EMERGENCY MAINTENANCE CONCLUDED

The Team has identified a fix for the recent Catalyst Offer issue.

Summoners who purchased this offer have been temporarily locked out of the Contest to Clawback any Catalysts bought/used while active, and ensure previously owned resources remain intact.
They will be unlocked once this process is complete, and no further action will be taken on their Accounts - along with a compensation package to those affected for the inconvenience.

Doing this allows us to bring the Game back up for everyone else.

We've removed the affected offer so we can decide later whether or not to bring it back after it's been fixed.
Additionally, all summoners can expect a general compensation package due to this Emergency Maintenance interrupting their play session.

We apologize for the inconvenience.

War matchmaking...why?

2»

Comments

  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    edited September 2020
    My alliance has a total rating of 17 mln and the lowest rating from our opponents so far was 24 mln. Twice we got matched with alliances 40 mln in total rating. This current system is beyond stupid. We are struggling between gold 2 and gold 1, not like we are trying to go for masters with 17 mln. But with our skills whenever we get matched with ally around twice as big as us we win. The issue comes when they're even bigger than that. I repeat this matchmaking is completely stupid. Furthermore it's stupid that alliances 40 mln in rating are struggling in gold 2. Seems to me like bigger alliances migrate to alliances with smaller war rating to have an easy season all wins no troubles no items spent etc. That's how they fixed the broken system??? And to all of you saying the current system works, you must be the ones taking advantage of it. Exploiting it. So basically I have to struggle all season to try and finish gold 1 while being matched with whales who easily destroy our defense? I repeat we got matched twice with alliances 40 mln in total war rating, 10.5 average prestige. Their place should be in plat 2 at least. Not gold 2 being matched with us. This system sucks!!!
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★





  • Agent_X_zzzAgent_X_zzz Member Posts: 4,498 ★★★★★
    The war rating is very similar fair matchup
  • danielmathdanielmath Member Posts: 4,106 ★★★★★
    Gold 1 seems really good for a 17 mil alliance, no?
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    My alliance has a total rating of 17 mln and the lowest rating from our opponents so far was 24 mln. Twice we got matched with alliances 40 mln in total rating. This current system is beyond stupid. We are struggling between gold 2 and gold 1, not like we are trying to go for masters with 17 mln. But with our skills whenever we get matched with ally around twice as big as us we win. The issue comes when they're even bigger than that. I repeat this matchmaking is completely stupid. Furthermore it's stupid that alliances 40 mln in rating are struggling in gold 2. Seems to me like bigger alliances migrate to alliances with smaller war rating to have an easy season all wins no troubles no items spent etc. That's how they fixed the broken system??? And to all of you saying the current system works, you must be the ones taking advantage of it. Exploiting it. So basically I have to struggle all season to try and finish gold 1 while being matched with whales who easily destroy our defense? I repeat we got matched twice with alliances 40 mln in total war rating, 10.5 average prestige. Their place should be in plat 2 at least. Not gold 2 being matched with us. This system sucks!!!

    There are lots of reasons why large alliances may not win much, skill is an important factors. In addition why would I drop to a low level alliance, since war rating afffects the multiplier of points, you would lose so many points it would not be worth the slightly easier fights.

    Also please, stop with the false dilemma fallacies. If you want to be in gold one you need to fight other gold one alliances, no matter thier size, you should not be in gold one unless you can defeat other gold one and all gold 2 alliances.
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    My alliance has a total rating of 17 mln and the lowest rating from our opponents so far was 24 mln. Twice we got matched with alliances 40 mln in total rating. This current system is beyond stupid. We are struggling between gold 2 and gold 1, not like we are trying to go for masters with 17 mln. But with our skills whenever we get matched with ally around twice as big as us we win. The issue comes when they're even bigger than that. I repeat this matchmaking is completely stupid. Furthermore it's stupid that alliances 40 mln in rating are struggling in gold 2. Seems to me like bigger alliances migrate to alliances with smaller war rating to have an easy season all wins no troubles no items spent etc. That's how they fixed the broken system??? And to all of you saying the current system works, you must be the ones taking advantage of it. Exploiting it. So basically I have to struggle all season to try and finish gold 1 while being matched with whales who easily destroy our defense? I repeat we got matched twice with alliances 40 mln in total war rating, 10.5 average prestige. Their place should be in plat 2 at least. Not gold 2 being matched with us. This system sucks!!!

    There are lots of reasons why large alliances may not win much, skill is an important factors. In addition why would I drop to a low level alliance, since war rating afffects the multiplier of points, you would lose so many points it would not be worth the slightly easier fights.

    Also please, stop with the false dilemma fallacies. If you want to be in gold one you need to fight other gold one alliances, no matter thier size, you should not be in gold one unless you can defeat other gold one and all gold 2 alliances.
    Yeah right of course an alliance 40 mln in rating got matched with kenobi and we get matched with an alliance of the same size while being in gold 2. This makes perfect sense. You are so very smart thank you for your enlightning comment now I feel like I learned a valuable lesson thanks to your intelligence and knowledge
  • ItsDamienItsDamien Member Posts: 5,626 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    The old system was even more flawed.

    Overall alliance rating means absolutely nothing other than they've ranked up more champs.

    A 2 mill player could sell all of their 1 2 3 and 4* champs and drop down to less than 1 mill rating, still have the same prestige as they currently do, and still match you because War Rating is all that matters.

    At most one player can have at MAXIMUM a defense of 100k rating before applying node bonuses. That goes for all players.
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    My alliance has a total rating of 17 mln and the lowest rating from our opponents so far was 24 mln. Twice we got matched with alliances 40 mln in total rating. This current system is beyond stupid. We are struggling between gold 2 and gold 1, not like we are trying to go for masters with 17 mln. But with our skills whenever we get matched with ally around twice as big as us we win. The issue comes when they're even bigger than that. I repeat this matchmaking is completely stupid. Furthermore it's stupid that alliances 40 mln in rating are struggling in gold 2. Seems to me like bigger alliances migrate to alliances with smaller war rating to have an easy season all wins no troubles no items spent etc. That's how they fixed the broken system??? And to all of you saying the current system works, you must be the ones taking advantage of it. Exploiting it. So basically I have to struggle all season to try and finish gold 1 while being matched with whales who easily destroy our defense? I repeat we got matched twice with alliances 40 mln in total war rating, 10.5 average prestige. Their place should be in plat 2 at least. Not gold 2 being matched with us. This system sucks!!!

    There are lots of reasons why large alliances may not win much, skill is an important factors. In addition why would I drop to a low level alliance, since war rating afffects the multiplier of points, you would lose so many points it would not be worth the slightly easier fights.

