Alliance War Matchmaking

sleimonsleimon Member Posts: 34 ★
in General Discussion
There needs to be some serious changes with the alliance war matchmaking algorithm. I'm currently in GT40, we're first this season as of now and we have had to match every serious contender for top spot twice. The alliances that are second and third, have barely matched any masters alliances. The alliance in second place (D69) has matched a masters alliance 3/11 times with the rest being alliances in platinum 1-3 despite being second in terms of points and W/L record. They've essentially been gifted a spot in the top 3 completely based off matchmaking. Any alliance can be a top 3 war alliance if matchmaking favours them, actually being the best doesn't seem to matter with how matchmaking is right now.
«1

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,627 ★★★★★
    If you're first, why are you concerned about second and third?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,627 ★★★★★
    Agent_X_zzz said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    If you're first, why are you concerned about second and third?

    I don’t expect a guy in Sand 22 AW to understand master AW
    That's funny. However, keeping track of every Match of other Alliances is a bit hypervigilant, no?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,627 ★★★★★
    Yes. I am of inferior intelligence. I couldn't possibly fathom the ins and outs of the level of competitiveness at such a high level.
    .....or I understand all too well, and I was highlighting the difference between being competitive and wanting to control the entire board.
  • TheBair123TheBair123 Member Posts: 5,344 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Agent_X_zzz said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    If you're first, why are you concerned about second and third?

    I don’t expect a guy in Sand 22 AW to understand master AW
    That's funny. However, keeping track of every Match of other Alliances is a bit hypervigilant, no?
    It’s better to be hypervigilant than hypovigilant, no?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,627 ★★★★★
    Within what we can control, yes. It's better to be vigilant. For the record, if there's an issue, then it's worth looking at. In general, we can only predict the outcome by paying attention to who Matches with who. We can't expect the system to pave the way.
  • UnknownUnknown
    edited June 2022
    This content has been removed.
  • JGaceJGace Member Posts: 4 ★
    Simply a strategy well executed. Inevitably to draw criticism when the worry is losing the throne. As we all know the game is never in the ideal state, we are playing the game as it is now. This is WAR anyway, man up soldier 😘 P.S. you’re my favorite OR player.
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Member Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    edited June 2022
    It’s your war rating that has you matching top alliances but then again you guys are the top alliance for war rating and by a significant margin compared to most t1 alliances. It makes sense for the king of the hill to defend against others near the top of that hill.

    But it Might be time to cull war ratings similar to what was done when prestige was taken out of the match making equation and they halved everyone’s war rating. This could help bring match making into a better alignment for the top tier while also removing all the potential shell alliances currently on the leaderboard.

    Remember shelling? It’s anti competitive and is becoming more common in recent times yet nothing is being done about it.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Member Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★
    CoatHang3r said:

    It’s your war rating that has you matching top alliances but then again you guys are the top alliance for war rating and by a significant margin compared to most t1 alliances. It makes sense for the king of the hill to defend against others near the top of that hill.

    But it Might be time to cull war ratings similar to what was done when prestige was taken out of the match making equation and they halved everyone’s war rating. This could help bring match making into a better alignment for the top tier while also removing all the potential shell alliances currently on the leaderboard.

    Remember shelling? It’s anti competitive and is becoming more common in recent times yet nothing is being done about it.

    The two alliances he's mentioning both shell
  • CoatHang3rCoatHang3r Member Posts: 4,965 ★★★★★
    Worknprogress said:

    CoatHang3r said:

    It’s your war rating that has you matching top alliances but then again you guys are the top alliance for war rating and by a significant margin compared to most t1 alliances. It makes sense for the king of the hill to defend against others near the top of that hill.

    But it Might be time to cull war ratings similar to what was done when prestige was taken out of the match making equation and they halved everyone’s war rating. This could help bring match making into a better alignment for the top tier while also removing all the potential shell alliances currently on the leaderboard.

    Remember shelling? It’s anti competitive and is becoming more common in recent times yet nothing is being done about it.

