I posted something similar to this a couple of weeks ago. We are like you, the time that works for us is around 7pm to 8pm CST to war. We've been hitting the matchmaking button for well over a year and never an issue. Couple weeks ago we hit the button and it took us FOUR HOURS to find a match. This four hour matchmaking time only allowed us to do 2 wars instead of 3 that week. All the responses Kabam gave us were "too bad, start earlier". So at least you got a war, we lost out on a war which is going to cost us Platinum rewards. We would have gladly taken the points for a loss than no points at all. I'm sorry man, Kabam won't do anything for you for their own systems being broke or not working properly.
It doesn’t matter what time either of these groups searched for a match, the system should have safe-guards to prevent this type of thing from happening
Time definitely matters since this would never happen if there were others searching at same tier.
A match is better than no match.
Apologies, it SHOUDLN’T matter because there should be safeguards in place to prevent this from happening.
It doesn’t matter what time either of these groups searched for a match, the system should have safe-guards to prevent this type of thing from happening
Time definitely matters since this would never happen if there were others searching at same tier.
A match is better than no match.
Apologies, it SHOUDLN’T matter because there should be safeguards in place to prevent this from happening.
Time should NOT matter if the search algorithm was focused on the established brackets, allowing people a reasonable expectation of being able to play competitively.
This notion that it has to do with what time any team performs a search simply does not hold water. While I completely understand the conclusion and logic that gets everyone to this hypothetical scenario it doesn't make it right.
As stated on the other thread, this situation defies common sense and any notion that there should be an expectation of reasonable competitive play (one of the primary points of establishing brackets in the first place in ANY sporting/competitive event).
It doesn’t matter what time either of these groups searched for a match, the system should have safe-guards to prevent this type of thing from happening
Time definitely matters since this would never happen if there were others searching at same tier.
A match is better than no match.
Apologies, it SHOUDLN’T matter because there should be safeguards in place to prevent this from happening.
Safeguards such as?
You don’t think the system should be designed in such a way as to avoid unfair matchups?
It doesn’t matter what time either of these groups searched for a match, the system should have safe-guards to prevent this type of thing from happening
Time definitely matters since this would never happen if there were others searching at same tier.
A match is better than no match.
Apologies, it SHOUDLN’T matter because there should be safeguards in place to prevent this from happening.
Safeguards such as?
You don’t think the system should be designed in such a way as to avoid unfair matchups?
It cannot do so with "safeguards" given the current way matchmaking works. So long as the game attempts to match you against other people coincidentally looking for match at the same time, there's no way to prevent this in the general case. To prevent this, you'd have to completely change match making to an assigned match system instead of a voluntary match system.
Time should NOT matter if the search algorithm was focused on the established brackets, allowing people a reasonable expectation of being able to play competitively.
Just to interject a bit here, I see a lot of people mentioning matching "within bracket" and I'm not sure if that's just casually misstated or an actual error. Within AW, "fair" matches take place between alliances within the same tier - i.e. that have similar win/loss records against (presumably if not always) similar strength competition. The game is not supposed to match alliances in the same *bracket* because that isn't the same thing. Remember, on day one of a new season we are all in the same bracket with zero points.
Restricting matches to only alliances in the same bracket is a potential subtle advantage to alliances in higher brackets, because it is much more difficult for alliances to fall out of a bracket when they continue to be matched against those opponents even when they lose.
That really sucks to hear and no matchmaking system is going to be perfect, there will always be flaws. It’s just a shame that something bad had to happen to you. But you guys are still getting pretty decent rewards. I know it’s not as much as you would’ve gotten in Plat 2 but still good. But you guys can’t go down without a fight.
Time should NOT matter if the search algorithm was focused on the established brackets, allowing people a reasonable expectation of being able to play competitively.
Just to interject a bit here, I see a lot of people mentioning matching "within bracket" and I'm not sure if that's just casually misstated or an actual error. Within AW, "fair" matches take place between alliances within the same tier - i.e. that have similar win/loss records against (presumably if not always) similar strength competition. The game is not supposed to match alliances in the same *bracket* because that isn't the same thing. Remember, on day one of a new season we are all in the same bracket with zero points.
