War Match Aftermath

GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
in General Discussion
So, I've seen a number of Posts on the mismatches in War, and we officially just had our first one. Significantly higher. About 5 Mil higher. I do the best I can with my guys, but I can only work within the limits of what we have. Now, my issue isn't Wins and Losses. If my guys fight and lose, that is fair. Even if the Match was lost when we started. What concerns me is that the Alliance we are up agaisnt is over 3 years old. I can't speculate whether it's the result of being docked for cheating, or taking a dive for Seasons, or that they're just not that skilled (500k Rated mostly), or that they don't do Wars often (Silver, so clearly they do). I really don't know for certain why they're Matched with us. I am however, concerned because I see the problem others have been pointing out. There seems to be an imbalance within the system now, and I am curious of ideas on how to continue improving Wars in a way that doesn't blindside people. Of course, we're all adults. If we're outnumbered, so be it. It's just bothersome because something is out of whack. Ideas?

Comments

  • Markjv81Markjv81 Member Posts: 1,032 ★★★★
    Alliance rating doesn't reflect strength in AW.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    Not always, no. When there's a significant difference, it has an effect. As I said, my issue isn't whether we win or lose. Its the extreme ambushes. Some have reported larger margins than myself. That's disturbing.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    What it's created is a pecking scenario.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    Rating is also not an insignificant metric. It denotes many things, including progress, potential capabilities, time and effort, etc. One can argue that anyone with "skill" can beat anything, but people do the best they can with what they have, and not everyone sells Champs or manipulates the data in some other way. Manipulate meaning change. It's significant when you have Allies coming up agaisnt others that are 3 and sometimes 4 times their Rating, with significant experience in the game. That's a flaw in the system somewhere.
  • SpeedbumpSpeedbump Member Posts: 1,520 ★★★
    Now your just typing to type....
  • Markjv81Markjv81 Member Posts: 1,032 ★★★★
    I'm guessing you don't run 3 BG so always going to be hard to give an exact level match up.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    I'm not the only one that's reported situations like this. It's a problem.
    As for suggestions, as much as I'm not a fan of the Prestige Race, I think it might be useful to incorporate it into Matchmaking. Especially in light of such shifting War Ratings. Believe me, my views on Prestige are pretty visible. Lol. However, it's the only suggestion I can come up with that accommodates people selling Champs and War Rating being used as punishment.
  • KarakanliKarakanli Member Posts: 82 ★
    There can be multiple reasons, some are legit:

    - your opponent had a big change of personal lately. Former inmates had less rating and/or Skill an degenerated the war Rating. The new guys there are just pushing Rating up again and your ways crossed.

    - your Opponent refuses to use potions on the new minibosses and or in general and therefore lost quite a few wars, which decreased war rating Significantly

    - your opponents tanked the last wars to lower war Tier and to get the 50k win Bonus as soon as season 3 arrives.

    - ...

    There are many more options and combinations how that May occur and while I am never to late in criticising Kabam Im afraid there is no mode or algorithm in war matchmaking the communitiy will not get used to. And therefore every system will be stressed and used by clever players and alliances.
  • HolyDracHolyDrac Member Posts: 106 ★
    Age of the alliance doesn't really affect match ups. I think how it works now is mostly based on the War Rating, and then the alliance rating. I believe it matches up alliances who are similar in both ratings, but sometimes when there are not enough alliances searching for war, it might broaden the pool and that's when there are mismatches of over 5mil. Granted matchmaking is a lot better now than it was before, but I imagine the core issue around matches like this is when there aren't enough alliances searching. And the latest issues causing alliances to drop like flies is certainly not helping. I imagine it is in fact exacerbating the issue with higher players leaving top alliances and dropping to lower alliances. This in turn makes alliances with lower war rating so much more stronger with the influx of the stronger players making it unfair for the lower tiers.

    I can't think of anything that can help this other than time so that alliances get to where they are meant to be in rating unfortunately
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    Well, I have some thoughts on how it's occurred. Some of which you mentioned. However, I'm just vocalizing that I've had such an encounter and throwing out ideas on how to prevent it.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    edited July 2018

    HolyDrac wrote: »
    Age of the alliance doesn't really affect match ups. I think how it works now is mostly based on the War Rating, and then the alliance rating. I believe it matches up alliances who are similar in both ratings, but sometimes when there are not enough alliances searching for war, it might broaden the pool and that's when there are mismatches of over 5mil. Granted matchmaking is a lot better now than it was before, but I imagine the core issue around matches like this is when there aren't enough alliances searching. And the latest issues causing alliances to drop like flies is certainly not helping. I imagine it is in fact exacerbating the issue with higher players leaving top alliances and dropping to lower alliances. This in turn makes alliances with lower war rating so much more stronger with the influx of the stronger players making it unfair for the lower tiers.

    I can't think of anything that can help this other than time so that alliances get to where they are meant to be in rating unfortunately
    I only mentioned the age incase the question of being a new Ally came up. That would explain a lower Rating.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    I mean, if I wanted to go further, I could create a whole new system that Matches after you place Defenders, within the same range (Rating or Prestige) of what you place. It could be done with 1, 2, or 3 BGs. That would be pretty hard to manipulate, considering. For added measure and to prevent 2* Wars and pecking, we could let the Win/Loss Rewards be scaled based on what you place. If you place 2*s, you can play. You just get 3* Shards. XD
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    That's more planning than I wanted to go into. Lol.
  • Jkw634Jkw634 Member Posts: 296 ★★
    What we are probably starting to see is higher alliances got docked aw war rating so now they are matching up with lower rated alliances who have played fair. Other option is the teams tanking on purpose to get easier matchups once aw season starts.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    Jkw634 wrote: »
    What we are probably starting to see is higher alliances got docked aw war rating so now they are matching up with lower rated alliances who have played fair. Other option is the teams tanking on purpose to get easier matchups once aw season starts.

    Those are a couple things I thought of. Speculation of course. I can't be sure either way.
  • HolyDracHolyDrac Member Posts: 106 ★
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    I mean, if I wanted to go further, I could create a whole new system that Matches after you place Defenders, within the same range (Rating or Prestige) of what you place. It could be done with 1, 2, or 3 BGs. That would be pretty hard to manipulate, considering. For added measure and to prevent 2* Wars and pecking, we could let the Win/Loss Rewards be scaled based on what you place. If you place 2*s, you can play. You just get 3* Shards. XD

    That could actually work. Not sure about the rewards part though haha
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    HolyDrac wrote: »
    GroundedWisdom wrote: »
    I mean, if I wanted to go further, I could create a whole new system that Matches after you place Defenders, within the same range (Rating or Prestige) of what you place. It could be done with 1, 2, or 3 BGs. That would be pretty hard to manipulate, considering. For added measure and to prevent 2* Wars and pecking, we could let the Win/Loss Rewards be scaled based on what you place. If you place 2*s, you can play. You just get 3* Shards. XD

    That could actually work. Not sure about the rewards part though haha

    I just meant a way that scales the Rewards based on what you place. Placing lower Defenders would give less Rewards. Somewhat curve the urge for easy Wins. Not 2*s get 3*s perse.
Sign In or Register to comment.