Do you think that this AW season matchmaking makes any sense at all?

danielmath

Yes

Mauled said:

Dr_Crazygavel said:

As we all know Kabam serevers are stupid this can be expected from them. Everytime they bring any new feature through update they **** on the previous good things unintentionally.
Its almost 5-6 years since the game has been launched and they are not even able to develop a hack free game even though they release a new udate every month and their so called nonsence server maintanance almost every week.Modded APKs of this game are available everywhere on the internet for free.
All they care is just about making money nothing else. Proff hoff proved that If you are a modder and u buy sigil then kabam won't ban you.
Just tell me kabam how many centuries it will take you to develop a mod free game?
There are many unfair things going on in this game. They just added another one in this season.

So why play?

Also, Prof Hoff is about as reputable as building your doctoral thesis around a Wikipedia page.

This matchmaking is a result of a change in the algorithm to no longer take alliance size and prestige into account. There will be an adjustment period. If you’re a small alliance it’s likely you’ll drop, if you’re a large alliance it’s likely you’re going to rise a bit. I’m 2-3 weeks all will be normal again.

ummm you should probably send wikipedia an apology email, that was uncalled for dude

TheTalents

Yes

GroundedWisdom said:

TheTalents said:

Based on this polling their is only a small minority of individuals that feel that the system is unfair. It would then be foolish to go back to the old ways and appease the few.

The Poll doesn't represent all the people affected by this.

Yeah Polls are sample sizes, we know this already. That doesn't change my response or the overwhelming support in numbers. You stand alone 9 times out of 10, just embrace it.

GroundedWisdom

No Comments

TheTalents said:

GroundedWisdom said:

TheTalents said:

Based on this polling their is only a small minority of individuals that feel that the system is unfair. It would then be foolish to go back to the old ways and appease the few.

The Poll doesn't represent all the people affected by this.

Yeah Polls are sample sizes, we know this already. That doesn't change my response or the overwhelming support in numbers. You stand alone 9 times out of 10, just embrace it.

You think it's about me? You think a Poll majority takes away the negative effects that these people are facing? No to either.

TheTalents

Yes

GroundedWisdom said:

TheTalents said:

GroundedWisdom said:

TheTalents said:

Based on this polling their is only a small minority of individuals that feel that the system is unfair. It would then be foolish to go back to the old ways and appease the few.

The Poll doesn't represent all the people affected by this.

Yeah Polls are sample sizes, we know this already. That doesn't change my response or the overwhelming support in numbers. You stand alone 9 times out of 10, just embrace it.

You think it's about me? You think a Poll majority takes away the negative effects that these people are facing? No to either.

I don't think the mismatches in size for alliances due to war ratings is a negative effect. I'm one of the alliances benefiting but I know how it feels to get matched up in a war you cannot win. I know because I been stuck in a perpetual cycle for the last 10 seasons where I'm fighting against 35-48 million alliances who are my prestige range. Nothing about those fights are easy once you get into tier 5.

hungryhungrybbq

Yes

Dr_Crazygavel said:

Lvernon15 said:

PathanSalar said:

Lvernon15 said:

UndeadNoob69 said:

This New Matchmaking System is a Treat for Bigger Alliance who suck at this game as they can just climb ranks by defeating weaker opponents. Thats why most of the peoples are saying that its fair.

No, it’s a treat for big alliances that were held back by never facing alliances that were weaker than them, while the weak alliances only faced other weak alliances and could climb higher despite getting obliterated in a 1v1 match

Dont get offended but do you mean you were held back because you were facing alliance as strong as yours and you need to fight lower alliances to climb up.

