I've been playing SWGOH since December of last year, and the main issue I have is with Arena. Specifically the mechanics preventing you from attacking another player if you are being attacked, or if the player you want to attack is being attacked. I try to time the majority of my PvPs to an hour before 6 PM and as early as a half an hour before 6 PM I find myself constantly blocked. I believe that the top 5 are simply attacking each other, and waiting the full 5 minutes.So I thought of a simple solution. Allow any player to attack at any time, regardless of who is currently in battle. If you lose, you stay where you are, if you win you take their spot, but rather than swapping, you push them and everyone below them down one place, until they fill in the gap where you used to be. And the push is done at the point you beat them, so if the #1 and #2 can't keep their spots just by attacking each other.No more collusion, no more locked spots.

So what becomes the solution for 5 players all battling for #1 spot and ending their battle at the same time. It turns into a game of chicken and rng why don't we just award everyone random rewards all 20k players in grouping can be 1 big lottery.

"Silentbobus;c-1494546" wrote:"Darthpedro;c-1488824" wrote:why don't we just award everyone random rewards all 20k players in grouping can be 1 big lottery.This is a terrible idea. There needs to be an incentive to climb the ladder for better payouts.Does this mean, you agree with the first part of Darthpedro's post ?

"Silentbobus;c-1495418" wrote:"Waqui;c-1494565" wrote:"Silentbobus;c-1494546" wrote:"Darthpedro;c-1488824" wrote:why don't we just award everyone random rewards all 20k players in grouping can be 1 big lottery.This is a terrible idea. There needs to be an incentive to climb the ladder for better payouts.Does this mean, you agree with the first part of Darthpedro's post ?No, I didn't think he was serious. I'm sure there would still be a way to game the new system, but it would be a huge improvement to the system in place now. Since it would be easy to implement it feels like a logical next step.Are you feeling ok?What darthpedro wrote is completely true. Your idea is more horrible than the sith raid.

@Silentbobus Again what's the solution for the 5 people battling for #1 at payout all ending their battles within milliseconds of each other? Especially for the person in 5th who battles for 1st but ends up finishing in 5th because they ended their battle half a second too early do you seriously not see the problem with your idea

"Silentbobus;c-1496476" wrote:"Darthpedro;c-1496468" wrote:@Silentbobus Again what's the solution for the 5 people battling for #1 at payout all ending their battles within milliseconds of each other? Especially for the person in 5th who battles for 1st but ends up finishing in 5th because they ended their battle half a second too early do you seriously not see the problem with your ideaHow would all of these people know when every one else's games were ending? How is the proposed system worse than the current one where the top 5 people don't/can't battle because the slots are all locked?Well if they all start their battle at exactly 5 minutes to payout with the intention of ending 1 second before payout it comes down to a game of chicken where fractions of a second decide your position. Now here's an even bigger curve ball because since, 6th can attack 2nd, 7th can attack 3rd, 8th can attack 4th, and 9th can attack 5th. Under your proposed system I can be in 5th battle for 1st and if I mess up the timing and am the first to finish battling I can end up collecting 9th for my payout instead of 1st who I beat.

Easy Fix for Arena | EA Forums

hendy_2012
7 years ago
So what becomes the solution for 5 players all battling for #1 spot and ending their battle at the same time. It turns into a game of chicken and rng why don't we just award everyone random rewards all 20k players in grouping can be 1 big lottery.
Waquira
7 years ago
"Silentbobus;c-1494546" wrote:
"Darthpedro;c-1488824" wrote:
why don't we just award everyone random rewards all 20k players in grouping can be 1 big lottery.

This is a terrible idea. There needs to be an incentive to climb the ladder for better payouts.

Does this mean, you agree with the first part of Darthpedro's post ?
Jim17490
7 years ago
"Silentbobus;c-1495418" wrote:
"Waqui;c-1494565" wrote:
"Silentbobus;c-1494546" wrote:
"Darthpedro;c-1488824" wrote:
why don't we just award everyone random rewards all 20k players in grouping can be 1 big lottery.

