I thought we had now fair War matchmaking?

SeraphionSeraphion Posts: 1,491 ★★★★


Not only did we get robbed by kabam of P2 last season. Now this is starting again. And no we dont run 2 BGs
«1

Comments

  • lowlevelplayerlowlevelplayer Posts: 4,293 ★★★★★
    yea, that ain't right
  • TheManMythLegendTheManMythLegend Posts: 4,813 ★★★★★
    Last war we got someone like 350 points lower. Felt really bad for them. Should not happen ever
  • -sixate--sixate- Posts: 1,492 ★★★★★
    Uhm, you're in P2, they're in P3. Prove you're better and beat them.
  • walkerdogwalkerdog Posts: 1,011 ★★★
    A thats a mismatch. Id be very curious how that match was made.

    B theyre in P2 which u think u should have been last season but don't think u can win? Or is this just pointing out the rating gap that really shouldn't be that high for a 3 bg war match (as u said you're not getting wonky 1-2 bG MMing)
  • DoubleDeltaDoubleDelta Posts: 2,314 ★★★★
    Weve gone up against bigger gaps and won. We actually faced these guys in off season. Its not a perfect system, although it is working better than before.

    The issue is, you're P2, they're P3. So technically you're above them. I understand where you're coming from, issue is, theres nothing to stop someone tanking their war rating down to nothing, then working their way back up, getting easy points from easy fights. I'm guessing they're high P3, and you're low P2?

  • DoubleDeltaDoubleDelta Posts: 2,314 ★★★★
    walkerdog said:

    A thats a mismatch. Id be very curious how that match was made.

    B theyre in P2 which u think u should have been last season but don't think u can win? Or is this just pointing out the rating gap that really shouldn't be that high for a 3 bg war match (as u said you're not getting wonky 1-2 bG MMing)

    @walkerdog OP is P2, the opponent is P3. So the lower war rating is actually ranked above the higher.. so although it sucks, it kinda makes sense that the match needs to be made, to either bring the OP war rating up, with that gap probably about 70/80 points, or, switch them around on the leaderboards..

    I know people aren't going to agree, but if its matching off war rating, the highest war ratings should theoretically be at the top, opposed to giving people the opportunity to use a shell alliance to tank the war rating down, then the following season building it back up.. thats the worst thing about competitive game modes, people will always find an exploit..

    Good luck in the war & rest of the season, hope you guys win and stay where you believe you belong 😁
  • walkerdogwalkerdog Posts: 1,011 ★★★

    walkerdog said:

    A thats a mismatch. Id be very curious how that match was made.

    B theyre in P2 which u think u should have been last season but don't think u can win? Or is this just pointing out the rating gap that really shouldn't be that high for a 3 bg war match (as u said you're not getting wonky 1-2 bG MMing)

    @walkerdog OP is P2, the opponent is P3. So the lower war rating is actually ranked above the higher.. so although it sucks, it kinda makes sense that the match needs to be made, to either bring the OP war rating up, with that gap probably about 70/80 points, or, switch them around on the leaderboards..

    I know people aren't going to agree, but if its matching off war rating, the highest war ratings should theoretically be at the top, opposed to giving people the opportunity to use a shell alliance to tank the war rating down, then the following season building it back up.. thats the worst thing about competitive game modes, people will always find an exploit..

    Good luck in the war & rest of the season, hope you guys win and stay where you believe you belong 😁
    Ty I totally missed that @DoubleDelta. Thats wild
  • DoubleDeltaDoubleDelta Posts: 2,314 ★★★★
    walkerdog said:

    walkerdog said:

    A thats a mismatch. Id be very curious how that match was made.

    B theyre in P2 which u think u should have been last season but don't think u can win? Or is this just pointing out the rating gap that really shouldn't be that high for a 3 bg war match (as u said you're not getting wonky 1-2 bG MMing)

    @walkerdog OP is P2, the opponent is P3. So the lower war rating is actually ranked above the higher.. so although it sucks, it kinda makes sense that the match needs to be made, to either bring the OP war rating up, with that gap probably about 70/80 points, or, switch them around on the leaderboards..

