Matchmaking Discussion [Merged Threads]

1232426282962

Comments

  • Mr_PlatypusMr_Platypus Member Posts: 2,779 ★★★★★

    That's half the problem. People aren't looking past their own nose. They're playing Judge, Jury, and Executioner. Based on their OWN experience, they're determining what's easy for others, where they should be, what Rewards they deserve, and whether they have the right to complain about their own Matches. It's just a joke. Might as well stop playing. Someone else is going to determine what you deserve because they're only winning half their Wars. Like that isn't logical to begin with. Of course you're going to be stuck if you're only breaking even.

    Judge jury and executioner? We went back to a system that basically says your position in the ranking will be based entirely on what level you are able to win at. Any alliance can get to any level if they can win wars there. If you win you will move up in ranking and fight those alliances. If you lose you move down and are matched accordingly. How is this judge, jury and execution lol?
    Had that system done so in a way that made it possible for people to fall into that, this Thread wouldn't exist. Yet here we are with people in Matches they're never going to win. Let's stop pretending if they're skilled, they'll win them. We all know full well there's no chance of that happening.
    Judge, Jury, and Executioner is exactly what it is. People have determined that the Matches of others are easier, they don't deserve their Rating or Wins, they should lose, and they have no right to complain because all is as it should be. That assessment is accurate.
    The only way the old system would ever be fair is if you were literally segregated into different war prestige groups with its own set of rewards. As long as we were fighting for the same rewards it was never going to be fair. If you want to turn War into a form of EQ, that would be one way to go I suppose. The Judge, Jury, and Executioner thing is stupid. People haven't Determined where other groups should be, and no one is executing anyone. War rating is going to determine that. Kabam looked at their data and realized that groups getting to Plat 2 without having to fight other groups in Plat 2, and other groups stuck in gold 2 fighting groups in Plat 1 didn't make sense. Low alliances have a rough 3 or 4 wars ahead of them. It's not the end of the world.
    Oh but it is the end of the world! How will they cope without being able to earn 1 6* per month using their little 4* attack and defence teams.
  • SkitardSkitard Member Posts: 55
    Up until now the wars my alliance has been in were equal in strength, prestige, alliance rating, and alliance war rating... we finished gold 2 because we won almost every war... and not due to matchmaking being unfair... majority of the time it was very close win or lose... i don't think ccrider474 should be annoyed that that other alliance was in the same tier... he should be annoyed that kabam does a horrible job at matchmaking...

    If you guys think an alliance that wins almost every war deserves to be placed in stone, bronze, or silver because they don't have an alliance rating of 50,000,000... then you are morons... I'm not saying that an alliance shouldn't have some tough matches... but to give a strong alliance such an easy win?... what part of that is fair at all?... the real problem is that they don't have it set up to where low rated alliances can be in a different bracket than all the high rated ones... giving them an opportunity to make gold and platinum at the end of the season...

    But in the end it's the way it always goes... kabam doesn't care about the game or its players... they care about the money... and the top tier alliances have most likely dropped some serious dime on this game... so kabam will continue to make everything easier for high rated players while pissing on the rest of us...
  • SkitardSkitard Member Posts: 55

    Here’s the deal. If you want the rewards come and beat us and take them now.... some baby alliance with a bunch of wins should not get better rewards than my alliance that would smash them. You want em come and get em....

    Like i said... there should be different brackets for alliances to be in... no alliance that is only a couple years old with newer ayers should have to compete with alliances that are full of 1.5 million rated players for a spot in gold... it's impossible to grow strong enough to fight an alliance like yours if you gett way way better rewards for the same amount of victories... thus the fact that there should be a bracket system...

    And I'm not saying same rewards... I'm saying of all the alliances that war with a 10mil rated alliance the top winners should get a little bit of 6* shards... people like you are ignorant... come fight us... pshhh... how bout come blow us...
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,643 ★★★★★
    These Posts are going to come, so people might as well stop rubbing in others' faces. No one is going to say it's okay to be placed in Matches they can't win, no matter how much you say it's for the best.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Member Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    xNig said:

    Anyone bother suggesting that struggling alliances should start a new alliance to wipe their war rating?