Not exactly, but if we get 50/50 we won’t climb up, meanwhile there are alliances we completely obliterate in a 1v1 climbing and facing other extremely weak alliances ranking above us, and I don’t find the fact they’re climbing higher than us by only facing weak alliances fair when we are only facing other crazy strong ones

The fact is they are skilled enough to defeate opponent ally of same rating while u are not. Thats why they are placed in ranking above you. Dont get jelous. The fact is you guys have increased your prestige ang rating but not your skills. Admit it man

I'm done wasting energy explaining why what you're saying is out of touch with reality, rude and offensive.
Look me up in game, note my war MVP stats, then invite me to incursions. We'll do a 4* only run and post the results here. Holler, I've made room in my friends list. Afterwards, we can then have a discussion about skill if you still wish to.

hungryhungrybbq

Yes

Also, I think the mismatches are winding down already anyway. I'll wait a little longer to see for sure, but we've just matched a relatively even alliance.

jammybstrd

'Hey, my roster consists of only 4* 5/50s. It's not fair that these whales with tons of 5* 5/65s can do Canadian difficulty and get the top rewards! I should get the same rewards for doing master, it's only fair, it's the same difficulty level for me that the bigger rosters experience against Canadian.'

This is what the people calling this change bad sound like, and this was what war was for seasons. I'm so glad they made this change, keep up the good work kabam

Speeds80

Yes

Here’s my matchup exp, for my 30m 3bg 65555 (so mid range alliance,) bearing in mind we had been stuck in silver 1and last two seasons winning over half and moving down in rankings.
War 1 10m g3 alliance, easy easy win.
War 2 20m g2 alliance, easy easy win,
war 3 25m g2 alliance, very very close war. Just won.
War 4 28m g2 Aliiance, close loss
Because of loss we dropped and caught a 19m alliance, they were ex gold 3 and we played low item and actually had to scramble for the win And use items when they kept reviving and took all bosses with 80 deaths
Now we have a 23m gold 2 alliance today
Anybody saying I should feel bad for the easy wins has to realise that every single one of these alliances displaced me by several brackets in the last system of wars and got much higher Season rewards than me, are they proving their skill? no every single one of them has had over 70 deaths on the map

Is the matchmaking system correcting? Yes clearly, but the ups and downs from each win or loss are still much higher than they will be when this system resets itself, I remind you we had 10 seasons of this same system, it worked.

DNA3000

Yes

Speeds80 said:

For the sake of a rounded view I have come up with 2 ideas that I think could have worked/ could help the outliers we will continue to see from new alliances. I posted them in one of the many threads here but didn’t get a chance to see any feedback.

1) I think kabam could have rolled out the adjustment period off season, but given all alliances the winning amount of shards for losing or winning to encourage everybody to participate and get their correct level outside of season, leaving the top alliances locked like they are, but the mid ranges would have competed for a better start to the season with a better multiplier. And the inflated alliances could have had their bubble popped while collecting shards and not losing their season rewards, (we probably would have still seen complaints like this but for those not realising how inflated their rewards are but definitely a lesser extent.

2) I think newly formed alliances should get matches within 50% of their prestige for 5 wars, then they are on their own. this is to stop the ugly ones we see where a true noob alliance has to face an unranked newly formed vet alliance

As I wonder if some relaxed vet alliances annoyed at the new much harder maps might just flag season rewards and form an alliance where they can win tons of wars with zero items and just collect win shards until they hit their actual plateau.

Option one looks good on paper, but we know with absolute certainty it wouldn't have worked because we know with absolute certainty that in the past alliances were willing to deliberately lose during the off season, forfeiting the victory rewards, to jockey their rating into a better starting position for the start of the actual season. So we know with absolute certainty that if Kabam asked everyone to participate as if it was a real season but didn't have season rewards, many alliances would instead take the opportunity to use it to manipulate rating in their favor.

Option two makes a trade. If you put in any prestige limit, whether it is 50% or any other amount, one of two things will happen. The limit will allow that alliance to win more wars than they would have, or it wouldn't. If it is too high and they don't win any more wars, it is irrelevant. If it is narrow enough that they don't always lose, then you're allowing them to win more wars than they ought to, score more points than they ought to, and thus enter a higher bracket than they would have otherwise. And every alliance that enters a higher bracket than they should is an alliance being bumped into a lower bracket than they would have. It seems like a free thing because you don't know who that alliance is. But suppose I did the calculations and figured out which alliance that was. Or alliances, because it could be more than one if the other alliance jumped upward more than one bracket (which would bump one alliance each down one bracket). What do you tell them, and how do you justify this trade? That's not a trade I would make.

