The war rating adjustments leave you in the same position as if you had lost the wars won (in part) by cheating. I fail to see how identical outcomes somehow warrant doing anything other than what has been done.
I can assure you we were at no point this low rated. There is nothing inherently wrong with "treating cheated games as a loss" on my end, but the problem with this system is the drastic difference between us and the people we now match with. Most advancing alliances can expect to have a win rate around 60% or so on average, as they slowly work there way up the ranks of better alliances. A demoted alliance however can expect a win rate of about 90% until they reach the bracket they were demoted from (the only reason I didn't say 100% chance is that there is still a change they get matched to another demoted alliance).
Screwing with alliance rating has adverse effects on more then just the offending alliance, and this is why it is a flawed system. If they just reduced offending alliances total seasonal score to act "as if they lost" it would keep the matchmaking system balanced (at least more so) while also ruining the offending alliances shot at top rewards.
I can assure you that had you lost the wars won by cheating your rating would be the same as it was after being credited the loss after having been found to have cheated the win.
Explain how most alliances (implying >50%) win 60% of the time? Lawl
your alliance isn't going to fluctuate often in rating. If you lose 1 war, you will get paired with an easier alliance. If you lose another, it gets even easier. As I said a "progressing" alliance is one that is doing everything they can to get better, and in turn that pays off with a slow increase in rating on average (60%). A non progressing alliance is one that isn't changing much and in turn can expect to stay at a stagnant rank (aka 50%)
Yes, if what you say is true and its based off the wars you won while cheating, then we would have lost that many points. But the fact this is not a gradual loss in rating is what causes the problem. Top alliances are getting dropped hundreds of rating and getting matched against alliances they can role over without trying.
Think about it as a bell curve, with your alliances total skill as the center. The farther you deviate from your average, the lower, or higher the chance you have to return to it. What deranking does is it places you at at bottom of your bell curve, making your win chance far higher. You are so blinded with your hate for cheating that you don't even care to think how it effects the innocent players.
If people fight and lose fairly, that's not an injustice. Coming up against a tougher Ally is always a possibility.
The war rating adjustments leave you in the same position as if you had lost the wars won (in part) by cheating. I fail to see how identical outcomes somehow warrant doing anything other than what has been done.
I can assure you we were at no point this low rated. There is nothing inherently wrong with "treating cheated games as a loss" on my end, but the problem with this system is the drastic difference between us and the people we now match with. Most advancing alliances can expect to have a win rate around 60% or so on average, as they slowly work there way up the ranks of better alliances. A demoted alliance however can expect a win rate of about 90% until they reach the bracket they were demoted from (the only reason I didn't say 100% chance is that there is still a change they get matched to another demoted alliance).
Screwing with alliance rating has adverse effects on more then just the offending alliance, and this is why it is a flawed system. If they just reduced offending alliances total seasonal score to act "as if they lost" it would keep the matchmaking system balanced (at least more so) while also ruining the offending alliances shot at top rewards.
I can assure you that had you lost the wars won by cheating your rating would be the same as it was after being credited the loss after having been found to have cheated the win.
Explain how most alliances (implying >50%) win 60% of the time? Lawl
your alliance isn't going to fluctuate often in rating. If you lose 1 war, you will get paired with an easier alliance. If you lose another, it gets even easier. As I said a "progressing" alliance is one that is doing everything they can to get better, and in turn that pays off with a slow increase in rating on average (60%). A non progressing alliance is one that isn't changing much and in turn can expect to stay at a stagnant rank (aka 50%)
Yes, if what you say is true and its based off the wars you won while cheating, then we would have lost that many points. But the fact this is not a gradual loss in rating is what causes the problem. Top alliances are getting dropped hundreds of rating and getting matched against alliances they can role over without trying.
Think about it as a bell curve, with your alliances total skill as the center. The farther you deviate from your average, the lower, or higher the chance you have to return to it. What deranking does is it places you at at bottom of your bell curve, making your win chance far higher. You are so blinded with your hate for cheating that you don't even care to think how it effects the innocent players.
