Grand arena match ups problems

Yes I have read that document.  It doesn't excuse a circumstance where one player has four GL's and I have one and another player in the bracket has none.  Unless another player in that bracket has four GL's, there is no chance of victory.  So the skill rating might be where it is do to indifference or glitch.  from the storefront, I can't see that.  But I can see someone with 1.8MM GP more than me and a 4x multiple of GLs.  "read this generic explanation" is an unsatisfactory response.  If I was the person who had 4MM GP less I would be equally livid.  There is no circumstance where that matchup makes sense whatever the criteria.  I have about 5.7 GP.  Do the math.  This circumstance is ludicrous. 

Unfortunately it is solely based on skill level for previous GAC wins/losses and the issues arise that what you are facing here is the evolution of how your opponents have fared (or not even tried). 

So what you find is that some players hate GAC, join anyway because there is still a reward of some kind, then players think why not have a go. The GAC model will have lots of players staying around the same levels. High GP monsters may be dropping down to either tactically win and get promoted or just inactivity/no motivation. Then you will get highly involved lesser GPs push up, so its not GP that is the matchmaker here, its the history of wins/losses that will decide your skill rating, your opponents skill rating and the GAC bracket where the matchmaking occurs.

I never see anyone complain they fight lesser GPs....forget GP and realise that this is the game model. You have just been unlucky to get this matchup but everyone is in the same boat.

@6sjbl6qlah38The new GAC system has no logic or algorithm for matchmaking.

There is just a global leaderboard. You get matched with the 7 players next to you on the leaderboard. That is it.

If you are an above average player, you will almost always be at a GL disadvantage. You should still end up with a 50% win rate though.

Hi, thanks for the responses.  There is a sense of algorithmic logic to the sentiments you are all putting forward, but If I am facing an opponent with 3MM more GP than me who has five GL's to my one, and the spread in GO in the battle group has me at the bottom of the group, my only motivation to participate is the hope that my incredibly dominant opponent does not participate.  That is not what should be a criteria for what EA wants to primary competitive battlefield in the game. 

TBH, I don't see much ongoing value in debating the topic.  Considering the rake on the game, my point is that EA should be held accountable to do a better job algorithmically in establishing matchups.  Rewarding players for non participation so that it is easier for them to receive larger prizes for defeating weaker players is a flaw.  Stupid games like candy crush have figured it out.  If you don't play every day you can't win the daily jackpot.  dangle the carrot without making it a stick for other players.  EA does it now by putting zetas at the end of the login calendar, perhaps they should use the same logic for game rounds in GA (logged play vs no play).

Good luck.

The 50% win rate is a myth.  For the last 6 months I haven't been able to win a battle much less a match in GAC.  I'm consistently matched against players so far above me.  It's ridiculously Unfair.

The worst is that they know and acknowledge the matchmaking issue.  But they refuse to update it.