Restricting matches to only alliances in the same bracket is a potential subtle advantage to alliances in higher brackets, because it is much more difficult for alliances to fall out of a bracket when they continue to be matched against those opponents even when they lose.
Not actually disagreeing here. Perhaps Bracket is the wrong word. Replace "Bracket" for the word "Tier" in anything I've said, and the spirit of my argument remains unchanged. Regardless of what it's called, even a Tiering system should be sensitive to this type of disparity when pairing two teams up with one another. Common sense.
So the safest way in order to avoid facing a team equal strength is make sure you start your War very late that's what these guys did cuz they wanted to avoid facing the teams that would beat them
I really hope a playoff type system gets implemented in future iterations of AW so that the top teams in each bracket can actually play each other and a true victor can be determined.
Ducking and dodging each other all season is ridiculous and takes the competitive spirit of this whole thing away. I know they're not the only ones doing this but this kind fo thing needs to stop.
I'm not trying to get this post taken down so I won't get too much into it.
At first this was to point out how flawed the match making system was but as soon as it was admitted that tough matches are purposely being avoided.....whole different ball game.
The top 10 should be the golden standard in this game, not who can win the most matches against everybody not in the top 10.....
This is an issue with how flawed the matchmaking system is, rather than a case of collusion. If Kabam wanted every alliance an equal chance of matching each other, they wouldn't have allowed alliances to pick their matchmaking time.
This is an issue with how flawed the matchmaking system is, rather than a case of collusion. If Kabam wanted every alliance an equal chance of matching each other, they wouldn't have allowed alliances to pick their matchmaking time.
That's like saying if they wanted the game to work correctly, they wouldn't have put so many bugs in it.
It is obvious to me the original intent of allowing match making at different times is to allow players to set their own schedules for wars, and the match making system attempts to make matches as quickly as possible to limit how long alliances have to wait for a war to start, and the combination of all the features of the system conspire to allow alliances to collude to create manipulated match ups. If they really wanted alliances to be able to directly manipulate who they matched with, they would have allowed alliances to challenge each other directly similar to how the duel system works.
Anyone who thinks this isn't just a bad side effect of a bunch of cobbled together features is simply in error.
This is an issue with how flawed the matchmaking system is, rather than a case of collusion. If Kabam wanted every alliance an equal chance of matching each other, they wouldn't have allowed alliances to pick their matchmaking time.
That's like saying if they wanted the game to work correctly, they wouldn't have put so many bugs in it.
It is obvious to me the original intent of allowing match making at different times is to allow players to set their own schedules for wars, and the match making system attempts to make matches as quickly as possible to limit how long alliances have to wait for a war to start, and the combination of all the features of the system conspire to allow alliances to collude to create manipulated match ups. If they really wanted alliances to be able to directly manipulate who they matched with, they would have allowed alliances to challenge each other directly similar to how the duel system works.
Anyone who thinks this isn't just a bad side effect of a bunch of cobbled together features is simply in error.
There's a bit sarcasm there, obviously it is not Kabam's intent to have alliances purposefully avoid each other. It's a flaw in the system that allows alliances to get away with not matching one another. Since the first month of Alliance War was released, there had to be at least 1 case of "collusion" due to the system.
Alliance leader 1: Hey did you guys match yet?
Alliance leader 2: Nope still searching
Alliance leader 1: Let me know when you guys match don't want to face you guys
Alliance leader 2: Okay cool.
And boom the matchmaking room was created. Will Kabam start punishing alliances who don't start matchmaking as soon as it opens? Who knows, that's something awfully hard to prove. I've brought up before an idea that is gaining traction as the way to go, an opt-in opt-out button that could allow a window of when alliances want to start an alliance war. It would resolve the matchmaking issue that the OP started this thread for.
you said it yourself, you were on a winning streak, this is how matchmaking works, you can't win all 10 wars (alliance war history), maybe 7 at best, unless you are in Pilo.. I mean Master alliance.
so best of luck against those guys, you actually can win if none of your alliance died
Comments
except that from Kabam themselves they said to keep the search going and to never cancel it.....would appreciate anything more constructive
Apologies, it SHOUDLN’T matter because there should be safeguards in place to prevent this from happening.