If people fight and lose fairly, that's not an injustice. Coming up against a tougher Ally is always a possibility.
it is if they never had a chance to win in the first place
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
The war rating adjustments leave you in the same position as if you had lost the wars won (in part) by cheating. I fail to see how identical outcomes somehow warrant doing anything other than what has been done.
I can assure you we were at no point this low rated. There is nothing inherently wrong with "treating cheated games as a loss" on my end, but the problem with this system is the drastic difference between us and the people we now match with. Most advancing alliances can expect to have a win rate around 60% or so on average, as they slowly work there way up the ranks of better alliances. A demoted alliance however can expect a win rate of about 90% until they reach the bracket they were demoted from (the only reason I didn't say 100% chance is that there is still a change they get matched to another demoted alliance).
Screwing with alliance rating has adverse effects on more then just the offending alliance, and this is why it is a flawed system. If they just reduced offending alliances total seasonal score to act "as if they lost" it would keep the matchmaking system balanced (at least more so) while also ruining the offending alliances shot at top rewards.
I can assure you that had you lost the wars won by cheating your rating would be the same as it was after being credited the loss after having been found to have cheated the win.
Explain how most alliances (implying >50%) win 60% of the time? Lawl
your alliance isn't going to fluctuate often in rating. If you lose 1 war, you will get paired with an easier alliance. If you lose another, it gets even easier. As I said a "progressing" alliance is one that is doing everything they can to get better, and in turn that pays off with a slow increase in rating on average (60%). A non progressing alliance is one that isn't changing much and in turn can expect to stay at a stagnant rank (aka 50%)
Yes, if what you say is true and its based off the wars you won while cheating, then we would have lost that many points. But the fact this is not a gradual loss in rating is what causes the problem. Top alliances are getting dropped hundreds of rating and getting matched against alliances they can role over without trying.
Think about it as a bell curve, with your alliances total skill as the center. The farther you deviate from your average, the lower, or higher the chance you have to return to it. What deranking does is it places you at at bottom of your bell curve, making your win chance far higher. You are so blinded with your hate for cheating that you don't even care to think how it effects the innocent players.
If people fight and lose fairly, that's not an injustice. Coming up against a tougher Ally is always a possibility.
it is if they never had a chance to win in the first place
The drops aren't that extreme. There's usually some chance to win. It's a fair solution because that Rating is acquired through wrongful means. Perhaps said Ally isn't as skilled as it thinks it is when playing fairly. Lol.
There's no such thing as a perfect system, and when balancing out, it will offset from time to time. It's a great deal more fair than it used to be. When you had Defender Kills as a scoring metric and came up against Allies with Champs 2 and 3 times the strength of yours, it was a setup for failure. As it is now, it's possible to win with a decent amount of skill.
The war rating adjustments leave you in the same position as if you had lost the wars won (in part) by cheating. I fail to see how identical outcomes somehow warrant doing anything other than what has been done.
I can assure you we were at no point this low rated. There is nothing inherently wrong with "treating cheated games as a loss" on my end, but the problem with this system is the drastic difference between us and the people we now match with. Most advancing alliances can expect to have a win rate around 60% or so on average, as they slowly work there way up the ranks of better alliances. A demoted alliance however can expect a win rate of about 90% until they reach the bracket they were demoted from (the only reason I didn't say 100% chance is that there is still a change they get matched to another demoted alliance).
Screwing with alliance rating has adverse effects on more then just the offending alliance, and this is why it is a flawed system. If they just reduced offending alliances total seasonal score to act "as if they lost" it would keep the matchmaking system balanced (at least more so) while also ruining the offending alliances shot at top rewards.
I can assure you that had you lost the wars won by cheating your rating would be the same as it was after being credited the loss after having been found to have cheated the win.