    Also please, stop with the false dilemma fallacies. If you want to be in gold one you need to fight other gold one alliances, no matter thier size, you should not be in gold one unless you can defeat other gold one and all gold 2 alliances.
    Yeah right of course an alliance 40 mln in rating got matched with kenobi and we get matched with an alliance of the same size while being in gold 2. This makes perfect sense. You are so very smart thank you for your enlightning comment now I feel like I learned a valuable lesson thanks to your intelligence and knowledge
    So you dont address anything I pointed out, just create more illogical comments. What does 40m alliance rating have to do with anything? Nothing, it is how good you are at this game that matters.
  • Mr_PlatypusMr_Platypus Member Posts: 2,779 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    An ally that is 17mil rated shouldn’t be fighting for gold 1 rewards either... so I guess you’re both where you don’t belong
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
    No, it does not. My alliance skipped the 2nd war in alliance due to leadership mistake. We fell from p4 to g2 but we kept our war rating, and plat multiplier, we are now half way through the season and we are still only half way through g1, and that is with a plat war rating tier modifier. You dont seem to know how war works.
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    My alliance has a total rating of 17 mln and the lowest rating from our opponents so far was 24 mln. Twice we got matched with alliances 40 mln in total rating. This current system is beyond stupid. We are struggling between gold 2 and gold 1, not like we are trying to go for masters with 17 mln. But with our skills whenever we get matched with ally around twice as big as us we win. The issue comes when they're even bigger than that. I repeat this matchmaking is completely stupid. Furthermore it's stupid that alliances 40 mln in rating are struggling in gold 2. Seems to me like bigger alliances migrate to alliances with smaller war rating to have an easy season all wins no troubles no items spent etc. That's how they fixed the broken system??? And to all of you saying the current system works, you must be the ones taking advantage of it. Exploiting it. So basically I have to struggle all season to try and finish gold 1 while being matched with whales who easily destroy our defense? I repeat we got matched twice with alliances 40 mln in total war rating, 10.5 average prestige. Their place should be in plat 2 at least. Not gold 2 being matched with us. This system sucks!!!

    There are lots of reasons why large alliances may not win much, skill is an important factors. In addition why would I drop to a low level alliance, since war rating afffects the multiplier of points, you would lose so many points it would not be worth the slightly easier fights.

    Also please, stop with the false dilemma fallacies. If you want to be in gold one you need to fight other gold one alliances, no matter thier size, you should not be in gold one unless you can defeat other gold one and all gold 2 alliances.
    Yeah right of course an alliance 40 mln in rating got matched with kenobi and we get matched with an alliance of the same size while being in gold 2. This makes perfect sense. You are so very smart thank you for your enlightning comment now I feel like I learned a valuable lesson thanks to your intelligence and knowledge
    So you dont address anything I pointed out, just create more illogical comments. What does 40m alliance rating have to do with anything? Nothing, it is how good you are at this game that matters.
    You're saying an ally 40 mln in rating must be in gold 2 because they suck at the game and I'm saying that can be the case but it's not necessarily so. The system is indeed exploitable and we're suffering from it. In fact if you take a look at the second time we got matched with an ally that big we just gave up on exploration all together. Pointless waste of resources. And yes I stand by what I said before: with things going as they are, players will get sick of this mode of gameplay. I have to take care of arranging defenses and assigning paths and everything along with my officers and then all that work goes to waste because we get an impossible war. That's not fun and enjoyable. I don't ask for opponents half my size. But I'd say there should be other parameters. Twice my size is still somehow doable, but even beyond that is just ridiculous
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    My alliance has a total rating of 17 mln and the lowest rating from our opponents so far was 24 mln. Twice we got matched with alliances 40 mln in total rating. This current system is beyond stupid. We are struggling between gold 2 and gold 1, not like we are trying to go for masters with 17 mln. But with our skills whenever we get matched with ally around twice as big as us we win. The issue comes when they're even bigger than that. I repeat this matchmaking is completely stupid. Furthermore it's stupid that alliances 40 mln in rating are struggling in gold 2. Seems to me like bigger alliances migrate to alliances with smaller war rating to have an easy season all wins no troubles no items spent etc. That's how they fixed the broken system??? And to all of you saying the current system works, you must be the ones taking advantage of it. Exploiting it. So basically I have to struggle all season to try and finish gold 1 while being matched with whales who easily destroy our defense? I repeat we got matched twice with alliances 40 mln in total war rating, 10.5 average prestige. Their place should be in plat 2 at least. Not gold 2 being matched with us. This system sucks!!!

    There are lots of reasons why large alliances may not win much, skill is an important factors. In addition why would I drop to a low level alliance, since war rating afffects the multiplier of points, you would lose so many points it would not be worth the slightly easier fights.

    Also please, stop with the false dilemma fallacies. If you want to be in gold one you need to fight other gold one alliances, no matter thier size, you should not be in gold one unless you can defeat other gold one and all gold 2 alliances.
    Yeah right of course an alliance 40 mln in rating got matched with kenobi and we get matched with an alliance of the same size while being in gold 2. This makes perfect sense. You are so very smart thank you for your enlightning comment now I feel like I learned a valuable lesson thanks to your intelligence and knowledge
    So you dont address anything I pointed out, just create more illogical comments. What does 40m alliance rating have to do with anything? Nothing, it is how good you are at this game that matters.
    You're saying an ally 40 mln in rating must be in gold 2 because they suck at the game and I'm saying that can be the case but it's not necessarily so. The system is indeed exploitable and we're suffering from it. In fact if you take a look at the second time we got matched with an ally that big we just gave up on exploration all together. Pointless waste of resources. And yes I stand by what I said before: with things going as they are, players will get sick of this mode of gameplay. I have to take care of arranging defenses and assigning paths and everything along with my officers and then all that work goes to waste because we get an impossible war. That's not fun and enjoyable. I don't ask for opponents half my size. But I'd say there should be other parameters. Twice my size is still somehow doable, but even beyond that is just ridiculous
    And I will ask the question again, HOW is it exploitable? No, all the parameters you want are really exploitable, which is why under the old system you liked so much you had people who sucked getting plat rewards, despite not being able to beat gold alliances, just because it went off those other paramaters, that hurts everyone in the game.
  • MauledMauled Member, Guardian Posts: 3,956 Guardian
    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    My alliance has a total rating of 17 mln and the lowest rating from our opponents so far was 24 mln. Twice we got matched with alliances 40 mln in total rating. This current system is beyond stupid. We are struggling between gold 2 and gold 1, not like we are trying to go for masters with 17 mln. But with our skills whenever we get matched with ally around twice as big as us we win. The issue comes when they're even bigger than that. I repeat this matchmaking is completely stupid. Furthermore it's stupid that alliances 40 mln in rating are struggling in gold 2. Seems to me like bigger alliances migrate to alliances with smaller war rating to have an easy season all wins no troubles no items spent etc. That's how they fixed the broken system??? And to all of you saying the current system works, you must be the ones taking advantage of it. Exploiting it. So basically I have to struggle all season to try and finish gold 1 while being matched with whales who easily destroy our defense? I repeat we got matched twice with alliances 40 mln in total war rating, 10.5 average prestige. Their place should be in plat 2 at least. Not gold 2 being matched with us. This system sucks!!!

