**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options

Matchmaking Discussion [Merged Threads]

1…4950525455…62

Comments

  • Options
    Speeds80Speeds80 Posts: 2,013 ★★★★
    edited July 2020
    But it is a solution, because it’s not the end game, these 3 times alliance strengths won’t happen once the system that ignored war rating is fixed. 75% win rate isn’t actually long term viable either in a fair system because you should hit a ceiling of your ability unless you are the very top, the only ones who should be able to maintain a 75% win rate are the very top, or those growing fast and finding their ability ceiling. the accomodation of the last system to low prestige made 96% win rate possible because it offered no ceiling and no fair ‘even ability’ matches. By ignoring the metrics that produce even ability matches. this is A tournament
    He isn’t worried about his alliance so much as he thinks he designed a system that Was fair, bit which over the long term fell apart. And has failed completely at bringing fair completion into the game, because once you favour an unfair metric, you bring inequality to the competition. He is using these temporary outliers to try and justify its nonsensical existence in the first place.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Speeds80 said:

    But it is a solution, because it’s not the end game, these 3 times alliance strengths won’t happen once the system that ignored war rating is fixed. 75% win rate isn’t actually long term viable either in a fair system because you should hit a ceiling of your ability unless you are the very top, the only ones who should be able to maintain a 75% win rate are the very top, or those growing fast and finding their ability ceiling. the accomodation of the last system to low prestige made 96% win rate possible because it offered no ceiling and no fair ‘even ability’ matches. By ignoring the metrics that produce even ability matches. this is A tournament
    He isn’t worried about his alliance so much as he thinks he designed a system that Was fair, bit which over the long term fell apart. And has failed completely at bringing fair completion into the game, because once you favour an unfair metric, you bring inequality to the competition. He is using these temporary outliers to try and justify its nonsensical existence in the first place.

    It's not a solution for the people on the other end of those impossible Matches. They have to go through it. It's sabotaging their outcome for the Season. Anyone on the winning end of this keeps arguing that it'll all fix itself in the end, but that's not the issue, is it? It's what people are having to go through right now. They don't owe anyone anything. All they did was play their Wars.
  • Options
    simzyboysimzyboy Posts: 4 ★
    As I understand it, matchmaking is ONLY on War rating, which has been halved for every alliance. We have just absolutely destroyed an alliance in War, who actually had exactly the same War rating as us, and last season finished one spot above us. I see both sides of the argument, but hopefully it ‘should’ start balancing out. I totally empathise when an alliance is matched against a far superior one, as they really won’t have any chance. Last season we busted a gut but kept getting drawn against Gold 1 & 2 alliances, when we were Silver 2 and in most cases lost. So for us, it levels the playing field to actually reward you for ranking up champions by completing content, that are used in War. Also means more of a focus on diversity for all alliances, rather than 3/4 Korgs, Things, Medusa etc as defenders.
  • Options
    Speeds80Speeds80 Posts: 2,013 ★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Speeds80 said:

    Technically as I said at the start a numbers system to keep matchups within a big range like 25% of prestige would probably work but during this season it actually would have prolonged the levelling effect

    Imagine you're a 5k prestige alliance and you want to break the match system. You buy an alliance shell whose war rating is high enough that the average prestige of the alliances with that rating is say 9k. You jump into that shell, and now the game starts looking for a match at that war rating and 5k plus or minus 25% (1250). When it can't find any alliances with 6250 prestige and that war rating, it starts looking lower. And now you've recreated the problem of the previous system, where that alliance will never get the matches that need to happen to curtail artificial rating inflation.

    Remember: with the current system doing this is probably suicide because when those guys jump into the new alliance they will have to face alliances with almost double their prestige and probably much higher war strength. But a prestige match window allows them to dodge that competition and ask the game servers to find them easier prey. And the more often they win, the harder the game servers will be forced to look to find competition, because they will become more and more extreme outliers (alliances with low prestige and high war rating are increasingly rare the more disparity between those values). Which will probably make their matches increasingly weird.
    Yeah so technically still exploitable, albeit much less so, when technically war rating is a fair system anyway and doesn’t really need a tweak once these imbalances settle down
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Speeds80 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Speeds80 said:

    Technically as I said at the start a numbers system to keep matchups within a big range like 25% of prestige would probably work but during this season it actually would have prolonged the levelling effect

    Imagine you're a 5k prestige alliance and you want to break the match system. You buy an alliance shell whose war rating is high enough that the average prestige of the alliances with that rating is say 9k. You jump into that shell, and now the game starts looking for a match at that war rating and 5k plus or minus 25% (1250). When it can't find any alliances with 6250 prestige and that war rating, it starts looking lower. And now you've recreated the problem of the previous system, where that alliance will never get the matches that need to happen to curtail artificial rating inflation.