Explain how most alliances (implying >50%) win 60% of the time? Lawl
your alliance isn't going to fluctuate often in rating. If you lose 1 war, you will get paired with an easier alliance. If you lose another, it gets even easier. As I said a "progressing" alliance is one that is doing everything they can to get better, and in turn that pays off with a slow increase in rating on average (60%). A non progressing alliance is one that isn't changing much and in turn can expect to stay at a stagnant rank (aka 50%)
Yes, if what you say is true and its based off the wars you won while cheating, then we would have lost that many points. But the fact this is not a gradual loss in rating is what causes the problem. Top alliances are getting dropped hundreds of rating and getting matched against alliances they can role over without trying.
Think about it as a bell curve, with your alliances total skill as the center. The farther you deviate from your average, the lower, or higher the chance you have to return to it. What deranking does is it places you at at bottom of your bell curve, making your win chance far higher. You are so blinded with your hate for cheating that you don't even care to think how it effects the innocent players.
If people fight and lose fairly, that's not an injustice. Coming up against a tougher Ally is always a possibility.
it is if they never had a chance to win in the first place
But alot of alliance just spent thousands of dollars to get crazy champs and bought every deals kabam throw out they will no doubt have better overall defense team compare to a F2P, RNG based only alliance. In that sense they never really had a chance to win... i don't always agree with Grounded wisdom posts but I do agree with him on this.
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
The war rating adjustments leave you in the same position as if you had lost the wars won (in part) by cheating. I fail to see how identical outcomes somehow warrant doing anything other than what has been done.
I can assure you we were at no point this low rated. There is nothing inherently wrong with "treating cheated games as a loss" on my end, but the problem with this system is the drastic difference between us and the people we now match with. Most advancing alliances can expect to have a win rate around 60% or so on average, as they slowly work there way up the ranks of better alliances. A demoted alliance however can expect a win rate of about 90% until they reach the bracket they were demoted from (the only reason I didn't say 100% chance is that there is still a change they get matched to another demoted alliance).
Screwing with alliance rating has adverse effects on more then just the offending alliance, and this is why it is a flawed system. If they just reduced offending alliances total seasonal score to act "as if they lost" it would keep the matchmaking system balanced (at least more so) while also ruining the offending alliances shot at top rewards.
I can assure you that had you lost the wars won by cheating your rating would be the same as it was after being credited the loss after having been found to have cheated the win.
Explain how most alliances (implying >50%) win 60% of the time? Lawl
your alliance isn't going to fluctuate often in rating. If you lose 1 war, you will get paired with an easier alliance. If you lose another, it gets even easier. As I said a "progressing" alliance is one that is doing everything they can to get better, and in turn that pays off with a slow increase in rating on average (60%). A non progressing alliance is one that isn't changing much and in turn can expect to stay at a stagnant rank (aka 50%)
Yes, if what you say is true and its based off the wars you won while cheating, then we would have lost that many points. But the fact this is not a gradual loss in rating is what causes the problem. Top alliances are getting dropped hundreds of rating and getting matched against alliances they can role over without trying.
Think about it as a bell curve, with your alliances total skill as the center. The farther you deviate from your average, the lower, or higher the chance you have to return to it. What deranking does is it places you at at bottom of your bell curve, making your win chance far higher. You are so blinded with your hate for cheating that you don't even care to think how it effects the innocent players.
If people fight and lose fairly, that's not an injustice. Coming up against a tougher Ally is always a possibility.
it is if they never had a chance to win in the first place
But alot of alliance just spent thousands of dollars to get crazy champs and bought every deals kabam throw out they will no doubt have better overall defense team compare to a F2P, RNG based only alliance. In that sense they never really had a chance to win... i don't always agree with Grounded wisdom posts but I do agree with him on this.
The people that whale out like that are moved to higher wars (yes, gradually) until they reach an equilibrium. These alliances are not dropped into places they should not be, just to win their way back up the ladder to there equilibrium
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
In the overall scheme, that trajectory will only last until you reach the appropriate spot. For the Allies you come up against, it equates to one Loss as you continue to go up. Losing fairly, regardless of your strength, is fair play.
