Due to an issue with Alliance War Defense Tactic, we will be ending this Alliance War Season effective immediately. This current War will not count towards your Alliance War Season Score. War Season eligibility rewards will be reduced to 2 Wars in the Season.

We understand that this is not a perfect solution, but without the ability to remove or freeze the War Rating quick enough, the rest of our Alliance War season would be compromised.

This war will remain active, and in-game, you will still see the season until tomorrow. After we end the season tomorrow, we will be taking some time to collect data and remove the changes to the Alliance War Season score. Once that is complete, we will be able to send out Alliance War Season rewards.

We apologize for the inconvenience.

Analysis of AW Season 1: Tier vs Bracket

12346

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    How you do is based on your Wins and Losses. If your 3 Mil is doing better, they're winning. If your 8 Mil wins, it will do better as well. That's not the system, that's how you perform.
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    @GroundedWisdom yes but the system is unfair
    The 3mil and the 8mil are esentially playing in different competitions but fighting for the same rewards and the same positions on the same leaderboard...
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    That's not unfair. They're fighting in their own respective Matches. What you're describing is a reasonable range for both, within 2 Mil give or take. Two different Ratings in the same Bracket doesn't really matter. I think you're forming a judgment based on the Rating. An Ally that is 3 Mil that puts the same amount of work in deserves the same Rewards. You can't judge their skill based on Rating. If they fight and win, they earn it. You can have an Ally that is more skilled with 3 Mil than an 8 Mil. It's not impossible. They don't have to fight the same Matches as an 8 Mil to be in the same Tier. They just have to win the Matches they're in. That's fair. I think you're focusing way too much on the fact that your 3 Mil is doing better than your 8 Mil. You have to judge it based on individual performance, not how they do against your 8 Mil. For that matter, a 3 Mil that plays better within their own Wars deserves to be higher. The Rating doesn't make the War. The performance does.
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    edited April 2018
    @GroundedWisdom that is stupid.....
    In sport where there are divisions the lower divisions get lower rewards.... if they want top rewards they need to grow....
    How is it fair that my ally grew and got stronger only to face harder matchups.... if we went back to the same 5 mil roster we had before we could half ass it for better rewards then we are now and we are trying our best now....
    It is not fair that a the best in a lower competition takes rewards away from someone in a higher level of competion
    This is a contest.....
    The best ally wins...
    This is not the best in class.....
    Marchmaking is performin in a class based situation but rewards are issued in a manner that does not reflect this...
    The seasons showed just how this happens....
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 13,520 Guardian
    That's not unfair. They're fighting in their own respective Matches. What you're describing is a reasonable range for both, within 2 Mil give or take. Two different Ratings in the same Bracket doesn't really matter. I think you're forming a judgment based on the Rating. An Ally that is 3 Mil that puts the same amount of work in deserves the same Rewards. You can't judge their skill based on Rating. If they fight and win, they earn it. You can have an Ally that is more skilled with 3 Mil than an 8 Mil. It's not impossible. They don't have to fight the same Matches as an 8 Mil to be in the same Tier. They just have to win the Matches they're in. That's fair. I think you're focusing way too much on the fact that your 3 Mil is doing better than your 8 Mil. You have to judge it based on individual performance, not how they do against your 8 Mil. For that matter, a 3 Mil that plays better within their own Wars deserves to be higher. The Rating doesn't make the War. The performance does.

    The fairness of the rating is the fact of the individual matches. When you earn rewards in the same tier it is a range of skill. Thus playing in a better rating makes the skill bracket for the alliance based on rating. That's why the performance isn't higher if rating is a range outside the average.
  • Speeds80Speeds80 Posts: 1,890 ★★★★
    Yeah this is actually proving to me that the 3m alliance is highly advantaged, I’m in a 12m alliance in tier 7, basically we are in direct competition with his 3m alliance for ranks in both tier and season rewards, because of their alliance rating we would never face them so they are being artificially held apart from the stronger teams they are directly competing against, then if some of the 12m alliances I’m facing decided to sell their low champs. And turn into 6m alliances they will have a distinct advantage over me, in war season and in tiers
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    That's not unfair. They're fighting in their own respective Matches. What you're describing is a reasonable range for both, within 2 Mil give or take. Two different Ratings in the same Bracket doesn't really matter. I think you're forming a judgment based on the Rating. An Ally that is 3 Mil that puts the same amount of work in deserves the same Rewards. You can't judge their skill based on Rating. If they fight and win, they earn it. You can have an Ally that is more skilled with 3 Mil than an 8 Mil. It's not impossible. They don't have to fight the same Matches as an 8 Mil to be in the same Tier. They just have to win the Matches they're in. That's fair. I think you're focusing way too much on the fact that your 3 Mil is doing better than your 8 Mil. You have to judge it based on individual performance, not how they do against your 8 Mil. For that matter, a 3 Mil that plays better within their own Wars deserves to be higher. The Rating doesn't make the War. The performance does.

    The fairness of the rating is the fact of the individual matches. When you earn rewards in the same tier it is a range of skill. Thus playing in a better rating makes the skill bracket for the alliance based on rating. That's why the performance isn't higher if rating is a range outside the average.