    I know people aren't going to agree, but if its matching off war rating, the highest war ratings should theoretically be at the top, opposed to giving people the opportunity to use a shell alliance to tank the war rating down, then the following season building it back up.. thats the worst thing about competitive game modes, people will always find an exploit..

    Good luck in the war & rest of the season, hope you guys win and stay where you believe you belong 😁
    Ty I totally missed that @DoubleDelta. Thats wild
    At one point last season we were joint 12/13/14th in the world for war rating, but finished low P1 with one loss. They couldn't realistically match us against alliances with a similar rating, because they were so much further above us.
  • DoubleDeltaDoubleDelta Posts: 2,314 ★★★★



    If the leaderboards are up to date and not the badges, then they're only 2 above you on the leaderboard.

    Oh just noticed my maths was wrong.. +103 points. So if you beat them, your rating will be 1879, theirs will be 1872. Its not such a huge gap if you think 1 loss on their part brings you even on rating.

    Again best of luck mate, cant tell you how easy or hard they were since we boss rushed it in off season
  • TheSweetKillTheSweetKill Posts: 32



    Their war rating is 100 higher than us and almost double our side
  • MasterpuffMasterpuff Posts: 6,103 ★★★★★
    This is one of the first legitimate matchmaking mismatches. Best of luck to you.
  • SpideyFunkoSpideyFunko Posts: 17,852 ★★★★★

    This is one of the first legitimate matchmaking mismatches. Best of luck to you.

    after reading some more into it, it might not be
  • Lvernon15Lvernon15 Posts: 11,471 ★★★★★
    Higher up it seems season ranking plays a big part, but yeah, since war rating is totally different this is justified tbh
  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,361 ★★★★★




    Their war rating is 100 higher than us and almost double our side

    you are in plat2. The higher in the rankings you get the more spread between the ratings that can occur because you are talking about the top 100 alliances only. The further down the less spread you see because there are more alliances more tightly packed. This assumes 3 bgs.
  • RapRap Posts: 2,953 ★★★★
    edited August 2020
    More and more alliances are quitting war! It is a silent boycott! And as the number of alliances playing shrinks top tier alliances are going to discover they are moving down because of averaging. Maybe when gold tier alliances find themselves ranked as bronze or silver because of averaging, when platinum alliances find themselves sinking to the bottom of the gold tier, they will call for something to be done! With no stone, bronze and silver alliances playing somebody is going to have to fill the void they left.
    The participation is shrinking every war. By the end of this season no one but (former) gold, platinum, and Master tiers will he playing! They will have a rude awakening as they see their status slip lower and as their "true war rating" is averaged out across the limited number of alliances playing.
    When the loss or gain of a mere 35-45 points can raise or lower an alliance an entire tier it should be obvious no one is playing!
    And more importantly that the system is broken and needs fixed!
    It is just simple logic! If 2000 alliances are playing (lets just say) they can't all be gold, platinum and master!
    And as i have warned before! Be careful what you ask for from kabam! You just might get it! And regret it!
  • MauledMauled Posts: 2,894 ★★★★★
    -sixate- said:

    Uhm, you're in P2, they're in P3. Prove you're better and beat them.

    They’re in P2, 2 places above the OP

  • winterthurwinterthur Posts: 6,021 ★★★★★
    Rap said:

    More and more alliances are quitting war!

    That sounds good for me.. :D
  • ItsDamienItsDamien Posts: 4,215 ★★★★★

    Rap said:

    More and more alliances are quitting war!

    That sounds good for me.. :D
    I would not be sad to see the most divisive and exploited game mode gone.
  • SeraphionSeraphion Posts: 1,491 ★★★★
    -sixate- said:

    Uhm, you're in P2, they're in P3. Prove you're better and beat them.

    The new matchmaking should be only Warrating vs Warrating. And on that lvl they should play vs Master or P1. Nothing to do with where you stand in the season.
  • SeraphionSeraphion Posts: 1,491 ★★★★
    edited August 2020
    walkerdog said:

    A thats a mismatch. Id be very curious how that match was made.

