Getting old with the GP disparity - every level is having this problem besides Kyber 1

GP is not everything. I'm 7M and just beat a 9.4M account that pretty much had everything, and with relics at that. They actually played well but made one small mistake that caused them to drop a battle. I punished that and ended up winning with a 1 banner difference.

I think this is the best matchmaking has ever been.

New systems works perfectly fine without the sandbaggers. The skill system can't really take into account sandbagging. So higher reward penalties and less skill points lost for sandbagging might help.

Just curious how do you seperate sandbagging and reallife problems?

here is an idea to "punish" sandbaggers:
don't reward everyone with the same amount of crystals for a win. put in the gp difference as a factor (maybe only if the difference gets to high, like it exceeds 10% of the players gp). so low gp winning against a big one will give significantly more crystals.

"pinguinbooks;c-2353110" wrote:
here is an idea to "punish" sandbaggers:
don't reward everyone with the same amount of crystals for a win. put in the gp difference as a factor (maybe only if the difference gets to high, like it exceeds 10% of the players gp). so low gp winning against a big one will give significantly more crystals.

I don't support this. People like me, who have bloated their GP for TB deployment and TW-rewards, are punished by your Idea.

"Phoenixeon;c-2353098" wrote:
Just curious how do you seperate sandbagging and reallife problems?

Maybe you can't, but if you have real life problems rewards ain't your biggest concern. However, maybe you can.

1. Sandbagging is a repeated thing.

2. Sandbagging you're signing up and doing minimal attacking for rewards. An RL more likely than not wouldn't result in this.

Meh, I just take those days off. I look for a squad to auto with Wampa and relax until the next round. Some people envy Sisyphus pushing the rock up the hill for eternity. Don't be those people. Put the rock down.

I don't know why we would want to incorporate GP into matchmaking and/or rewards, again. Have we already forgotten about all the threads complaining about the GP-based mismatches, and the fundamental flaw that caused the mismatches: one single numerical value does not even begin to measure a roster?

"CCyrilS;c-2352995" wrote:

"Fingolfin26;c-2352993" wrote:
I don't see why this is so challenging an issue. Start with the current matchmaking, then after you've got everyone grouped further refine the matches based on number of gls bare minimum. A gl will trump skill with a given roster when you don't have enough tools. Then you get people who are at least close on number of gls, and there's a reasonable chance of victory for both sides

Terrible idea. Takes away a hard earned advantage for those who have GLs.

Also, your premise that GLs trump skill is absolutely false. I just went 3-0 and every single opponent had more GP and more GLs (and they all showed up to play)

Terrible idea.

No, it doesn't. The idea of skill based matchmaking is to not match people with advantages. It's to match people who are close.

Your first statement contradicts your second statement. Additionally the fact you beat people with more gls doesn't disapprove anything. Just because gls will tell skill WITH A GIVEN ROSTER. Read what I actually wrote instead of just resorting to straw man arguments. Logical fallacies should be left at the door.

Cg has nerfed the vast majority of non gl counters. So your skill is moot, if you are at a disadvantage in gls. Again with some exception as there are a few counters left with high relics and great mods. Also the fact that your opponents showed up to play doesn't mean they played well, their skill might be significantly inferior to yours.

Also I said close on number of gls, not the exact same number. How many more did your opponents have?