When you had Defender Kills as a scoring metric and came up against Allies with Champs 2 and 3 times the strength of yours, it was a setup for failure. As it is now, it's possible to win with a decent amount of skill.
I'm curious how you came to this conclusion. If a decent amount of skill could win under the new system, it could under the old system as well. If skill = dying less than 3 times per node, then a decent amount of skill could have won under the old system as well.
To be fair, rating drop is a first measure as far as we've seen. On repetetive infraction not just war rating but points get deducted. Master allies of season 1 got over 1m points taken away and disbanded for that. I guess the point is to send a warning.
As for the unfair matches, it's also true the opposite. Imagine an ally disbanding and reforming matched for your war. You ll have literally a free win, and on top, 0% exploration on the other side (already happened in master, ie) netting you 200k+ extra points. My guess is they give them the opportunity to play clean without cutting off the ally immediatly. Besides, if they pilot alwais, their skills won't be as far from the bracket they drop to.
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
In the overall scheme, that trajectory will only last until you reach the appropriate spot. For the Allies you come up against, it equates to one Loss as you continue to go up. Losing fairly, regardless of your strength, is fair play.
Yes, our upward trajectory will only last until we reach our appropriate spot. So whats the point in dropping it to begin with? All it does is punish anyone that matches us until we are back to normal. I don't agree that we are winning these wars fairly, its just a meaningless slaughter.
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
In the overall scheme, that trajectory will only last until you reach the appropriate spot. For the Allies you come up against, it equates to one Loss as you continue to go up. Losing fairly, regardless of your strength, is fair play.
Yes, our upward trajectory will only last until we reach our appropriate spot. So whats the point in dropping it to begin with? All it does is punish anyone that matches us until we are back to normal. I don't agree that we are winning these wars fairly, its just a meaningless slaughter.
The point is that War Rating was earned wrongly, by breaking the rules.
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
In the overall scheme, that trajectory will only last until you reach the appropriate spot. For the Allies you come up against, it equates to one Loss as you continue to go up. Losing fairly, regardless of your strength, is fair play.
Yes, our upward trajectory will only last until we reach our appropriate spot. So whats the point in dropping it to begin with? All it does is punish anyone that matches us until we are back to normal. I don't agree that we are winning these wars fairly, its just a meaningless slaughter.
The point is that War Rating was earned wrongly, by breaking the rules.
And my point is that removing the rating isn't a good solution to this problem. It punishes the honest players by saturating their match making with wars they should not have to fight. A better system would punish the offender without causing these problems for others.
When you had Defender Kills as a scoring metric and came up against Allies with Champs 2 and 3 times the strength of yours, it was a setup for failure. As it is now, it's possible to win with a decent amount of skill.
I'm curious how you came to this conclusion. If a decent amount of skill could win under the new system, it could under the old system as well. If skill = dying less than 3 times per node, then a decent amount of skill could have won under the old system as well.
It was less about fight skill, and more about amassing Defender Kills into a Win. The focus was different, and the numbers that the Kills mounted to created a much more imbalanced system than anything. Lucrative for those relying on the Kills, no doubt....but that's a separate subject, and I've debated that months ago.
if we really don't deserve to be at our old rank, then implementing a warning with a heavy point deduction would do 1 of 2 things.
1.) make offenders shape up, stop cheating, and start losing till they reach the point they should be at.
2.) will do nothing, they will continue to cheat, and will continue to be reduced in points, unable to compete with the leaderboards
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
In the overall scheme, that trajectory will only last until you reach the appropriate spot. For the Allies you come up against, it equates to one Loss as you continue to go up. Losing fairly, regardless of your strength, is fair play.
Yes, our upward trajectory will only last until we reach our appropriate spot. So whats the point in dropping it to begin with? All it does is punish anyone that matches us until we are back to normal. I don't agree that we are winning these wars fairly, its just a meaningless slaughter.
The point is that War Rating was earned wrongly, by breaking the rules.