DannyB01

Yes

I absolutely love this change. Too many seasons looking at low rating alliances above me on the leaderboard knowing that I couldn't match them. Finally this is fair. Every alliance gets a rating and can face each other, entirely based on ability to win. Ridiculous that it wasn't always like this.

MattyPerler

This matchmaking is nonsense

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

fallenp0et

Ya_Boi_28 said:

fallenp0et said:

AlexBossu said:

fallenp0et said:

AlexBossu said:

How can you expect better rewards than an alliance you can not beat? This post is a nonsense. Stop beeing selfish.

If this post is nonsense then 70% of this game is nonsense. And that includes you as well.

Is this an insult? Moderators, pls take care of this annoying kids

Grow up cry baby.

Aren't you the one complaining?

Am I? Forums are for what then? For sure not to see some dumb people like you guys. When you create a poll do you simply ask yes and no? Oh sorry I forgot. You people don't even know what is the significance of a public poll.

Frosty

Yes

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

GroundedWisdom

No Comments

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

Lormif

Yes

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

For someone who does not want to debate it, you sure are debating a lot. In addition it is not a huge sign something is wrong, what was their war rating? the 130k alliance more than likely had an higher than they should rating due to too easy battles in previous wars.

ljballer22

Yes

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

No, that’s a huge sign something “was” wrong. This is a way to correct the wrongs that so many alliances suffered over the past several seasons.

GroundedWisdom

No Comments

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

For someone who does not want to debate it, you sure are debating a lot. In addition it is not a huge sign something is wrong, what was their war rating? the 130k alliance more than likely had an higher than they should rating due to too easy battles in previous wars.

I wasn't going to but I'm getting fed up with seeing the same dissociative justifications for some pretty serious gaps between Alliances. The War Rating means nil at this point. Absolutely nothing because we just spent however many Seasons with a different system working. Saying they're equally Matched because those are close is just plain ignorant at this stage. A 900k Matched with a 19 Mil? 130k avg. against a 1 Mil avg.? Enough is enough with pretending everything is as it should be.

Lormif

Yes

GroundedWisdom said:

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

For someone who does not want to debate it, you sure are debating a lot. In addition it is not a huge sign something is wrong, what was their war rating? the 130k alliance more than likely had an higher than they should rating due to too easy battles in previous wars.

I wasn't going to but I'm getting fed up with seeing the same dissociative justifications for some pretty serious gaps between Alliances. The War Rating means nil at this point. Absolutely nothing because we just spent however many Seasons with a different system working. Saying they're equally Matched because those are close is just plain ignorant at this stage. A 900k Matched with a 19 Mil? 130k avg. against a 1 Mil avg.? Enough is enough with pretending everything is as it should be.

So you are saying brackets in competitions, which war rating simulates in a non single.double elimination competition means nothing?

It shows skill. It shows that when matched with evenly matched (in terms of power), or greater than they beat them or lost to them, and it represents that as they beat those opponents they kept winning, or as they lost and lost to easier and easier opponents they kept losing. It is the closest representation to skill the game can have.

obviously has as been stated repeatably it will take some time for this to work itself out. You are focused on the short term not the long term.

Greekhit

Yes

GroundedWisdom said:

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

Yes, that’s a huge sign something was wrong.
The 130k ally had an inflated War Rating due to prestige matchmaking.
Kabam this time read these signs and corrected the corrupted matchmaking 👍

naikavon

Yes

Normal is something that will come. If the past system was sick, then this is the medicine to maken things better. Just like real medicine it's not instantaneous. It takes time.

I find it disingenuous to harp on alliance pi continuously as though this wasn't something anyone could see coming as a natural byproduct of the previous system. This is not a surprise. It is the system correcting.

Why we keep looking at alliance pi is beyond me. It has no bearing on matchups in the new system.

