Matchmaking Discussion [Merged Threads]

1454648505162

Comments

  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Member Posts: 8,672 ★★★★★
    xNig said:

    Ah yes. Let's come up with another analogy to justify screwing people over.

    No one is getting screwed over. The alliances who are getting bad matches due to inflated war ratings are far better off with the rewards they have already banked. That doesn't mean the handful of rough matches they are facing don't suck. Sure they do. Run no items wars and see where you land. But they aren't getting screwed.
    They're getting screwed. Being placed in Matches they have no chance of winning screws their Final Rankings in the Season. I called this the second they announced it. The only people benefitting from this are the ones high enough not to be affected, and the ones on the lower end of the mismatches are losing potential Wins through absolutely no control of their own. If they have no chance of winning, then the Season is not a fair competition. No one is truly earning anything in this. Not the larger ones or the lower ones. You can all say it's just the system fixing itself, but it's just a joke.
    I'm starting to despair of you making good on your word and quitting this thread. You keep recycling the same nonsense.
    Each reply makes you lose 15% temper?
    That sounds about right. Diminishing returns might affect it but at the same time, I might get Sasquatch synergy.
  • xNigxNig Member Posts: 7,330 ★★★★★

    xNig said:

    Ah yes. Let's come up with another analogy to justify screwing people over.

    No one is getting screwed over. The alliances who are getting bad matches due to inflated war ratings are far better off with the rewards they have already banked. That doesn't mean the handful of rough matches they are facing don't suck. Sure they do. Run no items wars and see where you land. But they aren't getting screwed.
    They're getting screwed. Being placed in Matches they have no chance of winning screws their Final Rankings in the Season. I called this the second they announced it. The only people benefitting from this are the ones high enough not to be affected, and the ones on the lower end of the mismatches are losing potential Wins through absolutely no control of their own. If they have no chance of winning, then the Season is not a fair competition. No one is truly earning anything in this. Not the larger ones or the lower ones. You can all say it's just the system fixing itself, but it's just a joke.
    I'm starting to despair of you making good on your word and quitting this thread. You keep recycling the same nonsense.
    Each reply makes you lose 15% temper?
    That sounds about right. Diminishing returns might affect it but at the same time, I might get Sasquatch synergy.
    At least there’s a cap now. Too many might endanger your phone.
  • Szapi85Szapi85 Member Posts: 6

    cry cry cry....

    all i hear here is
    "i have had many many many many seasons of unfair advantage gifting me rewards well beyond what i deserve. i know that others have been getting well below what they deserve but i don't care. i want i want i want.... you can't take away from me. you cant put me lower where i belong, getting lesser rewards. ... cry cry cry i am entitled and want everything without effort and don't care that those who put effort are getting nothing..."

    This isn’t true. We invested tousands of units in every damn season to get higher, ranked up the heros needed to get even higher. We always got alliances with the same or higher war and overall rating, we beet the **** out of them, end landed in g1 for two seasons continuisly. And that is I call investment. We did it with 5r4 and still some 4r5 defenders, maximal diversity, and so on. Now, everything is down in the dust bin, because after a while you cannot compete with the alliances, where every def hero is at least 5r5 or 6r2, and on attack they got 6r3 heroes. Okay, we should not be there like any analogy sais, but i think it is still unfair to get only such alliances es an opponent. Sorry!
  • MrTicTac19992008MrTicTac19992008 Member Posts: 608 ★★★
    War 3: Other alliance prestige is 200 more than us. Alliance rating is 5m more than us. It seems that is starting to even out already for us anyways but 3 wars is not enough to give a good guess. Currently this war could go either way. Will update in few days when war 4 happens.

    War 1: Came up against a stronger alliance, Their Prestige was 1300 more, rated 10m more, We lost by 4000 points. War rating was 1070, went down to 1005.

    War 2: Came up against a much weaker alliance: Our Prestige was 2300 more, we were rated 10m more. We won by 100,000 points excludes 50k bonus victory points. War rating back up to 1070.

    This new matchmaking system is much fairer. At least now we will know how good we actually are. If we win 50% of our wars, I would guess we will finish just in Gold 1 but will be interesting to see if we place higher or lower than we would have under the old system.

  • Szapi85Szapi85 Member Posts: 6
    edited July 2020




    The last one is our alliance. It looks much mich more fair like an 5m taking on a 34m, but still this whole process is making so much effort and resources go lost, it just doesn’t feel right. Yeah, I know, I just keep on crying...
  • Szapi85Szapi85 Member Posts: 6


    xNig said:

    Szapi85 said:

    cry cry cry....

    all i hear here is
    "i have had many many many many seasons of unfair advantage gifting me rewards well beyond what i deserve. i know that others have been getting well below what they deserve but i don't care. i want i want i want.... you can't take away from me. you cant put me lower where i belong, getting lesser rewards. ... cry cry cry i am entitled and want everything without effort and don't care that those who put effort are getting nothing..."

