The game experienced a brief connectivity issue this morning. The team promptly fixed the issue and things are back to normal, thank you to everyone who passed along reports!

Alliance War Matchmaking unfair [Merged Threads]

1…457910…20

Comments

  • CaptainPollCaptainPoll Member Posts: 901 ★★★
    Lol same with our Ally, my post is just below urs
  • Galaxy76Galaxy76 Member Posts: 62 ★
    Moltenhead said:




    Check us :/

    We're 4m against 30m.

    I FEEL THE PAIN BROTHER
  • FahadwaseemFahadwaseem Member Posts: 2
    Same here. This is not fair. We all confronting opponents who are double in alliance rating.
    Is this matchmaking a fair???
    We opponent
    A.rating 178000000 35400000
    Avg player 550000 800k+
    Prestige 7100 10100

    Is this a fair matchmaking??????
  • never2latenever2late Member Posts: 1 ★
    edited April 2020
    Well same happens with us. Amazing war.

  • Galaxy76Galaxy76 Member Posts: 62 ★
    It shouldn't be only based on war rating...kabam should consider alliance rating too.
  • xNigxNig Member Posts: 7,336 ★★★★★
    Then everyone will just sell their useless 2/3*s and lower their alliance rating.

    What a silly suggestion.
  • KnightZeroKnightZero Member Posts: 1,453 ★★★★★
    Consider prestige as well, but keep a limit. + or - 1k maybe. So 8k can face 9k, or whatever. For the lower brackets(below P3). Above that, keep it War rating. Alliances in G1 or S3 facing 3 times prestige wars is ridiculous
  • Lucifer1810Lucifer1810 Member Posts: 366 ★★★
    Moltenhead said:




    Check us :/

    We're 4m against 30m.

    Damn that's rough bro. We are also matched 4m against 13m with a hopeless matchmaking but yours is truly tragic.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Denta89Denta89 Member Posts: 74 ★
    edited April 2020

    Matchmaking is really broken... we are a 35mio alli, ny is a 70mio alli.
    Our warrating, Prestige or Season placement is not even near together
  • Mukesh3294Mukesh3294 Member Posts: 3 ★
    We are 15.5 mil alliance and we are matched with 28 mil alliance. This is unfair. They put 5* R5 in defense mostly and we put also 4* because we are lowered in comparison to theirs.
    This matchmaking is totally unfair. This war is so difficult for us

  • xNigxNig Member Posts: 7,336 ★★★★★
    Arguable whether it’s fair or not based on the 116 war rating difference.

    But matching of this war rating difference is possible (and likely) if you guys don’t run 3 BG wars.
  • MdNuman786MdNuman786 Member Posts: 2 ★
    edited April 2020
    Everytime we got expert oppnent. How we will win??
  • MdNuman786MdNuman786 Member Posts: 2 ★
    Double from my alliance. How we can win everytime happen.
  • CeresCPHCeresCPH Member Posts: 69 ★
    Amms90 said:




    Guys... This is a war we're not even playing. Wasting resources for no reason is against common sense. I believe this is an issue that should be addressed. Kabam will not profit from unfair match ups, as the alliances with zero chance at winning won't even try. No units spent by us, no money gained by kabam. I think war matchmaking was not broken as it was before, because we were always getting fair match ups and wars that we could play against opponents of the same strength as us. That was fun. Enjoyable. And the winner was the one who played better, not the one with the bigger profile... Remember what this all is supposed to be about? Entertainment and fun. This mode of gameplay is going to die with such a stupid matchmaking system. What needed to be changed was all the rest. You think it's unfair that an alliance with low prestige such as ours can go all the way up to reach gold 2-gold 1? Then fix the way to climb the ladder. But please don't make it so that because we won FAIRLY all wars against opponents our size now we gotta get paired with titans and lose every war until we go low enough to get fair match ups again. We won't even try playing these wars. None of the alliances suffering this same fate should. Moreover, this unannounced change is coming midseason. Does that make sense to you? Some of us spend money in this game. All of us spend our time playing this game. Farming units, farming glory, getting resources... What we thought so far after 6 war and 6 wins this season was that we were making progress. We invested resources in rank up materials and such to power up our defenders which are mostly forgettable for other modes of gameplay, thinking that this would be useful... Improving our defense just as well as our skills and our attack. But with things as they are now we just wasted resources we could invest in champions which would be way more useful in other modes of gameplay. If we go against alliances made of all r5 top champions like ghost, corvus, hype, domino etc etc then it doesn't really matter whether we have r3 5stars or r1 2stars in our defense... This makes us feel robbed.

