**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options
Comments
Comparing an under 12 team to the pros is not even close to an accurate comparison. A true comparison is an under 12 recreational team going against an under 12 high organized team. They both meet the criteria to play each other, but there can be a huge difference in skill and even player size.
Matchmaking is truly based on war rating. The more you win, the higher the rating and therefore harder competition. Win some, lose some, that's the nature of the game. Just because you're on the cusp of p2, doesn't mean you deserve to stay and shouldn't face tough competition during the season. Deal with it and learn for next season, if you choose to make p2 your war goal.
Every week or so there's always someone whining about matchmaking, even though ratings are close.
It’s frustrating when you get a tougher batch but if your aiming for P2 then you need to be able to beat the majority of alliances in the game.
I also think if you don’t have people who are confident against an r3 weapon x then you probably don’t deserve P2
If your war rating is higher than your actual strength, you'll face stronger alliances than you are most of the time. You'll lose more often than you win, and your war rating will drop until on average you're winning about as often as you are losing. Your war rating will represent your true strength, because that's the very definition of "correct" - everyone at the same rating has about even odds of beating anyone else at that same rating.
The odds of your alliance rating just coincidentally matching your actual war strength is almost zero. But nothing acts to correct it. If you are weaker than your alliance rating, you'll tend to remain so. If you are stronger than your alliance rating, you'll tend to remain so, because alliance rating is dominated by roster *width* and not roster *strength*.
Consider: at the moment according to the leaderboards my rank is 2041 in total base hero rating. That's amazing, but also mostly irrelevant except for fun, because all that means is I've been around forever and rank up all my 3* champs. My prestige on the other hand is relatively low: I'm 93,127 in "strongest team" which is more or less prestige, because I don't rank for prestige. Neither number comes remotely close to my actual war strength. This generalizes to whole alliances.
Well in that case then, there should be absolutely no way the under 12s team can earn rewards even remotely similar to a league team.
So bringing this back to alliance war.
If you’re wanting matchmaking in which you match based on alliance rating or prestige, then the rewards must also scale based on your alliance rating or prestige. See the problem yet?
Using the matchup OP is whining about, they will theoretically land in similar places, Plat 3 or Plat 2, but whereas currently there’s not a huge difference in rewards, no difference if they land in the same bracket, if rewards scaled based on alliance rating, there’d be a huge difference because OPs alliance is half the size of his opponents.
Well in that case then, there should be absolutely no way the under 12s team can earn rewards even remotely similar to a league team.
So bringing this back to alliance war.
If you’re wanting matchmaking in which you match based on alliance rating or prestige, then the rewards must also scale based on your alliance rating or prestige. See the problem yet?
Using the matchup OP is unhappy about about, they will theoretically land in similar places, Plat 3 or Plat 2, but whereas currently there’s not a huge difference in rewards, no difference if they land in the same bracket, if rewards scaled based on alliance rating, there’d be a huge difference because OPs alliance is half the size of his opponents
The OP's alliance appears to be one that overperforms, approaching the top 100 in season rank but with an alliance rating that ranks the alliance closer to 600h place. That can only happen in match systems where alliances are allowed to match against alliances that are stronger than they are on paper but that they beat. Eliminate that possibility, and it is far more likely they drop to P4 than rise to P2. Or you get the crazy exploits that accompanied the previous match system where wildly low rating alliances were leapfrogging past multiple tiers of competition without having to face any of them.
It is impossible to design a system when there are some who have started and take war seriously and those who have completed all content with big rosters who play war just to do something in the game. We also have shell alliances and people who intentionally lose so that they are not in tier 5. There are alliances who don't use any items and simply boss rush. With all these different strategies, war rating will not accurately define a alliances war capabilities. But, it is still the best metric to use, a whole lot better than alliance rating or alliance prestige.