    This isn’t true. We invested tousands of units in every damn season to get higher, ranked up the heros needed to get even higher. We always got alliances with the same or higher war and overall rating, we beet the **** out of them, end landed in g1 for two seasons continuisly. And that is I call investment. We did it with 5r4 and still some 4r5 defenders, maximal diversity, and so on. Now, everything is down in the dust bin, because after a while you cannot compete with the alliances, where every def hero is at least 5r5 or 6r2, and on attack they got 6r3 heroes. Okay, we should not be there like any analogy sais, but i think it is still unfair to get only such alliances es an opponent. Sorry!
    You’re talking as though every other alliance trying to get higher didn’t invest units and time and effort. What makes what you have invested special?

    If you’re getting Gold 1 with 4*s on defense and 5* R4s on attack, then you’ll most probably be losing a few wars until you get opponents using 5* R4s on attack and have 4*s on defense too.
    I never said, that our efforts and investment was bigger, propably it just felt for us so, where most of the ally members free to play players are. Then every revive boost or potion that cost you unit, hurts a lot.

    The problem is: now the bigger alliances need much smaller effort to get higher in ranks faster, where we shall fall back and back and back and then sometimes get again a matching opponent as you said, and if we invest again a lot, then well be able to climb back where we once were.

    This is now the compensation for the bigger allies, who spend a lot, to put them high enough where they “should” be. Not funny for us... it feels like a punch in the face. Call me a moron, but i feel like it
  • Sensei_MaatSensei_Maat Member Posts: 396 ★★★
    Szapi85 said:

    cry cry cry....

    all i hear here is
    "i have had many many many many seasons of unfair advantage gifting me rewards well beyond what i deserve. i know that others have been getting well below what they deserve but i don't care. i want i want i want.... you can't take away from me. you cant put me lower where i belong, getting lesser rewards. ... cry cry cry i am entitled and want everything without effort and don't care that those who put effort are getting nothing..."

    This isn’t true. We invested tousands of units in every damn season to get higher, ranked up the heros needed to get even higher. We always got alliances with the same or higher war and overall rating, we beet the **** out of them, end landed in g1 for two seasons continuisly. And that is I call investment. We did it with 5r4 and still some 4r5 defenders, maximal diversity, and so on. Now, everything is down in the dust bin, because after a while you cannot compete with the alliances, where every def hero is at least 5r5 or 6r2, and on attack they got 6r3 heroes. Okay, we should not be there like any analogy sais, but i think it is still unfair to get only such alliances es an opponent. Sorry!
    you are a smaller alliance, after a little bit of tough matches you will drop to where you belong and get appropriat matches.
    simple as that. an alliance that is still tiny and using 4* defenders does not belong up in the realm of gold 1....
    lets be real here.....
    you wanna get the big boy rewards you gotta have a big boy ally.....
    gold 3 maybe is where you belong at best....
  • This content has been removed.
  • This content has been removed.
  • PulyamanPulyaman Member Posts: 2,365 ★★★★★
    Don't know why you guys are poking him unnecessarily. Anyone have any idea for shells? I think there was a idea that if more that 15 members change, we could guess they are shelling. What to do though? Disqualify both the source and destination alliance for 1 season?
  • Speeds80Speeds80 Member Posts: 2,017 ★★★★
    @Gmonkey that
    Number up and down is entirely dependant on war rating,
    If you match a higher war rating opponent and Beat them, you get a bigger bonus to your war rating than if you beat a weaker war rated team than you, I’ve never thought it was very fair for the underdog, if they lose they don’t drop much war rating and so don’t get a better chance for a weaker opponent next time, it is designed to always favour the winner in that regard so underdog winners can move up faster to the appropriate skill level
  • This content has been removed.
  • edited July 2020
    This content has been removed.
  • PulyamanPulyaman Member Posts: 2,365 ★★★★★

    I just wanted to share this ... I run a laid back, 32M semi-retirement alliance and we hardly ever war because it’s frankly terrible and hardly anyone likes it ... but, when we do, it’s a single BG.

    Anyway, this is who we were matched up with this week:




    Easy win for us, yes - but it isn’t cool and doesn’t feel good to win a war like this.

    I haven’t read through every post, but I’m assuming this is some kind of unintentional byproduct of halving everyone’s war rating ... ?

    Hoping it eventually balances out, because we should not have been matched with these guys.

    Yikes, I feel for those guys. It was not a result of halfing the war rating, it is working as "intended".
  • This content has been removed.
  • PulyamanPulyaman Member Posts: 2,365 ★★★★★
    Ebony_Naw said:

    Pulyaman said:

    Don't know why you guys are poking him unnecessarily. Anyone have any idea for shells? I think there was a idea that if more that 15 members change, we could guess they are shelling. What to do though? Disqualify both the source and destination alliance for 1 season?


    Poking would imply looking for a response from him. I am not.
    Sorry, that was not aimed at anyone in particular. I realized that above a certain point, both sides have good points, the only problem is we need to admit it to ourselves that the other side also has a valid point and need to let go.
  • StormBreakerStormBreaker Member Posts: 1
    @Kabam Miike Can you guys at least acknowledge this issue. This is the worst alliance war season ever. Alliances are getting matched with opponents twice their size. Also the map has some of the worst combination of nodes I have seen so far.
This discussion has been closed.