Matchmaking Discussion [Merged Threads]

1434446484962

Comments

  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • QuikPikQuikPik Member Posts: 817 ★★★★
    @Diddydidit The pool for 2 BG wars is much smaller.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,646 ★★★★★
    edited July 2020
    Pulyaman said:

    Pulyaman said:

    Pulyaman said:

    Pulyaman said:

    I didn't benefit AT ALL. The topic is about how it was "necessary" to do this, and it was absolutely not necessary. It was wanted. Only, it came at the expense of many people who keep posting and getting trolled that "Matches are fair. War Ratings are similar.".
    It's not just some unfortunate but necessary transition phase. It's ruining their Season efforts and rendering the final results inaccurate because they have no chance of winning these Wars. Saying they just want better Rewards for less work is just ignorant. Their argument isn't for the Rewards. It's the grossly unfair Matches. I'm speaking to their issue because I knew it was going to happen, and I'm not just going to pretend that they don't matter.

    I think it was wanted by the high tier alliances and it was also necessary to some extent because it was screwing over some of the alliances. But, the way they went about it was too abrupt. Too many changes, the maps, the matchmaking, the defense tactics, rewards increase only in the top tiers.The maps and defense tactics should have been kept for one more season. They could have done what was suggested here with regards to prestige or alliance rating and used that as a metric, it would have resulted in uneven matches, but we are not going for a perfect system here. What's done is done and we need to figure out how to refine the system, not argue over who is more right at this point.
    That's the problem. Each one of these Alliances that complain are made up of people. They're not just Accounts. They're Players, Players who are being told their efforts are worth setting up to fail because their time and effort isn't valuable. While that may not be the intention, that's the outcome. When you're intentionally placed in a competition you have no chance of winning and being told it's necessary, that makes you expendable. It makes your goals and your work, a month's worth no less, not valuable. Not important. Less important than making those Top Players happy. I'm not about to pretend that those Allies, those people, don't matter. They absolutely do. Just like any other Human Being that picks up the game.
    What exactly is it that you want at this point mate? The system is in place. If you want people to apologize, its not going to happen. If you want the old system back, it may happen but even I don't want that at this point and I was against this decision of switching the matchmaking method that has resulted in uneven matches. At this point, it just feels like you are arguing for sympathy, which to be honest, none of the alliance that benefited from the system is going to get. As much as I hate to say it, the system is here to stay, so instead of arguing in circles as to how it should have been implemented, we are better off in thinking ways to improve this war rating based method so that all alliances have a best chance to get good matches and improve.
    What I want is an acknowledgement for what these Players have had to go through just to make others happy. At the very least for people to respect the fact that they're not happy and they shouldn't have to be. It's not okay. Not at all.
    Why? Nothing will come out of acknowledging that.People have acknowledged that these alliances are suffering but nothing can be done about it now. I think it is better to move forward.
    Right. So move forward and they face Match after Match they can't win, and nothing is done or said about it? Seem right to you?
    I don't like the scenario, but Kabam has put the system in place, but, I am not sure what arguing about it is helping anyone let alone the alliances getting mauled. If acknowledgment is what you were after for those alliances, every complaint has been replied to, not in the best way, but it was acknowledged. But, when you argue the same thing over and over again, it is not helping anyone post constructive things in the thread. I know you are passionate about this, but there comes a time to let go. Pick your battles.
    I get it. I'm just disappointed. Deeply disappointed. It's also incredibly frustrating because watching these people go through it and being told it's as it should be is just gloatingly uncool. As for the implication this was my fault, I don't make the calls. I suggested Prestige to stop people from cheating the system at the time..it worked until they froze War Ratings. Then when the Reward situation was presented, I devised a system to align the Rewards without having this happen. Do I still think Prestige is a useful metric? Yes. It always has been. It's not just numbers sprinkled in there for AQ. That one has been debated for years now. They're not just meaningless, arbitrary numbers. Could I see my system working? Absolutely. That doesn't mean I'm really advocating for it. It's not about me being right. It's about the effects of abruptly changing things like that and how it demeans Players and affects their Season. There should have been a better solution, either mine or not. Yes, here we are now, and what I said would happen is happening. I just care about what people will have to go through and I'm not the type to stay quiet while they get silenced. There should be a regulatory factor to ensure that Matches don't go beyond what one side is capable of winning, and I won't let that go regardless of the system. Either way, people are having their Season ruined and told to eat a #### sandwich.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • Soldierjr24Soldierjr24 Member Posts: 62
    We are 3 wars in season 19
    There is maybe a chance you make the alliance war rating disappear?
    It's kinda unfair a 5M alliance faced 2 18M alliances😅 out a 3 wars
  • This content has been removed.
  • 0casual00casual0 Member Posts: 457 ★★★
    How tf did my alliance ended up against bunch of 5-6 stars alliance when my alliance only have 4 stars at most. This game is broken af.
  • This content has been removed.
  • NojokejaymNojokejaym Member Posts: 4,127 ★★★★★
    edited July 2020
    .
  • PulyamanPulyaman Member Posts: 2,365 ★★★★★

