GAC Matchmaking badly needed, but will never get

"LukeDukem8;c-2205239" wrote:

"Gifafi;c-2204821" wrote:

"LukeDukem8;c-2204775" wrote:

"Gifafi;c-2188880" wrote:
https://swgoh.gg/p/853873546/characters/

well you have a lot of high relic chars but looks like not the reqs for slkr/rey, 11 r7, 5 r6 and a numch of r5 and below.

https://swgoh.gg/p/798333642/ opponent has jml and rey, and jkl, 11 r7, some r6, and multiple lower relics too.

tbh it looks like you just ran into an insanely focused roster. normally it's clear to see why one is bad choices, but here, while you took too many to r7 and have some questionable choices for other high relics, you should normally probably be matched with one gl, and just got real unlucky. imo

If my collegiate basketball team was pitted against some third grade team all because we were in the same gym and it was unlucky, neither side would have fun and would obviously not be a good match.

The point is it shouldn't come down to luck. It should be more thought out to provide the best player experience for both sides. IMO, this shouldn't happen and the GL's need to be weighted differently in their matchmaking algorithm.

that's not a correct analogy. The point is you relic'd up a bunch of toons but not enough to get a GL, that matches you with people who relic'd up chars and did get a GL. Matchmaking doesn't happen to you, you happen to it

actually the point is competitive balance and game play. Why design an algorithm that pins such a strong team against an opponent who has no shot of winning. Where is the fun in that? It's a game, it should be fun for both sides.

Someone makes an individual choice for their own enjoyment and you basically tell them they can't play one of the game modes because of a bad algorithm or is unlucky (which luck should never be involved in matchmaking).

Why even bother having GP tiers? Why stop at 0 GL's vs 2, we should pin 0 GL's vs 4, because who doesn't have a GL clearly has no idea what they are doing.

It doesn't make sense and is bad game design.

Part of the strategy is building your roster. And they typically release new toons that are better (see being an exception). People chase these toons and pay an exorbitant amount of money to get them early.

Now let's assume for a second you got your way and people who paid for the next new meta character that was amazing, only faced others that did the same in gac. Well it wouldn't be long before many of them realized that they paid for nothing when they could have just not bough the new amazing character and been just as well off.

So you may not like it, but your suggestion would remove a reason for many people to spend on new characters. So CG is never going to change it to be that way.

"DarkHelmet1138;c-2205874" wrote:

"LukeDukem8;c-2205239" wrote:

"Gifafi;c-2204821" wrote:

"LukeDukem8;c-2204775" wrote:

"Gifafi;c-2188880" wrote:
https://swgoh.gg/p/853873546/characters/

well you have a lot of high relic chars but looks like not the reqs for slkr/rey, 11 r7, 5 r6 and a numch of r5 and below.

https://swgoh.gg/p/798333642/ opponent has jml and rey, and jkl, 11 r7, some r6, and multiple lower relics too.

tbh it looks like you just ran into an insanely focused roster. normally it's clear to see why one is bad choices, but here, while you took too many to r7 and have some questionable choices for other high relics, you should normally probably be matched with one gl, and just got real unlucky. imo

If my collegiate basketball team was pitted against some third grade team all because we were in the same gym and it was unlucky, neither side would have fun and would obviously not be a good match.

The point is it shouldn't come down to luck. It should be more thought out to provide the best player experience for both sides. IMO, this shouldn't happen and the GL's need to be weighted differently in their matchmaking algorithm.

that's not a correct analogy. The point is you relic'd up a bunch of toons but not enough to get a GL, that matches you with people who relic'd up chars and did get a GL. Matchmaking doesn't happen to you, you happen to it

actually the point is competitive balance and game play. Why design an algorithm that pins such a strong team against an opponent who has no shot of winning. Where is the fun in that? It's a game, it should be fun for both sides.

Someone makes an individual choice for their own enjoyment and you basically tell them they can't play one of the game modes because of a bad algorithm or is unlucky (which luck should never be involved in matchmaking).

Why even bother having GP tiers? Why stop at 0 GL's vs 2, we should pin 0 GL's vs 4, because who doesn't have a GL clearly has no idea what they are doing.

It doesn't make sense and is bad game design.

Part of the strategy is building your roster. And they typically release new toons that are better (see being an exception). People chase these toons and pay an exorbitant amount of money to get them early.

Now let's assume for a second you got your way and people who paid for the next new meta character that was amazing, only faced others that did the same in gac. Well it wouldn't be long before many of them realized that they paid for nothing when they could have just not bough the new amazing character and been just as well off.

So you may not like it, but your suggestion would remove a reason for many people to spend on new characters. So CG is never going to change it to be that way.

I don't even know where to begin on how many things are off with this statement.

But it sounds like your point is they should match a kraken with 4 GL's against a player with none to give them a variety in opponents. And you actually think that kraken is going to see value in what they spent because they could beat a crap roster.

wow..