    Remember: with the current system doing this is probably suicide because when those guys jump into the new alliance they will have to face alliances with almost double their prestige and probably much higher war strength. But a prestige match window allows them to dodge that competition and ask the game servers to find them easier prey. And the more often they win, the harder the game servers will be forced to look to find competition, because they will become more and more extreme outliers (alliances with low prestige and high war rating are increasingly rare the more disparity between those values). Which will probably make their matches increasingly weird.
    Yeah so technically still exploitable, albeit much less so, when technically war rating is a fair system anyway and doesn’t really need a tweak once these imbalances settle down
    Not unless all Ratings are locked in the off-season. Even then, there are still these effects which shouldn't be ignored.
  • Options
    DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 18,661 Guardian
    GroundedWisdom said:

    You need at least 75% wins to make significant progress through the Tiers.

    Nope. At the start of 2020 we had a rating of 1355 and were in tier 13. We only fought in-season, not out of season, and generally finished with a record of either seven and five (58%) or eight and four (67%). We finished season 18 with a rating of 2070 and in tier 8.

    So in four seasons (seasons 15 through 18) we increased rating by 715 points and went up five tiers (the numbers add up: that's about 180 rating points per season which is about +3 wins, in between 7-5 and 8-4 record). An alliance winning 75% (9-3) would have a win delta of +6, and would probably be jumping multiple tiers per season until at least tier 6 or 5. That would be more than twice our average win delta per season.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    You need at least 75% wins to make significant progress through the Tiers.

    Nope. At the start of 2020 we had a rating of 1355 and were in tier 13. We only fought in-season, not out of season, and generally finished with a record of either seven and five (58%) or eight and four (67%). We finished season 18 with a rating of 2070 and in tier 8.

    So in four seasons (seasons 15 through 18) we increased rating by 715 points and went up five tiers (the numbers add up: that's about 180 rating points per season which is about +3 wins, in between 7-5 and 8-4 record). An alliance winning 75% (9-3) would have a win delta of +6, and would probably be jumping multiple tiers per season until at least tier 6 or 5. That would be more than twice our average win delta per season.
    I meant to say Brackets, not Tiers.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    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, .



    Like when you told everyone who's not lvl 60 that they shouldn't be allowed to do Canadian difficulty?


    I didn't tell anyone anything. I said it wasn't an unreasonable requirement.
  • Options
    CaptainGameCaptainGame Posts: 369 ★★★
    edited July 2020
    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    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, .



    Like when you told everyone who's not lvl 60 that they shouldn't be allowed to do Canadian difficulty?


    I didn't tell anyone anything. I said it wasn't an unreasonable requirement.



    You pretty much say that. Also according to this you're against the idea of low level alliances being in gold and above aren't you? So the matchmaking fix should rectify that and we all agree with you
    He like most are against teams ranking higher than teams they can’t beat and getting higher rewards than those who put in more effort. It’s simple to anybody with common sense.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    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, .



    Like when you told everyone who's not lvl 60 that they shouldn't be allowed to do Canadian difficulty?


    I didn't tell anyone anything. I said it wasn't an unreasonable requirement.



    You pretty much say that. Also according to this you're against the idea of low level alliances being in gold and above aren't you? So the matchmaking fix should rectify that and we all agree with you
    No, and no. I'm against placing Alliances in Matches they cannot win because they're overpowered beyond any chance. People are reacting as if I'm fighting for inappropriate Rewards. I've already said the Rewards could have been resolved without this mess.
    As for the off-topic, I was giving reasons why Kabam would make it Level 60 and up. Wasn't my decision. I still think it's reasonable. No idea why people aren't leveling up before trying the highest Storymode, but that's something that the majority of us have done long ago.
  • Options
    CaptainGameCaptainGame Posts: 369 ★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    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, .



    Like when you told everyone who's not lvl 60 that they shouldn't be allowed to do Canadian difficulty?


    I didn't tell anyone anything. I said it wasn't an unreasonable requirement.



    You pretty much say that. Also according to this you're against the idea of low level alliances being in gold and above aren't you? So the matchmaking fix should rectify that and we all agree with you
    No, and no. I'm against placing Alliances in Matches they cannot win because they're overpowered beyond any chance. People are reacting as if I'm fighting for inappropriate Rewards. I've already said the Rewards could have been resolved without this mess.
    As for the off-topic, I was giving reasons why Kabam would make it Level 60 and up. Wasn't my decision. I still think it's reasonable. No idea why people aren't leveling up before trying the highest Storymode, but that's something that the majority of us have done long ago.
    But you can’t figure out why someone would want to grow a stronger roster before war??? Where players who already beat that hardest content are competing to see who is the best?
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    CaptainGame said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    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, .



