Just a little secret. No one at support had any clue what’s going on. Their response is incorrect. It is an old canned response.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it was honestly read, and replied to soley by a bot. That system was how it used to be but is not like that any longer. Looks like they haven’t updated their template.
Though I can understand your point @VandalSavage I think the primary reason the OP is saying the matchup is unfair, is because the alliance they’re match with has an obvious advantage over their alliance. ....
No, that is not it. He witnessed the result (i.e. the loss), draws a conclusion, and then looks for anything to support that conclusion.
The reality is that a player can ONLY USE 8 HEROES in AW. That's it. ONLY EIGHT. The actual number that people need to see to determine whether they have an advantage is the average rating of the top 8 heroes, a number that NOBODY sees.
So instead, they use the number that they do see (i.e. alliance rating) and use that as an excuse for the loss.
Ultimately, it is pointless to determine who has an advantage or not.
In a game of chess, opponents are also matched up by rating. Nobody cares if one guy has 20 more years of experience (i.e. "alliance rating") playing or has 2000 more matches under his belt than the other. But in MCOC, it is now suddenly important because the result is not in their favor.
I'm in a 10 million alliance that is Tier 11 with a 1000 war rating, we lost recently to a 3 million alliance in Tier 11 with a 995 war rating. How could we possibly lose!?!? Because the players on my team are mostly casual who really don't care about war....they use their best champs in AQ because they like that part of the game, they typically use their second string of champs doing the monthly and level quests...their third string of champs might be used for War offense which leaves a pretty low string for defense....they don't place their defenders anywhere in particular, just wherever they fit when you join the war. THAT is why we only have a 1000 rating, and why we lost to a 3 million alliance. War rating is fair.
So you are confirming that AW rating should not be the parameter to search AW match making?
Though I can understand your point @VandalSavage I think the primary reason the OP is saying the matchup is unfair, is because the alliance they’re match with has an obvious advantage over their alliance. ....
No, that is not it. He witnessed the result (i.e. the loss), draws a conclusion, and then looks for anything to support that conclusion.
The reality is that a player can ONLY USE 8 HEROES in AW. That's it. ONLY EIGHT. The actual number that people need to see to determine whether they have an advantage is the average rating of the top 8 heroes, a number that NOBODY sees.
So instead, they use the number that they do see (i.e. alliance rating) and use that as an excuse for the loss.
Ultimately, it is pointless to determine who has an advantage or not.
In a game of chess, opponents are also matched up by rating. Nobody cares if one guy has 20 more years of experience (i.e. "alliance rating") playing or has 2000 more matches under his belt than the other. But in MCOC, it is now suddenly important because the result is not in their favor.
Uh, he started the thread right at the beginning of the attack phase before the results were even close to decided. You're entire argument is a series of straw men based on a false assumption.
Comments
I wouldn’t be surprised if it was honestly read, and replied to soley by a bot. That system was how it used to be but is not like that any longer. Looks like they haven’t updated their template.
No, that is not it. He witnessed the result (i.e. the loss), draws a conclusion, and then looks for anything to support that conclusion.
The reality is that a player can ONLY USE 8 HEROES in AW. That's it. ONLY EIGHT. The actual number that people need to see to determine whether they have an advantage is the average rating of the top 8 heroes, a number that NOBODY sees.
So instead, they use the number that they do see (i.e. alliance rating) and use that as an excuse for the loss.
Ultimately, it is pointless to determine who has an advantage or not.
In a game of chess, opponents are also matched up by rating. Nobody cares if one guy has 20 more years of experience (i.e. "alliance rating") playing or has 2000 more matches under his belt than the other. But in MCOC, it is now suddenly important because the result is not in their favor.
So you are confirming that AW rating should not be the parameter to search AW match making?
Uh, he started the thread right at the beginning of the attack phase before the results were even close to decided. You're entire argument is a series of straw men based on a false assumption.