So this fight is doable for most people on this thread but you can't handle it in war where the health pools are only 60-70k and PIs are around 18-25k. Doesn't make any sense.
Funny a 40mil 10.5k prestige alliance was taking same season rewards with a 5mil 4.3k till now. That joke finally ended 👍 *Totally fair matchup also
This exactly. Funny seeing all the lower level platinum alliances whining on here like they were ACTUAL platinum alliances. These teams were literally flooding the rankings of plat 2-4 where literally only a couple hundred teams can place. This is what facing REAL platinum teams look like. Thank you Kabam!!
Bro, because you aren’t facing correct level teams. It’s not that you aren’t skilled enough or something. But if you’re a 12M rated alliance taking away a platinum spot from a 30M rated alliance in what universe do you think that’s fair? That 30M alliance would smoke your 12M alliance but yet you get their spot? You aren’t better than them so why would you get that platinum spot?
This has been a long time coming and thank goodness it’s here. If you guys want to play platinum be prepared to play against REAL platinum level teams. Not other 10-12M rated alliances.
We were facing the correct level teams. The main problem lied with the extremely low rated players who got into very high ranks, for example, the master 2 fiasco. And what do you mean by REAL PLATINUM players? Does having a huge roster and r5 defenders makes you a platinum player, or does finishing act 6 & variants make you one? Our war opponents and we may be equally skilled but the variety of powerful champs they have is what makes the whole difference. It's like giving they guy with a better roster more rewards just for having a better roster.
Well, seeing the replies on this thread people are more than happy to crush smaller rated alliances instead of becoming tough enough to face and beat an ally their own size and strength, who doesn't love easy rewards I guess. Only kabam can save us now, they've had a bad record with addressing player problems but things were starting to look good lately
You just aren't understanding bud. The game is now actually forcing you to play in the CORRECT tier based on the strength of your alliance. If you can't grasp that then you need to a couple things.
1. Quit playing AW altogether. 2. Join a stronger team (which you probably cant). 3. Quit playing the game altogether.
So unless you take one of those options then please stop complaining and read the room. Everyone is excited about this because now teams aren't stealing spots that shouldn't belong to them. My team would SMOKE your 17M alliance and you probably ranked higher in plat 4 than we did last season. Nothing about that is fair at all. Good luck man.
@DNA3000 I get your point but the op is facing an alliance that is sub 30 million and coming to the forums to say its unfair. I think it is reasonable to assume that Plat 4 status in season 18 was dictated by the opposition they faced. 2 seasons ago the alliance I was in finished gold 1 by the skin of our teeth and had 2 matchups against alliances that were over 45 million.
War season is supposed to be a battle to see who is best. everyone should have to face everyone as they climb and when they cant climb anymore, that is where they belong.
I agree. My point was that prestige shouldn't dictate where you belong, who you can beat should dictate that. if you're facing someone of identical war rating but you think the fight is unfair because they have higher prestige or alliance rating, that means either they aren't as good as you think they are, or you aren't as good as you're supposed to be at that war rating.
I’m 100% that this is a correction and a righting of a broken system that screwed alliances like mine. But kabam could have done it better, starting it in season was dumb, we all know the locked ratings isn’t really doing much, should have implemented the change off season and not frozen the ratings so the settling could happen outside the season. Secondly they should have left a parameter like closest war rating within 1k Of prestige for say the 5 wars, thing is alliances like mine who have been absolutely left to rot for the last few seasons in silver 1 can only be happy about the discrepancies that have occurred to war rating that these matches are actually showing up. It’s just the brutal suddenness of it that going to cause these complaints, we all knew they were coming
Here is my war match exact same rating and tier, regardless of prestige this is the new normal that always should have existed. Gold 2 vs gold 2 with same rating.
Let me guess. You're the 38. Would it look fine to you if you were the 18? I'd say not.
We are an 8.3k prestige alliance that gave up on war about 8 seasons ago due to prestige matching. We run 2bgs purely to have something to do and end of season rewards, for silver 2.
We finished at the top of silver 3 for the first time in many seasons last season and didn't match a single alliance with a prestige more or less than 100 points different from us.
Only 8k+prestige Alliances, all in silver 1, 2 and 3, for season after season.
It's not been right for a year and it was way past time this was fixed. Yes, some alliances are going to get a pasting, but the silver lining to that cloud, is that they received inflated rewards for nearly a year...
(We've just been matched against a 3.19k prestige Alliance....)
Sorry, first couple matches will be painful while the system corrects itself. There's been extensive posting about how the prestige based matching system was very unfair for alliances with high prestige. This is the only way to correct it and return everyone's war rating to what it should truly be. If an alliance experiences unfavorable matches a few times in the beginning, it's because their war rating was higher then it should have been due to a flaw in the previous matching system. Things will even out soon as alliances find their way to an accurate war rating relative to their strength and experience.