    Pulyaman said:

    Pulyaman said:

    Pulyaman said:

    Pulyaman said:

    I didn't benefit AT ALL. The topic is about how it was "necessary" to do this, and it was absolutely not necessary. It was wanted. Only, it came at the expense of many people who keep posting and getting trolled that "Matches are fair. War Ratings are similar.".
    It's not just some unfortunate but necessary transition phase. It's ruining their Season efforts and rendering the final results inaccurate because they have no chance of winning these Wars. Saying they just want better Rewards for less work is just ignorant. Their argument isn't for the Rewards. It's the grossly unfair Matches. I'm speaking to their issue because I knew it was going to happen, and I'm not just going to pretend that they don't matter.

    I think it was wanted by the high tier alliances and it was also necessary to some extent because it was screwing over some of the alliances. But, the way they went about it was too abrupt. Too many changes, the maps, the matchmaking, the defense tactics, rewards increase only in the top tiers.The maps and defense tactics should have been kept for one more season. They could have done what was suggested here with regards to prestige or alliance rating and used that as a metric, it would have resulted in uneven matches, but we are not going for a perfect system here. What's done is done and we need to figure out how to refine the system, not argue over who is more right at this point.
    That's the problem. Each one of these Alliances that complain are made up of people. They're not just Accounts. They're Players, Players who are being told their efforts are worth setting up to fail because their time and effort isn't valuable. While that may not be the intention, that's the outcome. When you're intentionally placed in a competition you have no chance of winning and being told it's necessary, that makes you expendable. It makes your goals and your work, a month's worth no less, not valuable. Not important. Less important than making those Top Players happy. I'm not about to pretend that those Allies, those people, don't matter. They absolutely do. Just like any other Human Being that picks up the game.
    What exactly is it that you want at this point mate? The system is in place. If you want people to apologize, its not going to happen. If you want the old system back, it may happen but even I don't want that at this point and I was against this decision of switching the matchmaking method that has resulted in uneven matches. At this point, it just feels like you are arguing for sympathy, which to be honest, none of the alliance that benefited from the system is going to get. As much as I hate to say it, the system is here to stay, so instead of arguing in circles as to how it should have been implemented, we are better off in thinking ways to improve this war rating based method so that all alliances have a best chance to get good matches and improve.
    What I want is an acknowledgement for what these Players have had to go through just to make others happy. At the very least for people to respect the fact that they're not happy and they shouldn't have to be. It's not okay. Not at all.
    Why? Nothing will come out of acknowledging that.People have acknowledged that these alliances are suffering but nothing can be done about it now. I think it is better to move forward.
    Right. So move forward and they face Match after Match they can't win, and nothing is done or said about it? Seem right to you?
    I don't like the scenario, but Kabam has put the system in place, but, I am not sure what arguing about it is helping anyone let alone the alliances getting mauled. If acknowledgment is what you were after for those alliances, every complaint has been replied to, not in the best way, but it was acknowledged. But, when you argue the same thing over and over again, it is not helping anyone post constructive things in the thread. I know you are passionate about this, but there comes a time to let go. Pick your battles.
