Options

War scores/rankings BS

GraydroxGraydrox Posts: 413 ★★★
in General Discussion
I've been playing this game for over a year and no matter what ally I join, we are always in the silver 1 range. This goes back to when I was around 40k to now close to 500k. And now I'm in an ally who can do over 150mil in AQ.

My old ally did around 5 mil, and this one 130mil plus but yet, we are both silver one in war.....

Something is seriously f'ed in this game when a newb ally is getting the same rewards as an organized group of cavaliers/uncollected.

Yeah it kind of makes sense when a dumbass thinks about it. The computer pits you vs similar opponents and you only grow when you beat that opponent. That sounds fair right? Yeah, until you realize that the newb Ally's and the hardcore Ally's are getting the same rewards for much different work...

We need to rebel against this ****. It's absolute nonsense and we should let Kabam hear about it.

We need a different got damn ranking system. One that accurately reflects where an ally is in the grand scheme.

Comments

  • Options
    SiriusBreakSiriusBreak Posts: 2,156 Guardian
    @Graydrox what's your war tier/war rating? Next, does your Alliance 100% 3 BGs? Does your Alliance utilize high diversity? Do you still use 4* defenders? Does your Alliance win more than you lose? What's your average attack bonus output per war? All of this factors into your Season Point output. If you can give me some answers, I can explain why you're still in Silver.

    I lead a P4 Alliance and we're in T4/2,496 war rating (4.5× Multiplier as a result). We run full 150 diversity. We only run 5* R4+ or 6* R1+ defenders. We win more than we lose (7 wins/5 losses last Season and ranked 85th in P4). We average about 455 AB per war. Some wars we hit as high as 475 AB, some when things go sideways 440. Yet, we still maintain Platinum 4 without too much hassle.
  • Options
    GraydroxGraydrox Posts: 413 ★★★
    SiriusBreak said:

    @Graydrox what's your war tier/war rating? Next, does your Alliance 100% 3 BGs? Does your Alliance utilize high diversity? Do you still use 4* defenders? Does your Alliance win more than you lose? What's your average attack bonus output per war? All of this factors into your Season Point output. If you can give me some answers, I can explain why you're still in Silver.

    I lead a P4 Alliance and we're in T4/2,496 war rating (4.5× Multiplier as a result). We run full 150 diversity. We only run 5* R4+ or 6* R1+ defenders. We win more than we lose (7 wins/5 losses last Season and ranked 85th in P4). We average about 455 AB per war. Some wars we hit as high as 475 AB, some when things go sideways 440. Yet, we still maintain Platinum 4 without too much hassle.

    You see the **** a higher tier ally has to deal with to get into gold and beyond? It's insane, and yet, we have low level alliances with half their members not even showing up in a war, who by chance, end up in the same bracket as an ally who pushes all 30 with full diversity and low deaths.

    Thanks though bro. Couldn't have said it better myself.
  • Options
    NeotwismNeotwism Posts: 1,803 ★★★★★
    I don't see how this is possible. I just put a new alliance together earlier this year from scratch. We only run war for fun with no resources and we're out of silver the first season after starting the alliance. I would offer some suggestions, but I came figure out what the problem could be besides not advancing tiers
  • Options
    LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,643 ★★★★★
    I finished in gold with a baby account I used to farm donations with my main. My main account has never finished lower than plat 3 and mostly we've been plat 1-2. There is nothing wrong with the scoring, it sounds like you just need a better alliance that takes war seriously. I think if we ran no item wars for an entire season we would still finish at least gold 1 or plat 4.
  • Options
    -sixate--sixate- Posts: 1,532 ★★★★★
    My alliance doesn't take war seriously at all. We only play 1bg wars and easily finish in gold 3. We have some skilled players and we would be way higher if we ran 3bg wars. How many bg's you running?

    If your alliance is full of UC and Cavalier level players and can't get out of silver you're just not as organized or as good as you think. Diversity matters, need to rank good defenders, and know what everyone is capable of with their roster.
  • Options
    NiteAndDaeNiteAndDae Posts: 670 ★★★
    edited October 2019
    I know the rankings have changed, but the original post spells it out: https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/47443/announcing-alliance-wars-seasons

    You need to place in the top 4500 Ally's. As the game has progressed, more and more Ally's have joined (since more people have since joined) and thus it gets more and more competitive, even to make it to gold. As times goes on it will only get harder and you must get better and join even better Ally's.

    Basically means you have to grind hard (or spend) and then also keep pushing to get into better and better Ally's to move up in the ranks. For an ally to naturally move up, ALL members need to ALL be growing as a whole and thus pushing to make the top 4500, a difficult feat, and thus a lot of Ally's will stagnate, since those above them get better rewards, and thus progress faster.