    There are lots of reasons why large alliances may not win much, skill is an important factors. In addition why would I drop to a low level alliance, since war rating afffects the multiplier of points, you would lose so many points it would not be worth the slightly easier fights.

    Also please, stop with the false dilemma fallacies. If you want to be in gold one you need to fight other gold one alliances, no matter thier size, you should not be in gold one unless you can defeat other gold one and all gold 2 alliances.
    Yeah right of course an alliance 40 mln in rating got matched with kenobi and we get matched with an alliance of the same size while being in gold 2. This makes perfect sense. You are so very smart thank you for your enlightning comment now I feel like I learned a valuable lesson thanks to your intelligence and knowledge
    So you dont address anything I pointed out, just create more illogical comments. What does 40m alliance rating have to do with anything? Nothing, it is how good you are at this game that matters.
    You're saying an ally 40 mln in rating must be in gold 2 because they suck at the game and I'm saying that can be the case but it's not necessarily so. The system is indeed exploitable and we're suffering from it. In fact if you take a look at the second time we got matched with an ally that big we just gave up on exploration all together. Pointless waste of resources. And yes I stand by what I said before: with things going as they are, players will get sick of this mode of gameplay. I have to take care of arranging defenses and assigning paths and everything along with my officers and then all that work goes to waste because we get an impossible war. That's not fun and enjoyable. I don't ask for opponents half my size. But I'd say there should be other parameters. Twice my size is still somehow doable, but even beyond that is just ridiculous
    You’ve notified literally everyone is arguing against you? I’d say that people aren’t sick. Everybody is ending up where they should be, sure the extreme ends of the spectrum might take a little while to settle like that 6.5k ally that finished P1/2.

    If you chucked a league 2 team (your alliance) into the prem they’d get slapped back into league 2 by the second half. That’s what’s happening now. New alliances form and they have to fight their way up, unfortunately you’re gonna have to fight some of them. If you can’t beat them, why should you be above them? Why should they not be allowed to fight you because you’re a small group?
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
    No, it does not. My alliance skipped the 2nd war in alliance due to leadership mistake. We fell from p4 to g2 but we kept our war rating, and plat multiplier, we are now half way through the season and we are still only half way through g1, and that is with a plat war rating tier modifier. You dont seem to know how war works.
    That must be because you're losing and because your place was not pl 4 to begin with. I know how this stuff works. We finished gold 2 last season, won the first 3 wars and we were ranked high in gold 1. Another win and we'd be in plat 4. And so on. You aren't going up because you're not winning consistently, because with a tier 4 multiplier you easily recover even from an unplayed war. Unless that p4 was already out of reach to begin with. My point here is that we are struggling all season because we keep getting impossible match ups. We lost 3 wars out of 8 so far. One against an ally 26 mln in rating and that loss was on us. Twice against alliances 40 mln in rating. The other 5 we won against alliances with rating spanning between 25 and 28 mln. Our place is not in masters and not in platinum that's okay but we deserve gold 1 probably. Even if we don't, even if we only deserve gold 2, that's alright you know? If we lose playable wars that's on us. We're fine with that. What I hate is to log in to the game when war starts to find out it's an unwinnable war. That way I get bored. I'm fine finishing in gold 2 but I want to have fun, I want to try hard and play it until the end. If I lose, patience. They were better. But if I stand no chance to begin with, I might stop playing altogether. This is essentially what you people don't seem to understand about the current system. People will lose their interest in the game. And even right now I can tell you there's plenty of alliances and players which don't wanna be bothered with aw and only focus on aq. Cause after all that hassle the prizes suck. It's not worth it. We do it for fun, or else we'd just grind aq. But when the fun ends that's when a game loses its purpose
  • Colinwhitworth69Colinwhitworth69 Member Posts: 7,470 ★★★★★
    Lordabck said:

    This is opponent ally

    You might lose this war, but you'll live.
  • danielmathdanielmath Member Posts: 4,106 ★★★★★
    There might not be other alliances that have that low of an alliance rating that are also ranked that high. Who should you be playing? If a typical 17 mil alliance is in gold 4 or lower (just guessing), should you keep playing them? Or other alliances competing for the same rewards you’re competing for?
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    danielmath said:

    There might not be other alliances that have that low of an alliance rating that are also ranked that high. Who should you be playing? If a typical 17 mil alliance is in gold 4 or lower (just guessing), should you keep playing them? Or other alliances competing for the same rewards you’re competing for?

    There is no gold 4. My point is having fun against opponents that aren't completely out of our league. That could easily be adjusted by setting additional parameters. Like a range of minimum maximum ally rating. An interval like dunno between -10 and +10 millions, something like that. Of course if there are no opponents lower than you in gold 1 you keep facing alliances around 28 mln and some you win some you lose and you have fun
  • danielmathdanielmath Member Posts: 4,106 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    danielmath said:

    There might not be other alliances that have that low of an alliance rating that are also ranked that high. Who should you be playing? If a typical 17 mil alliance is in gold 4 or lower (just guessing), should you keep playing them? Or other alliances competing for the same rewards you’re competing for?

