Grand Arena Matchups

"Liath;c-1866032" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866021" wrote:

"Liath;c-1866020" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866014" wrote:


All of that presumes they actually care enough about GA to make the matchups as even as possible. Which is also questionable.

It also presumes they believe making the matchups as even as possible is an appropriate goal, which is entirely separate from whether they “care enough.” I believe that would be a terrible goal.

Why would making fair matchups be a terrible goal? It has always been my understanding that making the matchups as even as possible was the goal of GA. GA was seemingly meant to be a 1 on 1 version of TW - which, also seeks to make the matches even.

Uneven matchups and "keep up with the Jones'" is the function of the two arenas.

We’ve had this conversation a dozen times, do you really not remember the answer? First of all you said “as even as possible,” which you are now conflating with “as fair as possible,” but those are not the same thing. Arena simply matches people on a different metric than GA (time played vs GP). Different matching metrics can be fair without creating matches among identical rosters.

My opinion is that making matches as even as possible (which can only be accomplished by matching people with basically identical rosters, since anything less will continue to lead to “fairness” complaints) is terrible because it means I can never improve my chances of winning by improving my roster. If I plan really well and am one of #the882 can I be excited that I will do better in GA? Nope, I’ll only face other people who got Malak too, whereas I’d I hadn’t bothered I wouldn’t have had to face him. If I get that unicorn +25 speed mod can I be excited that it will help me do better in GA? Nope, I will get paired against somebody with the same number of +25 speed mods I have. For me, personally, this would remove a lot of enjoyment.

100% agree.

"Liath;c-1866032" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866021" wrote:

"Liath;c-1866020" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866014" wrote:


All of that presumes they actually care enough about GA to make the matchups as even as possible. Which is also questionable.

It also presumes they believe making the matchups as even as possible is an appropriate goal, which is entirely separate from whether they “care enough.” I believe that would be a terrible goal.

Why would making fair matchups be a terrible goal? It has always been my understanding that making the matchups as even as possible was the goal of GA. GA was seemingly meant to be a 1 on 1 version of TW - which, also seeks to make the matches even.

Uneven matchups and "keep up with the Jones'" is the function of the two arenas.

We’ve had this conversation a dozen times, do you really not remember the answer? First of all you said “as even as possible,” which you are now conflating with “as fair as possible,” but those are not the same thing. Arena simply matches people on a different metric than GA (time played vs GP). Different matching metrics can be fair without creating matches among identical rosters.

My opinion is that making matches as even as possible (which can only be accomplished by matching people with basically identical rosters, since anything less will continue to lead to “fairness” complaints) is terrible because it means I can never improve my chances of winning by improving my roster. If I plan really well and am one of #the882 can I be excited that I will do better in GA? Nope, I’ll only face other people who got Malak too, whereas I’d I hadn’t bothered I wouldn’t have had to face him. If I get that unicorn +25 speed mod can I be excited that it will help me do better in GA? Nope, I will get paired against somebody with the same number of +25 speed mods I have. For me, personally, this would remove a lot of enjoyment.

How does this encourage people who have DR/Malak (or whatever the current OP characters are) to improve if they are consistently matched up against inferior rosters, so all they have to do is out their OP team on defense and relax?

I presume that CG wants the different game modes to function differently. Not simply have every single game mode boil down to a "Malak check". If their intent is as you suggest (i.e. make everyone have Malak or lose) then that is really poor game design, as it simply boils the game down to "do you have the recent OP team?" - just changes the conditions under which the question is asked. That would remove all enjoyment from the game - for both those that can answer yes and those that have to answer no.

I've been on both sides. I've had GA matchups where I have JKR, and the other player doesn't. I won easily and found it terrible boring, as it was a forgone conclusion. The same holds true when facing rosters that have DR/Malak when I have neither. Unless they play absolutely horribly (or forget to play at all), it's simply a boring foregone conclusion for both of us.