What is alliance pi? If I sell all my 1* 2* and 3* what happens to my pi. What if everyone in my ally did the same. Would that make the matchups somehow fairer because the ally pi is lower. Of course not, because it's not the end all be all ndicator of strength. I think it's a far greater indicator of roster breadth and depth.

Are people really arguing that improving one's roster and growing it should be punished? How does that make sense to anyone?

GroundedWisdom

No Comments

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

For someone who does not want to debate it, you sure are debating a lot. In addition it is not a huge sign something is wrong, what was their war rating? the 130k alliance more than likely had an higher than they should rating due to too easy battles in previous wars.

I wasn't going to but I'm getting fed up with seeing the same dissociative justifications for some pretty serious gaps between Alliances. The War Rating means nil at this point. Absolutely nothing because we just spent however many Seasons with a different system working. Saying they're equally Matched because those are close is just plain ignorant at this stage. A 900k Matched with a 19 Mil? 130k avg. against a 1 Mil avg.? Enough is enough with pretending everything is as it should be.

So you are saying brackets in competitions, which war rating simulates in a non single.double elimination competition means nothing?

It shows skill. It shows that when matched with evenly matched (in terms of power), or greater than they beat them or lost to them, and it represents that as they beat those opponents they kept winning, or as they lost and lost to easier and easier opponents they kept losing. It is the closest representation to skill the game can have.

obviously has as been stated repeatably it will take some time for this to work itself out. You are focused on the short term not the long term.

No. I'm focused on the here and now, and person after person keeps pointing out some undeniable and substantial variations in strength NOW, and they can't just be ignored or brushed off for a future outcome. My patience for the denial is quite frankly at its end. These Matches are absolutely ridiculous in some cases, and it's time to stop pretending there's nothing to see here.

jammybstrd

GroundedWisdom said:

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

For someone who does not want to debate it, you sure are debating a lot. In addition it is not a huge sign something is wrong, what was their war rating? the 130k alliance more than likely had an higher than they should rating due to too easy battles in previous wars.

I wasn't going to but I'm getting fed up with seeing the same dissociative justifications for some pretty serious gaps between Alliances. The War Rating means nil at this point. Absolutely nothing because we just spent however many Seasons with a different system working. Saying they're equally Matched because those are close is just plain ignorant at this stage. A 900k Matched with a 19 Mil? 130k avg. against a 1 Mil avg.? Enough is enough with pretending everything is as it should be.

So you are saying brackets in competitions, which war rating simulates in a non single.double elimination competition means nothing?

It shows skill. It shows that when matched with evenly matched (in terms of power), or greater than they beat them or lost to them, and it represents that as they beat those opponents they kept winning, or as they lost and lost to easier and easier opponents they kept losing. It is the closest representation to skill the game can have.

obviously has as been stated repeatably it will take some time for this to work itself out. You are focused on the short term not the long term.

No. I'm focused on the here and now, and person after person keeps pointing out some undeniable and substantial variations in strength NOW, and they can't just be ignored or brushed off for a future outcome. My patience for the denial is quite frankly at its end. These Matches are absolutely ridiculous in some cases, and it's time to stop pretending there's nothing to see here.

The one time kabam make a positive change and you disagree? The irony.

This change is excellent. The bad matches now actually expose just how bad war matchmaking was before, the fact that alliances with pitiful rating and prestige sit on the same war rating as massive rating and prestige alliances.

War tiers are decided on war rating, not prestige, not alliance rating. Thus alliances of equal war rating will be matched. Deal with it.

Frosty

Yes

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

I'm not saying it was an even war. I'm saying alliance rating is not a way to judge how skilled people are at war.

War rating is how wars are now matched as it directly shows which alliance deserves the highest rank.

GroundedWisdom

No Comments

Frosty said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

I'm not saying it was an even war. I'm saying alliance rating is not a way to judge how skilled people are at war.

War rating is how wars are now matched as it directly shows which alliance deserves the highest rank.

Even is one thing. Overpowered beyond one side having a fair chance of winning is another.

