Matchmaking Discussion [Merged Threads]

1356763

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,673 ★★★★★
    It is bullying if one side CANNOT win no matter how skilled they are because the system makes it numerically impossible before it's even fought.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,673 ★★★★★
    But please continue to try and sell me of the trials of being entitled to knock people down.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,673 ★★★★★
    Skill has nothing to do with a Match that's literally over before it starts.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,673 ★★★★★
    edited July 9

    Skill has nothing to do with a Match that's literally over before it starts.

    How would you have made the changes then to make it more fair? Things are going to be rocky for some alliance because things are being balanced out. It may not seem fair and will cause losses, but it is to help fix the system that was previously broken. There's no bullying lower alliances, it is them fighting against their rating which should show their skill
    I've already outlined a number of options on how I would habe handled it differently, none of which involved a month's worth of work down the drain when it matters most. Rocky is downplaying it. It's intentionally setting people up to fail for the sake of changing the system.
  • MJROCKSMJROCKS Posts: 16
    edited July 9
    Stingerbk said:

    It is bullying if one side CANNOT win no matter how skilled they are because the system makes it numerically impossible before it's even fought.

    If you aren't equipped enough to beat them, don't expect to finish above them, simple.
    Really? Force 2 unequal alliances into battle and expect the weaker one to win it even when it was fair before? It's like a talented 10-year-old who used to fight other talented10-year-olds is suddenly forced to beat an 18-year-old dude and expected to see it as being "fair". RIP Logic
  • StingerbkStingerbk Posts: 157 ★★
    Daphboy said:

    A l p h a said:

    So the point is for the first couple wars to let some alliances be absolutely bowled over?

    Apparently, my group was matched against a 16mil alliance... we are nearly 34mil. I mean, thanks for the easy win, but I do feel bad for the people on the receiving end. I know we wouldn’t be very pleased and totally demoralized if all of the sudden we got thrown up against a master alliance.


    Also, holy moly, I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many people agree with GW.
    You are only gonna be facing Ally's with similar war rating which in turn means similar tier.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,102 ★★★★★
    Mcord117 said:

    Lets put it this way. Many alliances have achieved rewards that in all likelihood were not warranted for the last couple of seasons. They spent entire seasons only playing against other alliances with similar strength. Alliances that were much stronger than them received lessor rewards because they only faced stronger alliances and were prevented from climbing.

    you should be thanking kabam for the gift of the last couple of seasons rewards. If you want the same rewards, you will now have to beat the stronger alliances. If you do, kudos, if you don't, you will land in the bracket you should have been the last couple of seasons.

    This is the only fair way to match make, I cant understand how the other system ever came to be

    Tanking and shells more than likely
  • GreekhitGreekhit Posts: 1,068 ★★★★
    edited July 9

    Mcord117 said:

    Lets put it this way. Many alliances have achieved rewards that in all likelihood were not warranted for the last couple of seasons. They spent entire seasons only playing against other alliances with similar strength. Alliances that were much stronger than them received lessor rewards because they only faced stronger alliances and were prevented from climbing.

    you should be thanking kabam for the gift of the last couple of seasons rewards. If you want the same rewards, you will now have to beat the stronger alliances. If you do, kudos, if you don't, you will land in the bracket you should have been the last couple of seasons.

    This is the only fair way to match make, I cant understand how the other system ever came to be

    Tanking and shells more than likely
    Kabam either should lock aw rating off season or run seasons back to back with a few days break (without ranked wars of course). It’s been also discussed two seperate on/off season war ratings. That’s more complicated but still a solution.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,102 ★★★★★
    Mcord117 said:

    Mcord117 said:

    Lets put it this way. Many alliances have achieved rewards that in all likelihood were not warranted for the last couple of seasons. They spent entire seasons only playing against other alliances with similar strength. Alliances that were much stronger than them received lessor rewards because they only faced stronger alliances and were prevented from climbing.

    you should be thanking kabam for the gift of the last couple of seasons rewards. If you want the same rewards, you will now have to beat the stronger alliances. If you do, kudos, if you don't, you will land in the bracket you should have been the last couple of seasons.

    This is the only fair way to match make, I cant understand how the other system ever came to be

    Tanking and shells more than likely
    Unfortunately cheating and manipulation isn't going anywhere. It impacts only a few but the fixes impact the vast majority. I never could understand any of it, its a game. Running shells or trying to manipulate match making always seemed so petty to me.
    Oh I know it's not going anywhere. When everyone was in an uproar about then I told them be careful what you ask for bc half the time when they "fix" something in this game what you end up with is worse. We got the old matching system....

