only to the top end.

I agree, but there is more to the situation then just those points. I would also imagine that saying matchmaking doesnt work after X would probably needs to be validated on their side (another thing that needs analytic run on)

Both MM and GAC divisions have been on the radar for a bit, but the analytics side has been backed up for multiple reasons and things like this are just lower on the list than other things that need to be looked at.

If this is not the data they are looking for, what's the data they are looking for? Their only statement on the topic so far confirms this is the data they are looking for.

They will need to run the data on their end, and I'm sure they will look at more than just that data set there as there are many factors involved in a change like this.

I don't mean to try and dumb it down, and yes my "after X gp" is more of an assumption, but rosters that deep have way more than 80 useful toons, I do know that.
The rewards ofc will be a hot button topic, but the gear crunch is moving quickly to relic and g12+ as opposed to stun guns. GAC rewards being upped for 2-3 more divisions wouldn't change a ton if they scale it similarly.
That said, what needs to happen for them to parse through this data? Is there anyway to make this known? I know there's more than two people that care about this, and in another few months these percentages will be getting even further out of hand. This may not be the #1 issue, but we shouldn't wait to put this in their crosshairs.

Each of these points is not a simple thing and all has (or would need) data to define what changes would need to be made.

Everything they do is a balancing act, with new content and updates to the game and game modes. They are aware, and that will take the time it takes.

"Kyno;c-2235612" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235544" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235533" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2235532" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235531" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235511" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235505" wrote:
Honestly probably multiple stages/points of information. Brackets are ties to rewards so add new ones means new rewards structure also.

It's not just about how many are there, but also making a new system that doesnt isolate any particular group too much and swing us towards the other problem when some group faces the same people repeatedly.

There is also some discussion that needs to be around the "why".... many of these players do not face each other at all due to matchmaking.

I'm sure there are other points they discuss too.

I mean there's no reason they should diminish what other divisions receive. Add ones with slightly better rewards stashes. The "why" is there is too large a gap for top 80 to compute and effectively matchmake after 5 or so million GP. Another "why" would be so people past 6 million aren't ignoring some relic toons. Expanding the layout for super high GP players would be nice.

Adding rewards is never "simple", especially when adding only to the top end.

I agree, but there is more to the situation then just those points. I would also imagine that saying matchmaking doesnt work after X would probably needs to be validated on their side (another thing that needs analytic run on)

Both MM and GAC divisions have been on the radar for a bit, but the analytics side has been backed up for multiple reasons and things like this are just lower on the list than other things that need to be looked at.

If this is not the data they are looking for, what's the data they are looking for? Their only statement on the topic so far confirms this is the data they are looking for.

They will need to run the data on their end, and I'm sure they will look at more than just that data set there as there are many factors involved in a change like this.

I don't mean to try and dumb it down, and yes my "after X gp" is more of an assumption, but rosters that deep have way more than 80 useful toons, I do know that.
The rewards ofc will be a hot button topic, but the gear crunch is moving quickly to relic and g12+ as opposed to stun guns. GAC rewards being upped for 2-3 more divisions wouldn't change a ton if they scale it similarly.
That said, what needs to happen for them to parse through this data? Is there anyway to make this known? I know there's more than two people that care about this, and in another few months these percentages will be getting even further out of hand. This may not be the #1 issue, but we shouldn't wait to put this in their crosshairs.

Each of these points is not a simple thing and all has (or would need) data to define what changes would need to be made.

Everything they do is a balancing act, with new content and updates to the game and game modes. They are aware, and that will take the time it takes.

As you had the chance to talk about it... is adding slots also an option ?

As it stands, entering "Division 1" basically graduates you from the division system altogether, and enters you into the main pool of competitors forever. Doesn't seem so bad to me, except that higher GP players seem to need more slots?

"Jack1210;c-2235748" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235612" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235544" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235533" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2235532" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235531" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235511" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235505" wrote:
Honestly probably multiple stages/points of information. Brackets are ties to rewards so add new ones means new rewards structure also.

