GAC Tiebreaker

"Waqui;c-2192244" wrote:

"Camdent13;c-2192106" wrote:

"DarjeloSalas;c-2192072" wrote:

"Camdent13;c-2192050" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-2191993" wrote:

"Camdent13;c-2191990" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2191950" wrote:

"Camdent13;c-2191948" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2191887" wrote:
Total GP is irrelevant for your chances to win a round so why do you consider yourself the underdog? You and your opponent have matching relevant GP.

The underdog comment was just simply because I had the lower GP.

If that's true why should you "be rewarded for being the underdog and competing with the higher GP player" (your words)?

Because in the end someone has to take the tie breaker and giving it to someone who has 300k more GP than me seems like the wrong way to go.

But that 300k more GP didn't have any effect on the outcome. So perhaps think of it as a nod to the player who has the slightly more well-rounded roster?

But by that theory why are we rewarding a player with a “more well rounded roster” with the win when he clearly underperformed and tied someone with a lesser GP.

This is at least the 20th thread asking for this. I can see the logic from a distance, but when you drill down to it, the lower total GP winning a tiebreak argument doesn’t make any sense.

You and your opponent have been matched on the appropriate portion of your roster. The total GP is irrelevant to why you were matched together.

You and your opponent set 33 toons (I assume, can’t tell if you’re div 1/2 or not) each on defence. And by the looks of the map used 15 toons successfully on offence.

So, the fact that you have less GP on the bottom half of your roster than your opponent does not in any way make you “the underdog”.

Thank you that’s one of the better comments I’ve had on this. I guess ultimately what my question is, is there a better way to decide a tie breaker. Everyone’s saying overall gp is irrelevant in matchmaking but in the end is the only thing that decides a tie.

Using a coin flip as tiebreaker could be fine. However, the designers chose to reward the player who built the higher GP roster - probably to encourage investing resources (and possibly spending) - and that's fine as well.

This mechanism dates back to the original GA when matchmaking was by total GP and the total GP spread between opponents was small. More likely it was just a simple solution which they decided worked well enough.

It was always arbitrary though, with one player in each bracket having 100% chance to win any tie, one player having 0% chance and the others being somewhere in-between.