Unbalanced Matchmaking in Grand Arena

un6im9eoi14g wrote:

I understand the point about skill rating and long-term performance affecting matchmaking. That part makes sense in theory.

Well it isn't really a 'skill rating', that's just a word that CG are using.  You could call it a 'poopoo rating' and it's just as applicable.  We know a lot of the ladder positioning comes down to outright power (tools as you say) rather than skill.

un6im9eoi14g wrote:

The problem is that skill-based matchmaking only works when players have access to roughly comparable tools.

We're not matched on skill, we're matched based on our position on the ladder.  The better we do and higher up the ladder and the harder (in theory) the match up.  With a ladder the different amount of tools we have is irrelevant.  You either have the tools to win and move up to a harder match up or you lose and get easier match ups.

un6im9eoi14g wrote:

At a certain gap — especially when GP is double or triple — this stops being “skill vs skill” and turns into roster depth vs roster depth.

If you're both putting in the same amount of effort with your GAC, no it is not.  You have both shown the ability (or lack of) to be in that position and it's a fair match up, no matter the GP.  It might not be a straight up might vs might, in that the underdog may have to (or maybe using) a strategy to climb.  One very hard to beat team on defence and the nous to scrap for points on offence, for example.  Or a weak defence with one meta ship and enough of offence to grind a full clear.

un6im9eoi14g wrote:

If the only way to get “fair” matches is to inflate GP with useless bloat just to look bigger on paper,

I don't understand your point.  Your argument is pointed to me, but it's my belief that GP is a very poor match making tool.  You also called it 'bloat', so how is it effective?  Worse still, it would affect how you play and collect characters.  This isn't theory, this is real; we had GP match-making and back then it was awful and GA (GAC now) rewards were awful.  

un6im9eoi14g wrote:

then the system is effectively punishing efficient roster building. That goes directly against the idea that GAC rewards smart resource management and strategic growth.

The issue is this is a collection game.  What's more, CG pushes us to collect everything new for events.  CG wants us to bloat our rosters as this brings in more money.  A few points about this:

1. CG isn't going to reward players in GAC for good roster management skills when it means they're spending less.  This is just reality.  The mega-krakens in K1 keep the game running.  Domo arigato kraken-san.
2.  This isn't a roster management game-where you build a roster and play rosters of a similar size.  This is a character collectable game, but has a PvP side to it too.  There is enough here, that how you build and use your characters makes a tremendous difference.  However, at the end of the day 'might is king'.  The bigger the whale, the bigger the pectoral fin to slap you with.
3. CG has encouraged us to bloat.  As I said, each new character has an event or is needed for an unlock, raid or has a good temporary datacron.  It would be totally unfair to push us to bloat for several years and then say 'You know what, actually we are going to match-make on GP again'.  Another big issue here is that unlike roster management games, we can't cut characters.  Effectively, we cannot trim bloat from years old accounts.  This again is unfair for established rosters vs new rosters that would be able to min-max their build.

Also, I need to point out that big discrepancies in GP isn't a 'one net catches all' situation.  There are 2 key player-types that are affected by it.

Player 1:  Has done well in GAC and has moved so high that they are generally the underdog (in roster size) by some considerable way.

Player 2:  Is having a constant issue of having to face rosters that rarely play and have dropped through the leagues like a stone due to inactivity.

Of course, you'll get some players that at times will have both issues.  However, for me 'Player 1's' situation isn't a problem.  Either they swim at that lofty level or they sink.  If they sink, they'll sink to a division where the matches are manageable.  It may mean some losses in a row, which affects motivation.  However, this is the ladder working as intended.  I believe it's beautiful and simple.

Player 2 though, really does have an issue.  Like you, I think it needs fixing and needs fixing as a priority, especially for new players.  A player brand new to GAC, playing a hugely rostered opponent who probably won't turn up should not be a thing.  This is not the spirit of the game.

I've thought in the past of several tweaks that would help.  However, a YouTuber called 'Egnard', I believe has come up with a simple and effective solution:

An 'Activity Score (AS)'.  An 'AS' would give you a score on how much you participate offensively in your GAC match ups.  Those that put in max effort every GAC match would have a max score.  Those that never play would have a minimum score.  This doesn't affect your place on the ladder, but it would be used as a secondary match making criteria after your PooPoo Points.  We would first be matched on our 'PooPoo Rating'.....sorry our 'Skill Rating' (in real terms our ladder position).  Then after that we would be filtered again with our 'AS rating'.  This would then make it impossible for the free-falling high GP accounts to play vs small accounts that try their best and participate fully every round.

I think that there are few other small tweaks that could help GAC in general.  However, I believe the 'AS' is a simple and extremely effective way of combatting the 'hardly play players' without tweaking anybody's nose.

Y'all always complain about the matchmaking. Every time a player who had experienced GP-based matchmaking explains to you why it's a crap idea and every time y'all think you know better (you don't). Every time in these threads you forget about all the other parts of the game. If SWGOH's only major game mode was GAC, then it would make sense to only hyperfocus on units that are competitive in GAC and nothing else. 

There are other game modes that promote building out your roster wide instead of just tall. I have an R8 QGJ. I'm not talking about Poncho QG, I mean the OG one with a GAC omicron. He doesn't need to be R8 to function in GAC. Mine is R8 for the raid. TB promotes building up your GP. Conquest promotes building a wide roster. Teams that are competitive in GAC are sometimes different than those that are most useful elsewhere. 

You punched up to the point where people who win about as many matches as you do are in higher GP range. It happened because you were apparently wiping the floor with everyone of similar GP so the only fair thing possible in the ladder system was to promote you higher where you inevitably have to face larger rosters. If you win, you will go up. If you lose, you will get knocked back down. Simple stuff. The GP differences become less pronounced as your roster grows. When your GP is 3mln, a difference of 2mln is huge. When your GP is 12mln, a difference of 2mln is much smaller in terms of what that 2mln actually represents. 

What you guys want is basically for SWGOH to be a card game, where every player's deck is the same size and what matters is the quality of the deck and the skill of the player. Or maybe just have identical decks and skill and strategy are the most important deciding factors. So, chess. SWGOH isn't a card game, and it's not chess. You understood this when you tried it for the first time, right? You saw that it's a hero collector, right? Where the whole point is to grow your roster over time?

So... grow your roster. On a long enough timeline in a hero collector, you will have fewer "unbalanced" matchups where GP difference is a huge factor. I've seen a hundred of these threads and not a single one has ever brought up anything to counter anything I or Rius or harvestmouse said.