I can't speak for other players, but I spend money to support a game when I am enjoying myself. GA, when the matchups are uneven, is not enjoyable - no matter which side of the advantage you are on. If you of the opinion that GA should be a boring, foregone conclusion, to somehow encourage spending, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Especially when the rewards for a several day event are so paltry, it doesn't do that.

"Nikoms565;c-1866044" wrote:

"Liath;c-1866032" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866021" wrote:

"Liath;c-1866020" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866014" wrote:


All of that presumes they actually care enough about GA to make the matchups as even as possible. Which is also questionable.

It also presumes they believe making the matchups as even as possible is an appropriate goal, which is entirely separate from whether they “care enough.” I believe that would be a terrible goal.

Why would making fair matchups be a terrible goal? It has always been my understanding that making the matchups as even as possible was the goal of GA. GA was seemingly meant to be a 1 on 1 version of TW - which, also seeks to make the matches even.

Uneven matchups and "keep up with the Jones'" is the function of the two arenas.

We’ve had this conversation a dozen times, do you really not remember the answer? First of all you said “as even as possible,” which you are now conflating with “as fair as possible,” but those are not the same thing. Arena simply matches people on a different metric than GA (time played vs GP). Different matching metrics can be fair without creating matches among identical rosters.

My opinion is that making matches as even as possible (which can only be accomplished by matching people with basically identical rosters, since anything less will continue to lead to “fairness” complaints) is terrible because it means I can never improve my chances of winning by improving my roster. If I plan really well and am one of #the882 can I be excited that I will do better in GA? Nope, I’ll only face other people who got Malak too, whereas I’d I hadn’t bothered I wouldn’t have had to face him. If I get that unicorn +25 speed mod can I be excited that it will help me do better in GA? Nope, I will get paired against somebody with the same number of +25 speed mods I have. For me, personally, this would remove a lot of enjoyment.

How does this encourage people who have DR/Malak (or whatever the current OP characters are) to improve if they are consistently matched up against inferior rosters, so all they have to do is out their OP team on defense and relax?

1) I don't always face non-DR/Malak rosters.
2) I won't always have a DR/Malak advantage.

"Nikoms565;c-1866044" wrote:

"Liath;c-1866032" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866021" wrote:

"Liath;c-1866020" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866014" wrote:


All of that presumes they actually care enough about GA to make the matchups as even as possible. Which is also questionable.

It also presumes they believe making the matchups as even as possible is an appropriate goal, which is entirely separate from whether they “care enough.” I believe that would be a terrible goal.

Why would making fair matchups be a terrible goal? It has always been my understanding that making the matchups as even as possible was the goal of GA. GA was seemingly meant to be a 1 on 1 version of TW - which, also seeks to make the matches even.

Uneven matchups and "keep up with the Jones'" is the function of the two arenas.

We’ve had this conversation a dozen times, do you really not remember the answer? First of all you said “as even as possible,” which you are now conflating with “as fair as possible,” but those are not the same thing. Arena simply matches people on a different metric than GA (time played vs GP). Different matching metrics can be fair without creating matches among identical rosters.

My opinion is that making matches as even as possible (which can only be accomplished by matching people with basically identical rosters, since anything less will continue to lead to “fairness” complaints) is terrible because it means I can never improve my chances of winning by improving my roster. If I plan really well and am one of #the882 can I be excited that I will do better in GA? Nope, I’ll only face other people who got Malak too, whereas I’d I hadn’t bothered I wouldn’t have had to face him. If I get that unicorn +25 speed mod can I be excited that it will help me do better in GA? Nope, I will get paired against somebody with the same number of +25 speed mods I have. For me, personally, this would remove a lot of enjoyment.

How does this encourage people who have DR/Malak (or whatever the current OP characters are) to improve if they are consistently matched up against inferior rosters, so all they have to do is out their OP team on defense and relax?

I presume that CG wants the different game modes to function differently. Not simply have every single game mode boil down to a "Malak check". If their intent is as you suggest (i.e. make everyone have Malak or lose) then that is really poor game design, as it simply boils the game down to "do you have the recent OP team?" - just changes the conditions under which the question is asked. That would remove all enjoyment from the game - for both those that can answer yes and those that have to answer no.

