Alliance Matchmaking - Getting Busted

BlackSaChi

Not sure what was the intention for matchmaking changes in alliance war... But we are getting busted Everytime with too strong alliances. This time we are against a 21M alliance



And our alliance is 14M with some good player and mostly average FTP players



Again intention is to just bring this in attention of community and of course if Any one from Dev/Kabam team is reading this.

BlackSaChi

Btw this will be our 6th loss in last 15 days...

Iron_web93

First, you were both Gold 2 last season, so you should be competing against Gold 2 alliances. Second, how many BGs do you run?

Deadbyrd9

You both have a similar war rating so match making is working as intended. Alliance rating has nothing to do with skill

xNig

Iron_web93 said:

First, you were both Gold 2 last season, so you should be competing against Gold 2 alliances. Second, how many BGs do you run?

Ranks have no bearing in Matchmaking. It's the War Rating that matters.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

DNA3000

Fjolnir said:

This idea that a 21mm alliance facing off against 14mm alliance is equal is rubbish.

Alliance rating has no bearing on an alliance's ability to fight wars. Alliance rating is the sum total of all player ratings in the alliance, which itself is the sum total of all ratings of all champions in the player's roster, from their 6* champs all the way down to their 1* champs. The vast majority of my player rating is due to champions that are 5/50 or lower, not the high rank champs that are important for war.

What matters is wins and losses. If you take all the 20 million alliances as a set and there's a 21 million alliance rating alliance that on average beats them half the time, and another 14 million alliance rating alliance that on average also beats them about half the time, then those two alliances have about equal strength and should get matched against each other in a fair fight. Fundamentally speaking, that's what matching on war rating does.

What your opponent's alliance rating is doesn't matter. What your opponent's final bracket placing last season doesn't matter. What matters is: do you win wars about as often as they do when fighting similar opponents? If the answer is yes, it is a fair fight. If the answer is no, it is not. And war rating is the closest approximation we have to measuring that.

Matching against any other rating, like alliance rating or even prestige, is "rubbish."

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

DNA3000

Fjolnir said:

DNA3000 said:

Fjolnir said:

This idea that a 21mm alliance facing off against 14mm alliance is equal is rubbish.

Alliance rating has no bearing on an alliance's ability to fight wars. Alliance rating is the sum total of all player ratings in the alliance, which itself is the sum total of all ratings of all champions in the player's roster, from their 6* champs all the way down to their 1* champs. The vast majority of my player rating is due to champions that are 5/50 or lower, not the high rank champs that are important for war.

What matters is wins and losses. If you take all the 20 million alliances as a set and there's a 21 million alliance rating alliance that on average beats them half the time, and another 14 million alliance rating alliance that on average also beats them about half the time, then those two alliances have about equal strength and should get matched against each other in a fair fight. Fundamentally speaking, that's what matching on war rating does.

What your opponent's alliance rating is doesn't matter. What your opponent's final bracket placing last season doesn't matter. What matters is: do you win wars about as often as they do when fighting similar opponents? If the answer is yes, it is a fair fight. If the answer is no, it is not. And war rating is the closest approximation we have to measuring that.

Matching against any other rating, like alliance rating or even prestige, is "rubbish."

Greetings DNA. I am familiar with how it all works & have played this game since 2014. I don’t know how to fix or make matchmaking better, but my point is that an alliance that’s rated 7 million more than their opponent will usually have a stronger roster. I’d be interested to see Kabams metrics showing how those war matchups with a large difference in rating ended up.

An alliance with 21 million rating *might* be a strong war fighter, or it might not be. But an alliance with a 2000 war rating *definitely* no question, is capable of fighting other 2000 rating alliances on equal ground, because that's the only way to get a 2000 rating.

Even if the alliance with 21 million rating does have a stronger roster, we don't match based on stronger roster, any more than we seat sports tournaments by height. We do so by their ability to win games, not by the physical attributes of the players. Height does have a theoretical advantage, but win/loss record *measures* what that advantage actually ended up doing.

If you know how rating works as you say you do, you wouldn't need to see the statistics you're wondering about. That's because if a 14 million alliance faces a 21 million alliance at around rating 2000, both alliances must have arrived there in a similar way (I'm ignoring cheating and manipulation for now, as that is uncommon compared to the number of wars fought), by beating similar alliances of similar rating. That means there can't be a sizeable statistical advantage possessed by 21 million rating alliances over 14 million rated alliances [i]of similar war rating[/i]. Of course, on average 21 million rating alliances will tend to have higher war rating than 14 million alliances, but that's the point of war rating. The 21 million alliances that are in fact stronger and better than most 14 million alliances have a higher rating and thus never face them. They only face the 14 million alliances that are as strong as them, and can win wars against similar strength alliances.

BlackSaChi

Btw this will be our 6th loss in last 15 days...

Iron_web93 said:

First, you were both Gold 2 last season, so you should be competing against Gold 2 alliances. Second, how many BGs do you run?