    There is no gold 4. My point is having fun against opponents that aren't completely out of our league. That could easily be adjusted by setting additional parameters. Like a range of minimum maximum ally rating. An interval like dunno between -10 and +10 millions, something like that. Of course if there are no opponents lower than you in gold 1 you keep facing alliances around 28 mln and some you win some you lose and you have fun
    That would work in a system where all alliances are equally skilled and try equally hard. There’s lots of alliances who are just aq focused and don’t try it war, so they compete for lower rewards.
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
    No, it does not. My alliance skipped the 2nd war in alliance due to leadership mistake. We fell from p4 to g2 but we kept our war rating, and plat multiplier, we are now half way through the season and we are still only half way through g1, and that is with a plat war rating tier modifier. You dont seem to know how war works.
    That must be because you're losing and because your place was not pl 4 to begin with. I know how this stuff works. We finished gold 2 last season, won the first 3 wars and we were ranked high in gold 1. Another win and we'd be in plat 4. And so on. You aren't going up because you're not winning consistently, because with a tier 4 multiplier you easily recover even from an unplayed war. Unless that p4 was already out of reach to begin with. My point here is that we are struggling all season because we keep getting impossible match ups. We lost 3 wars out of 8 so far. One against an ally 26 mln in rating and that loss was on us. Twice against alliances 40 mln in rating. The other 5 we won against alliances with rating spanning between 25 and 28 mln. Our place is not in masters and not in platinum that's okay but we deserve gold 1 probably. Even if we don't, even if we only deserve gold 2, that's alright you know? If we lose playable wars that's on us. We're fine with that. What I hate is to log in to the game when war starts to find out it's an unwinnable war. That way I get bored. I'm fine finishing in gold 2 but I want to have fun, I want to try hard and play it until the end. If I lose, patience. They were better. But if I stand no chance to begin with, I might stop playing altogether. This is essentially what you people don't seem to understand about the current system. People will lose their interest in the game. And even right now I can tell you there's plenty of alliances and players which don't wanna be bothered with aw and only focus on aq. Cause after all that hassle the prizes suck. It's not worth it. We do it for fun, or else we'd just grind aq. But when the fun ends that's when a game loses its purpose
    No it is because how the system works, we lost 1 war and we cleared all the BGs when we did.... You went from g2 to g1 quickly because of how close you were to g1 last season, the issue is everyone gains points, But because of the way multipliers work people gain a varying level of points. If you start at the lowest tier you cannot get to plat in one season,



    lets take a look at how the tiers work if you win with 3 clears..

    4.5 you get 855k points
    4.0 you get 760k points
    3.4 you get 646k points

    This means that you can never catch up with people if you both win. The differnce between a 4.5 and a 4.0 tier alliance is small, so if you want easier matchups you would drop to 3.4 or lower. So lets assume you win and the 4.5 alliance loses, because you dropped to 3.4 for "easier matchups"

    At 4.5 and a loss with all 3 bgs cleared you still get 630 points. This means the 3.4 multiplier alliance only gains 16k points, this is the proverbial drop in the bucket.

    If when you lost you did not get any points it would be easy to gain on the other alliances, but since you gain points on a loss it makes it very difficult. This is th3e reason why back in the day when shell alliances were a thing they switched with another alliance so that they could keep the ratings closer.
  • Mr_PlatypusMr_Platypus Member Posts: 2,779 ★★★★★
    edited September 2020
    You’re in a 17mil alliance, you can’t go for gold 1 rewards then be shocked to come across opponents that are actually at gold 1 level.
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
    No, it does not. My alliance skipped the 2nd war in alliance due to leadership mistake. We fell from p4 to g2 but we kept our war rating, and plat multiplier, we are now half way through the season and we are still only half way through g1, and that is with a plat war rating tier modifier. You dont seem to know how war works.
    That must be because you're losing and because your place was not pl 4 to begin with. I know how this stuff works. We finished gold 2 last season, won the first 3 wars and we were ranked high in gold 1. Another win and we'd be in plat 4. And so on. You aren't going up because you're not winning consistently, because with a tier 4 multiplier you easily recover even from an unplayed war. Unless that p4 was already out of reach to begin with. My point here is that we are struggling all season because we keep getting impossible match ups. We lost 3 wars out of 8 so far. One against an ally 26 mln in rating and that loss was on us. Twice against alliances 40 mln in rating. The other 5 we won against alliances with rating spanning between 25 and 28 mln. Our place is not in masters and not in platinum that's okay but we deserve gold 1 probably. Even if we don't, even if we only deserve gold 2, that's alright you know? If we lose playable wars that's on us. We're fine with that. What I hate is to log in to the game when war starts to find out it's an unwinnable war. That way I get bored. I'm fine finishing in gold 2 but I want to have fun, I want to try hard and play it until the end. If I lose, patience. They were better. But if I stand no chance to begin with, I might stop playing altogether. This is essentially what you people don't seem to understand about the current system. People will lose their interest in the game. And even right now I can tell you there's plenty of alliances and players which don't wanna be bothered with aw and only focus on aq. Cause after all that hassle the prizes suck. It's not worth it. We do it for fun, or else we'd just grind aq. But when the fun ends that's when a game loses its purpose
    No it is because how the system works, we lost 1 war and we cleared all the BGs when we did.... You went from g2 to g1 quickly because of how close you were to g1 last season, the issue is everyone gains points, But because of the way multipliers work people gain a varying level of points. If you start at the lowest tier you cannot get to plat in one season,



    lets take a look at how the tiers work if you win with 3 clears..

    4.5 you get 855k points
    4.0 you get 760k points
    3.4 you get 646k points

    This means that you can never catch up with people if you both win. The differnce between a 4.5 and a 4.0 tier alliance is small, so if you want easier matchups you would drop to 3.4 or lower. So lets assume you win and the 4.5 alliance loses, because you dropped to 3.4 for "easier matchups"

    At 4.5 and a loss with all 3 bgs cleared you still get 630 points. This means the 3.4 multiplier alliance only gains 16k points, this is the proverbial drop in the bucket.

    If when you lost you did not get any points it would be easy to gain on the other alliances, but since you gain points on a loss it makes it very difficult. This is th3e reason why back in the day when shell alliances were a thing they switched with another alliance so that they could keep the ratings closer.
    Dude your reasoning is completely flawed. We're assuming an alliance that's plat 2 level drops to gold war rating. They have a lower multiplier but the multiplier goes up pretty much with every win. We were tier 7 last war then we won and we are tier 6 today. We'll be tier 5 since tomorrow if we win. That's how it goes. You don't need to do some complex maths calculations. If you win your multiplier gest better and better. Moreover, it's impossible that every other gold alliance keeps winning. Some may win, some others may lose and when you win you eventually gain points over those who lose. 50 thousands points x multiplier over every alliance who loses and clears the whole map, without taking into account how many bonuses and deaths etc etc. If you drop in aw rating going to a shell alliance and go for an easy itemless season you will easily climb the ladder destroying alliances that are way below yours in terms of skill and power
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
    No, it does not. My alliance skipped the 2nd war in alliance due to leadership mistake. We fell from p4 to g2 but we kept our war rating, and plat multiplier, we are now half way through the season and we are still only half way through g1, and that is with a plat war rating tier modifier. You dont seem to know how war works.
    That must be because you're losing and because your place was not pl 4 to begin with. I know how this stuff works. We finished gold 2 last season, won the first 3 wars and we were ranked high in gold 1. Another win and we'd be in plat 4. And so on. You aren't going up because you're not winning consistently, because with a tier 4 multiplier you easily recover even from an unplayed war. Unless that p4 was already out of reach to begin with. My point here is that we are struggling all season because we keep getting impossible match ups. We lost 3 wars out of 8 so far. One against an ally 26 mln in rating and that loss was on us. Twice against alliances 40 mln in rating. The other 5 we won against alliances with rating spanning between 25 and 28 mln. Our place is not in masters and not in platinum that's okay but we deserve gold 1 probably. Even if we don't, even if we only deserve gold 2, that's alright you know? If we lose playable wars that's on us. We're fine with that. What I hate is to log in to the game when war starts to find out it's an unwinnable war. That way I get bored. I'm fine finishing in gold 2 but I want to have fun, I want to try hard and play it until the end. If I lose, patience. They were better. But if I stand no chance to begin with, I might stop playing altogether. This is essentially what you people don't seem to understand about the current system. People will lose their interest in the game. And even right now I can tell you there's plenty of alliances and players which don't wanna be bothered with aw and only focus on aq. Cause after all that hassle the prizes suck. It's not worth it. We do it for fun, or else we'd just grind aq. But when the fun ends that's when a game loses its purpose
    No it is because how the system works, we lost 1 war and we cleared all the BGs when we did.... You went from g2 to g1 quickly because of how close you were to g1 last season, the issue is everyone gains points, But because of the way multipliers work people gain a varying level of points. If you start at the lowest tier you cannot get to plat in one season,



