In the long term this system is far better, you just have to deal with the short term mismatches, there are ways to somewhat mitigate it they could have done but they come with other issues, there isn’t a true solution for the current mismatches other than just try and hold out until everyone is where they should be
Yes, the frustration that the bigger alliances had to face is unprecedented compared to the mild inconvenience we are facing now. But this doesn’t justify the punishment mid-level alliances have to endure when the mistake is not even our’s. The game is solely responsible for having such a broken system for such a long time then fix it in such a way which has brought a feeling of bitterness among many players and alliances.
You're not being punished. This may be hard to see because there are so many moving parts, so let's simplify things a bit and say there are just two alliances, yours and mine. Last season you placed first and I placed second. But then we realize there was a scoring error in the system and when we change the scoring system you start earning far fewer points than you did last season and now I place first and you place second. Are you being "punished?" No, you're now just getting what you were supposed to get. It might *seem* like being punished, because why should you get less rewards this season than last season when it was not your "fault." But it has nothing to do with fault. It has to do with the fact that there can only be one first place winner, and it isn't you.
Here's the more mathy but hopefully still not terribly long explanation. If your alliance had the right rating, you'd be winning about half your wars against roughly equal competition. But if you have a higher rating than you were supposed to, you were getting more points than you were supposed to even if you were still winning 50/50 because your multiplier was higher than it should have been. So the game should drop you down to that proper rating as soon as possible, and ultimately that's going to happen through losses.
Could this have happened "gradually" by some complex mechanism? Let's say there is such a way. In that case you'd have that higher rating for longer, and accumulate more points longer. This benefits you. But because there are only so many places in each war tier and each season bracket, the more points you earn above what you ought to earn, the more you're displacing other alliances downward. If you're in tier 6 but you should be in tier 8, every war you remain in tier 6 is someone in tier 7 that should be in tier 6 and losing that multiplier, and someone in tier 8 that should be in tier 7 and losing that multiplier. You are costing them points, and if that places you into a higher season bracket then you're also costing someone, maybe multiple alliances, rewards.
So to give you a soft landing and make it seem like you aren't being "punished" how slowly do you want the game to gradually lower you, and how many alliances do you want to get lower rewards than they should be getting and for how long, so your alliance can get that softer landing? How much rewards do you want to take out of other player's pockets so you can reduce the change in rewards for your own alliance mates? If you were in charge of the game, how long would you allow that situation to continue?
If you were getting more rewards than you should have been, the current system will be handing you less rewards than you were getting before. That's unavoidable. It might seem like punishment, but it is really just resorting alliances into the proper order. That happens with wins and losses. It is just more obvious now than it was before, but it was happening all the same. People were losing wars they should have won, and getting fewer points than they should have been getting, and getting fewer rewards than they should have been receiving. If you're being punished now, they were being punished then. But in fact, no one was or is being punished. Players were just playing the game and the system was rewarding players as it was programmed to, and now the system is rewarding players in a different way. That isn't punishment. It just is.
Well said. My alliance was matched up with an alliance in same bracket that placed all 4/40s while we place 4/55s and 5/65s... it was a BLOWOUT... that ally wasn’t being punished by matching up with us, the alliance running 4/40s received them same rewards as us last season. How’s that fair based on rosters just bc they were matched based on prestige last season. Now it’s based on war rating, it’s either “you can compete or you can’t” if you can’t, move down a tier till you find your place. We got MESSED over on wars last few seasons, losing bc we had 18/20 participants instead of 19/20. Literally losing by less that 50 points 3 wars I a row while the alliance we just fought were fighting other 4/40 alliances placing in gold brackets
Comments