    The two alliances he's mentioning both shell
    So it’s not really matchmaking that brought about this situation, it’s alliances manipulating an subverting the intent of war rating ie shelling; not surprised.
  • danielmathdanielmath Member Posts: 4,105 ★★★★★
    JGace said:

    Simply a strategy well executed. Inevitably to draw criticism when the worry is losing the throne. As we all know the game is never in the ideal state, we are playing the game as it is now. This is WAR anyway, man up soldier 😘 P.S. you’re my favorite OR player.

    When he turns dex on
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Member Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★
    CoatHang3r said:

    Worknprogress said:

    CoatHang3r said:

    It’s your war rating that has you matching top alliances but then again you guys are the top alliance for war rating and by a significant margin compared to most t1 alliances. It makes sense for the king of the hill to defend against others near the top of that hill.

    But it Might be time to cull war ratings similar to what was done when prestige was taken out of the match making equation and they halved everyone’s war rating. This could help bring match making into a better alignment for the top tier while also removing all the potential shell alliances currently on the leaderboard.

    Remember shelling? It’s anti competitive and is becoming more common in recent times yet nothing is being done about it.

    The two alliances he's mentioning both shell
    So it’s not really matchmaking that brought about this situation, it’s alliances manipulating an subverting the intent of war rating ie shelling; not surprised.
    Even with shelling they still shouldn't have been getting some of the matches they did. There were like 300+ point WR disparities.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,627 ★★★★★
    edited June 2022
    Things don't happen linear. You don't just fight every Alliance in a straight line on your way up. You win and/or lose and gain or lose War Rating, and are matched based on that. Things get trickier the higher up you go because there are only so many Matches to be had, and specific War Rating parameters. The system will have to pull from what's left after making the closest Matches possible.
    The alternative is a system that either Matches the same Alliances over and over, or one that randomizes a Match, and that's equally as unfair for whoever is the recipient. People wanted War Rating to be the determining factor, knowing fully-well that even that wasn't a perfect system. Here we are.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Vergeman78Vergeman78 Member Posts: 133 ★★
    Unfortunately, no matter what kabam does, people will always find loopholes to exploit
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • The_man001The_man001 Member Posts: 624 ★★★
    Vergeman78 said:

    Unfortunately, no matter what kabam does, people will always find loopholes to exploit

    Just like.. No matter how many flaws kabam has some on forums will still defend them
  • JGaceJGace Member Posts: 4 ★
    DragosCDS said:

    Guys, the point is very simple. We don’t dispute that we must face the best to remain on top but the current system is not fair. There are 20-25 top master allies but we face only 7-8 in a Season because of rematches. While there are allies that have to face us twice in a Season, allies like the one sitting in 2nd place now never face us once. They’ve only faced 3 out of 10 AWs, master ranked allies. Is it fair to the allies sitting in 4th, 5th, 6th that they are not top 3? We only want a fair system were rankings are determined in a head to head competion, not by avoiding the best and slidering to the top.

    Iso8a is always in the top 10 - 5. To act like it’s big surprise that D69 with all the same players it’s fighting for a top spot is just just hilarious. People are bound to cry, let ‘em 😢
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,627 ★★★★★
    Worknprogress said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Things don't happen linear. You don't just fight every Alliance in a straight line on your way up. You win and/or lose and gain or lose War Rating, and are matched based on that. Things get trickier the higher up you go because there are only so many Matches to be had, and specific War Rating parameters. The system will have to pull from what's left after making the closest Matches possible.
    The alternative is a system that either Matches the same Alliances over and over, or one that randomizes a Match, and that's equally as unfair for whoever is the recipient. People wanted War Rating to be the determining factor, knowing fully-well that even that wasn't a perfect system. Here we are.

    You continually show you are utterly clueless about any and all things related to AW. These alliances were matching people two tiers and 300+ WR points below them. With the current matching system that should have absolutely never have happened.
    If you read my previous comments, I already said if there was an issue, it was worth looking into. I was speaking on the subject of having to come up against every Ally.
  • pseudosanepseudosane Member, Guardian Posts: 4,008 Guardian
    These shells are taking up t1 bracket spots as well. Right now to hit t1 you have to be top40 WR, With 7 of them old shells. Such nonsense.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
Sign In or Register to comment.