War Matchmaking [Edited for Clarity]

3 time AW season champs against a middling Plat3 alliance with a war rating difference of over 700 points.

Good job, guys.

Comments

ContestOfNoobs

Husky54

ContestOfNoobs wrote: »

hahaha, yeah basically

Dr_Z01dberg

Husky54

Dr_Z01dberg wrote: »

If it were a joke. But, it's pointed criticism.

MrBanks

Husky54 wrote: »

Dr_Z01dberg wrote: »

If it were a joke. But, it's pointed criticism.

I think he joined the forums just to post that lol

I_Like_Turtles

Damn, that's messed up.

Kabam Miike

Hey there,

We are continuously working on ways in which we can improve matchmaking, and are actually pretty close to announcing some pretty major changes.

As for the current situation you're in, I feel your pain. While we've done a lot to improve the current system, it's not foolproof, and some bad matchups like this can happen. We really want to get this fixed, and are hard at work to ensure that we give every Alliance the best match possible.

Look out for more information towards the end of the month on Matchmaking improvements.

Husky54

Also, re: "it's not foolproof."

The people who manipulate the matchmaking in their favor are clearly not fools. These alliances have chats and they coordinate these things. So, until you actually crack down on this kind of stuff and dole out punishments and compensation, it's all just white noise, Miike. These kinds of things hurt honest alliances and their season goals.

They also hurt your bottom line, because we're likely not using items on this war.

AgentV

absolutely unfair to other top Master allies who spend to earn their points to stay in Top 5!

Husky54

Ok, so serious question:

How can you all seriously expect us to buy into this system when it's this broken? How can season ranks and rewards be taken seriously when you're not doing the ground work to ensure that the system is legitimately fair?

Dr_Z01dberg

@Husky54 actually it was more of a nod to your original thread title. Your point on matchmaking however is very valid. The matchmaking appears to use as much science as pulling names from a hat...

Husky54

Dr_Z01dberg wrote: »

@Husky54 actually it was more of a nod to your original thread title. Your point on matchmaking however is very valid. The matchmaking appears to use as much science as pulling names from a hat...

No, I know it was. The fact that they edited it shows how out of touch they are.

Fishman13579

Those "top tier" allis rigging match making are weak. That's bush league baby garbage. Scared to fight each other for game rewards lol. What a joke.

Speeds80

The other stupid thing is your rating will only drop by 3 points making your next matchup just as hard as usual

unknown

This content has been removed.

Vale84

Kabam Miike wrote: »

Hey there,

We are continuously working on ways in which we can improve matchmaking, and are actually pretty close to announcing some pretty major changes.

As for the current situation you're in, I feel your pain. While we've done a lot to improve the current system, it's not foolproof, and some bad matchups like this can happen. We really want to get this fixed, and are hard at work to ensure that we give every Alliance the best match possible.

Look out for more information towards the end of the month on Matchmaking improvements.

Interesting cause you guys literally cut in half offseason and one of the "compensations" you wrote down when you decided to give us leaders a headache having only one week for changes was:

-We improved matchmaking!

What a fine job you did seems, along boost controversy and double points bug. Might not be our best top 10 season, but surely is the most entertaining!

So since you STILL have to come out with improved matchmaking standing from your reply, what did we had offseason cut in half for? o.o

Husky54

Vale84 wrote: »

Kabam Miike wrote: »

Hey

Interesting cause you guys literally cut in half offseason and one of the "compensations" you wrote down when you decided to give us leaders a headache having only one week for changes was:

-We improved matchmaking!

What a fine job you did seems, along boost controversy and double points bug. Might not be our best top 10 season, but surely is the most entertaining!

So since you STILL have to come out with improved matchmaking standing from your reply, what did we had offseason cut in half for? o.o

The war boost thing is a SERIOUS problem. The boost crystals are not only RANDOM but 240 units a piece (but how generous of Kabam to offer them for HALF OFF this week).

Db_6

Same here, a 14m ally paired up with a 19 mil ally. Typical kabam bs

CoatHang3r

Vale84 wrote: »

Interesting cause you guys literally cut in half offseason and one of the "compensations" you wrote down when you decided to give us leaders a headache having only one week for changes was:

-We improved matchmaking!

