Matchmaking Discussion [Merged Threads]

Comments

After one or two season small alliances will be pushed back to where they belong and there will be no more complaints as such.

That will be shorted much sooner. A couple of weeks will be enough to short things out.
The 10+ seasons aw circus is finally over 🥳

Mr_Platypus

After one or two season small alliances will be pushed back to where they belong and there will be no more complaints as such.
That will be shorted much sooner. A couple of weeks will be enough to short things out.
The 10+ seasons aw circus is finally over 🥳

Tbh for the many that are in gold 1/plat 4, it’ll be sorted probably by the 4th or 5th war.
The only ones that will take forever to sort are the 8k prestige groups that got plat 1 while steam rolling plat4/3 8k prestige groups.

LeNoirFaineant

After one or two season small alliances will be pushed back to where they belong and there will be no more complaints as such.
That will be shorted much sooner. A couple of weeks will be enough to short things out.
The 10+ seasons aw circus is finally over 🥳
Tbh for the many that are in gold 1/plat 4, it’ll be sorted probably by the 4th or 5th war.
The only ones that will take forever to sort are the 8k prestige groups that got plat 1 while steam rolling plat4/3 8k prestige groups.

It won't take that long with the war ratings cut in half.

Mr_Platypus

I think the fact that I could’ve got my 2nd account, that only has 3 5*s and easily gotten higher ranked rewards than my main that has over 20 6*s says everything you need about the old system.

A plat 2 alliance could all start new accounts, get 8 maxed 4*s and steamroll for several seasons and likely land plat 1 with relative ease, if they then played it smart and never opened any of the crystals they got from wars, they could keep that going for multiple seasons, then when they were done, pop all the crystals.

Mr_Platypus

After one or two season small alliances will be pushed back to where they belong and there will be no more complaints as such.
That will be shorted much sooner. A couple of weeks will be enough to short things out.
The 10+ seasons aw circus is finally over 🥳
Tbh for the many that are in gold 1/plat 4, it’ll be sorted probably by the 4th or 5th war.
The only ones that will take forever to sort are the 8k prestige groups that got plat 1 while steam rolling plat4/3 8k prestige groups.
It won't take that long with the war ratings cut in half.

Yeah forever was the wrong word, but it’ll take them a bit longer just because they’re higher up.

Mr_Platypus

If the war rating is the same, then you are competing against others for the same rewards, if you want those rewards, you’ll have to beat them.
Simple.

Greekhit

6M VS 44M

This match exposes how much prestige matchmaking was flawed. A 6mil ally had managed to have same rating as a 44mil 🤣

GroundedWisdom

It's ridiculous. Don't listen to people saying everything is as it should be.

Mr_Platypus

It’s not as it should be yet.
But it will be soon.

Mr_Platypus

There’s only 1 solution that could’ve removed many of the lopsided (but fair as far as war rating is concerned) matches. And that would’ve been for kabam to set everyone’s war rating to 0 and then used their prestige to give them a new starting war rating (something like prestige/10= war rating) this would’ve moved everyone back to where they theoretically should’ve been, essentially resetting the ranking, but of course not everyone cares about prestige or is at an equal skill to their prestige, so some would fall quite a bit, others would rise, but nothing would be lopsided as all your opponents would be similar in prestige, atleast for a few weeks until it starts mixing around again, and then anyone whining would truly be deluded.

GroundedWisdom

I don't care that they switched back to War Rating. It's the implementation and the effects I disagree with, and that has just as much to do with the Players wanting changes now as it does the hastiness of it.

CaptainGame

There’s only 1 solution that could’ve removed many of the lopsided (but fair as far as war rating is concerned) matches. And that would’ve been for kabam to set everyone’s war rating to 0 and then used their prestige to give them a new starting war rating (something like prestige/10= war rating) this would’ve moved everyone back to where they theoretically should’ve been, essentially resetting the ranking, but of course not everyone cares about prestige or is at an equal skill to their prestige, so some would fall quite a bit, others would rise, but nothing would be lopsided as all your opponents would be similar in prestige, atleast for a few weeks until it starts mixing around again, and then anyone whining would truly be deluded.