    They might not want to start from scratch and lose the 4/5/6* shards they have been winning from the inflated war ratings.
    If it’s about “fair” wars that’s how they get “fair”, it’s a step forward or a simple solution to this bickering is all.
  • AhzivistAhzivist Member Posts: 1
    Completely support SAWGAT request ...👍👍👍
    KABAM please make the necessary adjustments please !! 👌👍🤞
  • xNigxNig Member Posts: 7,336 ★★★★★

    xNig said:

    Anyone bother suggesting that struggling alliances should start a new alliance to wipe their war rating?

    They might not want to start from scratch and lose the 4/5/6* shards they have been winning from the inflated war ratings.
    If it’s about “fair” wars that’s how they get “fair”, it’s a step forward or a simple solution to this bickering is all.
    Yeah agree. Although some people might get drunk on rewards, personally, I find that resetting all war ratings to 0, then postponing season 19 for 1-2 months, might have been the fairest way.
  • xNigxNig Member Posts: 7,336 ★★★★★
    Skitard said:

    Here’s the deal. If you want the rewards come and beat us and take them now.... some baby alliance with a bunch of wins should not get better rewards than my alliance that would smash them. You want em come and get em....

    Like i said... there should be different brackets for alliances to be in... no alliance that is only a couple years old with newer ayers should have to compete with alliances that are full of 1.5 million rated players for a spot in gold... it's impossible to grow strong enough to fight an alliance like yours if you gett way way better rewards for the same amount of victories... thus the fact that there should be a bracket system...

    And I'm not saying same rewards... I'm saying of all the alliances that war with a 10mil rated alliance the top winners should get a little bit of 6* shards... people like you are ignorant... come fight us... pshhh... how bout come blow us...
    Grow strong to fight alliances like that? There’s EQ SQ and side quests for you to earn your catalysts to grow strong, not only AW. Those “1.5m rated players” you’re talking about? They’ve put in the work/money/time to get these quests done.

    If there were a bracketing system, then you guys who are lower will complain about the rewards of the bracket because you guys think you deserve better.

    And the fact is, if the “ignorant people” you were talking about were to match with you, yes they will “blow” through your defenses.
  • BuGiBuGi Member Posts: 22

    It's ridiculous. Don't listen to people saying everything is as it should be.

    yesterday
    6M vs 44 M
    today
    6M VS 0.5M
    It's still ridiculous




  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,643 ★★★★★
    Kevo9513 said:

    Your alliance isn’t G2 worthy, go down.

    A 16 Mil Ally isn't worthy of G2?
  • xNigxNig Member Posts: 7,336 ★★★★★
    BuGi said:

    It's ridiculous. Don't listen to people saying everything is as it should be.

    yesterday
    6M vs 44 M
    today
    6M VS 0.5M
    It's still ridiculous




    It’s a tanking shell.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Member Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    xNig said:

    xNig said:

    Anyone bother suggesting that struggling alliances should start a new alliance to wipe their war rating?

    They might not want to start from scratch and lose the 4/5/6* shards they have been winning from the inflated war ratings.
    If it’s about “fair” wars that’s how they get “fair”, it’s a step forward or a simple solution to this bickering is all.
    Yeah agree. Although some people might get drunk on rewards, personally, I find that resetting all war ratings to 0, then postponing season 19 for 1-2 months, might have been the fairest way.
    I try to think about the here, now and tomorrow, not focus on the coulda woulda shouldas.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Member Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    BuGi said:

    It's ridiculous. Don't listen to people saying everything is as it should be.

    yesterday
    6M vs 44 M
    today
    6M VS 0.5M
    It's still ridiculous




    Cute how you cropped the names so people can’t verify if they’re shells, which by the look of it at least one was; they have 2 members in the ally. I don’t know if you’re being disingenuous on purpose but that’s what this post is along with being ridiculous.

    Furthermore neither of those war rating could have supported actually fighting against their peers in those tiers.
  • Panchulon21Panchulon21 Member Posts: 2,605 ★★★★★
    He left the leaders names. If you want to find the alliance and post. You can 👀
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Member Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★

    He left the leaders names. If you want to find the alliance and post. You can 👀

    Thanks, the one that looks like it could actually be an alliance is actually not, ~20 haven’t logged in for months.
This discussion has been closed.