    When there's a metric that reflects performance and Matching is placed within range of that, it is indeed fair. The Tier reflects the Rewards each individual Ally is earning based on their cumulative Wins. Quite frankly, if the 8 Mil was performing better, they would be ahead in War Rating regardless of the Ally Rating.
  • Speeds80Speeds80 Posts: 1,890 ★★★★
    We have a sister alliance who are stronger but retired (only run map 3 2bgs for aq) they are 15m we have been on almost the same war rating and 2 wargroups all season, we hoped to face them, but never did, the fact they have more champs at lower levels ranked should not disadvantage them and keep them only fighting only 14-16m alliances. I’ve also noticed this system often has us playing the same alliances week after week
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 13,520 Guardian
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    That's not unfair. They're fighting in their own respective Matches. What you're describing is a reasonable range for both, within 2 Mil give or take. Two different Ratings in the same Bracket doesn't really matter. I think you're forming a judgment based on the Rating. An Ally that is 3 Mil that puts the same amount of work in deserves the same Rewards. You can't judge their skill based on Rating. If they fight and win, they earn it. You can have an Ally that is more skilled with 3 Mil than an 8 Mil. It's not impossible. They don't have to fight the same Matches as an 8 Mil to be in the same Tier. They just have to win the Matches they're in. That's fair. I think you're focusing way too much on the fact that your 3 Mil is doing better than your 8 Mil. You have to judge it based on individual performance, not how they do against your 8 Mil. For that matter, a 3 Mil that plays better within their own Wars deserves to be higher. The Rating doesn't make the War. The performance does.

    The fairness of the rating is the fact of the individual matches. When you earn rewards in the same tier it is a range of skill. Thus playing in a better rating makes the skill bracket for the alliance based on rating. That's why the performance isn't higher if rating is a range outside the average.

    When there's a metric that reflects performance and Matching is placed within range of that, it is indeed fair. The Tier reflects the Rewards each individual Ally is earning based on their cumulative Wins. Quite frankly, if the 8 Mil was performing better, they would be ahead in War Rating regardless of the Ally Rating.

    I contemplated continuing, but the previous post almost shattered my language processing neurons.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    I'm going to have to disagree that it's not fair, it's the very definition of fair. Otherwise you have a system that only reflects the Rating of the Ally, and thus Rewards. You end up having top Rewards given to those who have a larger Rating because they are able to peck off lower Allies who make their way up.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    That's not unfair. They're fighting in their own respective Matches. What you're describing is a reasonable range for both, within 2 Mil give or take. Two different Ratings in the same Bracket doesn't really matter. I think you're forming a judgment based on the Rating. An Ally that is 3 Mil that puts the same amount of work in deserves the same Rewards. You can't judge their skill based on Rating. If they fight and win, they earn it. You can have an Ally that is more skilled with 3 Mil than an 8 Mil. It's not impossible. They don't have to fight the same Matches as an 8 Mil to be in the same Tier. They just have to win the Matches they're in. That's fair. I think you're focusing way too much on the fact that your 3 Mil is doing better than your 8 Mil. You have to judge it based on individual performance, not how they do against your 8 Mil. For that matter, a 3 Mil that plays better within their own Wars deserves to be higher. The Rating doesn't make the War. The performance does.

    The fairness of the rating is the fact of the individual matches. When you earn rewards in the same tier it is a range of skill. Thus playing in a better rating makes the skill bracket for the alliance based on rating. That's why the performance isn't higher if rating is a range outside the average.

    When there's a metric that reflects performance and Matching is placed within range of that, it is indeed fair. The Tier reflects the Rewards each individual Ally is earning based on their cumulative Wins. Quite frankly, if the 8 Mil was performing better, they would be ahead in War Rating regardless of the Ally Rating.

    I contemplated continuing, but the previous post almost shattered my language processing neurons.

    The bottom line is Allies earn their War Rating through Wins. If they go up in Tiers, they deserve the Rewards they earn. There is nothing unfair about that.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 13,520 Guardian
    I'm going to have to disagree that it's not fair, it's the very definition of fair.

    I'm pretty sure you are in fact compelled to disagree, since you just disagreed with a post I deliberately constructed to be meaningless.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    I'm going to have to disagree that it's not fair, it's the very definition of fair.

    I'm pretty sure you are in fact compelled to disagree, since you just disagreed with a post I deliberately constructed to be meaningless.

    I'm not disagreeing to disagree. I just support a more fair system for Matching that encourages even progression based on performance, rather than a Darwinian Jungle.
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 13,520 Guardian
    DNA3000 wrote: »
    I'm going to have to disagree that it's not fair, it's the very definition of fair.

    I'm pretty sure you are in fact compelled to disagree, since you just disagreed with a post I deliberately constructed to be meaningless.

    I'm not disagreeing to disagree.

    You're apparently willing to disagree with a dictionary sent through a wood chipper.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    Okay, I've said my peace. That was funny though. :)
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    edited April 2018
    Yes if we win more we will go up.....
    Yes if we win more we will get better rewards.....

