Better Match Making

Based on wins after the initial start. Some people try harder than others.

It really doesnt matter bc its all over the place lol

"Thorvald85;d-262629" wrote:
In the last round of my arena, I was placed against someone who has over 8mil GP and 4 GLs, we both had 1 win, there is two other people who also have a win a piece and one guy has around 7 mil GP with 4 GLs and the other guy has close to 5 mil GP with just 1 GL. If these guys knew how to do a better job of making this game better at matchmaking based on GP or something, so many people wouldn’t be getting mismatched.

There is no matchmaking. You have one big ladder (win gain up, lose go down) and you're put in a 8 players pool with players around you in the ladder. Then you're randomly matched against people with the same number of victories inside the pool.

People are 'mismatched' because some players play sporadically, lose when they don't play and go down the ladder and then face much weaker rosters when they're in the mood for playing. So when you face such player it's a coin toss depending if they're in a mood for playing seriously or not. It doesn't have an impact on your reward as you tend to a 50/50 winrate anyway, but it's not fun for sure.

Yeah no kidding there’s no matchmaking. That was the point I was making. I was trying to say that they need to try and do something about that. You should try reading that more thoroughly next time.

GP based matchmaking was terrible and the new system is much better. I’m often matched against people that have 2 million + GP on me and I can still hold my ground.

"Thorvald85;c-2416975" wrote:
Yeah no kidding there’s no matchmaking. That was the point I was making. I was trying to say that they need to try and do something about that. You should try reading that more thoroughly next time.

The last sentence was not needed, please hold your horses and let’s keep things civil.

Matchmaking based on gp was used before and had its issues, like removing incentive to improve your roster because improving your gp would mean facing higher gp opponents. So if (if) they’re trying to improve gac experience, they’re probably working on the ‘or something’ part of your original post.

"BubbaFett;c-2416992" wrote:

"Thorvald85;c-2416975" wrote:
Yeah no kidding there’s no matchmaking. That was the point I was making. I was trying to say that they need to try and do something about that. You should try reading that more thoroughly next time.

So "they" should do something to make sure you have a better chance of winning? Why don't YOU do something to make sure you have a better chance of winning?

You quotet directly and yet nowhere in that quote or the original post does op say anything about a better chance of winning, so where do you get that?

Now I don't know about OP, but the forums are full of people explaining why they wish for a better matchmaking, and it has nothing to do with wanting to win more. I understand if someone is ok with the matchmaking or disagrees with a point someone makes but to interpret something into a post/comment, that was not said and to base the whole argument on that is not a good basis for a discussion.

"BubbaFett;c-2417005" wrote:

"Lumiya;c-2417003" wrote:

"BubbaFett;c-2416992" wrote:

"Thorvald85;c-2416975" wrote:
Yeah no kidding there’s no matchmaking. That was the point I was making. I was trying to say that they need to try and do something about that. You should try reading that more thoroughly next time.

So "they" should do something to make sure you have a better chance of winning? Why don't YOU do something to make sure you have a better chance of winning?

You quotet directly and yet nowhere in that quote or the original post does op say anything about a better chance of winning, so where do you get that?

Now I don't know about OP, but the forums are full of people explaining why they wish for a better matchmaking, and it has nothing to do with wanting to win more. I understand if someone is ok with the matchmaking or disagrees with a point someone makes but to interpret something into a post/comment, that was not said and to base the whole argument on that is not a good basis for a discussion.

I quoted the Op.... Not everything in a discussion requires having to only stick to the latest comment... maybe you should look at his many times the Op mentions "wins"....

Quite frankly, there is nothing more fair than the current system of wins versus losses determining how far up the ladder you go but I have yet to see someone post a complaint about "matchmaking" while acknowledging that or even showing the most basic understanding of how the system works.. If someone wants to make a thread asking for "better matchmaking" then I would submit that the onus is on them to understand the current system...

If we would like to have a discussion about how to penalize inactive high GP heavy roster players that allow themselves to fall down the ranks and how it diminishes game experience for lower players, I am all ears.... This thread isn't it.. .

If you read what OP wrote, they mentioned the wins in the context of their bracket and just to give an example who got matched with whom after their first round/win etc. Read it again. They wrote something along the lines of I won my first round, X, Y and Z won their first round, X, Y, Z had so and so GP and yet I got matched with Y eventhough they had much more GP whereas X is closer to my GP so why was I not matched with X. There was nothing said about wanting to win more.

Eta: There are enough people bringing up very valid points about what could be better for matchmaking and why... also why they dislike how it is at the moment. If you do not share their view that's your right, but they gave lots of good explanations one can easily understand and to say that they don't understand the system is also not right. There are many whom understand it perfectly. That does not mean they have to think it's good and that they can not point out the flaws they see.

"subxsimo;c-2417070" wrote:
I was at 3.5ml with 1Gl and went up against a 6 mil with 2 gls then the next round was a 7mil with 3gls I don't get how this works as I never go up against 1 or 2ml so why I am I always the underdog

Because you have the same SR as people with more stuff.

"subxsimo;c-2417070" wrote:
I was at 3.5ml with 1Gl and went up against a 6 mil with 2 gls then the next round was a 7mil with 3gls I don't get how this works as I never go up against 1 or 2ml so why I am I always the underdog

Why do you feel the need to humble-brag about being so good that you only get matched against people with 2M+ GP more than you AND more GLs? No one else with 3.5M GP and 1GL is good enough to have a high enough SR to get matched with you. We get it!