And my point is that removing the rating isn't a good solution to this problem. It punishes the honest players by saturating their match making with wars they should not have to fight. A better system would punish the offender without causing these problems for others.
As opposed to allowing cheaters to keep the Rating they earned? Not so much.
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
In the overall scheme, that trajectory will only last until you reach the appropriate spot. For the Allies you come up against, it equates to one Loss as you continue to go up. Losing fairly, regardless of your strength, is fair play.
Yes, our upward trajectory will only last until we reach our appropriate spot. So whats the point in dropping it to begin with? All it does is punish anyone that matches us until we are back to normal. I don't agree that we are winning these wars fairly, its just a meaningless slaughter.
The point is that War Rating was earned wrongly, by breaking the rules.
And my point is that removing the rating isn't a good solution to this problem. It punishes the honest players by saturating their match making with wars they should not have to fight. A better system would punish the offender without causing these problems for others.
As opposed to allowing cheaters to keep the Rating they earned? Not so much.
war rating is effectively meaningless outside of matchmaking and bracketing. If you take away the positive side of having a high rating, then the offender is left in a place they cant compete with, and wont even get rewarded well for it.
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
In the overall scheme, that trajectory will only last until you reach the appropriate spot. For the Allies you come up against, it equates to one Loss as you continue to go up. Losing fairly, regardless of your strength, is fair play.
Yes, our upward trajectory will only last until we reach our appropriate spot. So whats the point in dropping it to begin with? All it does is punish anyone that matches us until we are back to normal. I don't agree that we are winning these wars fairly, its just a meaningless slaughter.
The point is that War Rating was earned wrongly, by breaking the rules.
And my point is that removing the rating isn't a good solution to this problem. It punishes the honest players by saturating their match making with wars they should not have to fight. A better system would punish the offender without causing these problems for others.
As opposed to allowing cheaters to keep the Rating they earned? Not so much.
war rating is effectively meaningless outside of matchmaking and bracketing. If you take away the positive side of having a high rating, then the offender is left in a place they cant compete with, and wont even get rewarded well for it.
It is not effectively useless. It's a reflection of Wins and Losses.
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
In the overall scheme, that trajectory will only last until you reach the appropriate spot. For the Allies you come up against, it equates to one Loss as you continue to go up. Losing fairly, regardless of your strength, is fair play.
Yes, our upward trajectory will only last until we reach our appropriate spot. So whats the point in dropping it to begin with? All it does is punish anyone that matches us until we are back to normal. I don't agree that we are winning these wars fairly, its just a meaningless slaughter.
The point is that War Rating was earned wrongly, by breaking the rules.
And my point is that removing the rating isn't a good solution to this problem. It punishes the honest players by saturating their match making with wars they should not have to fight. A better system would punish the offender without causing these problems for others.
As opposed to allowing cheaters to keep the Rating they earned? Not so much.
war rating is effectively meaningless outside of matchmaking and bracketing. If you take away the positive side of having a high rating, then the offender is left in a place they cant compete with, and wont even get rewarded well for it.
It is not effectively useless. It's a reflection of Wins and Losses.
so basically offenders don't get to reflect on there past wins for a month or so, while honest players need to line up and lose to them while they recover the score. Being able to reflect on your war rating provides you no actual benefit to a player.
Can it be used to recruit players? Sure, but these payers will find out the alliance is not playing fair, losing out on its rewards, and they will just leave.
1) The top alliances already regulary match up with <300 WR difference alliances. That’s not abnormal and I’ve personally be party to it 3(?) times this season.
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
In the overall scheme, that trajectory will only last until you reach the appropriate spot. For the Allies you come up against, it equates to one Loss as you continue to go up. Losing fairly, regardless of your strength, is fair play.
Yes, our upward trajectory will only last until we reach our appropriate spot. So whats the point in dropping it to begin with? All it does is punish anyone that matches us until we are back to normal. I don't agree that we are winning these wars fairly, its just a meaningless slaughter.
The point is that War Rating was earned wrongly, by breaking the rules.