    Let me flip your post. We are an 10k prestige alliance. We have used money in the game and most of the accounts are more than 3 years old. Due to the war system we have only been matched with similar alliances but now it is obvious that alliances with lower ranked champs have been wrongly given an advantage and only matched with other lower alliances.

    The result has been that lower alliances has been getting gold 1 and 2 while bigger alliances has been pushed to gold 3.

    Or let’s put it this way. Now you just have be to working hard to protect your faulty high war rating. If you can’t beat the game accept your place in the lower leagues!

  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Member Posts: 8,675 ★★★★★
    FrenchyPants said:

    Today we are facing an alliance that has no business being in our class. For them it may seem unfair. For us it has seemed unfair that they were ranked higher than us and got better rewards than us, despite the fact that we could wipe the flow with them (I meant to do that). We work hard on war... we plan, we boost, we rank for defense.... they do the same but at a much much lower level. I don’t think they suck, they are good but not in our class. Getting prestige out of matchmaking was important. Great job kabam! I would have preferred the change between seasons, but between season a few seasons ago. Fix the problem when you know there is a problem though. What they did is easier than going back and adjusting past season standings that make no sense.

    Do we know that they dropped prestige from matchmaking or is that speculation?
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Member Posts: 8,675 ★★★★★
    Worknprogress said:

    If anything, all this does is show how badly broken matching has been and for how long. I imagine it took a long time and a lot of wars for some of these G1 maybe P4 alliances to get their ratings up to T1/T2. For alliances that lowly rated to have won that many wars at that rating is crazy

    Agree. Factoring in prestige allows lower groups to climb higher than they should by continuing to match with lower groups, and it means higher groups who aren't pushing war keep matching only other higher groups and fall further than they ought to. Honestly I don't know what the ideal system would look like, but it clearly isn't what we've had for awhile now.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    LeNoirFaineant said:

    FrenchyPants said:

    Today we are facing an alliance that has no business being in our class. For them it may seem unfair. For us it has seemed unfair that they were ranked higher than us and got better rewards than us, despite the fact that we could wipe the flow with them (I meant to do that). We work hard on war... we plan, we boost, we rank for defense.... they do the same but at a much much lower level. I don’t think they suck, they are good but not in our class. Getting prestige out of matchmaking was important. Great job kabam! I would have preferred the change between seasons, but between season a few seasons ago. Fix the problem when you know there is a problem though. What they did is easier than going back and adjusting past season standings that make no sense.

    Do we know that they dropped prestige from matchmaking or is that speculation?
    Speculation. We do know that a certain Alliance had a Player on here who indicated they were working on a weaker Ally just to come up and take out another particular Alliance. Next thing you know, they're Matched. Curiously, that Alliance was suspected of "allegedly" breaking TOS. Here we are with this situation. I'm not implying anything on either side, but the lengths of being competitive have crossed way beyond what is acceptable, and fairness is out the window at this point.
  • xBearxxBearx Member Posts: 61 ★
    Theres a big difference on our Alliance Member Rating ( around 370k )
    AlexAvalon said:

    Well there u go then



  • Denta89Denta89 Member Posts: 74 ★
    edited April 2020
    xNig said:

    Welcome to the adjustment period where wars are, and should be, based on war ratings.

    If you find yourself losing and losing and losing, you have been a beneficiary of a matchmaking system that matched alliances unfairly, resulting in your alliance having a war rating much higher than the actual war capabilities in the entire pool.

    The adjustment period is going to be tough for those who have been benefiting for the past 8 seasons, and easy for those who have been getting the short end of the stick.

    Good luck, have fun. This matchmaking system should have been introduced the moment war ratings were frozen in the off season.

