Character stragety confusion....
Okay I though I would get others thoughts as I'm confused about what is actual "core" tenet. So we they are addressing the GA matchmaking and I would like to thank them for that as it has seemed to me to need more tweaking. But I noticed something that seems to disagree with a prior ruling and character change. Here is the new announcement:
"Over the last few months, we’ve leaned much more heavily into Galactic Power as a matchmaking component because we saw that many players were concerned about the fairness of going up against a player with a meaningfully different collection size. This has resulted in a lot of fun, close matches, and very few “blowouts”, but it has also led to a bit of a disconnect in some players’ expectations, and resulted in some degenerative behavior patterns as a result."
I'm not sure I agree with the "very few blowouts" but I digress....
"Specifically, we’ve heard a lot from players who feel that GA matchmaking penalizes them for “going broad” – for building out a wide, diverse collection of characters and ships – and reduces the incentive to explore building up new squads, new mod sets, and new priorities. This is not something that we want to proliferate, and starting with the next update, we’re going to address it."
Totally agree! Right on the money there!
"Starting with the first Grand Arena Championship, we are going to slightly reduce the weighting of pure GP in the matchmaking system for GA, in favor of a larger set of variables intended to make players feel less like Grand Arena is punishing players for going broad. If you are working on newer or lower-powered squads, the matchmaking system will be much less likely to count those efforts towards matching you with an ideal opponent, and you will be less likely to be paired up with a player who a) looks just like you GP-wise, but b) has instead spent all of their efforts optimizing a smaller handful of squads. (Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them.)"
Okay I'm going to stop right there. Here is my confusion. How is not leveling characters a strategy? Didn't they just say that they want people to level their characters so they can try new teams and match ups? So wouldn't this "strategy" be against the "core tenets" of the game. Here is my example...remember the whole paper zombie fix? No? Here is part of the write up:
"We recently announced our intention to rework Nightsister Zombie during our changes to prevent the “Critolyte” strategy in the Sith Triumvirate Raid. Our decision to change Zombie is to prevent an investment/gameplay strategy referred to as “Paper Zombie”. For those not familiar, Paper Zombie is a strategy in which Nightsister Zombie is purposefully left underinvested (gear primarily) so that she will be defeated much more frequently and easily (in both PvP and PvE contexts). Being defeated frequently is made all the easier since Zombie taunts a lot. In being defeated more often, Zombie is able to activate Asajj Ventress’ Unique, Rampage, more often, giving Asajj a tremendous amount more Offense and Turn Meter, and consequently results in Asajj doing a lot more damage.
At its core, this strategy primarily breaks a core tenant/rule of the game - investing more deeply in a character should always be better in terms of gameplay outcomes; more health, more damage, more functionality, etc. This is a game about strategic resource management and you should be rewarded for strategically investing in a character. People who did this investment were then punished, because there is no way to “level down” a character. This doesn’t always perfectly hold up, but we do our best to hold to the spirit of that core pillar as much as we possibly can."
See right there they said that not leveling zombie was against the "core tenet/rule of the game" Let me say that again..."core tenet/rule of the game".....so not leveling your zombie was breaking the rules of the game and so they penalized people for doing it. So my question is how is not leveling/gearing your characters now a game strategy? Shouldn't by the prior rules, people should be penalized for not doing this? Thoughts?
"Over the last few months, we’ve leaned much more heavily into Galactic Power as a matchmaking component because we saw that many players were concerned about the fairness of going up against a player with a meaningfully different collection size. This has resulted in a lot of fun, close matches, and very few “blowouts”, but it has also led to a bit of a disconnect in some players’ expectations, and resulted in some degenerative behavior patterns as a result."
I'm not sure I agree with the "very few blowouts" but I digress....
"Specifically, we’ve heard a lot from players who feel that GA matchmaking penalizes them for “going broad” – for building out a wide, diverse collection of characters and ships – and reduces the incentive to explore building up new squads, new mod sets, and new priorities. This is not something that we want to proliferate, and starting with the next update, we’re going to address it."
Totally agree! Right on the money there!
"Starting with the first Grand Arena Championship, we are going to slightly reduce the weighting of pure GP in the matchmaking system for GA, in favor of a larger set of variables intended to make players feel less like Grand Arena is punishing players for going broad. If you are working on newer or lower-powered squads, the matchmaking system will be much less likely to count those efforts towards matching you with an ideal opponent, and you will be less likely to be paired up with a player who a) looks just like you GP-wise, but b) has instead spent all of their efforts optimizing a smaller handful of squads. (Those players will still be rewarded for their strategy in Grand Arena, but they’ll be matched up against someone who looks more like them.)"
Okay I'm going to stop right there. Here is my confusion. How is not leveling characters a strategy? Didn't they just say that they want people to level their characters so they can try new teams and match ups? So wouldn't this "strategy" be against the "core tenets" of the game. Here is my example...remember the whole paper zombie fix? No? Here is part of the write up:
"We recently announced our intention to rework Nightsister Zombie during our changes to prevent the “Critolyte” strategy in the Sith Triumvirate Raid. Our decision to change Zombie is to prevent an investment/gameplay strategy referred to as “Paper Zombie”. For those not familiar, Paper Zombie is a strategy in which Nightsister Zombie is purposefully left underinvested (gear primarily) so that she will be defeated much more frequently and easily (in both PvP and PvE contexts). Being defeated frequently is made all the easier since Zombie taunts a lot. In being defeated more often, Zombie is able to activate Asajj Ventress’ Unique, Rampage, more often, giving Asajj a tremendous amount more Offense and Turn Meter, and consequently results in Asajj doing a lot more damage.
At its core, this strategy primarily breaks a core tenant/rule of the game - investing more deeply in a character should always be better in terms of gameplay outcomes; more health, more damage, more functionality, etc. This is a game about strategic resource management and you should be rewarded for strategically investing in a character. People who did this investment were then punished, because there is no way to “level down” a character. This doesn’t always perfectly hold up, but we do our best to hold to the spirit of that core pillar as much as we possibly can."
See right there they said that not leveling zombie was against the "core tenet/rule of the game" Let me say that again..."core tenet/rule of the game".....so not leveling your zombie was breaking the rules of the game and so they penalized people for doing it. So my question is how is not leveling/gearing your characters now a game strategy? Shouldn't by the prior rules, people should be penalized for not doing this? Thoughts?
