"Comfortless;c-2333219" wrote:
"kello_511;c-2333216" wrote:
It remains to be seen but in theory this should result in better matchups over time.
This is still the initial phase. You are climbing the ladder and your opponent is descending it, you both just happen to be on the same rung today. Over time it should improve.
Show me that thoery. Show me how it will "improve over time" "in theory". Explain how that "theory" holds up in an argument when comparing how someone manages their GP. What skill are we determining then? Can someone with less GP beat someone with more GP and better characters? Is that true skill? Does that assume balance? There's no logic that defines these match ups as "skill related". The skill is comparing someone who has poor attendance, not bad strategy.
I have regularly beaten players with more GLs and relic levels than me. Players that actually set defence and fully attacked. Skill matters.
The only instance where this system is not working is the type that you have encountered. An inactive player loses skill points then becomes active again and are overpowering. That is far from the norm. This system is great for the majority of active players.
I did encounter it last GAC. A 6 GL player was in my pool with mostly players with 3 GLs. I had 2. I got matched with them. If I had played that round better I would actually have won it. My skill wasn't quite up to the task and I made a couple of mistakes.
As you say, these inactive falling players throw a spanner in the works. Freezing their skill points would stop that happening but it also might stop players from being able to move up leagues due to the population limits. Players would have to be excluded entirely from the GAC formula which would probably mean being excluded from all crystals too. Not sure that's a great idea.
I think this system is way better than the old GP based system. Miles better. We get to show how well we can use our own rosters.
