50/50 rule in war

So the way the system is, basically if you don't spend heavy to get into Platinum but you're an active full alliance, you're going to bounce between winning and losing wars. You win and then you face the Platinum+ alliances and you lose. Win, lose. Win 5, get knocked back 5. Only so much winning to be had. It's a boring system, very uncompetitive. Please come up with something else.

Comments

unknown

This content has been removed.

PandamanPete

Yeah I’m with dropfaith here. It’s competitive, that’s why you should lose the matches you can’t win. Not everyone can win all of their matches, someone has to lose

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

DarkestDestroyer

Division it, so you only play teams in your division or league, then from there you get demoted or promoted

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

RagamugginGunner

SmokingSurfer wrote: »

So the way the system is, basically if you don't spend heavy to get into Platinum but you're an active full alliance, you're going to bounce between winning and losing wars. You win and then you face the Platinum+ alliances and you lose. Win, lose. Win 5, get knocked back 5. Only so much winning to be had. It's a boring system, very uncompetitive. Please come up with something else.

I'm not sure if you know what "uncompetitive" means.

Deadbyrd9

You don’t have to spend heavy if you have skill. An alliance having better defense means nothing if you have the skill to easily defeat those champs. There are ways around each new champ. Plenty of videos on how to counter every champ in the game. You losing as many as you win is normal.

There should be a point where you win every other war because there are people better than you and others worse than you. If you want to continue climbing tiers then you have to better than the alliances above you. Not sure what’s uncompetitive about that. Sounds like you want wins given to you instead of earning and competing for them against better alliances. The only way to get to the top is to beat those above you

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Solrac_2

Yes, eventually you plateau. You then have to make some semi-drastic changes (with weaker links) and maybe strategy (though that can only help a bit).

Hulksmasshh

SmokingSurfer wrote: »

Deadbyrd9 wrote: »

You don’t have to spend heavy if you have skill. An alliance having better defense means nothing if you have the skill to easily defeat those champs. There are ways around each new champ. Plenty of videos on how to counter every champ in the game. You losing as many as you win is normal.

There should be a point where you win every other war because there are people better than you and others worse than you. If you want to continue climbing tiers then you have to better than the alliances above you. Not sure what’s uncompetitive about that. Sounds like you want wins given to you instead of earning and competing for them against better alliances. The only way to get to the top is to beat those above you

Try again dude. Well, I'll clear it up for you. I want the OPPORTUNITY to win more wars than 50/50 was that more clear. I made a little analogy too to try to help people like you, but you still aren't catching on. The boxing thing, middle weight Vs. Tyson. Yeah, the middleweight will never win, ever. He will not win. It's a roadblock. Opponents that you cannot defeat.

Tyson was the champ. In order to be the champ you got to beat the champ. You think the other boxers of that time were frustrated too? Hell yeah, Tyson not gonna lose just to make them feel better lol.

Now comparing anyone in plat+ to Mike Tyson is a way overstretch, but if you feel that the effort you and others are putting in should be winning you more wars than you are, you need to take a hard look at who/what is dragging y’all down. Don’t know if you’re an officer/leader or not, but from experience more times than not the best solution for you is finding another alliance who puts out that same level of effort.

Chimpyboy

Season 1 we were in Gold 2. We finished season 2 in the top 1/3 of Gold 1. Won some, lost some - won some we had no business winning, and lost some we should have won. We got beat badly a couple times. But we learned...did some new defensive rank ups, planned better, looked at attack plans, available rosters, path assignments, etc.

It shouldn't be just winning half and losing half - if that's what's going on for your group something is wrong.

If your group is constantly going 50/50 then you're either stagnating on the skill level or players and officers aren't learning from mistakes and using them to get better.

If you're just rolling out the same defense and attack teams over and over and expecting that all of a sudden everyone is just gonna play out of their minds someday and it's all gonna get better - you're hoping for too much.

It takes not just good players to hang in the higher alliances, but excellent defenses, smart placements, and good strategy and coordination.

With the new maps for season 3 (assuming you are in a tier higher enough to see the new maps) - the offseason should have given your officers some valuable information and insight as to what it's going to take to win against others in your tier. Do you need to clear 100%? Do you just need a couple of bosskills and decent exploration? Can you afford to skip certain paths and/or fights to have a better shot at a final boss? How much are they gonna push for items to be used?

They should be looking at all this stuff. If they are not you may want to think about changing groups.

Reference

Chimpyboy wrote: »

Season 1 we were in Gold 2. We finished season 2 in the top 1/3 of Gold 1. Won some, lost some - won some we had no business winning, and lost some we should have won. We got beat badly a couple times. But we learned...did some new defensive rank ups, planned better, looked at attack plans, available rosters, path assignments, etc.

It shouldn't be just winning half and losing half - if that's what's going on for your group something is wrong.

If your group is constantly going 50/50 then you're either stagnating on the skill level or players and officers aren't learning from mistakes and using them to get better.

If you're just rolling out the same defense and attack teams over and over and expecting that all of a sudden everyone is just gonna play out of their minds someday and it's all gonna get better - you're hoping for too much.

It takes not just good players to hang in the higher alliances, but excellent defenses, smart placements, and good strategy and coordination.

