The best way to fix it is to freeze the war rating at the end of the season, the off season matches are based on what rating you finished on. The new season then starts again exactly where you left off from the previous season rating wise.
That will hurt them in the long run, as they will get less points with the lower rating, I am not sure 12 matches is enough time to overcome that deficit.
Another long run everyone seems to be neglecting is how manipulating AW Seasons to get easier matchups means less need for players actually improving their skills. Look at certain alliances who dominated top AQ rank rewards for years, they're stacked on T4CC but haven't had nearly as much success replicating those results in AW Seasons. Alliances who've manipulated their way to master AW Season rank rewards are likely to a brick wall once Kabam implements game design that eliminates tanking and shell alliance manipulation strategies. When that happens MCOC's end-game rewards meta will be closer to or at T5CC, 8 seasons of receiving top end-game T5BC rewards will mean so much less once the game reaches that point.
Would you agree that teams at 3300-3400 war rating are better than teams at 2900-3000? If you agree with this, than your whole argument is invalid..
Don’t be naive. . It’s sandbagging and loopholing around getting easier matchups so they don’t have to face the top 5 alliances they were rated around
I’m in a masters alliance, 3000 is bottom of tier 1 and 2899-2950 is top of tier 2
I got my ratings vs scores confused for a second, but it still does not change that sandbagging hurts you or leaves you even in the sort run, and at that level I am not sure you can ever recover. If you drop a tier your multiplier drops and that puts you behind the curve. If you drop but stay in the tier the only way this helps you is if they do a top down matchmaking system, and not a randomized match making system, and even then you would only get a boost for a war before you are right back fighting the harder matches.
Your not dropping a tier multiplier.. 3000 is tier 1 just like 3500 is... you drop. Face easier alliances.. it’s common sense..
Even if they did drop a tier, and got to the top of tier 2, .. tier 2 wins wayyyy outweigh tier 1 losses. Plus if you drop to the top of tier 2, after 1-2 wars your back in tier 1 facing bottom tier 1 competition instead of the best of the best at the top where you were
It is not common sense, common sense is a logical statement. You still have to show how dropping and staying in the same tier would automatically mean easier matches. You would need to show that they use a top down approach as I previously said as opposed to a random approach. Top down meaning 1 is paired with 2, 3 with 4 and so on. Since we dont know how the system works at that granularity (not that I have seen) there is no way to say that this is "common sense"
It is not common sense, common sense is a logical statement. You still have to show how dropping and staying in the same tier would automatically mean easier matches. You would need to show that they use a top down approach as I previously said as opposed to a random approach. Top down meaning 1 is paired with 2, 3 with 4 and so on. Since we dont know how the system works at that granularity (not that I have seen) there is no way to say that this is "common sense"
Lower war ratings will face lower rated alliances.
Its easy to solve this problem, change the scoring. If they make points multiplyer scale based on tier as well as the difficulty of the match (war rating) they would be no reason to tank or shell for most. You want easy matches cool but you’ll get less points. The problem is people being punished facing stronger alliances while guys below them get easier matches but pass them on the score board. Make your war rating imporant and matter for points. A t2 team shouldnt be able to make masters over a legit masters alliance who has had rough matches all season. if you do that then shelling and tanking will stop. imo it will also reduce the stress on wars which is causing burn out and lots of guys to retire.
Comments
And that would kill new alliances.
Would you agree that teams at 3300-3400 war rating are better than teams at 2900-3000? If you agree with this, than your whole argument is invalid..
Don’t be naive. . It’s sandbagging and loopholing around getting easier matchups so they don’t have to face the top 5 alliances they were rated around
I’m in a masters alliance, 3000 is bottom of tier 1 and 2899-2950 is top of tier 2
Another long run everyone seems to be neglecting is how manipulating AW Seasons to get easier matchups means less need for players actually improving their skills. Look at certain alliances who dominated top AQ rank rewards for years, they're stacked on T4CC but haven't had nearly as much success replicating those results in AW Seasons. Alliances who've manipulated their way to master AW Season rank rewards are likely to a brick wall once Kabam implements game design that eliminates tanking and shell alliance manipulation strategies. When that happens MCOC's end-game rewards meta will be closer to or at T5CC, 8 seasons of receiving top end-game T5BC rewards will mean so much less once the game reaches that point.
I got my ratings vs scores confused for a second, but it still does not change that sandbagging hurts you or leaves you even in the sort run, and at that level I am not sure you can ever recover. If you drop a tier your multiplier drops and that puts you behind the curve. If you drop but stay in the tier the only way this helps you is if they do a top down matchmaking system, and not a randomized match making system, and even then you would only get a boost for a war before you are right back fighting the harder matches.
Even if they did drop a tier, and got to the top of tier 2, .. tier 2 wins wayyyy outweigh tier 1 losses. Plus if you drop to the top of tier 2, after 1-2 wars your back in tier 1 facing bottom tier 1 competition instead of the best of the best at the top where you were
Like the beatles?😂
It is not common sense, common sense is a logical statement. You still have to show how dropping and staying in the same tier would automatically mean easier matches. You would need to show that they use a top down approach as I previously said as opposed to a random approach. Top down meaning 1 is paired with 2, 3 with 4 and so on. Since we dont know how the system works at that granularity (not that I have seen) there is no way to say that this is "common sense"
Lower war ratings will face lower rated alliances.
Higher rating with face higher rating alliance.
Can’t get much more common sense than that
You will see this Wednesday .