And my point is that removing the rating isn't a good solution to this problem. It punishes the honest players by saturating their match making with wars they should not have to fight. A better system would punish the offender without causing these problems for others.
As opposed to allowing cheaters to keep the Rating they earned? Not so much.
war rating is effectively meaningless outside of matchmaking and bracketing. If you take away the positive side of having a high rating, then the offender is left in a place they cant compete with, and wont even get rewarded well for it.
It is not effectively useless. It's a reflection of Wins and Losses.
so basically offenders don't get to reflect on there past wins for a month or so, while honest players need to line up and lose to them while they recover the score. Being able to reflect on your war rating provides you no actual benefit to a player.
Can it be used to recruit players? Sure, but these payers will find out the alliance is not playing fair, losing out on its rewards, and they will just leave.
You accumulate War Rating with Wins. If those Wins are ill-gotten, they remove the Rating. That's about as fair as it gets. That's doesn't constitute a useless number for me. That's the whole basis of the topic.
@GroundedWisdom@Cryptic_Cobra
Presumably they have not just been getting a number as they work up but rather that number represents more resources along the way. More resources means more 4* and 5* champs and rank ups. They lose the number but not what they gained from the process of getting there which they now still have. They are now matched up with competing alliances who have not had such rewards yet as they are still working their way through the numbers (having never been higher up with all the rewards yet) and therefore are likely NOT to have 6* mini bosses and (3) 5* attackers to boot. I think there's a valid point here.
Another question:
If this means easier wins now for alliances who were cheating, and presumably they keep winning wars over and over, does anyone know how long it could take an alliance to recover from the typical drop in rating to get back to where they were?
Just curious since we're on the topic.
Another question:
If this means easier wins now for alliances who were cheating, and presumably they keep winning wars over and over, does anyone know how long it could take an alliance to recover from the typical drop in rating to get back to where they were?
Just curious since we're on the topic.
It depends on the alliance, but in general not long. When you win every war you tend to boost rating like crazy. And tbh we haven't even had a major point acquisition loss. Our wars are all ending with more then a few of our defenders remaining, so that is adding a surprising amount to our score, not to mention the increased attacker points from dying ALLOT less.
I am in an alliance that was recently de-ranked by 400-500 aw points. (we aren't major offenders or anything, but one of our members must have been using a pilot (wish kabam would tell us who, but that not the point of this thread) The problem this has created is one in our favor, and I don't agree with it.
I accept that rule breaking is bad, and should be dealt with, so i have no problem being punished if we did indeed break the rules. But we are not the only people being punished. Now that we are so low ranked in wars we are being unfairly matched against much worse alliances, and are crushing them with no chance of retaliation. This is so unfair to the other players we watch against and is effecting more then just the offending party.
My suggestion would be to deduct seasonal points only, or something of the sort, because reducing our rank is far from a fair solution. Sure we are now unable to compete for a top aw spot, but we are also a massive roadblock to anyone we match against.
The suggestion I made in season one was to give cheating alliances a multiplier penalty for some duration of time. This way they would still have to be matched against harder alliances, but they would gain fewer points for every way they fought, win or lose. Another possibility is to apply a reward tier penalty. Their war rating would stay the same, they would still get matched according to that rating, but all of their rewards, points, and seasonal multiplier would act as if they were several tiers lower until the penalty expired.
The cheating alliances should be deducted season points AND war rating points at the same time. By doing so, they not only lose their ranking but also their multiplier, thus it will be difficult for them to climb back.
You makes it as if you worry about the other alliances chance of retaliation but fact is you just don’t want to lose your multiplier. Nothing is wrong with that but I think the penalty perfectly fits the crime. So if you don’t want to lose it, don’t cheat.
The cheating alliances should be deducted season points AND war rating points at the same time. By doing so, they not only lose their ranking but also their multiplier, thus it will be difficult for them to climb back.
You makes it as if you worry about the other alliances chance of retaliation but fact is you just don’t want to lose your multiplier. Nothing is wrong with that but I think the penalty perfectly fits the crime. So if you don’t want to lose it, don’t cheat.