    lets take a look at how the tiers work if you win with 3 clears..

    4.5 you get 855k points
    4.0 you get 760k points
    3.4 you get 646k points

    This means that you can never catch up with people if you both win. The differnce between a 4.5 and a 4.0 tier alliance is small, so if you want easier matchups you would drop to 3.4 or lower. So lets assume you win and the 4.5 alliance loses, because you dropped to 3.4 for "easier matchups"

    At 4.5 and a loss with all 3 bgs cleared you still get 630 points. This means the 3.4 multiplier alliance only gains 16k points, this is the proverbial drop in the bucket.

    If when you lost you did not get any points it would be easy to gain on the other alliances, but since you gain points on a loss it makes it very difficult. This is th3e reason why back in the day when shell alliances were a thing they switched with another alliance so that they could keep the ratings closer.
    Dude your reasoning is completely flawed. We're assuming an alliance that's plat 2 level drops to gold war rating. They have a lower multiplier but the multiplier goes up pretty much with every win. We were tier 7 last war then we won and we are tier 6 today. We'll be tier 5 since tomorrow if we win. That's how it goes. You don't need to do some complex maths calculations. If you win your multiplier gest better and better. Moreover, it's impossible that every other gold alliance keeps winning. Some may win, some others may lose and when you win you eventually gain points over those who lose. 50 thousands points x multiplier over every alliance who loses and clears the whole map, without taking into account how many bonuses and deaths etc etc. If you drop in aw rating going to a shell alliance and go for an easy itemless season you will easily climb the ladder destroying alliances that are way below yours in terms of skill and power
    No it literally does not. The war rating goes up but there are only so many different tiers We have lost 1 war, won the rest and we have been in the same tier the entire time. And yes you need math calculations to determine how fast you climb. You can assume that half the alliances above you win, and half loses, but since losses still generate massive points it is an uphill battle. That is why dropping to a low level alliance will not help you under this system, you may have easier wins but there is no way you are going to end up with the same or better rewards.

    To go from 3.4 to 4.5 is only 2 tiers, but you have to go from the top 7% of alliances to the top 3% of alliances, that is a large jump. If you want to go from a 3.0 multiplier to 4.5 that is 4 jumps and from top 10% to 3%, that is a massive jump.
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
    No, it does not. My alliance skipped the 2nd war in alliance due to leadership mistake. We fell from p4 to g2 but we kept our war rating, and plat multiplier, we are now half way through the season and we are still only half way through g1, and that is with a plat war rating tier modifier. You dont seem to know how war works.
    That must be because you're losing and because your place was not pl 4 to begin with. I know how this stuff works. We finished gold 2 last season, won the first 3 wars and we were ranked high in gold 1. Another win and we'd be in plat 4. And so on. You aren't going up because you're not winning consistently, because with a tier 4 multiplier you easily recover even from an unplayed war. Unless that p4 was already out of reach to begin with. My point here is that we are struggling all season because we keep getting impossible match ups. We lost 3 wars out of 8 so far. One against an ally 26 mln in rating and that loss was on us. Twice against alliances 40 mln in rating. The other 5 we won against alliances with rating spanning between 25 and 28 mln. Our place is not in masters and not in platinum that's okay but we deserve gold 1 probably. Even if we don't, even if we only deserve gold 2, that's alright you know? If we lose playable wars that's on us. We're fine with that. What I hate is to log in to the game when war starts to find out it's an unwinnable war. That way I get bored. I'm fine finishing in gold 2 but I want to have fun, I want to try hard and play it until the end. If I lose, patience. They were better. But if I stand no chance to begin with, I might stop playing altogether. This is essentially what you people don't seem to understand about the current system. People will lose their interest in the game. And even right now I can tell you there's plenty of alliances and players which don't wanna be bothered with aw and only focus on aq. Cause after all that hassle the prizes suck. It's not worth it. We do it for fun, or else we'd just grind aq. But when the fun ends that's when a game loses its purpose
    No it is because how the system works, we lost 1 war and we cleared all the BGs when we did.... You went from g2 to g1 quickly because of how close you were to g1 last season, the issue is everyone gains points, But because of the way multipliers work people gain a varying level of points. If you start at the lowest tier you cannot get to plat in one season,



    lets take a look at how the tiers work if you win with 3 clears..

    4.5 you get 855k points
    4.0 you get 760k points
    3.4 you get 646k points

    This means that you can never catch up with people if you both win. The differnce between a 4.5 and a 4.0 tier alliance is small, so if you want easier matchups you would drop to 3.4 or lower. So lets assume you win and the 4.5 alliance loses, because you dropped to 3.4 for "easier matchups"

    At 4.5 and a loss with all 3 bgs cleared you still get 630 points. This means the 3.4 multiplier alliance only gains 16k points, this is the proverbial drop in the bucket.

