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

SilentBobUS
7 years ago
"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.
hendy_2012
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.

Just so you know he was completely serious the 2nd half he was being facetious.
NyKynoe
7 years ago
This idea has been suggested before the problem is that you can jump 5 positions and only be dropped 1.

Honestly i'm sure everyone would love it. you would drop so much less each night. i can drop into the teens after my payout from people moving up, but that would take 12+ attacks if this was done now, rather then 2-3....

This limited movement would drive people crazy.

Then the flip side, I can be battelting for one from 3 and end at 5 because i lost the battles in the time it took me to win. not sure how thats a solution to anything, its no longer anything except an RNG fest.... we have enough of that in fleet right now
SilentBobUS
7 years ago
"Kyno;c-1495490" wrote:
not sure how thats a solution to anything, its no longer anything except an RNG fest.... we have enough of that in fleet right now

It's a solution to the current state, in which you can't play games for the top 3 slots in the 10 minutes before payout because those people are continuously in battles.

As for RNG, there is nothing random about it, it is completely deterministic. If you beat the person you get their slot at the point you beat them. You get to predict whether you think they will be higher or lower, and whether you should try to complete your match quickly or slowly based on that prediction. Which will be a lot of fun. Unless you feel pressing refresh over and over again is fun, because that is what people currently do. Dozens of refreshes to play a single match.

I've seen a lot of message boards where the default position is not to change anything about game mechanics, but I thought people here would have played enough Arena to understand why this is a good idea.
SilentBobUS
7 years ago
"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?
Waquira
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?

Wether the people know or not is irrelevant. The problem remains and you just avoid commenting on it.
SilentBobUS
7 years ago
"Darthpedro;c-1496488" wrote:
"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.

I think you are getting caught up worrying about edge cases. This is a fix for the general case.

Which in my Arena is the top 2 players, sometimes the next 2 as well colluding with each other on Discord before payout time to remain in the top spots. It's not particularly difficult to do, the way I would do it would be to have one person start a match, wait for the full 5 minutes for the draw, then have the other immediately start a match. It isn't a bunch of people playing for the #1 slot, it's 2-4 people with mediocre squads retaining their spots by preventing matches from starting. That is what needs to be fixed. If you have a better way to fix it then by all means post it here.
SilentBobUS
7 years ago
"Darthpedro;c-1496488" wrote:
"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.

You are getting caught up on edge cases. This is a fix for the general case.

Which in my arena is the people in the top two spots, sometimes the people in the top four spots, colluding with each other to ensure that no matches can be started against their squads. I know they are colluding because they tried to rope me into it as well. Under the current system it is very easy to lock down slots, just have #1 play #2 to a draw, then have #2 play #1 to a draw. Rinse and repeat.

If you have a better method to fix this problem than the one I proposed then by all means post it here.
swgohfan29
7 years ago
"Silentbobus;c-1496559" wrote:
"Darthpedro;c-1496488" wrote:
"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.

You are getting caught up on edge cases. This is a fix for the general case.

Which in my arena is the people in the top two spots, sometimes the people in the top four spots, colluding with each other to ensure that no matches can be started against their squads. I know they are colluding because they tried to rope me into it as well. Under the current system it is very easy to lock down slots, just have #1 play #2 to a draw, then have #2 play #1 to a draw. Rinse and repeat.

If you have a better method to fix this problem than the one I proposed then by all means post it here.

1. i dont see a rpobelm, so i dont offer a solution
2. If i attack a player who is just about to finish attacking a player, and both of us win, who do i go to? the player my opponent just beat spot? my opponentz old spot? what happend to the spot that my opponent manages to get? who goes into my spot?
SilentBobUS
7 years ago
"swgohfan29;c-1496563" wrote:
"Silentbobus;c-1496559" wrote:
"Darthpedro;c-1496488" wrote:
"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.

You are getting caught up on edge cases. This is a fix for the general case.

Which in my arena is the people in the top two spots, sometimes the people in the top four spots, colluding with each other to ensure that no matches can be started against their squads. I know they are colluding because they tried to rope me into it as well. Under the current system it is very easy to lock down slots, just have #1 play #2 to a draw, then have #2 play #1 to a draw. Rinse and repeat.

If you have a better method to fix this problem than the one I proposed then by all means post it here.

1. i dont see a rpobelm, so i dont offer a solution
2. If i attack a player who is just about to finish attacking a player, and both of us win, who do i go to? the player my opponent just beat spot? my opponentz old spot? what happend to the spot that my opponent manages to get? who goes into my spot?

1) You really don't see collusion / locked spots in your arena? Where do you place? I remember seeing locked spots even in my first account where I was struggling to stay in the top 100. Now that I end in the top 5 most days I see nothing but locking.

2) It would depend on the timing, lets say that you are in 100th, and attack an opponent is attacking a person in 90th who is attacking 80th and you both win. If you win first, you'd get 90th, and your opponent would get 91th then your opponent would win, getting 80th, which would push you down to 91th. If instead you won after your opponent had already taken 80th, then you'd get 80th and they'd get 81th.

Another way to do this would be to use Elo, which is what most games use for rankings.