Kabam should figure out something, losing was shouldn't be the only way.
that's exactly how alliances will find their rating. they lose to those better than them in the same rating, so their rating decreases. if they win, their rating goes up. literally how the system works
This is my team and my personal defense. You want to know what is unfair? I have sunk so much time and money into my account much like most of my team. And some of you crying have far less but are getting better rewards than I am. You didn't earn it more than I did. You fought an easier team that my team would have beaten too while we fought a harder team that you wouldn't have beaten. Now you have to fight those teams that I've been facing. Let me make this clear. If you have less than my team, you don't belong in a tier above me. Regardless of how hard you thought those teams were that you faced. They wouldn't have had a chance against the actual stronger teams. And now that they fixed the ranking system, this is where you prove whether you were really that good or if you were just winning because of facing easy teams that also didn't belong in higher tiers. If you really belong in your tier, now it's fair. So prove it. Prove you are that good. If you are whining that it's unfair then you simply aren't good enough yet to be in that tier.
Really is unfair. My 36 mil alli got paired with a 9 mil alli. I feel bad for them
And that 9m alliance has been getting the same season rewards as you for the past 10 seasons.
That's Kabam's fault, and issue to have fixed in a better way. Now lower teams will get hammered, and it'll more than likely lead to alliances not bothering to even run war
this is exactly how they are fixing it. war brackets and places should be based off of war rating. period. do you expect kabam to go through each alliance and guess the skill of the alliance and place them? this is how it should've always been
Here is my war match exact same rating and tier, regardless of prestige this is the new normal that always should have existed. Gold 2 vs gold 2 with same rating.
Let me guess. You're the 38. Would it look fine to you if you were the 18? I'd say not.
Back when I did more competitive war, I didn't complain about alliance rating. If I matched against an alliance with significantly higher alliance rating, I assumed it was because they were not as good as most alliances of similar composition, and that increased the odds we would win. And most of the time, that is in fact what that meant: they were less strong than you would expect, and we tended to win more often than lose against such alliances. When we got destroyed, it was usually by alliances with very recent creation dates implying they were a new alliance working their way up, which is why their rating was unusually low for their strength. Either way, I never complained about it, because setting aside exploits that should be closed, I believe that competition should be about matching winners against winners and losers against losers, and war rating - which is the mathematical proxy for win/loss record - should be the only thing that decides match ups.
Last season we (6k prestige, 14m rating) matched against a 9k 25m rating alliance. And beat them. By diversity points only. As far as I was concerned, it was a 2k v 2k rating match, so it was fair.
@Plinko, as it is players like you that literally keep the lights on at kabam, it's a travesty that it's taken this long for them to fix it and that your alliance has been purposefully penalised.
I admire your patience in waiting this long to fix it!
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.
Ah. So it's all about revenge. Getting them back for winning their own Matches. Valiant. All I see is people gloating that they can win a Match that the other side has no chance in hell of winning. If that side is really the best, why doesn't it fight and win a fair fight?
what are you talking about? I've always respected you for taking all the sh*t people have sent to you because most of it was just for no reason. but what is this? war should be based off of war rating. war ratings are being adjusted with this new system so alliances that have higher war ratings but shouldn't be there are lowered so the system is balanced for everyone. it's how this ladder type situation should've worked from the beginning. in the beginning, like right now, there will be unfsir matchups, but this will all eventually being balance
Yeah man this is me Silver 1 rewards, 3* and 4* shards. Dropped as low as tier 13, never facing an alliance of less than 29m, running 3bgs and using boosts all season, sometimes finishing wars with zero attack kills, alliances with 900 prestige finishing higher than us. and after the season our two high prestige guys bailed for gold 1 teams, the system was broken af
@Plinko, as it is players like you that literally keep the lights on at kabam, it's a travesty that it's taken this long for them to fix it and that your alliance has been purposefully penalised.
I admire your patience in waiting this long to fix it!
I appreciate the kind words brother. It never bothered me that much before as there's a lot of good teams and the rewards are only so good. Just some of the entitled nonsensical responses I see on here are ridiculous. They basically are saying "it's not fair unless I can win against everybody". I'm just glad it's finally sorted and maybe my team will be good enough to move up into some higher tiers.
Yeah man this is me Silver 1 rewards, 3* and 4* shards. Dropped as low as tier 13, never facing an alliance of less than 29m, running 3bgs and using boosts all season, sometimes finishing wars with zero attack kills, alliances with 900 prestige finishing higher than us. and after the season our two high prestige guys bailed for gold 1 teams, the system was broken af
that sucks man. hope you guys get fixed and get the right rewards with this new system. if my alliance did a little more aw, we could've been around your rating and faced you due to our similar war ratings. I admit that it would suck for us, but it's all part of the process of making sure aw is more balanced
Let me preface my comments with this: I feel for smaller alliances going through this pain.
Now, that doesn't mean I think it is unfair. For those crying foul where were you when alliances larger then you were recieving lesser rewards? You honestly think it is fair for you to fight ONLY allys similar in strength to you? Why is that fair for the other alliances of greater strength/roster development competing for the SAME rewards?
There exists only 1 set of rewards. Meaning everyone is lumped together and each alliance receives rewards based on their standings at the end of a season.
What many of you are asking is simply not a fair solution to larger alliances. But there is a way I think all sides could be happy.