Are there negative points going under zero? Doing that still would place teams that are mismatched against each other until ranks are created but if there aren’t negative points then it would take longer to create ranks. By cutting everybody’s points by half, it leaves room for points to be deducted or gained. Or that’s what it seems like. I don’t know for sure.

LeNoirFaineant

I don't care that they switched back to War Rating. It's the implementation and the effects I disagree with, and that has just as much to do with the Players wanting changes now as it does the hastiness of it.

Hastiness? It's been like 10 seasons. If you don't have a problem with going back to war ratings, how could they have implemented it in a way that didn't result in a correction through war? Cutting the war rating in half limits the duration of the correction.

Sensei_Maat

@DNA3000 it was me that tried to pretend to be you with prestige based match making analysis. Apparently not everyone believes in science and numbers.

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/comment/1290631#Comment_1290631
Yes, your thread brought up the issue most recently (in terms of analysis). There was another player who did a completely different analysis I want to say two years ago, whom I have forgotten the precise details of. Although I did disagree with a small piece of the way you presented the argument, I believe your overall conclusion, that the rating/prestige match making was distorting war rating and season bracket results, was/is fundamentally sound.

This seems to be a very strange fundamental difference of opinion in what the point to a competition is. Some people think the point is to "test" alliances against equally composed ones, and not to actually expose them to the range of competition that exists. So much of the discussion is revolving around tangent issues of skill, cost, rewards, etc, when the issue is far more fundamental than that.

If someone believes, fundamentally, that no alliance should ever face another alliance of significantly different alliance rating or prestige, then they must fundamentally believe that all tournaments are unfair. An elimination tournament to decide the overall rankings of the alliances, where winners face winners and losers face losers is simply wrong. Even if you *start* with everyone facing materially identical strength alliances, *eventually* you have to face alliances of higher composition if you continue to win. You can only avoid facing higher rating alliances if you lose.

Here's the thought experiment that decides the issue for me. You have four alliances, two have 30 million rating called them A and B, and two have 15 million rating call them C and D. You want to decide who's #1, who's #2, and so on. You decide to be nice about it and have A face B and C face D. A wins and C wins. Now, what happens next: who does A face in round 2.

Either you believe A should face C next, or you believe A should face B again. If you believe A should face C next, you believe that's the fair match up even though they have wildly different ratings, and even if you believe A has a significant advantage, so in some sense that is not "a fair fight" it is in a larger sense the fair requirement overall. Winners must face winners to decide who's the best.

If you believe no 30 million alliance should never face a 15 million alliance because that's "not fair" then you believe A should fight B again and C should face D again. And if they both win again, then A and C tie for first place with two wins.

For anyone who actually believes the latter is "more fair" I don't think anyone can convince you otherwise, but you need to understand that the other 99% of Earthlings find this position to be not just untenable, but so completely ridiculous that they probably struggle to find a rational basis to argue against it.

@DNA3000 that was me. and yes i was 2 years ago.
began an initial discussion with you about it at the end of season 1 war when i first was seeing it becoming an issue
https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/60672/analysis-of-aw-season-1-tier-vs-bracket/p3

i then went on to provide more info in many threads for a period of time including creating my own

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/61676/war-matchmaking-does-take-ally-rating-into-account#latest

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/75680/war-matchups-war-system-issue#latest

and then i dropped it when it seemed people did not wann listen and acknowledge it as a provblem.

SO I FOR ONE AM SO HAPPY ABOUT THIS CHANGE AS ITS ABOUT TIME!!!!!
the system has been broken for the entrirety of war seasons and it is so good to see it get fixed!!!!!
season 19 may be a bit ****
but season 20 will be a great place to be!!!!!!