    I guess my answer is grind or spend and then push to get into a stronger ally?
  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Graydrox said:

    Exactly. Let me show you what we are

    Neotwism said:

    I don't see how this is possible. I just put a new alliance together earlier this year from scratch. We only run war for fun with no resources and we're out of silver the first season after starting the alliance. I would offer some suggestions, but I came figure out what the problem could be besides not advancing tiers

    Exactly. I've been in allies that only run war for fun and other allies that take it seriously and we all are in the same tier.

    There is no good explanation because of the brilliant system Kabam has. For the most powerfull allies, they can't be beat by most other allies so they end up near the top.

    For the other top 3000 or so allies, they can beat each other up and down. We are all trying so hard we are killing each other.
    Lormif said:

    Graydrox said:

    SiriusBreak said:

    @Graydrox what's your war tier/war rating? Next, does your Alliance 100% 3 BGs? Does your Alliance utilize high diversity? Do you still use 4* defenders? Does your Alliance win more than you lose? What's your average attack bonus output per war? All of this factors into your Season Point output. If you can give me some answers, I can explain why you're still in Silver.

    I lead a P4 Alliance and we're in T4/2,496 war rating (4.5× Multiplier as a result). We run full 150 diversity. We only run 5* R4+ or 6* R1+ defenders. We win more than we lose (7 wins/5 losses last Season and ranked 85th in P4). We average about 455 AB per war. Some wars we hit as high as 475 AB, some when things go sideways 440. Yet, we still maintain Platinum 4 without too much hassle.

    You see the **** a higher tier ally has to deal with to get into gold and beyond? It's insane, and yet, we have low level alliances with half their members not even showing up in a war, who by chance, end up in the same bracket as an ally who pushes all 30 with full diversity and low deaths.

    Thanks though bro. Couldn't have said it better myself.
    Say it better? His post was a full counter to yours....If you are still in silver it is YOUR alliances fault, it means you are not winning more than you are losing, which at that level of play is YOUR fault if what you claimed was true. If you win more than you lose your alliance rating will go up, and then your points, then your bracket in season.
    No it's not. Why can't I get atleast some semi intelligent responses? My post is not about why my ally isn't ranking up. It's about why my ally is the same rank as alliances we could curb stomp into the ground 365 days a year. I'm talking about alliances with **** participation and low level players playing against similarly **** alliances and therefore they get some wins. It's like having the Chicago bears and the local high school team in the same rank of top teams in the country because they are both 7-5. It doesn't make any sense. Do I need a hammer to pound this **** into your skull?

    Because you have to win. Jsut because you "can cub stomp into the ground" does not mean you have... You dont become gold just because you get uncollected/cav, you get gold tier because you accumulate enough points IN THE WAR SEASON to do so, which is based off your tier rating.

    Your analogy does not make any sense, they are not in the same overall league, but if they were in the same league if the high school had a better record then yea the high school would be higher ranked.

    You get matched with other silver/tier champions, if you are not out winning them and staying in silver it is, again, a reflection that your skills do not match up with your ego.

    Also we are not in the war season so points you gain now are only for individual war wins.

    Please learn how to play the game, and leave the arrogance at home, you will get banned here and this thread closed.
  • Options
    GinjabredMonstaGinjabredMonsta Posts: 6,464 Guardian
    Graydrox said:

    Lormif said:

    Graydrox said:

    SiriusBreak said:

    @Graydrox what's your war tier/war rating? Next, does your Alliance 100% 3 BGs? Does your Alliance utilize high diversity? Do you still use 4* defenders? Does your Alliance win more than you lose? What's your average attack bonus output per war? All of this factors into your Season Point output. If you can give me some answers, I can explain why you're still in Silver.

    I lead a P4 Alliance and we're in T4/2,496 war rating (4.5× Multiplier as a result). We run full 150 diversity. We only run 5* R4+ or 6* R1+ defenders. We win more than we lose (7 wins/5 losses last Season and ranked 85th in P4). We average about 455 AB per war. Some wars we hit as high as 475 AB, some when things go sideways 440. Yet, we still maintain Platinum 4 without too much hassle.

    You see the **** a higher tier ally has to deal with to get into gold and beyond? It's insane, and yet, we have low level alliances with half their members not even showing up in a war, who by chance, end up in the same bracket as an ally who pushes all 30 with full diversity and low deaths.

    Thanks though bro. Couldn't have said it better myself.
    Say it better? His post was a full counter to yours....If you are still in silver it is YOUR alliances fault, it means you are not winning more than you are losing, which at that level of play is YOUR fault if what you claimed was true. If you win more than you lose your alliance rating will go up, and then your points, then your bracket in season.
    No it's not. Why can't I get atleast some semi intelligent responses? My post is not about why my ally isn't ranking up. It's about why my ally is the same rank as alliances we could curb stomp into the ground 365 days a year. I'm talking about alliances with **** participation and low level players playing against similarly **** alliances and therefore they get some wins. It's like having the Chicago bears and the local high school team in the same rank of top teams in the country because they are both 7-5. It doesn't make any sense. Do I need a hammer to pound this **** into your skull?