    And what is with the Alliance there are going after the season in a Low Rating alli? Make no sence. It should be based on Season Placement. Warrating is still broken, says nothing about a good or Bad alli, because they f***ed up the system since yeahrs
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,722 ★★★★★
    I've loved Wars since the first Beta. I've stayed as vocal and active in these discussions over the years as possible. I was one of the people that suggested Seasons, albeit not in the format it is. At the time, it was a great idea along the lines of Diablo 3, where progress is restarted every Season. I'm at the point now where I'm so disappointed in the toxicity and greed of some that I'm ready to say scrap it all and redistribute Rewards among AQ, or come up with an indirect game mode that can't be manipulated. I don't fault the game team for doing their best to keep it fair. The goal post of what's fair keeps being shifted by the behavior of people who don't want to play fair. Altogether, I'm just disappointed.
  • xNigxNig Member Posts: 7,336 ★★★★★
    Denta89 said:

    xNig said:

    Welcome to the adjustment period where wars are, and should be, based on war ratings.

    If you find yourself losing and losing and losing, you have been a beneficiary of a matchmaking system that matched alliances unfairly, resulting in your alliance having a war rating much higher than the actual war capabilities in the entire pool.

    The adjustment period is going to be tough for those who have been benefiting for the past 8 seasons, and easy for those who have been getting the short end of the stick.

    Good luck, have fun. This matchmaking system should have been introduced the moment war ratings were frozen in the off season.

    And what is with the Alliance there are going after the season in a Low Rating alli? Make no sence. It should be based on Season Placement. Warrating is still broken, says nothing about a good or Bad alli, because they f***ed up the system since yeahrs
    You can NEVER get a Season Placement before Season ends. And by the time Season ends, you cannot match alliances for that Season. It’s common sense.

    If you’re talking about interim Season placements (that you see in the rankings currently), then such matching CAN still happen.

    Let me give you an example.

    An alliance that loses in Tier 2 at 3k war rating scores 150k x 7 = 1.05m points.

    An alliance that wins in Tier 4 at 2.5k war rating scores 200k x 4.5 = 900k points.

    If this were the first war of the Season, both alliances will land in Plat 3 on the interim Season Rank and can match each other. Will this be a fair matchup? Likely no. So using Interim Season Ranking is not a good matchmaking criteria as well.
  • Denta89Denta89 Member Posts: 74 ★
    xNig said:

    Denta89 said:

    xNig said:

    Welcome to the adjustment period where wars are, and should be, based on war ratings.

    If you find yourself losing and losing and losing, you have been a beneficiary of a matchmaking system that matched alliances unfairly, resulting in your alliance having a war rating much higher than the actual war capabilities in the entire pool.

    The adjustment period is going to be tough for those who have been benefiting for the past 8 seasons, and easy for those who have been getting the short end of the stick.

    Good luck, have fun. This matchmaking system should have been introduced the moment war ratings were frozen in the off season.

    And what is with the Alliance there are going after the season in a Low Rating alli? Make no sence. It should be based on Season Placement. Warrating is still broken, says nothing about a good or Bad alli, because they f***ed up the system since yeahrs
    You can NEVER get a Season Placement before Season ends. And by the time Season ends, you cannot match alliances for that Season. It’s common sense.

    If you’re talking about interim Season placements (that you see in the rankings currently), then such matching CAN still happen.

    Let me give you an example.

    An alliance that loses in Tier 2 at 3k war rating scores 150k x 7 = 1.05m points.

    An alliance that wins in Tier 4 at 2.5k war rating scores 200k x 4.5 = 900k points.

    If this were the first war of the Season, both alliances will land in Plat 3 on the interim Season Rank and can match each other. Will this be a fair matchup? Likely no. So using Interim Season Ranking is not a good matchmaking criteria as well.
    This make more sence like a war rating Matchmaking lol. Whats about when a master Alliance with 3400 warrating buy a 2800 warrating Alliance? They will get 12 free wins in the Season and 12 alliances are fu**ed. how is this even fair?
  • MoltenheadMoltenhead Member Posts: 11 ★
    @CeresCPH