    If my 8mil face the same allies as my 3mil
    We would win more and we would go up
    If my 3mil faced the same allies as my 8mil
    We would lose more and we would drop down

    It wat world is it fair that people can compete for the same prize yet be fighting a different competition.....

    The best featherweight boxer is not necesarilly a better boxer than the best heavyweight cus he is undefeated whilst the heavy weight has had two losses. You cannot compare as they are fighting different competitions.
    Hense why they are rewarded from different prize pools. It would be unfair if they were fighting different competition for the same prizes.
    It is made fair cus they are fighting different competition for different prizes.
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    @GroundedWisdom i feel like you are compelled to disagree simply because it is you and it seems that is what you do.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    edited April 2018
    I'm not disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing. You're in 2 Allies and you're trying to compare them when you need to look at their progress individually. The Rating has nothing to do with their performance. I don't care if it's a 1 Mil Ally. If they fight and earn their Rewards, they deserve the same Rewards based on their own performance. In both cases, the 3 Mil and the 8 Mil, you have Allies Matched within the same range as their Rating. That means it's fair. They're being rewarded based on fair performance. I think you need to get past the idea that Allies smaller in Rating can earn the same Rewards. There isn't much else I can say because we disagree. It's best just to leave it at that. It's fair. Rewards should be based on performance, not how big the Ally is. That's just my stance, and I'm not changing it so let's just respectfully disagree.
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    edited April 2018
    Yes but performance is biased....
    Performanced is biased due to matchmaking....
    Matchmaking is leading to skewed war ratings...

    Rewards should be based on performance yes....
    But top performance in a bottom pool is not better performance than average performance in a top pool...

    Are you saying a college football team undefeated deserves the same rewards as an undefeated pro NFL team.....

    They both deserve top rewards for thir class but not the same rewards as each other
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    edited April 2018
    My 3 mil allinace wins with only 2 bg clears....
    My 8 mil loses with 95% exploration....
    In wat world does this mean the 3mil performed better???
    By every metric the 8mil performed better but suffered a hard loss....
    This is the situation regularly
    And this is only the case due to the current broken problematic matchmaking system
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    Performance is not biased. Your 8 Mil is being Matched within its own range. Same with your 3 Mil. You can't compare the two and say it's unfair when it is the definition of fair. Evidently the 3 Mil IS performing better because they are higher. They don't have to beat your 8 Mil. They just have to beat the Ally they're Matched against. It's like I said. You're wearing too many hats and not seeing the individual perspective of it.
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    9 times out of ten from last 20 wars the level of performance required to get a win with the 3mil is much lower than the level of performance to get a win with the 8mil.....
    At the 3mil level most opposition doesnt have enough strength to clear all bgs..... meaning we can do less and get the win.....
    At the 8mil level who wins comes down the little details like 2% exploration or 10 less deaths. A much higher performance is required to get the win.
    Meaning the 8mil can have better “in war” performance but suffer a loss....
    This happens regularly meaning our win loss ratio amd therefore war rating is not actually a clear indicator of our perfomance level overall.
    Only an indicator of our performance against a biased subset of opponents
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    That entirely depends on how each side performs. You don't have to perform better than your 3 Mil to gain a Win in your 8 Mil, you have to perform better than your opponent. Same with the 3 Mil. Regardless of your comparison to how your 8 Mil is doing, all your 3 Mil needs to do is perform better than their Opponent. That may be comparable or it may not. Neither has anything to do with the other, other than your comparison. There aren't many more ways I can explain it other than if you want your 8 Mil to be higher, then you will have to Win more of your own Matches. That doesn't mean the 3 Mil doesn't deserve their own respective Wins.
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    @GroundedWisdom what i am saying is simple.
    Due simply to the strength of most attackers a 3mil ally has less boss kilss and less exploration needs to happen to get a win. As people die much easier.

    So yes a win is based on performance v an opponent.

    But that does not mean the alliance is a better performing alliance just because it has more wins..

    If one alliance can only ever kill 2 bosses but win every war whilst one can kill all 3 bosses does not indicate the 2 bosskilling alliance is better. In fact it shows the 3 bosskilling allinance is better.
    The fact the alliance with 2 bosskills always wins whilst the alliance with 3 boss kills losing is indicative of the performance of the opponents we are facing.
    We should be facing the same opponents. Then and only then will war rating actually clearly indicate the actuall war strength of an alliance.
    Now all it indicates is a skewed measurement.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 28,798 ★★★★★
    edited April 2018
    Okay, I'm out. Please stop tagging me every 5 minutes. I've tried to explain it, but you're not getting it. They win based on their own Fights. My advice is pick an Ally and stick to it. For some reason, you can't seem to understand how fair Fights are fair Wins. The system is not at fault because your 3 Mil is beating their Opponents and your 8 Mil is not.
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    What we need here is for a bunch of highly skilled players to start an alliance with really weak accounts.... climb to the top and then begin upsetting the apple cart at the top tiers.... as it keeps climbing cus of broken matchmaking
  • I have to agree with nearly everything said from @Maat1985 and @DNA3000... I’ve experienced all of this myself having two very different accounts.
Sign In or Register to comment.