    I get it. I'm just disappointed. Deeply disappointed. It's also incredibly frustrating because watching these people go through it and being told it's as it should be is just gloatingly uncool. As for the implication this was my fault, I don't make the calls. I suggested Prestige to stop people from cheating the system at the time..it worked until they froze War Ratings. Then when the Reward situation was presented, I devised a system to align the Rewards without having this happen. Do I still think Prestige is a useful metric? Yes. It always has been. It's not just numbers sprinkled in there for AQ. That one has been debated for years now. They're not just meaningless, arbitrary numbers. Could I see my system working? Absolutely. That doesn't mean I'm really advocating for it. It's not about me being right. It's about the effects of abruptly changing things like that and how it demeans Players and affects their Season. There should have been a better solution, either mine or not. Yes, here we are now, and what I said would happen is happening. I just care about what people will have to go through and I'm not the type to stay quiet while they get silenced. There should be a regulatory factor to ensure that Matches don't go beyond what one side is capable of winning, and I won't let that go regardless of the system. Either way, people are having their Season ruined and told to eat a #### sandwich.
    Yes, I think many people are judging by the number of complaints and no one is saying it is fair because they had no choice in the earlier matchmaking and not in this one. But, the problem is it is Kabam's responsibility to design a fair system and I think the criticism should be aimed at them and not at fellow players who were treated unfairly in the previous matchmaking system. I already requested many to stop telling that this is how it works and it will all be ok because that is not helping, but I am not going to repeat the same thing again and again because we are not the moderators and cannot control others.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • ButtehrsButtehrs Member Posts: 6,299 ★★★★★
    So if you equate alliance wars to actual real life wars you will find your answers. Did the 300 of Sparta simply succumb to xerxes because he had a higher troop count? No. They fought for 3 days and if it had been a 24 hr war like what we fight here then they would have won. Greece still won btw despite having 1/4th the number of troops years later. Basically, if you want your spot, earn it. It doesnt matter the prestige or alliance rating size. You can have far smaller numbers but if your skilled and better fighters you'll win.
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • edited July 2020
    This content has been removed.
  • mrfootball1988mrfootball1988 Member Posts: 14
    Wasn't aw in the beginning done by war rating or was it alliance rating before there was a season and peeps didn't like it either? No worries it's called kabamed and some stuff doesn't change. hopefully after awhile it will be better. The majority thinks it will. Hope it does. See you other 7 mil alliances I guess in bronze where we belong all this time and didn't know it.
  • This content has been removed.
  • mrfootball1988mrfootball1988 Member Posts: 14
    So just wondering how long it should take for the magic to work and everything be perfect.
  • Timone147Timone147 Member Posts: 1,276 ★★★★
    Hard to say.

    It will vary by alliances. If you are a 4* alliance that was placing in plat and in t4 then this might be a long fall.

    It will depend how far out of synch your alliance is in the overall meta.

    Also to some extent there will always be a risk of hitting and out match if there are newer alliances moving up through the ranks as well.
  • mrfootball1988mrfootball1988 Member Posts: 14
    Think it would of been more efficient just to set ever alliance to 0 and start from there. Like the game had just started
  • Speeds80Speeds80 Member Posts: 2,017 ★★★★
    edited July 2020
    How do you think the t10 4k bronze alliance felt facing another 4k alliance who was in t6 gold 2 and who had vets with one r4 5* who could walk through theOr defended nodes to mock them , then they probably had to face them over and over again, fairness works for everyone except those able to exploit, this system is far less exploitable, everything else is regurgitated nonsense that a t6 3k alliance should be able to continue winning 97% of its matches, because they never actually get fair matches. Fair matches are what they would get now because soon they would actually have to face people in their same tier and of equal skill, and so their roster again becomes a factor
  • PulyamanPulyaman Member Posts: 2,365 ★★★★★

    Think it would of been more efficient just to set ever alliance to 0 and start from there. Like the game had just started

    That will not be ideal since it may take even longer for some alliances to settle down.I think if the points awarded for winning or losing could have been increased to speed up this balancing, but I am not sure how that will impact anything else.
This discussion has been closed.