Unfair war matchups.

Diablord

So we are a silver 1 ally. We recently faced an ally way lower than us in everything. we were placing r2 6* and they were placing 4* r4 champs. I fell this should be changed. Even though we won, that ally would have had a very unfair matchup.

For info we had 2 deaths ( lagging out ) and they had 78 deaths. My 6* r1 punisher 2099 on kinetic tranference got 15 kills. they died many times but had those revives.

A way of solving this would be to make all ally members put thier defence champs in the ally champ section in the profile, then analyse the ally champs and give an opponent based on how strong the defence is.
To prevent faking, they could make it as you can only place the champs you chose as ally champs in defence.

danielmath

what were the war ratings? you didn't give any relevant numbers

Diablord

Our was 1301 and thiers was 1001

danielmath

Diablord said:

Our was 1301 and thiers was 1001

that's a massive gap, how many bgs?

ccrider474

While I see what your saying but the only way that works is to completely change war ratings.

Ie defence ratings a is tier 1
Defence ratings b is tier 2
Defence ratings c is tier 3.
So forth and so on

There is no way for you to push to next tier unless your defence meets the gate requirement. Rewards would have to scale in each tier as well to make trying to win in said tier worth doing.

My allaince at 50m+ average with avg defence rating (when we actually place) is 77k per member. We are silver 2 because we treat it as a game mode that is just running no one cares 1 bg rarely full. Do I deserve to go up the scales in rewards because my allaince has a high rating over others? I would feel confident you would say no to that. Does a newbie allaince deserve platinum because they only face newbies? I would think you would say no to that too.

I like that allainces can punch above their weight and they are getting better rewards with skill and a bit of luck. As opposed to a tier system that they only fight each other.

I don't deserve more because I'm higher rated but slacking off. You don't deserve less because your pushing harder but lower rated.

War ratings is fairest way you get what you work for and obviously they worked harder to get up high enough to get better stuff. You can't win them all but it's nice to have that chance.

Agent_X_zzz

Usually 1bg or 2bg there are less alliances doing it so harder to find fair WR based matchups

Captain_Montica

Crazy how even silver allies can put powerful defenders
I was in a silver ally for a while and our mini island was full of rank 3 6 stars
Our boss was rank 3 sig 200 thing

Diablord

danielmath said:

Diablord said:

Our was 1301 and thiers was 1001

that's a massive gap, how many bgs?

2 bgs

Diablord

Captain_Montica said:

Crazy how even silver allies can put powerful defenders
I was in a silver ally for a while and our mini island was full of rank 3 6 stars
Our boss was rank 3 sig 200 thing

Our boss is rank 3 sig 200 6* bishop

DNA3000

Diablord said:

Our was 1301 and thiers was 1001

That sounds like a bug if true. If you post a screenshot I will try to pass along to the devs.

Diablord said:

A way of solving this would be to make all ally members put thier defence champs in the ally champ section in the profile, then analyse the ally champs and give an opponent based on how strong the defence is.

That would cause chaos, because alliances could now "shop" for competition by manipulating their defense. The goal would be to place the strongest possible defense that is still low enough to get matched against actually low alliances. There's no actual way to analyze the defense for strength: the game doesn't understand the defensive meta. It would have to go by rank and rarity, or some other simple algorithm that would get it horribly wrong. Players would then be looking for ways to manipulate that algorithm to place the strongest possible defense that evaluated the weakest. This would lead to insanity.