    If when you lost you did not get any points it would be easy to gain on the other alliances, but since you gain points on a loss it makes it very difficult. This is th3e reason why back in the day when shell alliances were a thing they switched with another alliance so that they could keep the ratings closer.
    Dude your reasoning is completely flawed. We're assuming an alliance that's plat 2 level drops to gold war rating. They have a lower multiplier but the multiplier goes up pretty much with every win. We were tier 7 last war then we won and we are tier 6 today. We'll be tier 5 since tomorrow if we win. That's how it goes. You don't need to do some complex maths calculations. If you win your multiplier gest better and better. Moreover, it's impossible that every other gold alliance keeps winning. Some may win, some others may lose and when you win you eventually gain points over those who lose. 50 thousands points x multiplier over every alliance who loses and clears the whole map, without taking into account how many bonuses and deaths etc etc. If you drop in aw rating going to a shell alliance and go for an easy itemless season you will easily climb the ladder destroying alliances that are way below yours in terms of skill and power
    No it literally does not. The war rating goes up but there are only so many different tiers We have lost 1 war, won the rest and we have been in the same tier the entire time. And yes you need math calculations to determine how fast you climb. You can assume that half the alliances above you win, and half loses, but since losses still generate massive points it is an uphill battle. That is why dropping to a low level alliance will not help you under this system, you may have easier wins but there is no way you are going to end up with the same or better rewards.

    To go from 3.4 to 4.5 is only 2 tiers, but you have to go from the top 7% of alliances to the top 3% of alliances, that is a large jump. If you want to go from a 3.0 multiplier to 4.5 that is 4 jumps and from top 10% to 3%, that is a massive jump.
    that's alright, in fact I didn't speak about same rewards. You keep missing the point. I'm talking about migrating to a shell alliance for just a season to have an easy itemless season and then going back to the real ally when you're stacked with units, boosters etc. It's very likely that a pl2 worthy alliance could easily end in pl4 that way and be ready to push for pl2 next season. The consequence of this is that a pl2 worthy alliance would play an entire season against gold opponents. Does this make sense to you now? Cause it feels like I keep explaining the same concept over and over again
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
    No, it does not. My alliance skipped the 2nd war in alliance due to leadership mistake. We fell from p4 to g2 but we kept our war rating, and plat multiplier, we are now half way through the season and we are still only half way through g1, and that is with a plat war rating tier modifier. You dont seem to know how war works.
    That must be because you're losing and because your place was not pl 4 to begin with. I know how this stuff works. We finished gold 2 last season, won the first 3 wars and we were ranked high in gold 1. Another win and we'd be in plat 4. And so on. You aren't going up because you're not winning consistently, because with a tier 4 multiplier you easily recover even from an unplayed war. Unless that p4 was already out of reach to begin with. My point here is that we are struggling all season because we keep getting impossible match ups. We lost 3 wars out of 8 so far. One against an ally 26 mln in rating and that loss was on us. Twice against alliances 40 mln in rating. The other 5 we won against alliances with rating spanning between 25 and 28 mln. Our place is not in masters and not in platinum that's okay but we deserve gold 1 probably. Even if we don't, even if we only deserve gold 2, that's alright you know? If we lose playable wars that's on us. We're fine with that. What I hate is to log in to the game when war starts to find out it's an unwinnable war. That way I get bored. I'm fine finishing in gold 2 but I want to have fun, I want to try hard and play it until the end. If I lose, patience. They were better. But if I stand no chance to begin with, I might stop playing altogether. This is essentially what you people don't seem to understand about the current system. People will lose their interest in the game. And even right now I can tell you there's plenty of alliances and players which don't wanna be bothered with aw and only focus on aq. Cause after all that hassle the prizes suck. It's not worth it. We do it for fun, or else we'd just grind aq. But when the fun ends that's when a game loses its purpose
    No it is because how the system works, we lost 1 war and we cleared all the BGs when we did.... You went from g2 to g1 quickly because of how close you were to g1 last season, the issue is everyone gains points, But because of the way multipliers work people gain a varying level of points. If you start at the lowest tier you cannot get to plat in one season,



    lets take a look at how the tiers work if you win with 3 clears..

    4.5 you get 855k points
    4.0 you get 760k points
    3.4 you get 646k points

    This means that you can never catch up with people if you both win. The differnce between a 4.5 and a 4.0 tier alliance is small, so if you want easier matchups you would drop to 3.4 or lower. So lets assume you win and the 4.5 alliance loses, because you dropped to 3.4 for "easier matchups"

    At 4.5 and a loss with all 3 bgs cleared you still get 630 points. This means the 3.4 multiplier alliance only gains 16k points, this is the proverbial drop in the bucket.

    If when you lost you did not get any points it would be easy to gain on the other alliances, but since you gain points on a loss it makes it very difficult. This is th3e reason why back in the day when shell alliances were a thing they switched with another alliance so that they could keep the ratings closer.
    Dude your reasoning is completely flawed. We're assuming an alliance that's plat 2 level drops to gold war rating. They have a lower multiplier but the multiplier goes up pretty much with every win. We were tier 7 last war then we won and we are tier 6 today. We'll be tier 5 since tomorrow if we win. That's how it goes. You don't need to do some complex maths calculations. If you win your multiplier gest better and better. Moreover, it's impossible that every other gold alliance keeps winning. Some may win, some others may lose and when you win you eventually gain points over those who lose. 50 thousands points x multiplier over every alliance who loses and clears the whole map, without taking into account how many bonuses and deaths etc etc. If you drop in aw rating going to a shell alliance and go for an easy itemless season you will easily climb the ladder destroying alliances that are way below yours in terms of skill and power
    No it literally does not. The war rating goes up but there are only so many different tiers We have lost 1 war, won the rest and we have been in the same tier the entire time. And yes you need math calculations to determine how fast you climb. You can assume that half the alliances above you win, and half loses, but since losses still generate massive points it is an uphill battle. That is why dropping to a low level alliance will not help you under this system, you may have easier wins but there is no way you are going to end up with the same or better rewards.