    Like when you told everyone who's not lvl 60 that they shouldn't be allowed to do Canadian difficulty?


    I didn't tell anyone anything. I said it wasn't an unreasonable requirement.



    You pretty much say that. Also according to this you're against the idea of low level alliances being in gold and above aren't you? So the matchmaking fix should rectify that and we all agree with you
    No, and no. I'm against placing Alliances in Matches they cannot win because they're overpowered beyond any chance. People are reacting as if I'm fighting for inappropriate Rewards. I've already said the Rewards could have been resolved without this mess.
    As for the off-topic, I was giving reasons why Kabam would make it Level 60 and up. Wasn't my decision. I still think it's reasonable. No idea why people aren't leveling up before trying the highest Storymode, but that's something that the majority of us have done long ago.
    But you can’t figure out why someone would want to grow a stronger roster before war??? Where players who already beat that hardest content are competing to see who is the best?
    You don't prove you're the best by taking people out that can't fight back.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    CaptainGame said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    CaptainGame said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    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, .



    Like when you told everyone who's not lvl 60 that they shouldn't be allowed to do Canadian difficulty?


    I didn't tell anyone anything. I said it wasn't an unreasonable requirement.



    You pretty much say that. Also according to this you're against the idea of low level alliances being in gold and above aren't you? So the matchmaking fix should rectify that and we all agree with you
    No, and no. I'm against placing Alliances in Matches they cannot win because they're overpowered beyond any chance. People are reacting as if I'm fighting for inappropriate Rewards. I've already said the Rewards could have been resolved without this mess.
    As for the off-topic, I was giving reasons why Kabam would make it Level 60 and up. Wasn't my decision. I still think it's reasonable. No idea why people aren't leveling up before trying the highest Storymode, but that's something that the majority of us have done long ago.
    But you can’t figure out why someone would want to grow a stronger roster before war??? Where players who already beat that hardest content are competing to see who is the best?
    You don't prove you're the best by taking people out that can't fight back.
    Actually that is exactly how you prove you are the best. By beating the others.
    No. That's how you prove you can go for low-hanging fruit but don't do so well with people as strong.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    CaptainGame said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    CaptainGame said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    CaptainGame said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    HI_guys said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    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, .



    Like when you told everyone who's not lvl 60 that they shouldn't be allowed to do Canadian difficulty?


    I didn't tell anyone anything. I said it wasn't an unreasonable requirement.



    You pretty much say that. Also according to this you're against the idea of low level alliances being in gold and above aren't you? So the matchmaking fix should rectify that and we all agree with you
    No, and no. I'm against placing Alliances in Matches they cannot win because they're overpowered beyond any chance. People are reacting as if I'm fighting for inappropriate Rewards. I've already said the Rewards could have been resolved without this mess.
    As for the off-topic, I was giving reasons why Kabam would make it Level 60 and up. Wasn't my decision. I still think it's reasonable. No idea why people aren't leveling up before trying the highest Storymode, but that's something that the majority of us have done long ago.
    But you can’t figure out why someone would want to grow a stronger roster before war??? Where players who already beat that hardest content are competing to see who is the best?
    You don't prove you're the best by taking people out that can't fight back.
    Actually that is exactly how you prove you are the best. By beating the others.
    No. That's how you prove you can go for low-hanging fruit but don't do so well with people as strong.
    They are not low hanging. They are ranked in a high tier. They can’t compete. They will fall to the tier with teams at their level. They are first graders that somehow skipped to 11th grade. Now they are being given 11th grade tests instead of first grade tests. The 11th graders have been getting 11th grade tests this whole time. Those first graders are gonna have to fall back to their grade and learn and grow with time and hard work.
    So it's about revenge then.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    I don't know about you but when a Middle Schooler wants to beat up a First Grader and brags about it, I call it a bully.
  • Options
    Speeds80Speeds80 Posts: 2,013 ★★★★
    Great analogy, I was a 9th grader who failed a few tests after a season with a broken classroom. and got put back into grade 2 but only getting 9th grade tests and not passing them as easily as my 2nd grade classmates ( who were only getting second grade tests,) so they could progress and I couldn’t. so I got stuck in grade 2 until I could ace my grade 9 exams Better than my grade 2 classmates could ace their grade 2 exams
This discussion has been closed.