**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Alliance War Matchmaking unfair [Merged Threads]
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Now we’ve been given the tier 3 level map at expert level - and we’re tier 5, so two tiers below is a big discrepancy, against an opponent at that level where they can bring arguably a much stronger roster to bat with eg running Map 6/7 and still being able to have AWD of all R5 5* champs plus same for attack. And I see many members of the other alliance that have 6* R3 duped champs in their roster like Warlock. That doesn’t make war fun or fair. Especially when you throw in defence tactics to the mix which further boost their already OP defenders.
And both allys compete on same map but are given a different multiplier for doing the same map. Say we somehow do a David and beat these Goliaths (just need the right stone!) we’ll still only be awarded our multiplier of x4. Not begrudging that ally they prob deserve their multiplier but saying there’s a lot more inequity in matchmaking these days. The reason why we only do 2 BG wars is that may people have experienced similar disparity and don’t enjoy wars so have opted out entirely
Imo the system should match downwards based on war ratings ranked, #1 v #2 etc. And if there’s an odd number of alliances, the last alliance on that list gets a “Bye” as that usually has the least impact on the leaderboard.
While we usually fight (like this war) guys like this and keep our death count around 40 attack bonus lost against defense 30 times stronger than noname’s
Yes you do not get the point at all cause what you propose is exactly like it was so we could never face any of the lower prestige alliances in our same bracket purely because you don’t think it’s fair. There’s 1 reward system so everybody should be able to face everybody in their own bracket
Not all high prestige guys are there cause they are whales. You might be cause if I remember you’re in asgard and the 10 times we faced you in aw we always decimated you cause you actually are those high prestige players that aren’t as skilled as their rosters are developed. But that put aside you have no point at all, an alliance that wins should never have any overkills on a certain opponent. If we lose all 3 AB on even 1 opponent then we’ll lose this war so how is it fair that alliances like noname, howk, los mirmidones, ... can lose 60 AB against easier defenses (yes they also spend items and use boosts) while also using R5 5*’s that just aren’t max sig (which keeps their prestige low) while we face much better defense and mostly fight with R5 5*’s as well (some guys use a R3 6* but so what the defense we face has them as well). I’m certain all the guys in noname have around 10 - 15 R5’s, they just aren’t max sig
Everybody here has at least done 1 abyss path and 6.1-6.3 100% and are working on 100% act 6.4 (got 2 paths left myself) so how is it fair that an alliance of which most guys just got cavalier like a month ago are higher in aw rankings than us purely because they never face us (cause you claim it’s unfair)
If that was actually meant for me, which I don't know why bc I didn't even respond to your last post, I moved alliances before the season started bc I got bored with AQ and am currently in one of the master ranks.
and alliance B (8000 prestige, 2-3 R4 5*s on defence per player, 2400 war rating, Platinum 3 #100)
are both fighting for identical platinum 3 rewards its ok for alliance A and B to never be matched up with each other?
Because that’s a very silly argument isn’t it, they are fighting for the same rewards and they therefore should have the possibility to match each other.
Alliance B shouldn’t just get an easier time just because their accounts aren’t as developed, they should work for the platinum 3 rewards and that means they should match ANYONE else that is close to them on war rating, not just those that are also at about 8000 prestige (which would likely expand the bracket in which they draw their opponents from to all the way down to plat 4, possibly even gold 1).
As long as we aiming the same rewards, the war rating must be the only way of matchmaking! Everyone eventually after some deathatches will take the position he deserves.
Nice 👍🏽 job.
Wow. This is actuly not fair.
Are wars back to prestige rating?
Bc the prestige is the closest of all things.
Or did you do 2 BG wars? Bc there are not so much alliances that do that I guess
Edit: Nvm. I just read you do 2 BGs. That explains it at least.
We’re just looking for balance between AQ and AW, AQ being Map 5 with a dash of Map 6 at times, so to keep getting these kind of match ups is a kick in the teeth. And not gonna encourage us to resume full 3 BG wars anytime soon, no guarantee that match ups would be any fairer with 3 BGs. We’re just gonna try the best we can without spending up big on items. We’re actually doing ok but not expecting to win and doubt the opponent will finish either tbh
Can a lower Ally fight better than a higher one? Absolutely. Within War, the Points are very clear. It's all in the scoring. That's what you're working towards for placements, Points. Not fighting every other Ally close to you. Points. That's what determines say, Master 2 vs. Master 3. Master 2 is ahead because they put up more Points. Not because 3 coulda shoulda and woulda beat them.
In war there are only one set of rewards distributed to everyone. Beginners DO impact veterans from recieving rewards.
Apples and oranges.
The top teams should be facing very similar defenses for the same amount of points on the table. If Alliance A has a high war rating granting it a high multiplier, it should be facing the same defenses that Alliance B is facing.
I’m looking at your arena analogies and just shaking my head. The higher your PI, the higher your points. Same with AQ, the higher your prestige, the higher your score.
And with that higher prestige comes a harder map, which justifies the higher points. Now the way matchmaking was working was allowing some teams to get a higher multiplier while on an easier map for some alliances while others were fighting harder maps for less points.
Don’t even try to talk about “firepower”, everyone is bringing in their top attackers, and until recently that was capped to max 5* or R2 6*. Now there are a few bringing in R3 attackers, but they are also facing more R3 on defense as well.
There is just no world in which a team is considered a top team if they aren’t able to complete with teams below their artificially inflated rank. To be the best you have to beat the best. The sports world is the best example as so many have said before. LSU and Kansas City were both champions, but in no way could you say both teams deserved to have the same rewards or be ranked besides each other in a list of all teams playing.
9.2 x 6 = 55.2million + 3 @ 5.1 million = 70.5 million without spending on refreshes. Someone with 800k would never stand a chance in 5* featured. Not to mention it is all about who is willing to put in the time or spend as to who gets the champions.
You could be speaking about the 4* arena, but that is the problem. Wasting time on 4* which is not going to help advance your roster.
Now I am supposed to believe someone not dedicated to develop a 5* roster DESERVES similar chances at Gold, Platinum and Master awards without having to experience the toughness of the bracket others have to face. Sure the prestige wars are “fairer”, but what about the players who run 5*’s and have to spend on boosts and pots? How is it fair to them to have tougher and more costly matches only to rank in lower Gold because other teams never have to spend or face anything hard?
What of years the upper player put into their rosters? Where is the fairness there? You are completely wrong and off base with your responses.