It's arguable when there average team rating are in 700s and our 400s.. 2BGs

BlackSaChi

Deadbyrd9 said:

You both have a similar war rating so match making is working as intended. Alliance rating has nothing to do with skill

Not sure if that's the criteria to do matchmaking. But again I can be wrong

John757

You are wrong. War rating is almost equal, therefore a completely fair fight. Would you rather fight an alliance with a 7 million rating lower than you but they have only 5/65 5*s and 6*s?

BlackSaChi

Thanks all for comments. I wanted to respond each individual separately but may be one common response would be enough..

Suppose hypothetically you have 30 good players and you reach a alliance rating of 2k. And your top 5 players left and change alliance after season. Do all of you think we should still be fighting same 2k groups? And keep loosing till we just get exhausted and loose interest in war?.

Second thing hit us was timing... Most if our players can't even login in the last few hours of war, either in school or office. We used to start war 5 PM EST.

Again I respect all of you and your opinion. My point only is it's disheartening to keep loosing coz you get always alliance with that gape.

There average player rating is ,700k and our rating is 450k. What do you think we have?

Btw I would have shared my details of my alliance but unfortunately community rule doesn't allow me. .

Again thanks all for your inputs.

BlackSaChi

John757 said:

You are wrong. War rating is almost equal, therefore a completely fair fight. Would you rather fight an alliance with a 7 million rating lower than you but they have only 5/65 5*s and 6*s?

You have a good point, but that's Kabam job to find out, they have 4hours to run algorithm to give me match which actually matches my team, right?

ShaggyM

Why would prestige not work? Idk any better way. It represents the alliances top champs which in turn gives an accurate assessment of each alliances potential. Then skill would take over from there. War rating can be easily manipulated during the offseason

BlackSaChi

BlackSaChi said:

John757 said:

You are wrong. War rating is almost equal, therefore a completely fair fight. Would you rather fight an alliance with a 7 million rating lower than you but they have only 5/65 5*s and 6*s?

You have a good point, but that's Kabam job to find out, they have 4hours to run algorithm to give me match which actually matches my team, right?

I mean they have more data also. And exception can still be there my friend... I understand one or two time we get busted by strong alliance. But 6 times continuously? Don't you think something is wrong.

BlackSaChi

Inigo said:

Why would prestige not work? Idk any better way. It represents the alliances top champs which in turn gives an accurate assessment of each alliances potential. Then skill would take over from there. War rating can be easily manipulated during the offseason

May be or may be not

John757

BlackSaChi said:

BlackSaChi said:

John757 said:

You are wrong. War rating is almost equal, therefore a completely fair fight. Would you rather fight an alliance with a 7 million rating lower than you but they have only 5/65 5*s and 6*s?

You have a good point, but that's Kabam job to find out, they have 4hours to run algorithm to give me match which actually matches my team, right?

I mean they have more data also. And exception can still be there my friend... I understand one or two time we get busted by strong alliance. But 6 times continuously? Don't you think something is wrong.

No don’t think anything is wrong, war rating allows for lower alliances with good skill to rise up even if they don’t have top champs. And also punishes alliances that have large rosters but bad skill to drop to where they should be. If the war rating is near yours they are near you skill wise.

plpkok

War rating is all that matters. I know the "community" shuns it but I have and will still occasionally sell champs, as a result my overall team is only 300,000 however my strongest team per leaderboard is over 47,000, by far more than most in my alliance with many having rosters well above 600,000

BlackSaChi

John757 said:

BlackSaChi said:

BlackSaChi said:

John757 said:

You are wrong. War rating is almost equal, therefore a completely fair fight. Would you rather fight an alliance with a 7 million rating lower than you but they have only 5/65 5*s and 6*s?

You have a good point, but that's Kabam job to find out, they have 4hours to run algorithm to give me match which actually matches my team, right?

I mean they have more data also. And exception can still be there my friend... I understand one or two time we get busted by strong alliance. But 6 times continuously? Don't you think something is wrong.

No don’t think anything is wrong, war rating allows for lower alliances with good skill to rise up even if they don’t have top champs. And also punishes alliances that have large rosters but bad skill to drop to where they should be. If the war rating is near yours they are near you skill wise.

For me it's stupid to match team with 700K average player rating with 450K average player rating. That's kinda once sided. No point even trying when you know you are going to loose. It's not individual champions btw now a days. In war you can fight any one now a days. It's about 3 min timer when you know Medusa or Korg with rank5 you can't kill with ur r4s.

Again I respect your thoughts 🙏

plpkok

OP. You clearly do not understand how war works. War rating is based on skill, wins, losses. That determines war rating. Roster size and or rank mean nothing.

BlackSaChi

plpkok said:

OP. You clearly do not understand how war works. War rating is based on skill, wins, losses. That determines war rating. Roster size and or rank mean nothing.

