Weighting...
There’s a lot of talk about the unfairness in GAC. I couldn’t say if it’s right or wrong. But I was wondering why CG didn’t weight all the aspects of a roster. Such as character content (who you have)...
Forum Discussion
"Scuttlebutt;c-1914714" wrote:"Ultra;c-1914464" wrote:
I disagree,
1. Some zetas might be weighted a value the community would disagree with
2. Its punishing the people that worked hard to get those toons / invest in those zetas
3. The value of a specific toon or zeta diminishes over time as power creep settles in
4. People will complain about matchmaking even if they were matched against themselves
I worked hard to get JKR and DR and place as many zetas on them and their teams as possible. I’ve also suggested weighting on numerous occasions including in the feedback section of these forums. I don’t agree with this level of detail in weighting, but more granularity is needed to distinguish DR from Darth Sidious.
It’s not punishing people that worked hard on certain toons. It’s making it a level playing field. When I play chess, I don’t tell my opponent that I spent more time and money studying strategies so they need to remove 5 pieces from the board before we begin.
But in chess, you both start with the same pieces.
There are 2 things that annoy me. First is that, when going against guys in higher divisions, their depth is so much greater, and the matching hasn’t accounted for that, matching only on (for me) top 60. So while I’m skint on teams and struggling to have a complete defence and still have toons to attack (certainly no chance of running a second team if the first fails), while my opponent has depth to set strong defence, and have toons to pick from for attacks. We might match on top 60 gp, it isn’t a fair representation of comparative strength. Second, if I tie, I lose, even though it’s actually more impressive for lower gp to even match with the higher gp. But since it’s all been said and ignored, I just smile and talk to Mr Ben Dover.
