How is this possible?

k14nvuy5se7y.jpeg

A tier 1 should never be matched with a tier 5. It shouldn’t even be possible with filters. The search should keep going or it cancels and tells the alliance to search at a different time...the bloody hell Kabam...

Comments

  • So you want other alliances to not match so you dont have to lose ?
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    edited September 2017
    So you want other alliances to not match so you dont have to lose ?

    I think you failed to grasp what the OP was pointing out here and twisted it around. Theres over a 1k difference in War Rating, they shouldn't have ever been matched up.
  • UnsaferBinkie7UnsaferBinkie7 Posts: 658 ★★
    That shouldn't be happening though. Basically goes against what the war rating is for... right?
  • DaMunkDaMunk Posts: 1,842 ★★★★
    Because the matching system is new right? Lol.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 23,527 ★★★★★
    edited October 2017
    DaMunk wrote: »
    Because the matching system is new right? Lol.

    No. With Defender Rating as a defining metric, eventually the Matches will be more in-range with our own. The Tiers will also reflect this. Eventually there won't be many extreme Matches because the Tiers will be more appropriate to our Rating. This is an example of what happens when Allies agree to avoid fighting each other in Tier 1 to peck off other Allies. Not implying that's what happened here. I have no idea. There will be fewer Matches possible like this because the system will balance itself. War Rating and Tiers will be more in tune to our Rating.
    Now, if something else could be done to address it more specifically, I'd support that, but for now I'm waiting to see if it's curbed by the rebalance. It could be the "Agreement", or it could be that this Ally was the closest in War Rating at the time of Matchmaking. Either way the system is in the middle of shifting, so things will change.
  • Zeke_the_XbotZeke_the_Xbot Posts: 202
    DaMunk wrote: »
    Because the matching system is new right? Lol.

    No. With Defender Rating as a defining metric, eventually the Matches will be more in-range with our own. The Tiers will also reflect this. Eventually there won't be many extreme Matches because the Tiers will be more appropriate to our Rating. This is an example of what happens when Allies agree to avoid fighting each other in Tier 1 to peck off other Allies. Not implying that's what happened here. I have no idea. There will be fewer Matches possible like this because the system will balance itself. War Rating and Tiers will be more in tune to our Rating.
    Now, if something else could be done to address it more specifically, I'd support that, but for now I'm waiting to see if it's curbed by the rebalance. It could be the "Agreement", or it could be that this Ally was the closest in War Rating at the time of Matchmaking. Either way the system is in the middle of shifting, so things will change.

    You say that like the matchmaking is intelligent and can figure out what to factor in to create a fair matchup. But I wager the algorithm is still largely the same broken stuff it was before instead of saying okay tier 1 alliances match with Tier 1 and no if and or buts about it no hoop jumping or manipulations will change that. No one deserves easy wins at that level and no alliance should be allowed to engage in any sort of behavior that leads to unfair matchups ever. Which is why tier locked matchmaking would be the best solution.
  • GbSarkarGbSarkar Posts: 1,075 ★★★
    Should have given up the moment you saw the +128/-2
    (Btw, you're in t3, not t5)
  • RaaRaa Posts: 294
    I know it's frustrating. We're going to see some Matches like this until the system balances itself more.

    You know so much
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 23,527 ★★★★★
    edited October 2017
    DaMunk wrote: »
    Because the matching system is new right? Lol.

    No. With Defender Rating as a defining metric, eventually the Matches will be more in-range with our own. The Tiers will also reflect this. Eventually there won't be many extreme Matches because the Tiers will be more appropriate to our Rating. This is an example of what happens when Allies agree to avoid fighting each other in Tier 1 to peck off other Allies. Not implying that's what happened here. I have no idea. There will be fewer Matches possible like this because the system will balance itself. War Rating and Tiers will be more in tune to our Rating.
    Now, if something else could be done to address it more specifically, I'd support that, but for now I'm waiting to see if it's curbed by the rebalance. It could be the "Agreement", or it could be that this Ally was the closest in War Rating at the time of Matchmaking. Either way the system is in the middle of shifting, so things will change.