    Your post should be about why aren't ranking up because that seems to be the issue at the moment. You are saying you are better than these other opponents you are up against however your stuck in silver. Seriousbreak asked you some questions regarding how your alliance handles war and you completely skipped that part of his response. You seem to not want "intelligent responses" to this post but are just looking to rant and hope that someone comes and agrees with whatever logic or analogies that you are using in order to support your stance that the system is the issue.
  • Options
    ahock101ahock101 Posts: 118 ★
    I have 2 accounts, 1 is around 250k in an alliance that runs 2 bgs in war and rarely scores over 40 mil in aq, we worked our arses off getting to gold 3 in tier 8 wars, my main account is in an alliance that gets 130mil in aq is full of cavalier and 500k+ players we finished 10 places below my mini, still in gold 3, if you don't like the system don't do wars, if you can't get out of silver in a high tier alliance then either, quit or work harder
  • Options
    GraydroxGraydrox Posts: 413 ★★★
    Ganging up on me won't make your toeing the line any less apparent. Just because something is done a certain way doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. Our ally has been gold 2, we know it takes good diversity and minimal deaths for attack bonus. I'm not here asking for a seminar on how to move up in the system. I'm questioning the system.

    I'm done with this though. Don't ban me please. Still love the game, just sharing my opinion.
  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Graydrox said:

    Ganging up on me won't make your toeing the line any less apparent. Just because something is done a certain way doesn't mean it can't be improved upon. Our ally has been gold 2, we know it takes good diversity and minimal deaths for attack bonus. I'm not here asking for a seminar on how to move up in the system. I'm questioning the system.

    I'm done with this though. Don't ban me please. Still love the game, just sharing my opinion.

    So you have been gold 2, but now you are silver, which shows you are losing to that high school team with a supposed bears level roster.
  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    edited October 2019
    Graydrox said:

    Hellow said:

    You are “questioning the system” after a completely independent choice
    It would be “questioning the system” if it forces you to stay in those brackets or if you did whatever you could and you were still held back
    To me this just sounds like you did Poor decision making

    You're really struggling with this one dude. I'm sorry but this thread isn't for you.
    insults people, then plays the victim when pointing out how silly he is.
    then says he is done with the thread just to come back to insult more people.

    How about instead of coming here to be rude and vague you come here and state exactly what your issues are with the system so there can be a constructive conversation.
  • Options
    GraydroxGraydrox Posts: 413 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Graydrox said:

    Hellow said:

    You are “questioning the system” after a completely independent choice
    It would be “questioning the system” if it forces you to stay in those brackets or if you did whatever you could and you were still held back
    To me this just sounds like you did Poor decision making

    You're really struggling with this one dude. I'm sorry but this thread isn't for you.
    insults people, then plays the victim when pointing out how silly he is.
    then says he is done with the thread just to come back to insult more people.

    How about coming here to be rude and vague you come here and state exactly what your issues are with the system so there can be a constructive conversation.
    I'm not playing the victim I'm just stating the facts. You guys are attacking my opinion. And I'm defending myself. You guys are ganging up on me but it's not going to change the fact that I don't agree with your just tolerate it approach. I've already told you my issue with system. I'm not going to lay out some sophisticated plan to improve it when nobody agrees it needs to be improved anyway.
  • Options
    GraydroxGraydrox Posts: 413 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Graydrox said:

    Lormif said:

    Graydrox said:

    Hellow said:

    You are “questioning the system” after a completely independent choice
    It would be “questioning the system” if it forces you to stay in those brackets or if you did whatever you could and you were still held back
    To me this just sounds like you did Poor decision making

    You're really struggling with this one dude. I'm sorry but this thread isn't for you.
    insults people, then plays the victim when pointing out how silly he is.
    then says he is done with the thread just to come back to insult more people.

    How about coming here to be rude and vague you come here and state exactly what your issues are with the system so there can be a constructive conversation.
    I'm not playing the victim I'm just stating the facts. You guys are attacking my opinion. And I'm defending myself. You guys are ganging up on me but it's not going to change the fact that I don't agree with your just tolerate it approach. I've already told you my issue with system. I'm not going to lay out some sophisticated plan to improve it when nobody agrees it needs to be improved anyway.
    Your opinion and you are 2 different things. You also are not defending your opinion so much as insulting people who disagree with your vague, non constructive opinion. If you take people disagreeing with your opinions to this level you are going to lead a tough life, especially when you come out the gate insulting others. (ad hominem attacks such as yours shows a bad set of logical skills)

    you did not tell us your issue with the system other than you are in silver, that does not illustrate an issue with the system so much as an issue with your team.