Sensei_Maat

JUST GUNNA LEAVE THIS HERE

@GroundedWisdom saying 2 years ago that WAR RATING BASED MATCHUPS IS THE FAIREST WAY!!!!

this is from when i initially started talking bout prestige based matchmaking

it was in this thread https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/60672/analysis-of-aw-season-1-tier-vs-bracket/p3
You're right. I did. When it was. Before it was manipulated within a shred of its life by Tanking, cheating punishments, Alliance hopping, Shells, and other ways of bypassing the system. After that, it wasn't a true measure of skill because it was a mess. So before they locked any Ratings, I suggested they use it to balance out the Matches temporarily. Reason being, no one could manipulate their Prestige. Until people started making Alts to bypass that. Every turn of this game mode, people make it an unfair competition, and you have to come up with some way to stop them.
you are a hypocrite. clear as day.
you are literally just taking the oposing point to what the community does.
GOOD DAY TO YOU.
i have done my job here. i have proved you to be a hypocrite with 0 credability.
just lay off.
WR is fair.
simple as that.
prestige is not we all know that, including you.

this will all be good by season 20. so deal with it for a little while.
No. You proved that I made a comment 2 years ago, before the issues that warranted the use of Prestige even arose. You might want to include everything that happened between now and then too if you want to make a valid argument. The bottom line is these things are the result of the mess that people make by trying to get some kind of unfair advantage from the system.

the factr that little alliances are undeservedly hiher than big alliances while big alliances are stuck low and can't climb is nothing more that a direct result of the broken war matchmaking system.

nothing more.
nothing less.
prestige manipulation would never be a thing if prestige was never a factor.
tanking was a thing but basically fixed by locking off season ranking.
shells were a thing and may still continue to be a thing until kabam finds a way to adress that. some kind of blackout system.

people will unfortunately try and manipulate any situation. but that is where rules and punishments need to be put in place.
but a bad matchmaking system will always be a bad matchmaking system.

GroundedWisdom

It worked until they implemented War Ratings being locked, which was my original suggestion to begin with. Said it many times. Lock things in the off-season, and there's no possibility of it. Don't know why they kept it on after that, but it stopped people from manipulating it long enough.

Mr_Platypus

There’s only 1 solution that could’ve removed many of the lopsided (but fair as far as war rating is concerned) matches. And that would’ve been for kabam to set everyone’s war rating to 0 and then used their prestige to give them a new starting war rating (something like prestige/10= war rating) this would’ve moved everyone back to where they theoretically should’ve been, essentially resetting the ranking, but of course not everyone cares about prestige or is at an equal skill to their prestige, so some would fall quite a bit, others would rise, but nothing would be lopsided as all your opponents would be similar in prestige, atleast for a few weeks until it starts mixing around again, and then anyone whining would truly be deluded.
Are there negative points going under zero? Doing that still would place teams that are mismatched against each other until ranks are created but if there aren’t negative points then it would take longer to create ranks. By cutting everybody’s points by half, it leaves room for points to be deducted or gained. Or that’s what it seems like. I don’t know for sure.

Everything would work exactly as it does now, just everyone starts this one season in order of prestige, you lose, you lose war rating, you win, you gain more. Those highly skilled 8k prestige alliances, they have the chance to fight for the bigger rewards, but not before proving they can beat everyone they come across on their way up, regardless of the opponents roster strength.

If alliances started excessively cheating the system with shells and tanking, kabam could reset the rankings again based on prestige, removing that as an option.
It’s still not a flawless system, but it would’ve stopped all the whining from these guys that are supposedly platinum but can’t get cavalier.

Speeds80

It didn’t work, the issues aren’t from the lockings, or the shells, those are different problems , the locking and shells didnt bring about the fundamental flaw of the old system, personally I suspect the previous system could have been changed, the closest prestige within a tier could have been a better system, but I guess that would have made repeat matchups crazy common. ignoring tiers and rankings because prestige was paramount was the problem. But you know what ...war rating only matchup was never really an issue, it was working great, a strong spending small alliance would go on a run and catch a big alliance who were relaxed at war or may have just had a member take a break or just had a rebuild and lost a few. Wars. Causing the weak team to freak out at the matchup and take photos and cause the concern that brought about the prestige system, thing is if you go on a run it is fair that you have to fight stronger alliances, going on a run but never having to face a stronger alliance was exactly the problem. Glad to see you actually have admitted this system will be fair in the long run. Whether or not there could have been a better rollout is the only thing debateable here, I haven’t seen a perfect solution suggested yet, and I’m not particularly bothered, I feel sorry for the weak teams with tough matchups right now, but my sense of justice finally being achieved for my alliance after 8 very rocky seasons and losing a lot of good alliance friends over the broken system. overrides that, normally I’m all for the underdog, but these underdogS have been gifted 8 seasons of Much easier rewards for effort than I have, and tbh rewards their level of the game don’t particularly need ie 6* shards for 3* alliances

AvolA1987

I absolutely adore this new matchmaking system. Ok, it's no real fun for the lower rating/prestige allies that get stomped upon by the bigger rating/prestige allies, but this is what is needed to even out the playing field.