I've been on both sides. I've had GA matchups where I have JKR, and the other player doesn't. I won easily and found it terrible boring, as it was a forgone conclusion. The same holds true when facing rosters that have DR/Malak when I have neither. Unless they play absolutely horribly (or forget to play at all), it's simply a boring foregone conclusion for both of us.

I can't speak for other players, but I spend money to support a game when I am enjoying myself. GA, when the matchups are uneven, is not enjoyable - no matter which side of the advantage you are on. If you of the opinion that GA should be a boring, foregone conclusion, to somehow encourage spending, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Especially when the rewards for a several day event are so paltry, it doesn't do that.

Do you think that every person with Malak now goes 3-0 in every GA? Or do you recognize that it’s not that simplistic? There were what, like 15,000 people that got Malak? (I might be mixing that number up with DR but it’s some number of thousands.) People that got Malak will face others who got him in addition to people who didn’t get him. People who got him can still lose GA due to a variety of factors. In fact one of the most talked about subjects people in my guild have gotten excited about lately is beating people who had DR and/or Malak when they didn’t.

People with Malak are encouraged to improve because they know they might face somebody else who also has him. They are encouraged to improve because they know one team is not sufficient to guarantee wins against otherwise strong opponents. And to the extent that they do win matches more easily, they are encouraged to shell out money and/or saved resources again next time for the next OP character in order to retain that advantage.

Also, there is a lot of room between “as even as possible” and “every match is a foregone conclusion.” The devs have announced an intention to make the matchmaking more even than it currently is. That can be done without making it “as even as possible” like you demand.

"Liath;c-1866052" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866044" wrote:

"Liath;c-1866032" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866021" wrote:

"Liath;c-1866020" wrote:

"Nikoms565;c-1866014" wrote:


All of that presumes they actually care enough about GA to make the matchups as even as possible. Which is also questionable.

It also presumes they believe making the matchups as even as possible is an appropriate goal, which is entirely separate from whether they “care enough.” I believe that would be a terrible goal.

Why would making fair matchups be a terrible goal? It has always been my understanding that making the matchups as even as possible was the goal of GA. GA was seemingly meant to be a 1 on 1 version of TW - which, also seeks to make the matches even.

Uneven matchups and "keep up with the Jones'" is the function of the two arenas.

We’ve had this conversation a dozen times, do you really not remember the answer? First of all you said “as even as possible,” which you are now conflating with “as fair as possible,” but those are not the same thing. Arena simply matches people on a different metric than GA (time played vs GP). Different matching metrics can be fair without creating matches among identical rosters.

My opinion is that making matches as even as possible (which can only be accomplished by matching people with basically identical rosters, since anything less will continue to lead to “fairness” complaints) is terrible because it means I can never improve my chances of winning by improving my roster. If I plan really well and am one of #the882 can I be excited that I will do better in GA? Nope, I’ll only face other people who got Malak too, whereas I’d I hadn’t bothered I wouldn’t have had to face him. If I get that unicorn +25 speed mod can I be excited that it will help me do better in GA? Nope, I will get paired against somebody with the same number of +25 speed mods I have. For me, personally, this would remove a lot of enjoyment.

How does this encourage people who have DR/Malak (or whatever the current OP characters are) to improve if they are consistently matched up against inferior rosters, so all they have to do is out their OP team on defense and relax?

I presume that CG wants the different game modes to function differently. Not simply have every single game mode boil down to a "Malak check". If their intent is as you suggest (i.e. make everyone have Malak or lose) then that is really poor game design, as it simply boils the game down to "do you have the recent OP team?" - just changes the conditions under which the question is asked. That would remove all enjoyment from the game - for both those that can answer yes and those that have to answer no.

