Alliance Matchmaking - Getting Busted

plpkok

Bottom line. Your alliance is not as good as those you are facing as it pertains to war. End of story.

John757

No it is not based on assuming you did that. If the matchup was 400k vs 400k against that same alliance, but THEY sold all those types of champs. Would it be a fair fight to you?

BlackSaChi

BlackSaChi said:

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.

also if I am programmer I would do alliance Matchmaking keeping ur r5 and r4s in mind. I am just saying that as I have 4hours to run the alogorithn

Dexman1349

If you are the ally with the 400k average and are matched with another ally with the same war rating but 700k average, perhaps they added some new players and are going through a series of wins to correct their war rating to something higher?

BlackSaChi

Dexman1349 said:

If you are the ally with the 400k average and are matched with another ally with the same war rating but 700k average, perhaps they added some new players and are going through a series of wins to correct their war rating to something higher?

Absolutely agree, I can understand it happens 1/2 times not 6 times...

BlackSaChi

plpkok said:

Bottom line. Your alliance is not as good as those you are facing as it pertains to war. End of story.

Thanks for understanding 😊😊

BlackSaChi

I think I have said enough... Have a nice day and season war all of you. Peace out

plpkok

It is what it is. You want sympathy? If your alliance does not have the champs or skill to beat another than you should lose. You know the nodes you are facing, it is AI you are fighting. Maybe they are boosting, potions, etc to ensure they do not die.

plpkok

The algorithm most certainly does not have a vendetta against your alliance

John757

So we all agree that this guy is misunderstanding the game mechanics and doesn’t want to listen to others explaining that the game is working as intended. sounds good.

BlackSaChi

plpkok said:

It is what it is. You want sympathy? If your alliance does not have the champs or skill to beat another than you should lose. You know the nodes you are facing, it is AI you are fighting. Maybe they are boosting, potions, etc to ensure they do not die.

Oh come on. Ping me on line sir. I can show you more, cmehta82 my line id.

plpkok

Agreed

BlackSaChi

John757 said:

So we all agree that this guy is misunderstanding the game mechanics and doesn’t want to listen to others explaining that the game is working as intended. sounds good.

Haha respectfully sir just ping me on line and will share more information.

Lovejoy72

The idea that war rating is all that counts is precisely why tanking works, at least for the first week of war. It’s also why we switched to an AQ focused alliance

John757

I don’t need more info, I have all the information needed to make an “informed” decision

BlackSaChi

Lovejoy72 said:

The idea that war rating is all that counts is precisely why tanking works, at least for the first week of war. It’s also why we switched to an AQ focused alliance

Exactly where we are going too.

DNA3000

Lovejoy72 said:

The idea that war rating is all that counts is precisely why tanking works, at least for the first week of war. It’s also why we switched to an AQ focused alliance

You can't blame war rating matching for tanking, because alliance rating matching contains the same problem in a worse form: selling lower champs to lower rating and gain a competitive advantage. It is a worse problem because you don't even have to lose to do it.

And it has happened before in a different context: when AQ was the only game in town high tier alliances would sell all their lower tier champs to maximize their top rated champs to maximize prestige. This happened to such a degree that many of these players accused Kabam of "cheating them" when they offered 12.0 compensation packages based on player rating. These players said it was "obvious" that the entire goal of the game was to maximize prestige at all costs, and by "forcing" players to sell lower champs to maximize prestige they "tricked" them into doing something against their interests.

There's no question at all that if matches used alliance rating as the primary metric for matches this would just happen again, on a larger scale.

winterthur

BlackSaChi said:

BlackSaChi said:

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.

also if I am programmer I would do alliance Matchmaking keeping ur r5 and r4s in mind. I am just saying that as I have 4hours to run the alogorithn

I think there was a post from the Mod stating they will be considering only War Rating at the moment.

DNA3000

Belfigor said:

yea they dont care about fair game, if they did they would matchmake AFTER everyone placed champions and then match alliance to another alliance with same amount of 5 stars at same rank etc and THEN use rating to filter it down.

Everyone's a genius. If you're talking about matching based on the content of the defense, I would simply instruct my entire battlegroup to place a nominally (but not completely) weak defense, hoping to draw an alliance that *only* has low ranked champions, which we would proceed to mow down with our 5* attackers. If you actually meant matching based on the entire roster of both alliances that would probably take forever, and also not actually require waiting for the alliances to place defenses which would be nonsensical.

plpkok

I have given up on this discussion