    To go from 3.4 to 4.5 is only 2 tiers, but you have to go from the top 7% of alliances to the top 3% of alliances, that is a large jump. If you want to go from a 3.0 multiplier to 4.5 that is 4 jumps and from top 10% to 3%, that is a massive jump.
    that's alright, in fact I didn't speak about same rewards. You keep missing the point. I'm talking about migrating to a shell alliance for just a season to have an easy itemless season and then going back to the real ally when you're stacked with units, boosters etc. It's very likely that a pl2 worthy alliance could easily end in pl4 that way and be ready to push for pl2 next season. The consequence of this is that a pl2 worthy alliance would play an entire season against gold opponents. Does this make sense to you now? Cause it feels like I keep explaining the same concept over and over again
    No one is going to do that, if you want an easy aw season you just stop spending, you would still end up with better rewards. A p2 alliance that stops trying is not going to lose that many places because they still get points, and it can take many losses to lose your tier. If you dropped to a new alliance you still won’t gain enough to catch up, because of how the point system works, so no, it does not make sense
  • danielmathdanielmath Member Posts: 4,106 ★★★★★
    why would a plat 2 alliance want plat 4 rewards? that's silly
  • Amms90Amms90 Member Posts: 364 ★★★
    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
    No, it does not. My alliance skipped the 2nd war in alliance due to leadership mistake. We fell from p4 to g2 but we kept our war rating, and plat multiplier, we are now half way through the season and we are still only half way through g1, and that is with a plat war rating tier modifier. You dont seem to know how war works.
    That must be because you're losing and because your place was not pl 4 to begin with. I know how this stuff works. We finished gold 2 last season, won the first 3 wars and we were ranked high in gold 1. Another win and we'd be in plat 4. And so on. You aren't going up because you're not winning consistently, because with a tier 4 multiplier you easily recover even from an unplayed war. Unless that p4 was already out of reach to begin with. My point here is that we are struggling all season because we keep getting impossible match ups. We lost 3 wars out of 8 so far. One against an ally 26 mln in rating and that loss was on us. Twice against alliances 40 mln in rating. The other 5 we won against alliances with rating spanning between 25 and 28 mln. Our place is not in masters and not in platinum that's okay but we deserve gold 1 probably. Even if we don't, even if we only deserve gold 2, that's alright you know? If we lose playable wars that's on us. We're fine with that. What I hate is to log in to the game when war starts to find out it's an unwinnable war. That way I get bored. I'm fine finishing in gold 2 but I want to have fun, I want to try hard and play it until the end. If I lose, patience. They were better. But if I stand no chance to begin with, I might stop playing altogether. This is essentially what you people don't seem to understand about the current system. People will lose their interest in the game. And even right now I can tell you there's plenty of alliances and players which don't wanna be bothered with aw and only focus on aq. Cause after all that hassle the prizes suck. It's not worth it. We do it for fun, or else we'd just grind aq. But when the fun ends that's when a game loses its purpose
    No it is because how the system works, we lost 1 war and we cleared all the BGs when we did.... You went from g2 to g1 quickly because of how close you were to g1 last season, the issue is everyone gains points, But because of the way multipliers work people gain a varying level of points. If you start at the lowest tier you cannot get to plat in one season,



    lets take a look at how the tiers work if you win with 3 clears..

    4.5 you get 855k points
    4.0 you get 760k points
    3.4 you get 646k points

    This means that you can never catch up with people if you both win. The differnce between a 4.5 and a 4.0 tier alliance is small, so if you want easier matchups you would drop to 3.4 or lower. So lets assume you win and the 4.5 alliance loses, because you dropped to 3.4 for "easier matchups"

    At 4.5 and a loss with all 3 bgs cleared you still get 630 points. This means the 3.4 multiplier alliance only gains 16k points, this is the proverbial drop in the bucket.

    If when you lost you did not get any points it would be easy to gain on the other alliances, but since you gain points on a loss it makes it very difficult. This is th3e reason why back in the day when shell alliances were a thing they switched with another alliance so that they could keep the ratings closer.
    Dude your reasoning is completely flawed. We're assuming an alliance that's plat 2 level drops to gold war rating. They have a lower multiplier but the multiplier goes up pretty much with every win. We were tier 7 last war then we won and we are tier 6 today. We'll be tier 5 since tomorrow if we win. That's how it goes. You don't need to do some complex maths calculations. If you win your multiplier gest better and better. Moreover, it's impossible that every other gold alliance keeps winning. Some may win, some others may lose and when you win you eventually gain points over those who lose. 50 thousands points x multiplier over every alliance who loses and clears the whole map, without taking into account how many bonuses and deaths etc etc. If you drop in aw rating going to a shell alliance and go for an easy itemless season you will easily climb the ladder destroying alliances that are way below yours in terms of skill and power
    No it literally does not. The war rating goes up but there are only so many different tiers We have lost 1 war, won the rest and we have been in the same tier the entire time. And yes you need math calculations to determine how fast you climb. You can assume that half the alliances above you win, and half loses, but since losses still generate massive points it is an uphill battle. That is why dropping to a low level alliance will not help you under this system, you may have easier wins but there is no way you are going to end up with the same or better rewards.

    To go from 3.4 to 4.5 is only 2 tiers, but you have to go from the top 7% of alliances to the top 3% of alliances, that is a large jump. If you want to go from a 3.0 multiplier to 4.5 that is 4 jumps and from top 10% to 3%, that is a massive jump.
    that's alright, in fact I didn't speak about same rewards. You keep missing the point. I'm talking about migrating to a shell alliance for just a season to have an easy itemless season and then going back to the real ally when you're stacked with units, boosters etc. It's very likely that a pl2 worthy alliance could easily end in pl4 that way and be ready to push for pl2 next season. The consequence of this is that a pl2 worthy alliance would play an entire season against gold opponents. Does this make sense to you now? Cause it feels like I keep explaining the same concept over and over again
    No one is going to do that, if you want an easy aw season you just stop spending, you would still end up with better rewards. A p2 alliance that stops trying is not going to lose that many places because they still get points, and it can take many losses to lose your tier. If you dropped to a new alliance you still won’t gain enough to catch up, because of how the point system works, so no, it does not make sense
    so they don't lose the aw rating or the tier multiplier in their main alliance. And next season they can push again for pl2. Damn guys you're weird. Ah for the records we got another impossible match. This way we're not even finishing gold 1. Gold 2 at most. It's absurd. I know people that have been in my own alliance and were completely incapable of anything. We were even smaller and we all had r4 5stars and this dude had all r5 we're talking 2 season ago. He was useless in aq he was useless in war. He admitted he couldn't help at all in the boss island nor with the minis. Well he's recruiting for a pl4 alliance. You know why? Cause he's got a big profile and a fat prestige. That's all that matters now. You have a big profile you can do pl4 even if you have absolutely 0 skills. We're talking about a guy I had to cut from the alliance because he was useless. And he's in pl4. And we're not even worthy of gold 1 because of this stupid stupid matchmaking system. Which you guys seem to think is very fair. I'm done talking because it seems like nobody gives a damn. You're all just saying "same war rating it's fair" as if you were dumb enough not to see the disparity of the match.
  • LormifLormif Member Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Lormif said:

    Amms90 said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    The war rating is very similar fair matchup

    You must be a troll. An ally 40 mln in rating shouldn't have that low war rating. The point is this system is exploitable and the smaller alliances like my own which are always doing their best without trying easy shortcuts to achieve better prizes and better results are the ones suffering. The whales who migrate in lower alliances for easy seasons are the ones laughing. And all of you who are saying this system works are giving your contribution to making things worse. I think this may be our last season of aw. This way I assure you many people will drop the game. Because aq is boring as f*** and aw is broken.
    So now you accuse others being a troll because they disagree with you? And why should a 40m alliance rating not have a low war rating? not everyone focuses on war, nor does roster size = skill in the game.