I've been on both sides. I've had GA matchups where I have JKR, and the other player doesn't. I won easily and found it terrible boring, as it was a forgone conclusion. The same holds true when facing rosters that have DR/Malak when I have neither. Unless they play absolutely horribly (or forget to play at all), it's simply a boring foregone conclusion for both of us.

I can't speak for other players, but I spend money to support a game when I am enjoying myself. GA, when the matchups are uneven, is not enjoyable - no matter which side of the advantage you are on. If you of the opinion that GA should be a boring, foregone conclusion, to somehow encourage spending, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Especially when the rewards for a several day event are so paltry, it doesn't do that.

Do you think that every person with Malak now goes 3-0 in every GA? Or do you recognize that it’s not that simplistic? There were what, like 15,000 people that got Malak? (I might be mixing that number up with DR but it’s some number of thousands.) People that got Malak will face others who got him in addition to people who didn’t get him. People who got him can still lose GA due to a variety of factors. In fact one of the most talked about subjects people in my guild have gotten excited about lately is beating people who had DR and/or Malak when they didn’t.

People with Malak are encouraged to improve because they know they might face somebody else who also has him. They are encouraged to improve because they know one team is not sufficient to guarantee wins against otherwise strong opponents. And to the extent that they do win matches more easily, they are encouraged to shell out money and/or saved resources again next time for the next OP character in order to retain that advantage.

Also, there is a lot of room between “as even as possible” and “every match is a foregone conclusion.” The devs have announced an intention to make the matchmaking more even than it currently is. That can be done without making it “as even as possible” like you demand.

I think we can be done with this topic. We're splitting hairs now. You seem to think that the devs announced intention to make matchmaking more even somehow doesn't include my points regarding Malak. And on the other hand seem content to cast my points in the most hyperbolic extremes you can come up with.

I am pleased that you at least acknowledged the developers intention to make GA more even - as the DR/Malak situation in GA is clearly the most glaring (and most posted about) example.

"EgoSlayer;c-1864527" wrote:

"Waqui;c-1864516" wrote:

"EgoSlayer;c-1864379" wrote:
There is a difference between not performing optimally, and being punished for spending resources. GA is the latter. Until the introduction of GA there is *no* game mode where expanding your roster and spending resources penalized you.

Fluff could also give you a harder opponent in TW just like it does in GA. It's not a new thing. It's amazing how some players appear surprised by this effect.

The developers intention is that players should *never* be penalized for spending resources to improve your characters.

It seems like you misinterpreted the announcements regarding the paper zombie situation. That announcement said, that a character should always become stronger / more usefull, when you spend ressources on it. That's not the same thing as what you claim.

Again - a fundamental difference between not performing optimally and an actual penalty for having GP. 10 8K GP characters does not in any way compete with a 5 character 80K team in GA - yet GA thinks they are the same.

GA matches by GP. GA doesn't match players to create even matches/battles. GA doesn't 'think' it's the same.

TW "Fluff" nets higher rewards and is distributed across 25-50 rosters and is a game mode where everyone on average only needs 8-10 teams total so the majority of every TW player's roster is "fluff" because it's never needed. GA players often need that many just for defense from a single roster, and then likewise matching number for attacking. It's not even remotely the same.

Yet, fluff still has the same effect on match-making contrary to your claims. And once you cross the threshold for the highest rewards tier, there's no positive effect. If you fluffed up you roster to reach a higher reward tier, you always knew, that one day that fluff would loose its positive effect.

But it sounds like they are finally changing it because GP is a poor measure for matchmaking. And they know it, so its getting addressed.

The changes will be introduced along with the introduction of GA championshipswhich will also introduced tiered rewards. It's just the way it should be. If we would all still fight for the exact same rewards, those announced changes to match-making would be unfair. With rewards tiers I believe it's fair enough.

They knew it in TW as well, because they added other criteria to the TW matchmaking that included some limited roster comparisons as part of the matching shortly after it's release that was using GP only.

Previously there could be rather large differences in active GP in TW matches. They changed the match-making algorithm (last fall, IIRC) to create more even matches GP-wise.

