**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.

I'd like to apologize to this alliance for the broken matchmaking system

DshuDshu Posts: 1,503 ★★★★
edited July 2019 in General Discussion


This is a perfect example of the broken matchmaking system. The top alliance is 1/18th of ours. Since the war chat is apparently not working I wanted to apologize for this here. Hopefully someone from their alliance reads this. It is wrong to see this much difference between the 2 alliances in a war.

Comments

  • cx23433cx23433 Posts: 465 ★★
    Oof
  • Dose_ResponsiveDose_Responsive Posts: 89
    Our alliance is the same. We are regularly fighting alliances many tiers above us until we lose so many and then then we get opponents closer to our level.
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,503 ★★★★
    We are the larger alliance. We haven't taken war seriously in a couple of seasons. Mostly retired guys who don't want to stress over the outdated rewards in aw. I just find it disheartening for the other alliance to be matched against us. Some of them only have 3*s for defense and attack. Its poor matchmaking like this that kills any motivation to do aw
  • TwmRTwmR Posts: 662 ★★★
    This is an example of matchmaking working perfectly. War rating should be the only thing that determines matchmaking
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,503 ★★★★
    Not really I've seen multiple wars this season where alliances don't even place. The point I was trying to demonstrate though is that war rating alone is a terrible way to match alliances. I suppose it is also possible that they took over a dead alliance which could have also inflated the war rating but last season shows them in bronze
    @Drooped2
  • Drooped2 said:

    Dshu said:

    We are the larger alliance. We haven't taken war seriously in a couple of seasons. Mostly retired guys who don't want to stress over the outdated rewards in aw. I just find it disheartening for the other alliance to be matched against us. Some of them only have 3*s for defense and attack. Its poor matchmaking like this that kills any motivation to do aw

    If they only have 3s their war rating shouldnt be 1700. Theres a flaw there.
    Not necessarily. If they're good at AW against other Alliances that are closer in size/Prestige, 1700s isn't out of the realm of possibilities. Or, it was a larger Alliance at one time that experienced a mass exodus. Now they're rebuilding with smaller accounts. This is QUITE the mismatch indeed no matter how the other guys got their war rating. It's gonna be a slaughter by the looks of it.
  • Panchulon21Panchulon21 Posts: 2,605 ★★★★★
    We faced a 2600 alliance who had a 4 star boss and their players reflected it. It’s a burner alliance. They probably bounce back and forth as a tanking strategy.
  • klobberintymeklobberintyme Posts: 1,389 ★★★
    Dshu said:

    Not really I've seen multiple wars this season where alliances don't even place. The point I was trying to demonstrate though is that war rating alone is a terrible way to match alliances. I suppose it is also possible that they took over a dead alliance which could have also inflated the war rating but last season shows them in bronze
    @Drooped2

    Welcome to shell alliance city. Don't feel bad, this is how it works: guys ping between 3 or 4 alliances over several seasons, leaving second or third accounts to pilot. Matter of fact, these guys cycle between 4 alliances, one of my sleeper accounts jumped on between seasons a few cycles ago, watched as all the officers and leader jumped to a similarly named plat alliance 4 wars into season 8.
  • If they were a bit higher in war rating I could see that being a strategy @Panchulon21 . However, they're in the 1700s and they landed Bronze 1 last Season. I don't think this is a Shell Alliance situation. Maybe it WAS a shell Alliance and it's been tossed out to someone else to use for a few Seasons. However, typically don't they swap Season to Season? If they had landed in Gold 1, or Platinum 3+ and were rocking that rating, I would call Shell Alliance all day.
  • DshuDshu Posts: 1,503 ★★★★
    I'm leaning towards them getting matched against alliances that had no defense or just tanked on the off season. Unfortunately they landed us on a day we actually had 10 guys place defense since we normally only have a few guys place and people join attack for the loyalty from rewards. We aren't tanking we just no longer care about aw. Unfortunately it is a necessary evil for aq loyalty
  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 20,817 ★★★★★
    Dshu said:

    I'm leaning towards them getting matched against alliances that had no defense or just tanked on the off season. Unfortunately they landed us on a day we actually had 10 guys place defense since we normally only have a few guys place and people join attack for the loyalty from rewards. We aren't tanking we just no longer care about aw. Unfortunately it is a necessary evil for aq loyalty

    So its 1 bg vs 1 bg? If so, that's why you matched. There weren't enough 1 bg allys out there at your ally rating so it worked its way down to who you matched.
  • Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 1,003 ★★★★
    If you aren’t running 3 bg’s there will always be anomalies. The pool is significantly smaller at 1 bg. Match making overall this season seems to have improved.
  • Yeah, the 1 BG aspect does help explain why this happened. It's certainly unfortunate for them.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,169 ★★★★★
    The War Ratings are the same. Unfortunately, there's not much that can be said.
Sign In or Register to comment.