Alliance War’s points

Atomic_Tom

From those time when Kabam made tier 1 brackets bigger (now it’s about 45 alliances) I think (actually not only me, but many players from high tier alliances) that Kabam should make it more fairly. Let me explain.
Matchmaking doesn’t work very well while it doesn’t base on alliance’s place in season leaderboard. It’s based only on war ratings. So alliances with lower war rating matches against the same alliances almost every war while alliances with higher war rating matches against the same. And what we see in leaderboard? The alliances with low war rating (but still enough for t1) which won wars with 20+ deaths placed in masters, while other alliances which lost war with only around 5 deaths placed in pl1.

It would be more fairly if Kabam delete 30k points for the win.

What will we get?

The leaderboard that based on skill of every alliances not on their “lucky” matchmaking. Because alliances with less deaths will be higher because they showed more skill game than alliances which have more deaths.

Atomic_Tom

This is result from s31 with numbers of “win” and “lose” and with numbers of deaths. What do you think is this fair that Alliance who died 150 times is higher than alliance who died less than 100 times?

Atomic_Tom

And to take into account, alliances with 150+ deaths didn’t matched with strong alliances who died less than 10 deaths.

Char

Your math is incorrect. GT40 had a war where someone kicked a bunch of their members mid war, so they didn’t 100% it. They are absolutely one of the alliances that die the least in top 20.

Atomic_Tom

Yes I know, that’s why it’s yellow.

Char

But to your point, the matchmaking system is utterly unfair. So many rematches of alliances and others with low AW rating end up facing easier opponents throughout the season.

Atomic_Tom

Absolutely agree. And those alliances died more than alliances who faced against high war rating alliances

Mad_Titan_Thanos

Atomic_Tom said:

From those time when Kabam made tier 1 brackets bigger (now it’s about 45 alliances) I think (actually not only me, but many players from high tier alliances) that Kabam should make it more fairly. Let me explain.
Matchmaking doesn’t work very well while it doesn’t base on alliance’s place in season leaderboard. It’s based only on war ratings. So alliances with lower war rating matches against the same alliances almost every war while alliances with higher war rating matches against the same. And what we see in leaderboard? The alliances with low war rating (but still enough for t1) which won wars with 20+ deaths placed in masters, while other alliances which lost war with only around 5 deaths placed in pl1.

It would be more fairly if Kabam delete 30k points for the win.

What will we get?

The leaderboard that based on skill of every alliances not on their “lucky” matchmaking. Because alliances with less deaths will be higher because they showed more skill game than alliances which have more deaths.

The problem with this spreadsheet is that GT40 had a war where everyone was kicked by a rogue officer. Exploration points count less than deaths. And GT40 matched newn, KenOB twice, ASR, and many other top allies during that season and guess who came out on top, even after having little war points

Atomic_Tom

I didn’t mean GT40 is alliance who placed on top1 unfair. I know about your situation. That’s why it’s yellow, bc of it I couldn’t know how many times you died. I meant other alliances. Don’t get me wrong

Agent_X_zzz

My ally op we died 201,125 times and still first 😎

aloneagainor

totally agree with this, that’s unfair that top tier allies all play together and even 2-3 deaths aren’t enough for a win whereas other allies win with 10-20 deaths and get easy master rewards !

K00shMaan

Difficulty of Schedule is unfortunately a very common problem in a lot of competitive sports. Unless everyone faces everyone the same amount of times it is going to exist here too. Even then the actual performance of any opponent varies from day to day so you can't really ever get it perfect.

What I don't agree with is removing the Win Bonus. I think reducing it from 50K to 30K was a good move because it obviously still accounts for a ton of points but does shift the balance of points closer to raw performance rather than just the outcome.

However, getting rid of it entirely basically removes the importance of your own Alliance's defense. If you remove the Win Bonus, your defense is equally as valuable to you as every other Alliance's defense (other than who your facing that War specifically). When your own defense gets a kill, that has to be more important than a random other alliance getting a kill. That is accomplished by having a Win Bonus as your defense getting kills allows you the opportunity to get 30K more points.