With the new maps for season 3 (assuming you are in a tier higher enough to see the new maps) - the offseason should have given your officers some valuable information and insight as to what it's going to take to win against others in your tier. Do you need to clear 100%? Do you just need a couple of bosskills and decent exploration? Can you afford to skip certain paths and/or fights to have a better shot at a final boss? How much are they gonna push for items to be used?

They should be looking at all this stuff. If they are not you may want to think about changing groups.

Your comment is really good and insightful.
Instead of using boxing as an example, I'd rather pick those team playing games (e.g. soccer, baseball, and etc). Sometimes win or lose is really depends on many variables, like the performance of each teammate, whether your opponents' defenders match with your team's attackers.
Especially I share your views that "We got beat badly a couple times. But we learned...did some new defensive rank ups, planned better, looked at attack plans, available rosters, path assignments, etc." and I think that's the funnest part of AW. I played in Plat-1 alliance in Season 1 and I'm deeply impressed with how the officer of my sub-team executing the above things.....I always wonder how long the time he spent on that everyday.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Demonzfyre

SmokingSurfer wrote: »

You're all trying to circle around it whichever way you can, but nothing changed. After going on a winning streak, you start to face opponents that you cannot beat... Absolutely cannot beat.

I think that's just you and your ally's mindset. We've never gone 50/50 after a loss to a plat alliance when in gold 1. You are just looking for excuses for poor play and want things changed so you don't feel bad about a loss. Seeing your comments in this thread shows you have a lot of growing and understanding to do.

Kabam Spice

Hey All,
Let's not insult one another. It is okay to have different opinions but let's be sure to keep the conversation constructive and on topic.

Patchie93

Thats because you moved up in tiers (leagues) and are now facing guys in your (new) tier (leagues)

Exactly what you want is whats happening.

Except what you actually want is to be mike tyson and to be able to win all the time. Thats not competion thats called beating on smaller guys.
You wanna be a top dog without putting in the time or moneu to be a top dog.

Tiers do exactly what your saying you get placed against another alliance with similar war rating hence similar tier and the BETTER alliance wins. If you go on a win streak your bound to fight someone bigger then you that's exactly what competition should involve.

Mr_Platypus

SmokingSurfer wrote: »

You're all trying to circle around it whichever way you can, but nothing changed. After going on a winning streak, you start to face opponents that you cannot beat... Absolutely cannot beat.

Well of course, if you win 5 wars and go up 250 war rating then you’ll face opponents with a similar war rating to your new one, that’s how it works lol, upto your alliance officers to find out why you can’t win at your peak war rating and adjust so that you can.
Who knows, maybe it’s your “this is unfair, we can’t ever win against stronger opponents” attitude that’s causing problems as you and others stop trying

Alzkabet

The AW matchmaking is ranking aliance by their TIER points if im not wrong? So if you got an aliance in the war matchmaking im sure that they have the same tier points as your aliance, so the truth it is that u can't face the aliance that are in that tier and that tier is not for your aliance, but if you are let's say 1500 points and u get like 1900-2000 aliance, than yes, i agree with you this is wrong.

gadgetfanatic

hmmm...i do agree with the others here. The current one is the best system for this war. Disregarding the time to time mismatched war matching, alliances have got to expect to fight harder opponents everytime they get a win. Simply, to be the best, beat the best and get better. If you have observed a 50/50 win, it is just that you are at your peak tier...and to win you guys got to change some of the things you do in war. To beat your opponent, it can either depend on outsmarting them on placement, outpowering them with skill, spending more than them, (at hier tiers) attacking smart / strategically via focusing on exploring only the needed paths for boss kill or getting that extra exploration on any money grabbing path, etc...lots of ways to win but also lots of ways to lose if you are not willing to take it. good luck to you guys this coming season.

RagamugginGunner

SmokingSurfer wrote: »

RagamugginGunner wrote: »

SmokingSurfer wrote: »

So the way the system is, basically if you don't spend heavy to get into Platinum but you're an active full alliance, you're going to bounce between winning and losing wars. You win and then you face the Platinum+ alliances and you lose. Win, lose. Win 5, get knocked back 5. Only so much winning to be had. It's a boring system, very uncompetitive. Please come up with something else.

I'm not sure if you know what "uncompetitive" means.

I'm not sure you know what having a life is OK? Because you get your kicks from scouring forums looking for typos and bad grammar. Check yourself?

Yeah, I wasn't commenting on your grammar lol.

Chimpyboy

SmokingSurfer wrote: »

You're all trying to circle around it whichever way you can, but nothing changed. After going on a winning streak, you start to face opponents that you cannot beat... Absolutely cannot beat.

There is no way around this - do you think you can beat every alliance on any day? It's not possible. There is always going to be a ceiling where you will encounter alliances who have already gone through all the growing pains you are having now.....

My alliance - as it is constructed currently - could never beat 4Loki or any of the top 30 alliances. A Stone alliance could never beat a Plat alliance - unless there's something weird going on - that is not a design flaw - that is how tiering and rankings work.

Sports is a great example: A AAA Baseball team could possibly beat a major league team - b/c many of the players in AAA are not in the majors for reasons like injury or roster space. But many are good players - and a pitcher can always have a great day.
However, a single-A team or college division 1 team could never beat a major league team (assuming both teams are actually trying).