A fair grand arena match...?

"Zippy_3000;c-2011008" wrote:

"Disruptor92;c-2011000" wrote:


If you want to win that badly then stop being casual perhaps? If you don't want to lose all the time then maybe it's time for you to put some effort into it. And if you're casual and don't care much, then just join, set defenses, do nothing and get free rewards. Sounds reasonable or not? Why do people always expect everything handed to them on a silver platter... No pain, no gain. Simple as that.

I never said I wanted to be handed wins on a silver platter.. I said I think im being consistently matched with opponents who outskill me specifically in GA.

Matchmaking is partly based on previous performance (leagues), but how exactly do you expect it to be matched on skill? How would you measure skill?

"Zippy_3000;c-2010989" wrote:

This is a casual game. I’m a casual player. I don’t have day and night to study strats or never ending cash to buy mods and gear.. I’m CASUAL. Can’t I be matched against other players at a similar skill level? I win one out of 20 rounds. I have never actually won a match. It’s not very fun to me. I would just not bother, but I need the stupid currency for gear.

Then what do you care? As you said, you're a casual player...not a competitive player. So winning vs. losing shouldn't matter to you.

"Zippy_3000;c-2010989" wrote:

"RandomSithLord;c-2010985" wrote:
Has it ever occured to you that something is wrong with your roster, modding, strategy, the way you use your characters on offense or all of the above?

No offense, but blaming it on not spending enough is a not exactly a valid excuse. It's highly doubtful that all your opponents just outspend you, especially when you are in division 3 which is not exactly whale territory.

You do get matched with similarly performing players over the course of a one month-long GAC event, since you are matched with players within the same league (and the better ones are usually in aurodium by week 4). If you can still barely win a match even then, it's hardly the fault of matchmaking, even less so the issue of one's spending tendencies.

Dude, I said I’m out skilled. I mentioned the pay to win thing because it IS a factor, but I’m not saying that’s why I’m losing.

I don't believe, it's a matter of paying to win. If you win 1 of every 20 round, I'm quite sure, that those 19 other opponents didn't all pay to beat you. I assume, that most of them were free players just like you.

I believe it's a matter of roster, strategy and execution.

If you want some help, please post a link to your profile on swgoh.gg and I'm sure people will be willing to help you. That is a far better use of your time, than simply complaining.

"Liath;c-2011090" wrote:
You’re basically asking the devs to make you a JV conference. Would you be ok with competing for significantly fewer rewards as a result of playing in JV? Because if they just matched you with other people who lose and matched the winners with other people who win, keeping the same rewards system as now, then the winners will be getting lower rewards so that you can get higher rewards. Why should the people you admit are better than you at this game mode get lower rewards due to only getting matched against each other?

I think his ask is reasonable, and lesser rewards are also reasonable.

Many other games have this type of setup in their championship mode. The model I have seen most is the top 25% of each bracket advances to a higher bracket after each championship and the worst 25% drop to a lower bracket (unless they are already in the lowest). Instead of resetting everyone each championship season, you stay in the bracket you were last in. The higher the bracket, the higher the rewards. The best part of a setup like this is that you end up with fair and competitive matches after a few iterations of the championship. Granted you can still get a bad match if someone doesn't play for a few iterations, but for the most part everything evens out.

"StratosF34r;c-2011608" wrote:
When 1 person wins, there's going to be 7 losers. And obviously, the winner will not be flexing his/her win on the forums.

Your first post on this forum about asking to remove the "dumb squad arena" mode just because you can't win just tells me you're a very entitled person who just constantly contradict your own statements. In fact, almost everyone one of your post is just rant after rant after rant.
ve around you.

You mean self-entitled. Entitled means he actually does deserve what he is saying.

"TVF;c-2011456" wrote:

"7AnimalMother;c-2011112" wrote:

"Liath;c-2011090" wrote:
You’re basically asking the devs to make you a JV conference. Would you be ok with competing for significantly fewer rewards as a result of playing in JV? Because if they just matched you with other people who lose and matched the winners with other people who win, keeping the same rewards system as now, then the winners will be getting lower rewards so that you can get higher rewards. Why should the people you admit are better than you at this game mode get lower rewards due to only getting matched against each other?

I think his ask is reasonable, and lesser rewards are also reasonable.

I don't think most people who complain about MM would suddenly stop complaining if they started winning but got less rewards.

Tiered brackets with increasing rewards are already a concept in this game. D1 gets more than D2. Bronzium gets less than Chromium etc.

Honestly matchmaking should never have even been a consideration in this mode had it been developed right.