"LukeDukem8;c-2206112" wrote:

"DarkHelmet1138;c-2205874" wrote:

"LukeDukem8;c-2205239" wrote:

"Gifafi;c-2204821" wrote:

"LukeDukem8;c-2204775" wrote:

"Gifafi;c-2188880" wrote:
https://swgoh.gg/p/853873546/characters/

well you have a lot of high relic chars but looks like not the reqs for slkr/rey, 11 r7, 5 r6 and a numch of r5 and below.

https://swgoh.gg/p/798333642/ opponent has jml and rey, and jkl, 11 r7, some r6, and multiple lower relics too.

tbh it looks like you just ran into an insanely focused roster. normally it's clear to see why one is bad choices, but here, while you took too many to r7 and have some questionable choices for other high relics, you should normally probably be matched with one gl, and just got real unlucky. imo

If my collegiate basketball team was pitted against some third grade team all because we were in the same gym and it was unlucky, neither side would have fun and would obviously not be a good match.

The point is it shouldn't come down to luck. It should be more thought out to provide the best player experience for both sides. IMO, this shouldn't happen and the GL's need to be weighted differently in their matchmaking algorithm.

that's not a correct analogy. The point is you relic'd up a bunch of toons but not enough to get a GL, that matches you with people who relic'd up chars and did get a GL. Matchmaking doesn't happen to you, you happen to it

actually the point is competitive balance and game play. Why design an algorithm that pins such a strong team against an opponent who has no shot of winning. Where is the fun in that? It's a game, it should be fun for both sides.

Someone makes an individual choice for their own enjoyment and you basically tell them they can't play one of the game modes because of a bad algorithm or is unlucky (which luck should never be involved in matchmaking).

Why even bother having GP tiers? Why stop at 0 GL's vs 2, we should pin 0 GL's vs 4, because who doesn't have a GL clearly has no idea what they are doing.

It doesn't make sense and is bad game design.

Part of the strategy is building your roster. And they typically release new toons that are better (see being an exception). People chase these toons and pay an exorbitant amount of money to get them early.

Now let's assume for a second you got your way and people who paid for the next new meta character that was amazing, only faced others that did the same in gac. Well it wouldn't be long before many of them realized that they paid for nothing when they could have just not bough the new amazing character and been just as well off.

So you may not like it, but your suggestion would remove a reason for many people to spend on new characters. So CG is never going to change it to be that way.

I don't even know where to begin on how many things are off with this statement.

But it sounds like your point is they should match a kraken with 4 GL's against a player with none to give them a variety in opponents. And you actually think that kraken is going to see value in what they spent because they could beat a crap roster.

wow..

But that's the catch. You are not being matched with a kraken (unless you are one yourself), rather with someone that spent roughly the same amount of resources but allocated them in a more efficient way.

This is my matchmaking GP cost for SLKR. If I had not gone for him, I would just have one FO squad around g11 - g12 with maybe KRU g13 and Palp probably g12.



If you have bloated the top end of your roster like this without acquiring a GL then that is on you.

People here seem to think that the argument is about the choices someone makes and how it's their own fault that they are getting matched up with someone who has 2 GLS.

The key argument here is BALANCE and game play (at the end of the day we are playing a game here). We have already seen examples of extreme mismatches where someone with 0 GLs is matched up against someone with 2. and the only counter I have heard is "well they were smarter".

It shouldn't matter how smart someone plays or what toons they did or did not farm. Good game design would match two people of equal inventories (not just on GP math). This makes for a better experience for BOTH players.

I have never disagreed about personal choices, I have never even disagreed that the players who are more focused on GAC are probably set up for more success. (as they should be)

But the thought that someone is playing the game 'wrong" and how it makes total sense for a kraken with 4 GLs should or could be matched with someone with 0 is good for the game because the kraken gets variety is insanely stupid.

"LukeDukem8;c-2207010" wrote:

It shouldn't matter how smart someone plays or what toons they did or did not farm. Good game design would match two people of equal inventories (not just on GP math). This makes for a better experience for BOTH players.

I have never disagreed about personal choices, I have never even disagreed that the players who are more focused on GAC are probably set up for more success. (as they should be)

But the thought that someone is playing the game 'wrong" and how it makes total sense for a kraken with 4 GLs should or could be matched with someone with 0 is good for the game because the kraken gets variety is insanely stupid.

How would your experience be if every GAC would consist of 12 mirror matches with players of equal inventories? I would become bored pretty quickly.

Also, you seem to be contradicting yourself. "Good game design would match two people of equal inventories" but at the same time "players who are more focused on GAC should be set up for more success". How would players who build their roster well for GAC be set up for more success if they are matched with players with equal inventorie?

Noone is playing the game wrong. There's no right or wrong way. However, a player who chooses to relic Phoenix, tusken and ewok instead of unlocking a GL will have a hard time in GAC - as they should. How you build your roster influences your chances of success. It's no different than other game modes.

