Forum Discussion

John_Bakur's avatar
John_Bakur
5 years ago

TW Matchmaking

Yes, this is another crying post about TW matchmaking.
Our Guild's power is 256mil and all 50 players participate in TW (in almost every TW). We are facing 296mil GP guild and have 21 squad per zone. Let's guess they have 42 active players (84 % of total their rosourses) and do some math.
GP 256 vs 296 (296*0.84=248)
Zetas 4477 vs 5338 (4483)
Ults on GL 11 vs 45 (37)
G13 toons 1514 vs 3006 (2525)
GLs
SLKR 9 vs 27 (22)
Rey 13 vs 21 (17)
SEE 1 vs 5 (4)
JML 0 vs 5 (4)
JKL 5 vs 34 (28)
All other characters aren't big deal and number of g13 toons decribes their value better.
We have one better condition (active GP but if they have 43 active players active GP will be very close), one close condition (zetas) and huge gap on other valueable conditions. Average arena also better for them. We have better avg fleet arena but fleet means nothing in this game.
I don't know why am i writting this, i don't blame other guild, i don't need (actualy i don't expect) answers. Maybe a little support becouse we tierd (close gp metches take only 10-15%, all other wars we face guilds stronger but sometimes have chanses to win). Anyway i have two questions:
1) why does this game punish active guilds?
2) what is the problem to add one more variable to the undoubtedly complicated enomerous matchmaking algorithm - the number of active players


  • Chilichimp's avatar
    Chilichimp
    5 years ago
    Same dude.

    When are they even going to acknowledge this is a problem?

    1) why does this game punish active guilds?
    2) what is the problem to add one more variable to the undoubtedly complicated enomerous matchmaking algorithm - the number of active players


    1.) Your opponents aren't inactive, they're intentionally sandbagging to get this match-up, because this nearly guarantees a win every war and is worth more than fair play in the long-run.
    2.) They don't know how to adjust the algorithm without destroying their spaghetti code... if they've got anyone looking into fixing this at all.
  • NyKynoe's avatar
    NyKynoe
    5 years ago
    "Chilichimp;c-2184694" wrote:
    Same dude.

    When are they even going to acknowledge this is a problem?

    1) why does this game punish active guilds?
    2) what is the problem to add one more variable to the undoubtedly complicated enomerous matchmaking algorithm - the number of active players


    1.) Your opponents aren't inactive, they're intentionally sandbagging to get this match-up, because this nearly guarantees a win every war and is worth more than fair play in the long-run.
    2.) They don't know how to adjust the algorithm without destroying their spaghetti code... if they've got anyone looking into fixing this at all.


    1) you dont know that, and it also doesn't matter, so maybe stop trying to make it a vendetta against other players and just focus on the problem.
    they should look at making it more fair when the number of players is different.
    2) yes they are looking at this. not a fix, but they are looking at the data of the matches.
  • Chilichimp's avatar
    Chilichimp
    5 years ago
    "Kyno;c-2184707" wrote:

    1) you dont know that, and it also doesn't matter, so maybe stop trying to make it a vendetta against other players and just focus on the problem.
    they should look at making it more fair when the number of players is different.
    2) yes they are looking at this. not a fix, but they are looking at the data of the matches.


    I can't be CERTAIN of anything without being in their guild war planning, Kyno, but the circumstantial evidence that this is the practice is overwhelming. The extensive anecdotal evidence posted on these forums is also worth something, because of the quantity.

    I'm glad they're looking at it, it's probably why we have data about past war participation from various 3rd party API data grabs... but this is just the state of TW most guilds experience, and has been for years now.
  • NyKynoe's avatar
    NyKynoe
    5 years ago
    "Chilichimp;c-2184720" wrote:
    "Kyno;c-2184707" wrote:

    1) you dont know that, and it also doesn't matter, so maybe stop trying to make it a vendetta against other players and just focus on the problem.
    they should look at making it more fair when the number of players is different.
    2) yes they are looking at this. not a fix, but they are looking at the data of the matches.


    I can't be CERTAIN of anything without being in their guild war planning, Kyno, but the circumstantial evidence that this is the practice is overwhelming. The extensive anecdotal evidence posted on these forums is also worth something, because of the quantity.

    I'm glad they're looking at it, it's probably why we have data about past war participation from various 3rd party API data grabs... but this is just the state of TW most guilds experience, and has been for years now.


    Just an FYI, no most have not. They did look at this a while back and pre GLs, and saw no real correlation between going in short and winning.

    Guilds do win against tougher matches.

    The real issue is that people come into this topic with a bone to pick and it makes having a fruitful discussion more difficult.

    It doesnt matter how 2 guilds get to the number of players they have, not at all, what matters is when it's not fair, by measure of something like average GP or other factors. (Not specific toons)
  • John_Bakur's avatar
    John_Bakur
    5 years ago
    "Chilichimp;c-2184694" wrote:

    1.) Your opponents aren't inactive, they're intentionally sandbagging to get this match-up, because this nearly guarantees a win every war and is worth more than fair play in the long-run.


    I never call them inactive, it's not my intense why all those guilds has short number of active players.

    Here is some interesting data: our last 24 wars (half the year)
    For GP and G13 toons:
    red is impossible gap (15+ %)
    Yellow is huge gap (10-15%)
    Blue is small gap (2-10%)
    White is close number (+-2%)
    Green is our advantage (2+%)
    For GLs:
    Red is more than twice for opponents
    Yellow is small advantage
    Green is our advantage

    As you see we never fought opponents with less GP comparing with us. And only 16% matches was with close numbers of GP.
    Number of G13 toons i don't even want to comment. @kyno may like those numbers, maybe just gently pat on the shoulder
    We aren't that strong guild, we won almost every White and half Blue GP matches but we tired to see all those number every war

  • RSithLord's avatar
    RSithLord
    5 years ago
    "DarjeloSalas;c-2185049" wrote:
    are you going in 50/50 every time?

    The way the matchmaking operates, if you go in 50/50 you will flat out never get matched with a lower total GP guild.

    Actually you can. TW cycle is 11 wars. If there are 10 regular guilds always going in at full, they'll all pull at least 1 higher GP match (if possible) or dip down a few million/tens of millions.
  • RSithLord's avatar
    RSithLord
    5 years ago
    Not necessarily. It is very unlikely to happen at lower GPs but not excluded and probably difference is not that high. More like 260m vs 250m at full 50 on both sides (not 411m vs 340m that can still happen at full 50).
  • John_Bakur's avatar
    John_Bakur
    5 years ago
    "DarjeloSalas;c-2185049" wrote:
    @EVGENII are you going in 50/50 every time?

    The way the matchmaking operates, if you go in 50/50 you will flat out never get matched with a lower total GP guild.


    Most of the times 50/50. Usually <50 happens when we have vacant places in guild

About SWGOH General Discussion

Discuss and share your feedback on Star Wars: Galaxy of Heroes with fellow players.

78,387 PostsLatest Activity: 6 months ago