    How is the system exploitable? Why would a whales migrate to lower alliances for easy seasons? easy seasons means lower rewards due to point multipliers.
    There are 12 wars in a season. Winning the first wars gets you up very fast and you reach a good multiplier again. An alliance 40 mln in rating which can struggle for plat 3 - plat 2 can also have a season where they're taking a break and collecting resources while migrating to a lower alliance with lower war rating and having a season with 12 wins itemless. They'll easily end in plat 4 while being matched with gold alliances all seasons. Do I really need to point out the obvious here?
    No, it does not. My alliance skipped the 2nd war in alliance due to leadership mistake. We fell from p4 to g2 but we kept our war rating, and plat multiplier, we are now half way through the season and we are still only half way through g1, and that is with a plat war rating tier modifier. You dont seem to know how war works.
    That must be because you're losing and because your place was not pl 4 to begin with. I know how this stuff works. We finished gold 2 last season, won the first 3 wars and we were ranked high in gold 1. Another win and we'd be in plat 4. And so on. You aren't going up because you're not winning consistently, because with a tier 4 multiplier you easily recover even from an unplayed war. Unless that p4 was already out of reach to begin with. My point here is that we are struggling all season because we keep getting impossible match ups. We lost 3 wars out of 8 so far. One against an ally 26 mln in rating and that loss was on us. Twice against alliances 40 mln in rating. The other 5 we won against alliances with rating spanning between 25 and 28 mln. Our place is not in masters and not in platinum that's okay but we deserve gold 1 probably. Even if we don't, even if we only deserve gold 2, that's alright you know? If we lose playable wars that's on us. We're fine with that. What I hate is to log in to the game when war starts to find out it's an unwinnable war. That way I get bored. I'm fine finishing in gold 2 but I want to have fun, I want to try hard and play it until the end. If I lose, patience. They were better. But if I stand no chance to begin with, I might stop playing altogether. This is essentially what you people don't seem to understand about the current system. People will lose their interest in the game. And even right now I can tell you there's plenty of alliances and players which don't wanna be bothered with aw and only focus on aq. Cause after all that hassle the prizes suck. It's not worth it. We do it for fun, or else we'd just grind aq. But when the fun ends that's when a game loses its purpose
    No it is because how the system works, we lost 1 war and we cleared all the BGs when we did.... You went from g2 to g1 quickly because of how close you were to g1 last season, the issue is everyone gains points, But because of the way multipliers work people gain a varying level of points. If you start at the lowest tier you cannot get to plat in one season,



    lets take a look at how the tiers work if you win with 3 clears..

    4.5 you get 855k points
    4.0 you get 760k points
    3.4 you get 646k points

    This means that you can never catch up with people if you both win. The differnce between a 4.5 and a 4.0 tier alliance is small, so if you want easier matchups you would drop to 3.4 or lower. So lets assume you win and the 4.5 alliance loses, because you dropped to 3.4 for "easier matchups"

    At 4.5 and a loss with all 3 bgs cleared you still get 630 points. This means the 3.4 multiplier alliance only gains 16k points, this is the proverbial drop in the bucket.

    If when you lost you did not get any points it would be easy to gain on the other alliances, but since you gain points on a loss it makes it very difficult. This is th3e reason why back in the day when shell alliances were a thing they switched with another alliance so that they could keep the ratings closer.
    Dude your reasoning is completely flawed. We're assuming an alliance that's plat 2 level drops to gold war rating. They have a lower multiplier but the multiplier goes up pretty much with every win. We were tier 7 last war then we won and we are tier 6 today. We'll be tier 5 since tomorrow if we win. That's how it goes. You don't need to do some complex maths calculations. If you win your multiplier gest better and better. Moreover, it's impossible that every other gold alliance keeps winning. Some may win, some others may lose and when you win you eventually gain points over those who lose. 50 thousands points x multiplier over every alliance who loses and clears the whole map, without taking into account how many bonuses and deaths etc etc. If you drop in aw rating going to a shell alliance and go for an easy itemless season you will easily climb the ladder destroying alliances that are way below yours in terms of skill and power
    No it literally does not. The war rating goes up but there are only so many different tiers We have lost 1 war, won the rest and we have been in the same tier the entire time. And yes you need math calculations to determine how fast you climb. You can assume that half the alliances above you win, and half loses, but since losses still generate massive points it is an uphill battle. That is why dropping to a low level alliance will not help you under this system, you may have easier wins but there is no way you are going to end up with the same or better rewards.

    To go from 3.4 to 4.5 is only 2 tiers, but you have to go from the top 7% of alliances to the top 3% of alliances, that is a large jump. If you want to go from a 3.0 multiplier to 4.5 that is 4 jumps and from top 10% to 3%, that is a massive jump.
    that's alright, in fact I didn't speak about same rewards. You keep missing the point. I'm talking about migrating to a shell alliance for just a season to have an easy itemless season and then going back to the real ally when you're stacked with units, boosters etc. It's very likely that a pl2 worthy alliance could easily end in pl4 that way and be ready to push for pl2 next season. The consequence of this is that a pl2 worthy alliance would play an entire season against gold opponents. Does this make sense to you now? Cause it feels like I keep explaining the same concept over and over again
    No one is going to do that, if you want an easy aw season you just stop spending, you would still end up with better rewards. A p2 alliance that stops trying is not going to lose that many places because they still get points, and it can take many losses to lose your tier. If you dropped to a new alliance you still won’t gain enough to catch up, because of how the point system works, so no, it does not make sense
    so they don't lose the aw rating or the tier multiplier in their main alliance. And next season they can push again for pl2. Damn guys you're weird. Ah for the records we got another impossible match. This way we're not even finishing gold 1. Gold 2 at most. It's absurd. I know people that have been in my own alliance and were completely incapable of anything. We were even smaller and we all had r4 5stars and this dude had all r5 we're talking 2 season ago. He was useless in aq he was useless in war. He admitted he couldn't help at all in the boss island nor with the minis. Well he's recruiting for a pl4 alliance. You know why? Cause he's got a big profile and a fat prestige. That's all that matters now. You have a big profile you can do pl4 even if you have absolutely 0 skills. We're talking about a guy I had to cut from the alliance because he was useless. And he's in pl4. And we're not even worthy of gold 1 because of this stupid stupid matchmaking system. Which you guys seem to think is very fair. I'm done talking because it seems like nobody gives a damn. You're all just saying "same war rating it's fair" as if you were dumb enough not to see the disparity of the match.
    So they drop down and lose massive rewards in a season to maybe, but probably not get back to where they were? And you call us weird? And about the dude, it was 2 seasons ago, he could have gotten better, or they could have been an aq allance, could be anything
Sign In or Register to comment.