Lormif

Yes

GroundedWisdom said:

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

For someone who does not want to debate it, you sure are debating a lot. In addition it is not a huge sign something is wrong, what was their war rating? the 130k alliance more than likely had an higher than they should rating due to too easy battles in previous wars.

I wasn't going to but I'm getting fed up with seeing the same dissociative justifications for some pretty serious gaps between Alliances. The War Rating means nil at this point. Absolutely nothing because we just spent however many Seasons with a different system working. Saying they're equally Matched because those are close is just plain ignorant at this stage. A 900k Matched with a 19 Mil? 130k avg. against a 1 Mil avg.? Enough is enough with pretending everything is as it should be.

So you are saying brackets in competitions, which war rating simulates in a non single.double elimination competition means nothing?

It shows skill. It shows that when matched with evenly matched (in terms of power), or greater than they beat them or lost to them, and it represents that as they beat those opponents they kept winning, or as they lost and lost to easier and easier opponents they kept losing. It is the closest representation to skill the game can have.

obviously has as been stated repeatably it will take some time for this to work itself out. You are focused on the short term not the long term.

No. I'm focused on the here and now, and person after person keeps pointing out some undeniable and substantial variations in strength NOW, and they can't just be ignored or brushed off for a future outcome. My patience for the denial is quite frankly at its end. These Matches are absolutely ridiculous in some cases, and it's time to stop pretending there's nothing to see here.

"hear and now", aka short term. you are concerned about short term loses, and loses is what it is, which will still net them better rewards than they deserve or the rewards that they deserve.

GroundedWisdom

No Comments

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Lormif said:

GroundedWisdom said:

Frosty said:

MattyPerler said:

My alliance with average summoner rating 130k just matched with an alliance with an average rating of almost 1 million. The matching doesn't make sense at all.

Why do people focus on alliance rating or summoner rating? It's an irrelevant number that can be manipulated by selling champs.

We have a war rating for a reason. You win rating goes up, you lose rating goes down. Best alliances rise to the top, its as easy as that. If you can't beat an alliance you don't deserve to be higher rated.

All the whiners sound like they only want to play little league for major league rewards. I have no problem playing against bigger alliances as long as if i win i will be rightly rewarded.

Stop and think about that. 130k against 1 Mil average. That's not just a number. That's a huge sign something is wrong.

For someone who does not want to debate it, you sure are debating a lot. In addition it is not a huge sign something is wrong, what was their war rating? the 130k alliance more than likely had an higher than they should rating due to too easy battles in previous wars.

I wasn't going to but I'm getting fed up with seeing the same dissociative justifications for some pretty serious gaps between Alliances. The War Rating means nil at this point. Absolutely nothing because we just spent however many Seasons with a different system working. Saying they're equally Matched because those are close is just plain ignorant at this stage. A 900k Matched with a 19 Mil? 130k avg. against a 1 Mil avg.? Enough is enough with pretending everything is as it should be.

So you are saying brackets in competitions, which war rating simulates in a non single.double elimination competition means nothing?

It shows skill. It shows that when matched with evenly matched (in terms of power), or greater than they beat them or lost to them, and it represents that as they beat those opponents they kept winning, or as they lost and lost to easier and easier opponents they kept losing. It is the closest representation to skill the game can have.

obviously has as been stated repeatably it will take some time for this to work itself out. You are focused on the short term not the long term.

No. I'm focused on the here and now, and person after person keeps pointing out some undeniable and substantial variations in strength NOW, and they can't just be ignored or brushed off for a future outcome. My patience for the denial is quite frankly at its end. These Matches are absolutely ridiculous in some cases, and it's time to stop pretending there's nothing to see here.

"hear and now", aka short term. you are concerned about short term loses, and loses is what it is, which will still net them better rewards than they deserve or the rewards that they deserve.

Losses have nothing to do with it. You've asserted that repeatedly and I keep telling you it's not about the Loss. If an Alliance fights a fair fight and loses, that's not the same. When the Loss is set up by the Matchmaking itself, that is NOT a fair contest.