    B theyre in P2 which u think u should have been last season but don't think u can win? Or is this just pointing out the rating gap that really shouldn't be that high for a 3 bg war match (as u said you're not getting wonky 1-2 bG MMing)

    @walkerdog

    I see what you mean. By robbed:

    I mean we got put in T3 from T2 after a win last season. Then we won 2 wars and lost 3 ranks and ended it P3 R7. Then in offseason we got promoted back into T2.

    That felt like a hugh middlefinger.
  • Ebony_NawEbony_Naw Posts: 2,474 ★★★★★
    Rap said:

    More and more alliances are quitting war! It is a silent boycott! And as the number of alliances playing shrinks top tier alliances are going to discover they are moving down because of averaging. Maybe when gold tier alliances find themselves ranked as bronze or silver because of averaging, when platinum alliances find themselves sinking to the bottom of the gold tier, they will call for something to be done! With no stone, bronze and silver alliances playing somebody is going to have to fill the void they left.
    The participation is shrinking every war. By the end of this season no one but (former) gold, platinum, and Master tiers will he playing! They will have a rude awakening as they see their status slip lower and as their "true war rating" is averaged out across the limited number of alliances playing.
    When the loss or gain of a mere 35-45 points can raise or lower an alliance an entire tier it should be obvious no one is playing!
    And more importantly that the system is broken and needs fixed!
    It is just simple logic! If 2000 alliances are playing (lets just say) they can't all be gold, platinum and master!
    And as i have warned before! Be careful what you ask for from kabam! You just might get it! And regret it!


    Um... what? Why would alliances slide down in the standings if it isn't percentage based?
  • SeraphionSeraphion Posts: 1,491 ★★★★
    edited August 2020

    walkerdog said:

    A thats a mismatch. Id be very curious how that match was made.

    B theyre in P2 which u think u should have been last season but don't think u can win? Or is this just pointing out the rating gap that really shouldn't be that high for a 3 bg war match (as u said you're not getting wonky 1-2 bG MMing)

    @walkerdog OP is P2, the opponent is P3. So the lower war rating is actually ranked above the higher.. so although it sucks, it kinda makes sense that the match needs to be made, to either bring the OP war rating up, with that gap probably about 70/80 points, or, switch them around on the leaderboards..

    I know people aren't going to agree, but if its matching off war rating, the highest war ratings should theoretically be at the top, opposed to giving people the opportunity to use a shell alliance to tank the war rating down, then the following season building it back up.. thats the worst thing about competitive game modes, people will always find an exploit..

    Good luck in the war & rest of the season, hope you guys win and stay where you believe you belong 😁
    @DoubleDelta

    I dont think your arguement makes sense.
    Going down and lose Warrating will lose you Tiers as well. Which makes it impossible to earn the same rewards. You can maybe try to tank 1 or 2 war but then your might be in danger of losing a Tier.

    The skill indicator is Warrating and nothing else. They are in Tier 1. And they get x8 points when they beat us (a middle P2 alliance at the moment). Is that fair for them or us?

    Think about it this way: kenob doesnt play their first war (for example). So next they should face some1 from P2?


    I dont even care to much about 1 lost war. But it looks like there are still easy to fix problems in the matchmaking
  • Thicco_ModeThicco_Mode Posts: 8,848 ★★★★★
    Rap said:

    More and more alliances are quitting war! It is a silent boycott! And as the number of alliances playing shrinks top tier alliances are going to discover they are moving down because of averaging. Maybe when gold tier alliances find themselves ranked as bronze or silver because of averaging, when platinum alliances find themselves sinking to the bottom of the gold tier, they will call for something to be done! With no stone, bronze and silver alliances playing somebody is going to have to fill the void they left.
    The participation is shrinking every war. By the end of this season no one but (former) gold, platinum, and Master tiers will he playing! They will have a rude awakening as they see their status slip lower and as their "true war rating" is averaged out across the limited number of alliances playing.
    When the loss or gain of a mere 35-45 points can raise or lower an alliance an entire tier it should be obvious no one is playing!
    And more importantly that the system is broken and needs fixed!
    It is just simple logic! If 2000 alliances are playing (lets just say) they can't all be gold, platinum and master!
    And as i have warned before! Be careful what you ask for from kabam! You just might get it! And regret it!

    ok
Sign In or Register to comment.