It's not just about how many are there, but also making a new system that doesnt isolate any particular group too much and swing us towards the other problem when some group faces the same people repeatedly.

There is also some discussion that needs to be around the "why".... many of these players do not face each other at all due to matchmaking.

I'm sure there are other points they discuss too.

I mean there's no reason they should diminish what other divisions receive. Add ones with slightly better rewards stashes. The "why" is there is too large a gap for top 80 to compute and effectively matchmake after 5 or so million GP. Another "why" would be so people past 6 million aren't ignoring some relic toons. Expanding the layout for super high GP players would be nice.

Adding rewards is never "simple", especially when adding only to the top end.

I agree, but there is more to the situation then just those points. I would also imagine that saying matchmaking doesnt work after X would probably needs to be validated on their side (another thing that needs analytic run on)

Both MM and GAC divisions have been on the radar for a bit, but the analytics side has been backed up for multiple reasons and things like this are just lower on the list than other things that need to be looked at.

If this is not the data they are looking for, what's the data they are looking for? Their only statement on the topic so far confirms this is the data they are looking for.

They will need to run the data on their end, and I'm sure they will look at more than just that data set there as there are many factors involved in a change like this.

I don't mean to try and dumb it down, and yes my "after X gp" is more of an assumption, but rosters that deep have way more than 80 useful toons, I do know that.
The rewards ofc will be a hot button topic, but the gear crunch is moving quickly to relic and g12+ as opposed to stun guns. GAC rewards being upped for 2-3 more divisions wouldn't change a ton if they scale it similarly.
That said, what needs to happen for them to parse through this data? Is there anyway to make this known? I know there's more than two people that care about this, and in another few months these percentages will be getting even further out of hand. This may not be the #1 issue, but we shouldn't wait to put this in their crosshairs.

Each of these points is not a simple thing and all has (or would need) data to define what changes would need to be made.

Everything they do is a balancing act, with new content and updates to the game and game modes. They are aware, and that will take the time it takes.

I mean that's as vague of an answer as possible. Are they actively looking into this? Or are you just saying sit back and let them get to it when they get to it?

They cannot actively look at this without the data and the data will take the time it takes to get.

They are aware and it is on the list of thing, but that all takes time.

"Kyno;c-2235756" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235748" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235612" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235544" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235533" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2235532" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235531" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235511" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235505" wrote:
Honestly probably multiple stages/points of information. Brackets are ties to rewards so add new ones means new rewards structure also.

It's not just about how many are there, but also making a new system that doesnt isolate any particular group too much and swing us towards the other problem when some group faces the same people repeatedly.

There is also some discussion that needs to be around the "why".... many of these players do not face each other at all due to matchmaking.

I'm sure there are other points they discuss too.

I mean there's no reason they should diminish what other divisions receive. Add ones with slightly better rewards stashes. The "why" is there is too large a gap for top 80 to compute and effectively matchmake after 5 or so million GP. Another "why" would be so people past 6 million aren't ignoring some relic toons. Expanding the layout for super high GP players would be nice.

Adding rewards is never "simple", especially when adding only to the top end.

I agree, but there is more to the situation then just those points. I would also imagine that saying matchmaking doesnt work after X would probably needs to be validated on their side (another thing that needs analytic run on)

Both MM and GAC divisions have been on the radar for a bit, but the analytics side has been backed up for multiple reasons and things like this are just lower on the list than other things that need to be looked at.

If this is not the data they are looking for, what's the data they are looking for? Their only statement on the topic so far confirms this is the data they are looking for.

They will need to run the data on their end, and I'm sure they will look at more than just that data set there as there are many factors involved in a change like this.