So since you STILL have to come out with improved matchmaking standing from your reply, what did we had offseason cut in half for? o.o

Wasn’t what was said. Just sayin.

but we’ve made these schedule adjustments to accommodate upcoming optimizations to Alliance Wars matchmaking.

Zuko_ILC

Husky54 wrote: »

3 time AW season champs against a middling Plat3 alliance with a war rating difference of over 700 points.

Good job, guys.

Matchmaking is completely broken, Master Alliances still manipulate the matchmaking so they don't fight each other. This has been this way for every War season and Kabam has turned a blind eye. They constantly face lesser competition and is one of the main reasons they stay up so high. Yes they are skilled but If I'm in Plat3 and facing Gold 2 Allys, I've got quite an advantage over them. Same is going on here over and over and over and well you get it. Wish Kabam would take it seriously it is basically a contest of dodging opponents not of champions.

MattMan

Master should only be able to match against master, platinum vs platinum. How hard is it really. “We’re working on it” BS the same stuffs been happening since before seasons.

Dock them they obviously colluded with other alliances to avoid the tough matchups

Husky54

MattMan wrote: »

Master should only be able to match against master, platinum vs platinum. How hard is it really. “We’re working on it” BS the same stuffs been happening since before seasons.

Dock them they obviously colluded with other alliances to avoid the tough matchups

Matching shouldn't be based on when you start matching. You know what would work?

You have an OPT-IN period for each war. Alliances are either IN or OUT for however many battle groups.

The opt-in period ends, then the system matches comparable opponents.

AQ starts and ends at the same time each day, why not war, too.

Husky54

Husky54 wrote: »

Matching shouldn't be based on when you start matching. You know what would work?

You have an OPT-IN period for each war. Alliances are either IN or OUT for however many battle groups.

The opt-in period ends, then the system matches comparable opponents.

AQ starts and ends at the same time each day, why not war, too.

This also eliminates the problematic match timer and alliances getting screwed out of wars mid season.

unknown

This content has been removed.

ContestOfNoobs

INTEGRAL wrote: »

ASR - ZeusE
ASR - Kenob
4Loki - Iso8a
MNG - MMX
4Loki - ZeusE
MNG - J11
4Loki - BRAE
Kenob- BRAE
NY - MMX
MMX - D69
Kenob - D69
those are the ones I remember from first 3 wars

So what else do you want?

Brae is 0-3 and in plat2,
another loss would devastating 0-4
they are a legit master allaince

Markjv81

How are they legit master if lost 3 wars? Or legit only when facing non master alliances?

unknown

This content has been removed.

ContestOfNoobs

Markjv81 wrote: »

How are they legit master if lost 3 wars? Or legit only when facing non master alliances?

@Markjv81
i mean theres more to it. big difference between top 10 masters vs top 20 masters
1.kenob-loss last yeears champions in 1st
2.nyc-have won 1st place in masters couple seasons ago

3.4loki, a really close war, anyone could have won

DNA3000

Drooped2 wrote: »

This is just a split second thought but wouldn't just going by your opponents multiplier solve most if this with very little consequence?

Ie tier 1 allainces facing a t3 the
T1 allaince gets the multi plier of the t3
And the t3 wouod get the t1 multiplier .

It punishes the t1 and compensates the t3 all at once.

Again 2 second thought so it may be flawed feel free to point out the abusable aspect maybe we can work thru it

You're assuming that all of these mismatches are caused by the higher alliance manipulating match making to draw the lower alliance. But that's not the case. Given the way match making currently works, these types of mismatches are actually impossible to avoid. In fact, if the issue was purely due to match making manipulation, the matches would actually be closer than this. Manipulation can allow two 3000+ alliances from avoiding each other, but it cannot arbitrarily seek out and find alliances 700 points lower. For that to happen, other things must be simultaneously in play, and those are the result of match making happening at different times, rating differentials linear all the way to the top, and match making attempting to find good alliance rating matches on top of war rating matches and failing to find an optimal match in such a way as it then settles for horrible matches.

The multiplier swap would penalize alliances that matched lower through no fault of their own.

unknown

This content has been removed.