We're a 10k prestige 33 mil ally, fighting for G1/P4. In the previous matchmaking system, there were 20 mil allies (8k prestige or so) who were way above us regarding season placement. This was not right.

If we were to encounter one of those allies in a war, we would most definetely smash them, as both our defence and offence is alot stronger (and we worked hard for it), but that didn't happen, obviously.

So in my eyes, in the previous matchmaking system, in matters of AW, you didn't always get rewarded properly for making more effort into individual and ally growth. You could just aswell join a 20mil ally and collect the same or better AW rewards.

Conclusion: these first 10(?) wars are meant to divide your ally into the tier/season rating where you belong, according to your ally strength.

one_punch_girl

Just wanted to reply to the argument that only the big alliances benefit while all the smaller ones get stomped on: I'd say my alliance is far from the big ones, 7.7k prestige, silver 1 last season. We got matched up with another silver 1 alliance with 6.2k prestige. We had an easy win, while they were far from finishing the map.
So there was definitely something wrong with both of us being in silver 1. I don't know if we should be higher or they should be lower, but I'm glad this is being corrected!

Some of you seem to think it's fun watching the other alliance struggle. That's not true at all. I prefer a challenge and I would think most players do as well.

You all should understand that with every war the matchups will get better. We just have to get through the phase where every alliance approaches their correct rating.

Corby11

The more I think about it the more I feel that alliances like mine - who were robbed of a higher placing in AW because of the grossly unfair system of having everyone share the same prize pool without having the potential to face every opponent of the same AW rank and fighting in the same map tiers - should given compensation. It’s cost some of us thousands of 6* shards finishing Gold 1 when without this handicap we should have been Platinum. This should never have happened in the first place, if kabam had wanted to group alliances by prestige they should have separated the reward tiers in the same manner. This rebalancing of AW is well over due.

Corby11

Kabam makes you push prestige to gain ground in AQ then punished you for it in AW by giving lower prestige teams advantage. I wonder would we have been better off forgetting AQ placement keeping prestige low and picking up tons of AW rewards instead 🤔

Speeds80

I should agree with you, before that system change we were g1 (about 25m back then) and if we had a terrible season g2, we couldn’t miss gold 2 because we were tier 6-7 And if we lost a few we would start getting easier matches. and that was where we should always have been. The map there is designed for 8-10k prestige people. That system got us dropped as low as tier 14, 3* shard prizes, no 6* shards in a season, (we dropped after a split and a rebuild and could never climb out) but it was the alliance mates bailing that really hurt, it was the stress of matches so tight because we were fighting the most boring nodes, that often we would see zero kills and if somebody forgot to place defense it practically always meant a loss, (5 diversity points is worth >2 defensive kills) These are our stories, that was the other side of the coin. Tbh I wouldn’t even ask for Comp myself, probably do deserve it, but I’m just happy enough to have a fair system back in place and an alliance I can recruit more competitive people for

SummonerNR

There’s only 1 solution that could’ve removed many of the lopsided (but fair as far as war rating is concerned) matches. And that would’ve been for kabam to set everyone’s war rating to 0 and then used their prestige to give them a new starting war rating (something like prestige/10= war rating) this would’ve moved everyone back to where they theoretically should’ve been, essentially resetting the ranking, but of course not everyone cares about prestige or is at an equal skill to their prestige, so some would fall quite a bit, others would rise, but nothing would be lopsided as all your opponents would be similar in prestige, atleast for a few weeks until it starts mixing around again, and then anyone whining would truly be deluded.

Are there negative points going under zero? Doing that still would place teams that are mismatched against each other until ranks are created but if there aren’t negative points then it would take longer to create ranks. By cutting everybody’s points by half, it leaves room for points to be deducted or gained. Or that’s what it seems like. I don’t know for sure.