    No one asked you to lay out some sophisticated plan to improve it, we are asking you to tell us what exactly you have an issue with.
    My issue is the unfair ranking system(imo). I believe the ranking should be fixed so that an Ally's ranking is an attempt to rank them from strongest to weakest. As in, who would win in a head to head matchup based on who they have beaten and who they lose to. In the current system, alliances that are much weaker than my own are ranked higher than us, purely because they got to fight against sloppy weak alliances.
  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Graydrox said:

    Lormif said:

    Graydrox said:

    Lormif said:

    Graydrox said:

    Hellow said:

    You are “questioning the system” after a completely independent choice
    It would be “questioning the system” if it forces you to stay in those brackets or if you did whatever you could and you were still held back
    To me this just sounds like you did Poor decision making

    You're really struggling with this one dude. I'm sorry but this thread isn't for you.
    insults people, then plays the victim when pointing out how silly he is.
    then says he is done with the thread just to come back to insult more people.

    How about coming here to be rude and vague you come here and state exactly what your issues are with the system so there can be a constructive conversation.
    I'm not playing the victim I'm just stating the facts. You guys are attacking my opinion. And I'm defending myself. You guys are ganging up on me but it's not going to change the fact that I don't agree with your just tolerate it approach. I've already told you my issue with system. I'm not going to lay out some sophisticated plan to improve it when nobody agrees it needs to be improved anyway.
    Your opinion and you are 2 different things. You also are not defending your opinion so much as insulting people who disagree with your vague, non constructive opinion. If you take people disagreeing with your opinions to this level you are going to lead a tough life, especially when you come out the gate insulting others. (ad hominem attacks such as yours shows a bad set of logical skills)

    you did not tell us your issue with the system other than you are in silver, that does not illustrate an issue with the system so much as an issue with your team.

    No one asked you to lay out some sophisticated plan to improve it, we are asking you to tell us what exactly you have an issue with.
    My issue is the unfair ranking system(imo). I believe the ranking should be fixed so that an Ally's ranking is an attempt to rank them from strongest to weakest. As in, who would win in a head to head matchup based on who they have beaten and who they lose to. In the current system, alliances that are much weaker than my own are ranked higher than us, purely because they got to fight against sloppy weak alliances.
    Thank you, now we can discuss this rationally.

    That is not a good ranking system . How would they determine who would win? Your alliance *could* be made up of all people who paid their way to cav or uncollected, and someone with all 3*s could be able to kill every thing you have. Alliances with ~1m average total pi have been beaten by players with ~400k average pi. The game has no way to judge skill.

    In the current system you dont get to fight against "sloppy weak alliances" you fight against alliances who have proven to be similar in ranking to yours, either by slacking if they should be doing better, or by doing better than their rating/titles suggest.

    you stated you were gold, but now silver, you fought people on par with your tier, so why did you not stay in gold?

  • Options
    GraydroxGraydrox Posts: 413 ★★★
    You just need a system that takes into account your past victories and losses. I'm not sure how the algorithm would work exactly but if you beat an ally that has beaten another ally, logic would have it so that you would be ranked ahead of both of them. I know it will become more complicated than that but I'm sure that an algorithm could be made to handle it.

    As for us now being is silver, we just had a bad run. Played a lot of quality alliances. We will be on and upward trajectory soon I'm sure.
  • Options
    LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Graydrox said:

    You just need a system that takes into account your past victories and losses. I'm not sure how the algorithm would work exactly but if you beat an ally that has beaten another ally, logic would have it so that you would be ranked ahead of both of them. I know it will become more complicated than that but I'm sure that an algorithm could be made to handle it.

    As for us now being is silver, we just had a bad run. Played a lot of quality alliances. We will be on and upward trajectory soon I'm sure.

    This system does take that into account, in your tier. I am currently in tier 4, if I lose enough points I will fall to tier 5, if I win enough I will move to tier 3. Our tier determines the amount of points I get after a win/loss in the season, it does not matter out of season.

    If my alliance beats another alliance my tier will be higher than theirs point wise, and I will get more points towards the season.

    Being in silver you should be in a tier that can move up during the off season and make it easier to score bigger points and end in a higher bracket, this stops in tier 5 to prevent abuses.
  • Options
    MatiEspinozaMatiEspinoza Posts: 93 ★
    Just win wars dude
  • Options
    ExHavokExHavok Posts: 519 ★★★
    I'm playing this game since the beginning and my personal thoght no one ever believe an alliance of organized with full uncollected/cavalier players can't get out of silver.I don't know about war scores/rankings but this statement is absolutely BS. You can question about my IQ score too of course, but I bet it's higher than the temperature in the room unlike yours.
Sign In or Register to comment.