As I have stated previously, this loss in war rating is not effecting me personally. We were likely going to be gold 1, and all this has done is ensured we will get gold 1 (without even trying). Even with the worse multiplier we are still getting more then enough points from crushing the opposition we are paired with.
As for "you make it as if you worry about the other alliances chances of relatiation", that's precisely correct. I feel awful about how unfair these wars are, and believe it or not, have empathy for the victims.
The cheating alliances should be deducted season points AND war rating points at the same time. By doing so, they not only lose their ranking but also their multiplier, thus it will be difficult for them to climb back.
You makes it as if you worry about the other alliances chance of retaliation but fact is you just don’t want to lose your multiplier. Nothing is wrong with that but I think the penalty perfectly fits the crime. So if you don’t want to lose it, don’t cheat.
As I have stated previously, this loss in war rating is not effecting me personally. We were likely going to be gold 1, and all this has done is ensured we will get gold 1 (without even trying). Even with the worse multiplier we are still getting more then enough points from crushing the opposition we are paired with.
As for "you make it as if you worry about the other alliances chances of relatiation", that's precisely correct. I feel awful about how unfair these wars are, and believe it or not, have empathy for the victims.
What you said is from your perspective. The lower tier alliances would have fun, having the chance to fight a better opponent that they wouldn’t have faced in normal circumstances in a war that they were supposed to lose. They would get matched with weaker alliances in the following wars.
Me and my alliance were having a lot of fun, battling a 3.1k alliance even when we ended up losing badly eventually. We took it as a chance to test our limit. We don’t need any sympathy and we are definitely not a victim.
Comments
If people fight and lose fairly, that's not an injustice. Coming up against a tougher Ally is always a possibility.
it is if they never had a chance to win in the first place
2) It’s been shown that WR is not the only factor in MMing, circumstantially the match up is possible sans the reduction in WR. And that’s what you are arguing with, circumstance.
3) if we’re going to make it personal and attmept to mind read, I’d say you’re blinded by the shock of being party to cheating and trying to minimize it’s impact on your alliances standing. However that has as much factual basis as you saying im blinded by hatred.
The drops aren't that extreme. There's usually some chance to win. It's a fair solution because that Rating is acquired through wrongful means. Perhaps said Ally isn't as skilled as it thinks it is when playing fairly. Lol.
There's no such thing as a perfect system, and when balancing out, it will offset from time to time. It's a great deal more fair than it used to be. When you had Defender Kills as a scoring metric and came up against Allies with Champs 2 and 3 times the strength of yours, it was a setup for failure. As it is now, it's possible to win with a decent amount of skill.
But alot of alliance just spent thousands of dollars to get crazy champs and bought every deals kabam throw out they will no doubt have better overall defense team compare to a F2P, RNG based only alliance. In that sense they never really had a chance to win... i don't always agree with Grounded wisdom posts but I do agree with him on this.
I'm literally advocating that we get a real punishment. We had little to no chance of reaching plat, and we now have gold 1 guaranteed without even trying. I don't really care what you think goes into the match making system, but the fact is we are railroading every alliance we run into. War rating in top 1% is far less impact-full as it is in the lower tiers. You are right that a few hundred dropped wont change much for top alliances(because it mostly comes down to skill alone at that point), but it changes allot for the lower ones, where they do not have defenses equipped to hold off a much larger opponent.
The people that whale out like that are moved to higher wars (yes, gradually) until they reach an equilibrium. These alliances are not dropped into places they should not be, just to win their way back up the ladder to there equilibrium
I'm curious how you came to this conclusion. If a decent amount of skill could win under the new system, it could under the old system as well. If skill = dying less than 3 times per node, then a decent amount of skill could have won under the old system as well.
As for the unfair matches, it's also true the opposite. Imagine an ally disbanding and reforming matched for your war. You ll have literally a free win, and on top, 0% exploration on the other side (already happened in master, ie) netting you 200k+ extra points. My guess is they give them the opportunity to play clean without cutting off the ally immediatly. Besides, if they pilot alwais, their skills won't be as far from the bracket they drop to.