    You say that like the matchmaking is intelligent and can figure out what to factor in to create a fair matchup. But I wager the algorithm is still largely the same broken stuff it was before instead of saying okay tier 1 alliances match with Tier 1 and no if and or buts about it no hoop jumping or manipulations will change that. No one deserves easy wins at that level and no alliance should be allowed to engage in any sort of behavior that leads to unfair matchups ever. Which is why tier locked matchmaking would be the best solution.

    That's not what I'm implying. The Tiers and War Rating are proportionate to Wins and Losses. With Defender Rating as a significant metric, those Wins and Losses will be affected in part by Rating. Definitely by the Rank of Champs, and in turn, those are reflected in the Ally Rating. The system searches for a Match within the WR range. When the system is more balanced, as in closer in Ratings, there will be much less in proximity to peck off.
    As for Tier-specific Matches, I suppose that would be an idea. As long as it doesn't affect the way we advance or lower in Tiers. As I said, I'm all for a more direct solution, as I don't agree with the "Agreement". Whether within the rules or not, it creates a monopoly on spots and makes for an unfair situation.
  • TwuntTwunt Posts: 149
    This is the same guy from the old forum but with a new name. Please don’t dilute my concern with your innane remarks.
  • UnsaferBinkie7UnsaferBinkie7 Posts: 658 ★★
    I've never seen someone be so far up kabam's ass. Anyway, this shouldn't be happening period. If you're tier1, you should be fighting a tier 1 alliance. Unfair matchups like this should even be a thing with such a war rating difference. It's another flaw for this great war mode.
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    This is nothing new at all and has been complained about before in the past.
    I have seen other tiers fight before, and in my own experience fought a different tier. Only difference with my experience is our war rating was much closer with our opponents. The gap here is huge and a whole other tier in-between the both.

    Not sure if this would be a "glitch" or some serious random bad luck on start time with no other alliances available, not really sure what the odds are of that though. Either way, highly flawed.
  • TwuntTwunt Posts: 149
    I agree R4GE, I’m just pointing out the clear innaccuracy of the formula being used. If an alliance is somehow timing this, then the search should keep searching or after 10 min of not finding a suitable match, should send a message saying to try again later. No way on this earth should a tier 2800 be matched with a tier 1500. Does not make sense how much you stretch it.
  • R4GER4GE Posts: 1,530 ★★★★
    Twunt wrote: »
    I agree R4GE, I’m just pointing out the clear innaccuracy of the formula being used. If an alliance is somehow timing this, then the search should keep searching or after 10 min of not finding a suitable match, should send a message saying to try again later. No way on this earth should a tier 2800 be matched with a tier 1500. Does not make sense how much you stretch it.
    I agree completely and that's just a terrible match up. I'm here more out of curiosity as to how that could even happen.

    Even if a tier 1 alliance was attempting an exploit to avoid fighting another tier 1 alliance, why would it not match them against a tier 2 alliance?
  • Haji_SaabHaji_Saab Posts: 4,009 ★★★★★
    What's up with the Buzzfeed type topic names??

    Just the first page has thread named:
    1. "How is this possible?" ...
    2. "this is what is really happening" ...
    3. "Cold Hard truth"....
    4. "Let's take a step back and approach it logically" ...

    I really miss the old forums where you could hover over the topic and read the first couple of line. #RelevantTopicNamesMatter
  • TwuntTwunt Posts: 149
    Sorry about that. I didn’t put much thought into the topic.
  • ZabirZabir Posts: 76
    Stop crying just play the game
  • unknownunknown Posts: 378
    Who is going through these forums and flagging all kinds of responses? Go away trolls
  • gahrlinggahrling Posts: 176
    Too much click bait going on here and it's not even generating any user revenue.
Sign In or Register to comment.