I don't mean to try and dumb it down, and yes my "after X gp" is more of an assumption, but rosters that deep have way more than 80 useful toons, I do know that.
The rewards ofc will be a hot button topic, but the gear crunch is moving quickly to relic and g12+ as opposed to stun guns. GAC rewards being upped for 2-3 more divisions wouldn't change a ton if they scale it similarly.
That said, what needs to happen for them to parse through this data? Is there anyway to make this known? I know there's more than two people that care about this, and in another few months these percentages will be getting even further out of hand. This may not be the #1 issue, but we shouldn't wait to put this in their crosshairs.

Each of these points is not a simple thing and all has (or would need) data to define what changes would need to be made.

Everything they do is a balancing act, with new content and updates to the game and game modes. They are aware, and that will take the time it takes.

I mean that's as vague of an answer as possible. Are they actively looking into this? Or are you just saying sit back and let them get to it when they get to it?

They cannot actively look at this without the data and the data will take the time it takes to get.

They are aware and it is on the list of thing, but that all takes time.

Not sure how pulling data on their own game should interfere with other activities. Again though, why do you need to be so vague and snarky...? "It will take the time it takes..." That's not an answer. I'd rather hear you don't know than that.

"Jack1210;c-2235956" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235756" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235748" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235612" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235544" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235533" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2235532" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235531" wrote:

"Jack1210;c-2235511" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2235505" wrote:
Honestly probably multiple stages/points of information. Brackets are ties to rewards so add new ones means new rewards structure also.

It's not just about how many are there, but also making a new system that doesnt isolate any particular group too much and swing us towards the other problem when some group faces the same people repeatedly.

There is also some discussion that needs to be around the "why".... many of these players do not face each other at all due to matchmaking.

I'm sure there are other points they discuss too.

I mean there's no reason they should diminish what other divisions receive. Add ones with slightly better rewards stashes. The "why" is there is too large a gap for top 80 to compute and effectively matchmake after 5 or so million GP. Another "why" would be so people past 6 million aren't ignoring some relic toons. Expanding the layout for super high GP players would be nice.

Adding rewards is never "simple", especially when adding only to the top end.

I agree, but there is more to the situation then just those points. I would also imagine that saying matchmaking doesnt work after X would probably needs to be validated on their side (another thing that needs analytic run on)

Both MM and GAC divisions have been on the radar for a bit, but the analytics side has been backed up for multiple reasons and things like this are just lower on the list than other things that need to be looked at.

If this is not the data they are looking for, what's the data they are looking for? Their only statement on the topic so far confirms this is the data they are looking for.

They will need to run the data on their end, and I'm sure they will look at more than just that data set there as there are many factors involved in a change like this.

I don't mean to try and dumb it down, and yes my "after X gp" is more of an assumption, but rosters that deep have way more than 80 useful toons, I do know that.
The rewards ofc will be a hot button topic, but the gear crunch is moving quickly to relic and g12+ as opposed to stun guns. GAC rewards being upped for 2-3 more divisions wouldn't change a ton if they scale it similarly.
That said, what needs to happen for them to parse through this data? Is there anyway to make this known? I know there's more than two people that care about this, and in another few months these percentages will be getting even further out of hand. This may not be the #1 issue, but we shouldn't wait to put this in their crosshairs.

Each of these points is not a simple thing and all has (or would need) data to define what changes would need to be made.

Everything they do is a balancing act, with new content and updates to the game and game modes. They are aware, and that will take the time it takes.

I mean that's as vague of an answer as possible. Are they actively looking into this? Or are you just saying sit back and let them get to it when they get to it?

They cannot actively look at this without the data and the data will take the time it takes to get.

They are aware and it is on the list of thing, but that all takes time.

Not sure how pulling data on their own game should interfere with other activities. Again though, why do you need to be so vague and snarky...? "It will take the time it takes..." That's not an answer. I'd rather hear you don't know than that.

This is not the only thing that data needs to be collected for, and pulling data is only part of it, as the data has to be parsed and made into presentable comparisons and other actions to show what they need to look at.

I am not being snarky, it just takes what it takes, and without going into a bunch of details (some of which I do not have) it's not as simple as just pulling data.