A mobile game called golf star gets this type of mode perfect. Essentially everyone (regardless of level or GP) gets set in bracket 1 to start. The top 25% of scorers move to bracket 2 after one event. After the 2nd event the top 25% of scorers in bracket 1 move to 2. The top 25% of 2 move to 3. The bottom 25% of scorers in 2 move down to 1. So on and so forth. Don't ever reset the leader board. If you skip a week, you end up in the bottom 25% that get relegated. Eventually, everyone reaches a level at which they can be competitive, and the mode becomes fun for everyone who participates because the ladders are based on performance and not some horrible matchmaking formula.

And of course, rewards in 3 are better than 2 which are better than 1.

"TVF;c-2011746" wrote:

"7AnimalMother;c-2011745" wrote:

"TVF;c-2011456" wrote:

"7AnimalMother;c-2011112" wrote:

"Liath;c-2011090" wrote:
You’re basically asking the devs to make you a JV conference. Would you be ok with competing for significantly fewer rewards as a result of playing in JV? Because if they just matched you with other people who lose and matched the winners with other people who win, keeping the same rewards system as now, then the winners will be getting lower rewards so that you can get higher rewards. Why should the people you admit are better than you at this game mode get lower rewards due to only getting matched against each other?

I think his ask is reasonable, and lesser rewards are also reasonable.

I don't think most people who complain about MM would suddenly stop complaining if they started winning but got less rewards.

Tiered brackets with increasing rewards are already a concept in this game. D1 gets more than D2. Bronzium gets less than Chromium etc.

Honestly matchmaking should never have even been a consideration in this mode had it been developed right.

A mobile game called golf star gets this type of mode perfect. Essentially everyone (regardless of level or GP) gets set in bracket 1 to start. The top 25% of scorers move to bracket 2 after one event. After the 2nd event the top 25% of scorers in bracket 1 move to 2. The top 25% of 2 move to 3. The bottom 25% of scorers in 2 move down to 1. So on and so forth. Don't ever reset the leader board. If you skip a week, you end up in the bottom 25% that get relegated. Eventually, everyone reaches a level at which they can be competitive, and the mode becomes fun for everyone who participates because the ladders are based on performance and not some horrible matchmaking formula.

And of course, rewards in 3 are better than 2 which are better than 1.

Ok but what does any of that have to do with my point?

"Tiered brackets with increasing rewards are already a concept in this game. D1 gets more than D2. Bronzium gets less than Chromium etc."

I'm saying many of these people who are complaining about MM are already getting lesser rewards by virtue of not advancing as far up their current ladders. If they had the feeling of being competitive to earn those rewards, the mode becomes more fun for them.

You have already stated the problem... new players at a much lower GP are already farming for JKR and DR. If they grow faster than you they reach your division and you'll be facing them.

Matchmaking is divided by (in order) Division, then league, then top x GP characters (x changes by division).

Other casual players will grow slowly and not reach you, more motivated players will reach you while having a much stronger roster for that GP.

How do YOU fix that (not rely on the game changing to you)? Is it frustrating? Yes! But you can complain or you can change.
You look at what meta teams are coming up, you ask those players in your guild how they spend crystal or what their farming techniques are. You ask your guild for a counter sheet that helps you understand what teams make effective counters.

You said you have Jedi Revan, did you know a fast jedi revan with thrawn or with anakin can counter DR for instance? Are you farming the right mods? Are you modding characters effectively?

How about accept some help and put a tiny bit of effort into learning the game to improve, or accept not winning.

What do you do in single player games when you reach a hard boss that stomps you? Do you play over and over doing the same thing getting the same results? Do you try different things to try to understand the game mechanics? Do you look up a guide to figure out what you're missing? Do you look for a cheat code that let's you beat that boss by being invincible? Or do you just give up and never finish the game?

"Kluski;c-2013102" wrote:
How fair is a matchmaking of over 25 g12 toons vs 8 g12 toons? Well, I won with 8g 12 toons, by 20 banners. Was it RNG? Not sure if RNG was in my favor for 14 battles (offense and defense combined). Was it p2p? I don't know how much my opponent paid, I usually spend less than $20 a month. Unfair matchmaking? I didn't hear my opponent complain it was unfair matchmaking. This isn't the only time I have fought and won against a team that seemed better.

This is what people don't seem to get: just "having more shiny stuff" doesn't mean you're guaranteed to win. So many people that wail about "unfair" matches would probably pull out wins if they would just try.

I’m being matched against opponents with rosters far better than mine with elite characters I don’t even have unlocked. I do quite well despite that but some opponents I go in knowing it’s impossible. Do the best I can but still impossible. Stop adding crap content and fix matchups.