Grand Arena Tie-breaker

"Jiden;c-1952698" wrote:
Just saying that in the spirit of competition, it makes little sense to use "higher GP" as the person who deserves to win.

It's got nothing to do with who deserves to win. You tied. Noone deserves it more than the other. It's a random selection of a winner.

I'll say what i've said several times before (and been ignored!):
1) You can NOT have ties broken by who attacked first/second as this is a worldwide game with all the associated Time Zones so some people will be asleep when GAC Attack rounds start, or at work etc.
2) Breaking a tie based on who has the higher/lower gp is an awful way to deal with a tie. There are multiple "performance" based metrics that could be used, so to just award it to who has the most (or least) gp just feels utterly wrong. However if a sensible person were going to use this particular value then they'd award it to the person with the lesser gp as a way of potentially recognizing "stepping up" against a larger player
3) The way a tie SHOULD be broken is by a "performance metric". Personally I'd do it by awarding the win to whichever player had the most 64-banner first-time wins, if still tied then the most 63 and so on. Then if still completely tied go to whoever had the most first-time undersized squad / fleet victories. Then if still tied go to whoever had the most Defensive holds, then if still tied who had the most Offensive first-time wins, and if still completely tied (unlikely!!) Only at that point would you move to using gp - I'm sure there are other performance metrics that could be totted up and used, or people may prefer to use the ones i've mentioned but in a different order, but pretty much anything along those lines would be better than just "big gp wins"
4) There's no reason why the points or new GAC store credits couldn't simply be split equally while there is no performance metric being used to determine the winner!

"Waqui;c-1952741" wrote:

"Jiden;c-1952698" wrote:
Just saying that in the spirit of competition, it makes little sense to use "higher GP" as the person who deserves to win.

It's got nothing to do with who deserves to win. You tied. Noone deserves it more than the other. It's a random selection of a winner.

The player who used less GP (offense + defense) to reach that result played better and thus deserves the win.

"gflegui;c-1952539" wrote:
You were not punished. Your opponent was rewarded for develop his rooster!

That's just dumb. David fights goliath to a tie, goliath wins cause he's bigger? Not at all. Everyone would be applauding david because he didn't lose, and goliath would take a beating from his coach and fans etc :)

Whoever decided tie goes to the bigger roster was clueless. There's no basis whatsoever for giving it to the higher GP. IT's not a reward for developing a roster. That's just bs. If player A started Jan 2018 and Player B starterd in August 2018, and they face each other in this weeks GAC with Player A at a 2.4M GP roster and Player B at 2.1M, exactly who's developed a deeper roster worthy of winning a tie break? Hint, it's isn't Player A...

"Waqui;c-1952741" wrote:

"Jiden;c-1952698" wrote:
Just saying that in the spirit of competition, it makes little sense to use "higher GP" as the person who deserves to win.

It's got nothing to do with who deserves to win. You tied. Noone deserves it more than the other. It's a random selection of a winner.

I've yet to hear anyone say they tied and were declared the winner with lesser GP.

"Rath_Tarr;c-1953073" wrote:

"Waqui;c-1952741" wrote:

"Jiden;c-1952698" wrote:
Just saying that in the spirit of competition, it makes little sense to use "higher GP" as the person who deserves to win.

It's got nothing to do with who deserves to win. You tied. Noone deserves it more than the other. It's a random selection of a winner.

The player who used less GP (offense + defense) to reach that result played better and thus deserves the win.

They scored the same amount of banners. They played equally well. Banners are all that matters.

"cboath7;c-1953153" wrote:

"Waqui;c-1952741" wrote:

"Jiden;c-1952698" wrote:
Just saying that in the spirit of competition, it makes little sense to use "higher GP" as the person who deserves to win.

It's got nothing to do with who deserves to win. You tied. Noone deserves it more than the other. It's a random selection of a winner.

I've yet to hear anyone say they tied and were declared the winner with lesser GP.

The tiebreaker is GP. Higher GP wins. However, since whoever has the highest GP is random at matchmaking, it's a random selection of the winner in case of a tie.

"Waqui;c-1953160" wrote:

"Rath_Tarr;c-1953073" wrote:

"Waqui;c-1952741" wrote:

"Jiden;c-1952698" wrote:
Just saying that in the spirit of competition, it makes little sense to use "higher GP" as the person who deserves to win.

It's got nothing to do with who deserves to win. You tied. Noone deserves it more than the other. It's a random selection of a winner.

The player who used less GP (offense + defense) to reach that result played better and thus deserves the win.

They scored the same amount of banners. They played equally well. Banners are all that matters.

If both players scored the same number of banners and one player used less GP to do so then that player was better and thus deserves the win.

The only other thing which remotely makes sense is a simple coin flip.

"Rath_Tarr;c-1953210" wrote:

"Waqui;c-1953160" wrote:

"Rath_Tarr;c-1953073" wrote:

"Waqui;c-1952741" wrote:

"Jiden;c-1952698" wrote:
Just saying that in the spirit of competition, it makes little sense to use "higher GP" as the person who deserves to win.

It's got nothing to do with who deserves to win. You tied. Noone deserves it more than the other. It's a random selection of a winner.

The player who used less GP (offense + defense) to reach that result played better and thus deserves the win.

They scored the same amount of banners. They played equally well. Banners are all that matters.

If both players scored the same number of banners and one player used less GP to do so then that player was better and thus deserves the win.

The only other thing which remotely makes sense is a simple coin flip.

I think the higher GP wins because people complained about rosters being fluffed.

It rewards the OG players who have roster fluff for TBs.

If it was the other way the fluffers would get mad at the non fluffers

If we want a tiebreaker that has a skill/merit component to it, how about giving the win to the player that finished attacking first?

If you attack first, your opponent gets to see how you've done and knows how many points are needed to beat you. This can be quite advantageous. So in the event of a tie, why not give the win to the one who attacked and earned the same score without that edge?

I'm not married to the idea, but it's more fair than going into a matchup knowing in the event of a tie you'll absolutely be the winner or loser based on GP numbers. It lets the players' actions determine the tiebreak winner, instead of it being completely outside their control. :|