Yes, our upward trajectory will only last until we reach our appropriate spot. So whats the point in dropping it to begin with? All it does is punish anyone that matches us until we are back to normal. I don't agree that we are winning these wars fairly, its just a meaningless slaughter.
The point is that War Rating was earned wrongly, by breaking the rules.
And my point is that removing the rating isn't a good solution to this problem. It punishes the honest players by saturating their match making with wars they should not have to fight. A better system would punish the offender without causing these problems for others.
It was less about fight skill, and more about amassing Defender Kills into a Win. The focus was different, and the numbers that the Kills mounted to created a much more imbalanced system than anything. Lucrative for those relying on the Kills, no doubt....but that's a separate subject, and I've debated that months ago.
1.) make offenders shape up, stop cheating, and start losing till they reach the point they should be at.
2.) will do nothing, they will continue to cheat, and will continue to be reduced in points, unable to compete with the leaderboards
As opposed to allowing cheaters to keep the Rating they earned? Not so much.
war rating is effectively meaningless outside of matchmaking and bracketing. If you take away the positive side of having a high rating, then the offender is left in a place they cant compete with, and wont even get rewarded well for it.
It is not effectively useless. It's a reflection of Wins and Losses.
Ideally they would receive a ban and also be removed from their current alliance by a MCOC Admin.
so basically offenders don't get to reflect on there past wins for a month or so, while honest players need to line up and lose to them while they recover the score. Being able to reflect on your war rating provides you no actual benefit to a player.
Can it be used to recruit players? Sure, but these payers will find out the alliance is not playing fair, losing out on its rewards, and they will just leave.
You accumulate War Rating with Wins. If those Wins are ill-gotten, they remove the Rating. That's about as fair as it gets. That's doesn't constitute a useless number for me. That's the whole basis of the topic.
Presumably they have not just been getting a number as they work up but rather that number represents more resources along the way. More resources means more 4* and 5* champs and rank ups. They lose the number but not what they gained from the process of getting there which they now still have. They are now matched up with competing alliances who have not had such rewards yet as they are still working their way through the numbers (having never been higher up with all the rewards yet) and therefore are likely NOT to have 6* mini bosses and (3) 5* attackers to boot. I think there's a valid point here.
If this means easier wins now for alliances who were cheating, and presumably they keep winning wars over and over, does anyone know how long it could take an alliance to recover from the typical drop in rating to get back to where they were?
Just curious since we're on the topic.
The suggestion I made in season one was to give cheating alliances a multiplier penalty for some duration of time. This way they would still have to be matched against harder alliances, but they would gain fewer points for every way they fought, win or lose. Another possibility is to apply a reward tier penalty. Their war rating would stay the same, they would still get matched according to that rating, but all of their rewards, points, and seasonal multiplier would act as if they were several tiers lower until the penalty expired.
You makes it as if you worry about the other alliances chance of retaliation but fact is you just don’t want to lose your multiplier. Nothing is wrong with that but I think the penalty perfectly fits the crime. So if you don’t want to lose it, don’t cheat.
As I have stated previously, this loss in war rating is not effecting me personally. We were likely going to be gold 1, and all this has done is ensured we will get gold 1 (without even trying). Even with the worse multiplier we are still getting more then enough points from crushing the opposition we are paired with.
As for "you make it as if you worry about the other alliances chances of relatiation", that's precisely correct. I feel awful about how unfair these wars are, and believe it or not, have empathy for the victims.
What you said is from your perspective. The lower tier alliances would have fun, having the chance to fight a better opponent that they wouldn’t have faced in normal circumstances in a war that they were supposed to lose. They would get matched with weaker alliances in the following wars.
Me and my alliance were having a lot of fun, battling a 3.1k alliance even when we ended up losing badly eventually. We took it as a chance to test our limit. We don’t need any sympathy and we are definitely not a victim.