With due respect, May be I don't know actually. My maths are simple. can you please guide this poor community member by creating one post and tell me how does it works?

plpkok

I just told you. Skill. Wins. Losses. The more you lose the lower the rating. The more you win the higher the rating. That is it. You could have a roster of all 2 stars and if you explore 100% of the map, have 100% diversity, and 100% attack bonus beat an alliance that has all 6 stars rank 2 and dupped

BlackSaChi

plpkok said:

I just told you. Skill. Wins. Losses. The more you lose the lower the rating. The more you win the higher the rating. That is it. You could have a roster of all 2 stars and if you explore 100% of the map, have 100% diversity, and 100% attack bonus beat an alliance that has all 6 stars rank 2 and dupped

And you think you can do that with 2* in 3 min? Fighting a 6* dupped? Come on sir, are you seriously saying you can fight top alliances even if u don't have champs at there ranks?

Dexman1349

BlackSaChi said:

Thanks all for comments. I wanted to respond each individual separately but may be one common response would be enough..

Suppose hypothetically you have 30 good players and you reach a alliance rating of 2k. And your top 5 players left and change alliance after season. Do all of you think we should still be fighting same 2k groups? And keep loosing till we just get exhausted and loose interest in war?.

Second thing hit us was timing... Most if our players can't even login in the last few hours of war, either in school or office. We used to start war 5 PM EST.

Again I respect all of you and your opinion. My point only is it's disheartening to keep loosing coz you get always alliance with that gape.

There average player rating is ,700k and our rating is 450k. What do you think we have?

Btw I would have shared my details of my alliance but unfortunately community rule doesn't allow me. .

Again thanks all for your inputs.

If you have players leave and are replaced with other smaller players, then a series of losses can be expected as the war rating "corrects" itself to the new alliance.

If the opposite was true, say an alliance with a 1500 war rating replaces a BG with 800k players, would it also be reasonable to expect a series of wins?

Additionally as DNA pointed out, player size does not necessarily equal skill. What's to stop a player who's explored LOL and Variant to sell all of their champs below 4/55 to significantly drop player rating? I know people with ratings of under 300k who have 100% explored everything. I am over 725k but haven't even attempted Variant nor done a single LOL path. So who is the easier matchup, the 300k guy who's explored everything or the 725k guy who still ranks up 3* champs?

I could turn around and sell all my small champs to reduce myself to a roster size of 50 and a player rating of ~250k. Would that be fair metric to determine my next war opponent?

At the end of it all, my point is that player rating is very easily manipulated and should only be used as a VERY rough guide to player capabilities.

plpkok

You do understand that if you can or cant then your war rating changes right?

John757

BlackSaChi said:

John757 said:

BlackSaChi said:

BlackSaChi said:

John757 said:

You are wrong. War rating is almost equal, therefore a completely fair fight. Would you rather fight an alliance with a 7 million rating lower than you but they have only 5/65 5*s and 6*s?

You have a good point, but that's Kabam job to find out, they have 4hours to run algorithm to give me match which actually matches my team, right?

I mean they have more data also. And exception can still be there my friend... I understand one or two time we get busted by strong alliance. But 6 times continuously? Don't you think something is wrong.

No don’t think anything is wrong, war rating allows for lower alliances with good skill to rise up even if they don’t have top champs. And also punishes alliances that have large rosters but bad skill to drop to where they should be. If the war rating is near yours they are near you skill wise.

For me it's stupid to match team with 700K average player rating with 450K average player rating. That's kinda once sided. No point even trying when you know you are going to loose. It's not individual champions btw now a days. In war you can fight any one now a days. It's about 3 min timer when you know Medusa or Korg with rank5 you can't kill with ur r4s.

Again I respect your thoughts 🙏

You don’t understand what we are all saying. If that alliance with 700k rating sold all its 2 stars, 3 stars and 4 stars they don’t use and had the same alliance rating as you, would it be a fair fight in your eyes? 400k vs 400k

BlackSaChi

John757 said:

BlackSaChi said:

John757 said:

BlackSaChi said:

BlackSaChi said:

John757 said:

You are wrong. War rating is almost equal, therefore a completely fair fight. Would you rather fight an alliance with a 7 million rating lower than you but they have only 5/65 5*s and 6*s?

You have a good point, but that's Kabam job to find out, they have 4hours to run algorithm to give me match which actually matches my team, right?

I mean they have more data also. And exception can still be there my friend... I understand one or two time we get busted by strong alliance. But 6 times continuously? Don't you think something is wrong.

No don’t think anything is wrong, war rating allows for lower alliances with good skill to rise up even if they don’t have top champs. And also punishes alliances that have large rosters but bad skill to drop to where they should be. If the war rating is near yours they are near you skill wise.

For me it's stupid to match team with 700K average player rating with 450K average player rating. That's kinda once sided. No point even trying when you know you are going to loose. It's not individual champions btw now a days. In war you can fight any one now a days. It's about 3 min timer when you know Medusa or Korg with rank5 you can't kill with ur r4s.

Again I respect your thoughts 🙏

You don’t understand what we are all saying. If that alliance with 700k rating sold all its 2 stars, 3 stars and 4 stars they don’t use and had the same alliance rating as you, would it be a fair fight in your eyes? 400k vs 400k

Unfortunately I can not give you more proof. But that's not the case here. What you are talking is based on assumption that we have sold our 2*s and 3*s.