"Waqui;c-2189642" wrote:
"LastNeuron;c-2189531" wrote:
Agree, original GP MM was fair than this one, sure for 3v3
You could argue that both MM designs were fair. However, the current system creates significantly more even matches and doesn't disincentivise building the lower part of your roster like the old design did.
This. Both systems are fine. There are arguments for either. There are people who will do better under one than another.
But as in any game, fairness is determined more by the rules applying equally to everyone. And under either matchmaking system, they do. So they are fair.
It's like creating house rules in monopoly. A whole assortment of different rules can be fair as long as they apply equally to all players.
Unfortunately adding GAC was like staring a monopoly game with whatever money you had. No set of rules at that point will be perfect. But any set of uniform rules that base matchmaking on resources put into the game are fair.
One idea for another matchmaking system that would be interesting to see if they could somehow measure resources collected and base matchmaking on that rather than resources used. It would be similar to the original gp matchmaking except it would include hoarded Crystal's and gear at the rate it raises gp. Basically it wouldn't matter whether you gear the low end or hoard because matchmaking would treat both equally.
Probably not feasible but it would be interesting.
I would also be ok with it if they mixed up the matchmaking every so often. Have one gac based on total gp and another based on top 80. Maybe alternate. It's like playing monopoly with extra money one game and without the next. Some people will do better one way and others will do better another way.