What I have seen in many other games is a tiering (let's call it bracketing for MCOC) where allys are bracketed based on a range of strength. For instance, 0-5 million would be one bracket and 5 million and 1 to say 12 million etc etc...
Each bracket has it's own set of rewards. Now there is a catch. Generally speaking rewards get much better the higher the bracket. The top rewards for a lower bracket tend to be on par with average rewards for the next bracket up. This encourages growth rather than complacency.
This system would allow similar war rating allys to match with similar war ratings and comparable strength. You can tie growth to a new bracket based upon ally rating to encourage allys to grow.
As an aside, shelling can easily be fixed. I think it is important to allow people free movement to change allys as things happen. However, there exists no reason to not associate a penalty to changing alliances associated with war. Preventing a member from participating in say 6 wars once joining a new alliance would deter shelling. 1 member is manageable, not ideal but manageable, 30 on the other hand... that's disastrous.
Comments
So this fight is doable for most people on this thread but you can't handle it in war where the health pools are only 60-70k and PIs are around 18-25k. Doesn't make any sense.
The AW rating is really close
Well, seeing the replies on this thread people are more than happy to crush smaller rated alliances instead of becoming tough enough to face and beat an ally their own size and strength, who doesn't love easy rewards I guess. Only kabam can save us now, they've had a bad record with addressing player problems but things were starting to look good lately
You just aren't understanding bud. The game is now actually forcing you to play in the CORRECT tier based on the strength of your alliance. If you can't grasp that then you need to a couple things.
1. Quit playing AW altogether.
2. Join a stronger team (which you probably cant).
3. Quit playing the game altogether.
So unless you take one of those options then please stop complaining and read the room. Everyone is excited about this because now teams aren't stealing spots that shouldn't belong to them. My team would SMOKE your 17M alliance and you probably ranked higher in plat 4 than we did last season. Nothing about that is fair at all. Good luck man.
We finished at the top of silver 3 for the first time in many seasons last season and didn't match a single alliance with a prestige more or less than 100 points different from us.
Only 8k+prestige Alliances, all in silver 1, 2 and 3, for season after season.
It's not been right for a year and it was way past time this was fixed. Yes, some alliances are going to get a pasting, but the silver lining to that cloud, is that they received inflated rewards for nearly a year...
(We've just been matched against a 3.19k prestige Alliance....)
This is my team and my personal defense. You want to know what is unfair? I have sunk so much time and money into my account much like most of my team. And some of you crying have far less but are getting better rewards than I am. You didn't earn it more than I did. You fought an easier team that my team would have beaten too while we fought a harder team that you wouldn't have beaten. Now you have to fight those teams that I've been facing. Let me make this clear. If you have less than my team, you don't belong in a tier above me. Regardless of how hard you thought those teams were that you faced. They wouldn't have had a chance against the actual stronger teams. And now that they fixed the ranking system, this is where you prove whether you were really that good or if you were just winning because of facing easy teams that also didn't belong in higher tiers. If you really belong in your tier, now it's fair. So prove it. Prove you are that good. If you are whining that it's unfair then you simply aren't good enough yet to be in that tier.
Last season we (6k prestige, 14m rating) matched against a 9k 25m rating alliance. And beat them. By diversity points only. As far as I was concerned, it was a 2k v 2k rating match, so it was fair.
I admire your patience in waiting this long to fix it!
Silver 1 rewards, 3* and 4* shards. Dropped as low as tier 13, never facing an alliance of less than 29m, running 3bgs and using boosts all season, sometimes finishing wars with zero attack kills, alliances with 900 prestige finishing higher than us. and after the season our two high prestige guys bailed for gold 1 teams, the system was broken af
Now, that doesn't mean I think it is unfair. For those crying foul where were you when alliances larger then you were recieving lesser rewards? You honestly think it is fair for you to fight ONLY allys similar in strength to you? Why is that fair for the other alliances of greater strength/roster development competing for the SAME rewards?
There exists only 1 set of rewards. Meaning everyone is lumped together and each alliance receives rewards based on their standings at the end of a season.
What many of you are asking is simply not a fair solution to larger alliances. But there is a way I think all sides could be happy.
What I have seen in many other games is a tiering (let's call it bracketing for MCOC) where allys are bracketed based on a range of strength. For instance, 0-5 million would be one bracket and 5 million and 1 to say 12 million etc etc...
Each bracket has it's own set of rewards. Now there is a catch. Generally speaking rewards get much better the higher the bracket. The top rewards for a lower bracket tend to be on par with average rewards for the next bracket up. This encourages growth rather than complacency.
This system would allow similar war rating allys to match with similar war ratings and comparable strength. You can tie growth to a new bracket based upon ally rating to encourage allys to grow.
As an aside, shelling can easily be fixed. I think it is important to allow people free movement to change allys as things happen. However, there exists no reason to not associate a penalty to changing alliances associated with war. Preventing a member from participating in say 6 wars once joining a new alliance would deter shelling. 1 member is manageable, not ideal but manageable, 30 on the other hand... that's disastrous.