"Dk_rek;c-1864294" wrote:

"Scuttlebutt;c-1850163" wrote:


But seriously, if you want to stop the bleeding, just don’t activate new characters or ships until absolutely needed. Don’t Star up toons or ships until needed. And remove mods from characters you don’t use in GA (assuming you don’t use them elsewhere too). Ships are a huge hit right now...just activating a 5* palpmobile was 40k power for me.

Sorry, But it took me 3 years of hard grinding to get to 4.3 million GP, taking my vitamins saying my prayers drinking my milk to follow the TB advice of devs (when released) to help my guild.

You don't just lean that out in 2, 4, 6, 8, months... fluff guys can't compete and never will be able to compete..because the people destroying them now will graduate eventually out of your GP range and the NEWER players who never fluffed rosters to begin with will eventually begin to climb into your GP range with 0 fluff and make matters worse....

In fact this is the best it's ever going to be for fluff guys (last place) lol. (can't get worse anyway)

GA championships..... we will see what they roll out.... who knows maybe at the bottom ranks fluff guys can play fluff guys and have a chance to win one here and there.

So basically you're saying that you're a Fluff-er who has fluffed a lot in the past?
:o

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/fluffer

"leef;c-1866543" wrote:

"Scuttlebutt;c-1866467" wrote:

"WEDWAY;c-1865948" wrote:

"Scuttlebutt;c-1850163" wrote:
Get ready for a wave of comments about how GA matchups are fair and nothing needs to change, get gud, you shouldn’t have wasted resources on fluff, and how this matchmaking is nothing new since TW using the same thing.

But seriously, if you want to stop the bleeding, just don’t activate new characters or ships until absolutely needed. Don’t Star up toons or ships until needed. And remove mods from characters you don’t use in GA (assuming you don’t use them elsewhere too). Ships are a huge hit right now...just activating a 5* palpmobile was 40k power for me.

Well, it happened. There are so many biased opinions that just want to prove why I am wrong. It is a waste to post problems on a site like this. Thank you to those who tried to support my post. I am not going to pull apart any responses to comment on every sentence. No matter what I write, these are the type of people who will only support their opinions and not try to understand a situation that someone else is experiencing. In some cases, I think people just don't understand the issue. I literally stated,"My son cannot play GA. The matches are way out of his league." Yet, someone responds, "Your son can play." Wow. I have learned my lesson. I was wrong to post on this site. Enjoy the game everyone.

Lol yep. I’ve been arguing GA matchmaking for far too long. I’ve realized that it doesn’t matter what facts, statistics, or numbers you bring to the argument here. People will just find the one sentence that they can actually argue and hone in on that until you give up. Provide enough good facts and those people will just move to the next thread and start repeating the same thing they said here. Or they just blow your argument out of proportion to prove their own point.

Bottom line is that it’s pointless arguing GA matchmaking on these forums. I’ve actually read some good discussions on reddit about matchmaking. And for the most part, there very little trolling despite both sides being involved in the discussion. You should try looking and commenting there.

I'm sorry, but you make it seem like you're the gold standard when it comes to online debating, providing facts, statistics etc etc haha
You're trying to discredit anyone who has a different opinion even before they even said anything with your FIRST post in this thread.
But you're right about it being pointless, it's just the same old biased arguments vs the same old biased arguments over and over again. I mean, the OP is clearly biased and doesn't want to hear the other side of the argument either, so your sympathy towards him is only comming from him sharing your opinion, not because he's above the forum in terms of being able to have a good discussion about this topic, neither are you for that matter.
Have fun on reddit though, cya

I probably shouldn’t have made such a a sweeping statement. I have no problem with you and a few others that disagree with me. In fact, you and I came to an agreement about this topic on another thread.

But I have been in the OP’s position, and I can tell you that it sucks to bring up a point (vague argument or factual based) and have it met with the same comment regardless of what’s said.

And I’ve never claimed that I’m a gold standard for online debating.