This is a terrible idea. There needs to be an incentive to climb the ladder for better payouts.

Does this mean, you agree with the first part of Darthpedro's post ?

No, I didn't think he was serious. I'm sure there would still be a way to game the new system, but it would be a huge improvement to the system in place now. Since it would be easy to implement it feels like a logical next step.

Are you feeling ok?
What darthpedro wrote is completely true. Your idea is more horrible than the sith raid.
hendy_2012
7 years ago
@Silentbobus

Again what's the solution for the 5 people battling for #1 at payout all ending their battles within milliseconds of each other? Especially for the person in 5th who battles for 1st but ends up finishing in 5th because they ended their battle half a second too early do you seriously not see the problem with your idea
hendy_2012
7 years ago
"Silentbobus;c-1496476" wrote:
"Darthpedro;c-1496468" wrote:
@Silentbobus

Again what's the solution for the 5 people battling for #1 at payout all ending their battles within milliseconds of each other? Especially for the person in 5th who battles for 1st but ends up finishing in 5th because they ended their battle half a second too early do you seriously not see the problem with your idea

How would all of these people know when every one else's games were ending? How is the proposed system worse than the current one where the top 5 people don't/can't battle because the slots are all locked?

Well if they all start their battle at exactly 5 minutes to payout with the intention of ending 1 second before payout it comes down to a game of chicken where fractions of a second decide your position.

Now here's an even bigger curve ball because since, 6th can attack 2nd, 7th can attack 3rd, 8th can attack 4th, and 9th can attack 5th. Under your proposed system I can be in 5th battle for 1st and if I mess up the timing and am the first to finish battling I can end up collecting 9th for my payout instead of 1st who I beat.
hendy_2012
7 years ago
I also don't see it as problem. I'm just showing you that your "simple and easy fix" is neither simple nor easy and creates an even bigger problem. Locking a position, whether alone or as a team, is a viable strategy they do it in car racing all the time.
449710430e37db5
7 years ago
It's not collusion if they're open about it and actually invited you in. And rather than cooperating with them, you choose to snipe them as a lone wolf? Then you come up with a terrible idea to 'fix' the Arena after failing to snipe them?

No thank you.
hendy_2012
7 years ago
"Silentbobus;c-1497899" wrote:
"Waqui;c-1497771" wrote:
"Silentbobus;c-1497541" wrote:
"leef;c-1497216" wrote:

Right, so how would that work in the sytem you proposed?

Getting first place under the system I proposed would take strategy, tactics, intuition and would make it exceptionally difficult (although not impossible) for players to collude.

It would also take a great deal of luck. As someone already pointed out earlier:
With your system, you rank 5th, fight for 1st place, win, and then still be ranked 5th afterwards. This type of randomness is a spoiler in arenas. In the current system this kind of randomness doesn't exist.

The system I am proposing has no randomness in it, it is completely deterministic. If you are saying that what other people do has an impact on the outcome of the match, then yes, you are correct it does. But what other players do already has a far greater impact in the current system in the sense it currently prevents matches from being played at all.

But at this point I think I'm tired of advocating for this system, I'd just like to advocate moving away from the current system. I've played a lot of PvP RPGs and card games and this is the first one where players could prevent you from challenging them. Thinking back on the others, all of the others used Elo so I would imagine that is the easiest to implement. You beat someone, you get a higher Elo rating, highest Elo rating at the end of the day is the highest rank. In practice it would work out much the same to what I was originally proposing because beating someone who got knocked down while you were beating them would net you less points, but the effect wouldn't be as dramatic.

So whoever can afford the most refreshes and there by win the most matches gets first. That's pay to win without question and an awful idea.
449710430e37db5
7 years ago
Highest ELO rating at the end of whose day? Your day or mine? This is an international game. Unless you advocating a payout in every single possible time zone (38 at last count), it’s still a terribad idea.
SilentBobUS
7 years ago
"Darthpedro;c-1488824" wrote:
why don't we just award everyone random rewards all 20k players in grouping can be 1 big lottery.

This is a terrible idea. There needs to be an incentive to climb the ladder for better payouts.