GA Algorithm - Worse Than Before??

"YaeVizsla;c-1897666" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1897617" wrote:
Apparently so are the several hundred people flooding the forums and Reddit with similar matchup concerns.

In the first (failed) launch of GAC, there was a guy in our bracket who had a 6* Traya, no Malak and no DR. Many of the rest of us had 2 (2 had all 3) maxed. And the differences in mods, g12, zetas, etc. were all way off compared to previous iterations of GA. I'm not "playing the victim". I legitimately think something is wrong with the matchup calculations.

The "new" algorithm has created far less even matchups within a given bracket than the previous one, as evidenced by the numerous screen shots (both in-game and from Discord) showing a much bigger discrepancy in matchups.

Is it, though?

A lot of the people who actually show the full Discord readout- which is not the majority of those complaining- have pretty fair matchups but large toon GP disparities that appear to be caused by fluff.

We had one thread a few minutes ago where the OP was courteous enough to include links to rosters. They were complaining about a 400k difference in character GP, but I scroll down to the bottom of their opponent's roster and I'm seeing things like a 4* G8 level 85 Sith Marauder. The opponent had WAY more fluff.

These complaints are flooding, but are they really valid?

I'll let CG decide. That's why I am posting.

I realize my 8-player bracket is a small sample size - but the first GAC and this one are by far the worst GA matchups, in terms of balance, I have ever seen compared to any previous GA - no matter what metrics you want to look at - g12, zetas, character GP, mods, etc. There are much bigger discrepancies in all of those areas between the strongest and weakest players in these GAC brackets then there ever were before. I am sitting down dinner right now, but am more than happy to post full screen shots (and discord stats) to back up that claim tomorrow morning when I have more time.

But CG can check all that as well - and on a much larger scale. That's why I am bringing it to their attention.