VERY GOOD IDEA..
I actually suggested same thing, way back on Page-11, lol.

https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/208267/matchmaking-discussion-merged-threads/p11

One-time RESET of War Ratings to have an initial STARTING point based on your Prestige.
And for @CaptainGame , Ally's wouldn’t be at 0 (regarding what happens to negative from a loss).
So a 9000 Prestige Ally would have an initial starting point of 900 for War Rating, and a 4000 Prestige Ally would start at just 400 WR (based on 1/10th suggestion above, or whatever other multiple might be better aligned with existing WR like 1/5th).

So all the initial wars would at least be of similar strength, as Ally's over time will settle into a place based on how dedicated (and capable) they are. Instead of all the “adjustments” being done now between such lopsided matchups.

TheTalents

I just want to say personally that I love these changes. I was in a 42 million alliance and stuck in gold 2 because I would get matched up with opponents who have the same rating as me yet 20 million alliances got plat 4 and plat 3 rewards. It was laughable.
You were in Gold 2 because you couldn't beat Allies with the same Rating as you, so now you're glad Allies are being outmatched?

I can beat allies that are on my level but I run itemless AW so allies that are trying on my level will beat me. That doesn't mean that 23 million alliances who are in gold 2 should not be able to face me if we're getting the same rewards. Like its not that hard to understand.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Jridenhour_3

It’s comical reading these threads. All these guys in high alliances thinking they’ve been getting screwed just because they couldn’t beat opponents equal to them. So now there happy they get to beat up lower opponents to get better rewards. Everyone should be fighting alliances at there same level. Just because you can’t beat the people at your level doesn’t mean lower alliances should be punished for it.
If you belive that those are equal based on rating and prestige, then all alliances should've be first placed in different tiers based on rating and prestige, and then only move up and down within that tier. Then those 10kk alliances would've never be above silver 2 probably. So yes, all those guys were screwed for a very long time.
If you're using 3* or 4* in aw, you should not be getting plat rewards

Just because your in a higher rated alliance and higher prestige doesn’t mean your better then someone in a lower one. You can buy rating an prestige. I play incursions with people in way higher alliances an better prestige then me and they die all the time before me. Like I said basically all you higher rated guys just glad you get to fight lower rated alliance because you suck to bad to beat alliances equal too you.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Jridenhour_3

It’s comical reading these threads. All these guys in high alliances thinking they’ve been getting screwed just because they couldn’t beat opponents equal to them. So now there happy they get to beat up lower opponents to get better rewards. Everyone should be fighting alliances at there same level. Just because you can’t beat the people at your level doesn’t mean lower alliances should be punished for it.
This current war system is like the original ufc 1 no weight classes figure out the best fighter. If you want weight classes then break up rewards by prestige.
This current war system will find out the strongest alliances compared to everyone in the game. No dodging fights, or only fight in your weight class. We will all know how good everyone is and who is the best.

You mean you will know who spends the most money to buy the best rosters and use the most potions

Aleor

It’s comical reading these threads. All these guys in high alliances thinking they’ve been getting screwed just because they couldn’t beat opponents equal to them. So now there happy they get to beat up lower opponents to get better rewards. Everyone should be fighting alliances at there same level. Just because you can’t beat the people at your level doesn’t mean lower alliances should be punished for it.
If you belive that those are equal based on rating and prestige, then all alliances should've be first placed in different tiers based on rating and prestige, and then only move up and down within that tier. Then those 10kk alliances would've never be above silver 2 probably. So yes, all those guys were screwed for a very long time.
If you're using 3* or 4* in aw, you should not be getting plat rewards
Just because your in a higher rated alliance and higher prestige doesn’t mean your better then someone in a lower one. You can buy rating an prestige. I play incursions with people in way higher alliances an better prestige then me and they die all the time before me. Like I said basically all you higher rated guys just glad you get to fight lower rated alliance because you suck to bad to beat alliances equal too you.

Then you shouldn't be matched with only same rating/prestige alliances. Wich is happening now.
"Everyone should be fighting alliances at there same level. Just because you can’t beat the people at your level doesn’t mean lower alliances should be punished for it." - that's what you said in your previous post. I also don't think rewards should be based on prestige, it is just stupid. So now they removed it. Give it some time, and those stronger alliances will move up, weaker move down and will stay where they belong