    I never really thought it made much of a difference personally. I was in an alliance that tanked for a while and never saw any noticeable difference in matches. Is what it is though, people will always try to game the system
  • AleorAleor Posts: 2,160 ★★★★

    Mcord117 said:

    Lets put it this way. Many alliances have achieved rewards that in all likelihood were not warranted for the last couple of seasons. They spent entire seasons only playing against other alliances with similar strength. Alliances that were much stronger than them received lessor rewards because they only faced stronger alliances and were prevented from climbing.

    you should be thanking kabam for the gift of the last couple of seasons rewards. If you want the same rewards, you will now have to beat the stronger alliances. If you do, kudos, if you don't, you will land in the bracket you should have been the last couple of seasons.

    This is the only fair way to match make, I cant understand how the other system ever came to be

    Tanking and shells more than likely
    All it takes to avoid those is to make sure long win streak through season from lower tier to tier X gives less points, then 50/50 ratio in that tier X.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,673 ★★★★★
    Stingerbk said:

    Daphboy said:

    A l p h a said:

    So the point is for the first couple wars to let some alliances be absolutely bowled over?

    Apparently, my group was matched against a 16mil alliance... we are nearly 34mil. I mean, thanks for the easy win, but I do feel bad for the people on the receiving end. I know we wouldn’t be very pleased and totally demoralized if all of the sudden we got thrown up against a master alliance.


    Also, holy moly, I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many people agree with GW.
    You are only gonna be facing Ally's with similar war rating which in turn means similar tier.
    That doesn't mean anything. We all know they just changed the system all at once, so that's just obtuse. The issue is these Matches involve people fighting Wars they'll never win no matter what they do. That's the argument, and it's 100% not okay.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,102 ★★★★★
    Greekhit said:

    Mcord117 said:

    Lets put it this way. Many alliances have achieved rewards that in all likelihood were not warranted for the last couple of seasons. They spent entire seasons only playing against other alliances with similar strength. Alliances that were much stronger than them received lessor rewards because they only faced stronger alliances and were prevented from climbing.

    you should be thanking kabam for the gift of the last couple of seasons rewards. If you want the same rewards, you will now have to beat the stronger alliances. If you do, kudos, if you don't, you will land in the bracket you should have been the last couple of seasons.

    This is the only fair way to match make, I cant understand how the other system ever came to be

    Tanking and shells more than likely
    Kabam either should lock aw rating off season or run seasons back to back with a few days break (without ranked wars of course). It’s been also discussed two seperate on/off season war ratings. That’s more complicated but still a solution.
    Not having an off-season would make changing alliances a nightmare
  • BigManOnCampusBigManOnCampus Posts: 119
    og_steele said:

    This was the point. You guys with lower ratings shouldn’t be ranked so high. Many other alliances who are 30-40M are being pushed out of platinum by low ranked teams.

    I’ve even seen plat 2 & plat 1 alliances that have only 5M team rating. With a very limited amount of spots in these top tiers they should go to the teams that actually deserve it. This matchmaking is meant to push teams like yours to the spots they really belong in. This is a long time coming.

    Best of luck.

    Amen !! B)
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 25,673 ★★★★★

    Greekhit said:

    Mcord117 said:

    Lets put it this way. Many alliances have achieved rewards that in all likelihood were not warranted for the last couple of seasons. They spent entire seasons only playing against other alliances with similar strength. Alliances that were much stronger than them received lessor rewards because they only faced stronger alliances and were prevented from climbing.

    you should be thanking kabam for the gift of the last couple of seasons rewards. If you want the same rewards, you will now have to beat the stronger alliances. If you do, kudos, if you don't, you will land in the bracket you should have been the last couple of seasons.

    This is the only fair way to match make, I cant understand how the other system ever came to be

    Tanking and shells more than likely
    Kabam either should lock aw rating off season or run seasons back to back with a few days break (without ranked wars of course). It’s been also discussed two seperate on/off season war ratings. That’s more complicated but still a solution.
    Not having an off-season would make changing alliances a nightmare
    No, but all Ratings should be locked in the off. Not just Tiers 1-5.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,102 ★★★★★

    Greekhit said:

    Mcord117 said:

    Lets put it this way. Many alliances have achieved rewards that in all likelihood were not warranted for the last couple of seasons. They spent entire seasons only playing against other alliances with similar strength. Alliances that were much stronger than them received lessor rewards because they only faced stronger alliances and were prevented from climbing.

    you should be thanking kabam for the gift of the last couple of seasons rewards. If you want the same rewards, you will now have to beat the stronger alliances. If you do, kudos, if you don't, you will land in the bracket you should have been the last couple of seasons.

    This is the only fair way to match make, I cant understand how the other system ever came to be

    Tanking and shells more than likely
    Kabam either should lock aw rating off season or run seasons back to back with a few days break (without ranked wars of course). It’s been also discussed two seperate on/off season war ratings. That’s more complicated but still a solution.
    Not having an off-season would make changing alliances a nightmare
    No, but all Ratings should be locked in the off. Not just Tiers 1-5.
    Fine with me. People just use shells at that point though which is equally as annoying but ah well
This discussion has been closed.