Safeguards such as?
This notion that it has to do with what time any team performs a search simply does not hold water. While I completely understand the conclusion and logic that gets everyone to this hypothetical scenario it doesn't make it right.
As stated on the other thread, this situation defies common sense and any notion that there should be an expectation of reasonable competitive play (one of the primary points of establishing brackets in the first place in ANY sporting/competitive event).
You don’t think the system should be designed in such a way as to avoid unfair matchups?
It cannot do so with "safeguards" given the current way matchmaking works. So long as the game attempts to match you against other people coincidentally looking for match at the same time, there's no way to prevent this in the general case. To prevent this, you'd have to completely change match making to an assigned match system instead of a voluntary match system.
Just to interject a bit here, I see a lot of people mentioning matching "within bracket" and I'm not sure if that's just casually misstated or an actual error. Within AW, "fair" matches take place between alliances within the same tier - i.e. that have similar win/loss records against (presumably if not always) similar strength competition. The game is not supposed to match alliances in the same *bracket* because that isn't the same thing. Remember, on day one of a new season we are all in the same bracket with zero points.
Restricting matches to only alliances in the same bracket is a potential subtle advantage to alliances in higher brackets, because it is much more difficult for alliances to fall out of a bracket when they continue to be matched against those opponents even when they lose.
Not actually disagreeing here. Perhaps Bracket is the wrong word. Replace "Bracket" for the word "Tier" in anything I've said, and the spirit of my argument remains unchanged. Regardless of what it's called, even a Tiering system should be sensitive to this type of disparity when pairing two teams up with one another. Common sense.
Ducking and dodging each other all season is ridiculous and takes the competitive spirit of this whole thing away. I know they're not the only ones doing this but this kind fo thing needs to stop.
congratulations on your "deserved" top 3
I'm sure 4th place is going to be thrilled.
At first this was to point out how flawed the match making system was but as soon as it was admitted that tough matches are purposely being avoided.....whole different ball game.
The top 10 should be the golden standard in this game, not who can win the most matches against everybody not in the top 10.....
Lol, @Dropfaith isn’t part of the ally you’re talking about..that post was sarcasm.
oh,....well my point still stands! lol
Rumor is every master alliance got an easy draw
That's like saying if they wanted the game to work correctly, they wouldn't have put so many bugs in it.
It is obvious to me the original intent of allowing match making at different times is to allow players to set their own schedules for wars, and the match making system attempts to make matches as quickly as possible to limit how long alliances have to wait for a war to start, and the combination of all the features of the system conspire to allow alliances to collude to create manipulated match ups. If they really wanted alliances to be able to directly manipulate who they matched with, they would have allowed alliances to challenge each other directly similar to how the duel system works.
Anyone who thinks this isn't just a bad side effect of a bunch of cobbled together features is simply in error.
There's a bit sarcasm there, obviously it is not Kabam's intent to have alliances purposefully avoid each other. It's a flaw in the system that allows alliances to get away with not matching one another. Since the first month of Alliance War was released, there had to be at least 1 case of "collusion" due to the system.
Alliance leader 1: Hey did you guys match yet?
Alliance leader 2: Nope still searching
Alliance leader 1: Let me know when you guys match don't want to face you guys
Alliance leader 2: Okay cool.
And boom the matchmaking room was created. Will Kabam start punishing alliances who don't start matchmaking as soon as it opens? Who knows, that's something awfully hard to prove. I've brought up before an idea that is gaining traction as the way to go, an opt-in opt-out button that could allow a window of when alliances want to start an alliance war. It would resolve the matchmaking issue that the OP started this thread for.
so best of luck against those guys, you actually can win if none of your alliance died