"Waqui;c-2207063" wrote:

"LukeDukem8;c-2207010" wrote:

It shouldn't matter how smart someone plays or what toons they did or did not farm. Good game design would match two people of equal inventories (not just on GP math). This makes for a better experience for BOTH players.

I have never disagreed about personal choices, I have never even disagreed that the players who are more focused on GAC are probably set up for more success. (as they should be)

But the thought that someone is playing the game 'wrong" and how it makes total sense for a kraken with 4 GLs should or could be matched with someone with 0 is good for the game because the kraken gets variety is insanely stupid.

How would your experience be if every GAC would consist of 12 mirror matches with players of equal inventories? I would become bored pretty quickly.

Also, you seem to be contradicting yourself. "Good game design would match two people of equal inventories" but at the same time "players who are more focused on GAC should be set up for more success". How would players who build their roster well for GAC be set up for more success if they are matched with players with equal inventorie?

Noone is playing the game wrong. There's no right or wrong way. However, a player who chooses to relic Phoenix, tusken and ewok instead of unlocking a GL will have a hard time in GAC - as they should. How you build your roster influences your chances of success. It's no different than other game modes.

I think you are taking the balanced/equal comment to a bit extreme. There will always be variances. However the GL disparity takes things to a new level that compromises (my belief) of the spirit of the game mode, not to mention overall game enjoyment by both sides. (again my position).

Let's be honest about the difficulty in facing a GL on defense and how it would eat up significant resources to a player who doesn't have a GL, much less a 2 GL disparity.

As for those that are GAC focused, there are other factors to consider than just toons. Mods, factions, theory crafting design that (should) come more into play beyond just having a GL advantage or not.

Again, I invested 349k matchmaking GP (not to mention a ton of gear, relic materials and zetas) in toons I would not otherwise have bothered with in order to own a GL.

If those were my only relic toons then my roster would be horribly unbalanced and vulnerable in other ways.

Either way, you would have to relic up at least that many characters in order to get matched with me in GAC.

If you made good choices then you would have the tools to beat me. If you did not make good choices then you would be in trouble. But that was also true before I had a GL.

"LukeDukem8;c-2207100" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2207063" wrote:

"LukeDukem8;c-2207010" wrote:

It shouldn't matter how smart someone plays or what toons they did or did not farm. Good game design would match two people of equal inventories (not just on GP math). This makes for a better experience for BOTH players.

I have never disagreed about personal choices, I have never even disagreed that the players who are more focused on GAC are probably set up for more success. (as they should be)

But the thought that someone is playing the game 'wrong" and how it makes total sense for a kraken with 4 GLs should or could be matched with someone with 0 is good for the game because the kraken gets variety is insanely stupid.

How would your experience be if every GAC would consist of 12 mirror matches with players of equal inventories? I would become bored pretty quickly.

Also, you seem to be contradicting yourself. "Good game design would match two people of equal inventories" but at the same time "players who are more focused on GAC should be set up for more success". How would players who build their roster well for GAC be set up for more success if they are matched with players with equal inventorie?

Noone is playing the game wrong. There's no right or wrong way. However, a player who chooses to relic Phoenix, tusken and ewok instead of unlocking a GL will have a hard time in GAC - as they should. How you build your roster influences your chances of success. It's no different than other game modes.

I think you are taking the balanced/equal comment to a bit extreme. There will always be variances. However the GL disparity takes things to a new level that compromises (my belief) of the spirit of the game mode, not to mention overall game enjoyment by both sides. (again my position).

Let's be honest about the difficulty in facing a GL on defense and how it would eat up significant resources to a player who doesn't have a GL, much less a 2 GL disparity.

As for those that are GAC focused, there are other factors to consider than just toons. Mods, factions, theory crafting design that (should) come more into play beyond just having a GL advantage or not.

Even with only little variances it would be boring.

It's not a new level of disparity. We've seen the same kind of complaints with f.ex. Malak the first few months after he was released - and even with Han's Falcon which was quite easy to unlock. The complaints usually stop as more and more players unlock the new META characters or build their counters. Players that put their mind to it will unlock the new GLs or build their counters as well one by one. Players that don't put their mind to it may have a harder time in GAC.

Let's be honest about the difficulty in facing a GL on defense: There are non-GL counters. Yes, some of them require key characters from two or more factions but they are out there.

"Rath_Tarr;c-2207629" wrote:
Again, I invested 349k matchmaking GP (not to mention a ton of gear, relic materials and zetas) in toons I would not otherwise have bothered with in order to own a GL.

If those were my only relic toons then my roster would be horribly unbalanced and vulnerable in other ways.

Either way, you would have to relic up at least that many characters in order to get matched with me in GAC.

If you made good choices then you would have the tools to beat me. If you did not make good choices then you would be in trouble. But that was also true before I had a GL.

Not if you had 2 GL's vs a player with none (which has been the argument the entire time).