    Everything is fine and I do understand previous matchmaking process had its flaw but changing it in the middle of aw season? That's painful. And if they're considering war rating for matchmaking then why not just reset the war ratings of all alliance to zero and start from fair and square. Now if people will start getting matchmaking like this they'll lose and not just one war they'll lose every upcoming wars unless they get equal opponent. Also if you consider war rating then what about the new formed alliance? Will now a newly formed alliance with 100 war ratings and 1m alliance rating (for example) will face another 100 war ratings but 15m alliance ratings Alliance? Please explain how this will work?
  • MoltenheadMoltenhead Member Posts: 11 ★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    I've loved Wars since the first Beta. I've stayed as vocal and active in these discussions over the years as possible. I was one of the people that suggested Seasons, albeit not in the format it is. At the time, it was a great idea along the lines of Diablo 3, where progress is restarted every Season. I'm at the point now where I'm so disappointed in the toxicity and greed of some that I'm ready to say scrap it all and redistribute Rewards among AQ, or come up with an indirect game mode that can't be manipulated. I don't fault the game team for doing their best to keep it fair. The goal post of what's fair keeps being shifted by the behavior of people who don't want to play fair. Altogether, I'm just disappointed.

    I agree with you mate. Just run AQ and like AQ ranking system those who play gets the rewards. Makes perfect sense.
  • Markjv81Markjv81 Member Posts: 1,037 ★★★★
    Denta89 said:

    xNig said:

    Denta89 said:

    xNig said:

    Welcome to the adjustment period where wars are, and should be, based on war ratings.

    If you find yourself losing and losing and losing, you have been a beneficiary of a matchmaking system that matched alliances unfairly, resulting in your alliance having a war rating much higher than the actual war capabilities in the entire pool.

    The adjustment period is going to be tough for those who have been benefiting for the past 8 seasons, and easy for those who have been getting the short end of the stick.

    Good luck, have fun. This matchmaking system should have been introduced the moment war ratings were frozen in the off season.

    And what is with the Alliance there are going after the season in a Low Rating alli? Make no sence. It should be based on Season Placement. Warrating is still broken, says nothing about a good or Bad alli, because they f***ed up the system since yeahrs
    You can NEVER get a Season Placement before Season ends. And by the time Season ends, you cannot match alliances for that Season. It’s common sense.

    If you’re talking about interim Season placements (that you see in the rankings currently), then such matching CAN still happen.

    Let me give you an example.

    An alliance that loses in Tier 2 at 3k war rating scores 150k x 7 = 1.05m points.

    An alliance that wins in Tier 4 at 2.5k war rating scores 200k x 4.5 = 900k points.

    If this were the first war of the Season, both alliances will land in Plat 3 on the interim Season Rank and can match each other. Will this be a fair matchup? Likely no. So using Interim Season Ranking is not a good matchmaking criteria as well.
    This make more sence like a war rating Matchmaking lol. Whats about when a master Alliance with 3400 warrating buy a 2800 warrating Alliance? They will get 12 free wins in the Season and 12 alliances are fu**ed. how is this even fair?
    Eventually you’ll lose enough rating to start winning again.
  • MauledMauled Member, Guardian Posts: 3,957 Guardian
    I don’t think there’s a perfect solution to it, but matchmaking should essentially match 1v2v3 etc. In your 12 wars you should face the 12 alliances who are closest to you on the leaderboard at the time of matchmaking.

    For instance you’re 1st place overall, you fight 2nd. You lose and end up dropping to 10th. Your next war you should be fighting 9th or 11th. You win this, you’re up to 4th, so you fight 3rd-5th etc.

    It feels like there’s two seasons running parallel to each other at the moment, whale wars and the sub-10k prestige alliances.
  • Denta89Denta89 Member Posts: 74 ★
    Mauled said:

    I don’t think there’s a perfect solution to it, but matchmaking should essentially match 1v2v3 etc. In your 12 wars you should face the 12 alliances who are closest to you on the leaderboard at the time of matchmaking.

    For instance you’re 1st place overall, you fight 2nd. You lose and end up dropping to 10th. Your next war you should be fighting 9th or 11th. You win this, you’re up to 4th, so you fight 3rd-5th etc.

    It feels like there’s two seasons running parallel to each other at the moment, whale wars and the sub-10k prestige alliances.

    Thats what i meaning, or maybe plat 1 Place 1-5 fighting against master place 16-20

  • MoltenheadMoltenhead Member Posts: 11 ★

    Is this fair ? No its massacre.
This discussion has been closed.