Kabam...AW match making frustrations boiling over

Cobs · May 2019

You are saying - im against greed and unfair advantages. Got it.

Im telling you how to fix this, and you are arguing with me. Got it.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Tanking is happening more wide-spread than just being able to break through to Masters. It's in a large chunk of the system. So far, the only suggestions I've seen still enable it to happen.

Cranmer00 · May 2019

This is trash.. how are crappy alliances getting top 3masters when they’re not the best in the game..

This is an OXYMORONIC SYSTEM!!!

How can you be top 10 in alliance wars vs other alliances , especially top 3, if youre not even a top 20 alliance..

Please, There is no defending this, so no need to bother mods under their troll logins with 4-20k post counts

Can the mods please check for double points throughout the season again... that has to be the explanation.. this makes 0 sense... has anyone data mined the scores ?

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Well....that's productive. Lol.

HENRIQUE_FORTE · May 2019

Why not a system with leagues and promotions / relegations?
League #1 would have the better rewards, one division, some 500 alliances, bottom 100 would get relegated.
League #2 would have 2 divisions, top 50 of each would get promoted, bottom 100 of each would get demoted. Etc.

Inside each division, since we are talking about hundreds of alliances and only 12 matches are played each season, the Swiss-System Tournament (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss-system_tournament) could be used for pairing alliances. It's what they use on chess, on open tournaments with dozens of players and not enough rounds for an all-play-all.

Off season would not count towards relegation, promotions, etc. Would just be «practice».

Cranmer00 · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:
Well....that's productive. Lol.

Maybe, but that’s the way to get things fixed, being quiet never helps. Been there, done that.

The ranking is messing ya up this season while watching some plat 2-3allisnces get top 3in masters is BS

RagamugginGunner · May 2019

Cobs said:
Lol so you literally have no clue why people tank or what your talking about. If it wasn’t possible to make masters starting in tier2 at start of the season then tanking/shelling wouldn’t exist. Thats the loophole ffs

correct

Cranmer00 · May 2019

Have the mods commented anywhere about knowingly changing the system this season.

3 diff matchmaking systems in 3 seasons?

Cranmer00 · May 2019

Drooped2 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

QuikPik said:
Here Kabam, I did some of your work. Red denotes alliances that you would not normally expect to be in the position they are in. Some of these alliance have people under level 60. Also, in Plat 1 and Master you would expect to see profiles with all R5 but that's not the case.

7 Allies on the board moved, and you call that a problem. That is exactly what happens when Allies are able to progress instead of being held and stifled by other means. Here's the problem. People are convinced that positions are owned and must coincide with the Alliance Rating, and must be what they were last Season. Only that's the opposite of being able to progress, and that's not a competiton at all. No one owns their spot on the board. Where people should be is where they work their way to. It's not a travesty that there's been movement on the board. That was the point.
7 of 30 first of all that's a pretty good amount 23 percent to be clear. Second it's not about rating per say it's about profile strength notice number 2 isnt highlighted? They have all r5s

Number 3? Nah r4s all over in profiles but they dont need to face any master allainces

7 out of 20* over 33%

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Cranmer00 said:

GroundedWisdom said:
Well....that's productive. Lol.
Maybe, but that’s the way to get things fixed, being quiet never helps. Been there, done that.

The ranking is messing ya up this season while watching some plat 2-3allisnces get top 3in masters is BS

Being dramtaic doesn't get anything done any faster than commenting normally.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Drooped2 said:

GroundedWisdom said:

QuikPik said:
Here Kabam, I did some of your work. Red denotes alliances that you would not normally expect to be in the position they are in. Some of these alliance have people under level 60. Also, in Plat 1 and Master you would expect to see profiles with all R5 but that's not the case.

7 Allies on the board moved, and you call that a problem. That is exactly what happens when Allies are able to progress instead of being held and stifled by other means. Here's the problem. People are convinced that positions are owned and must coincide with the Alliance Rating, and must be what they were last Season. Only that's the opposite of being able to progress, and that's not a competiton at all. No one owns their spot on the board. Where people should be is where they work their way to. It's not a travesty that there's been movement on the board. That was the point.
7 of 30 first of all that's a pretty good amount 23 percent to be clear. Second it's not about rating per say it's about profile strength notice number 2 isnt highlighted? They have all r5s

Number 3? Nah r4s all over in profiles but they dont need to face any master allainces

They've had ongoing issues with the Leaderboards and Points, so we don't know what's actually accurate or not. That's not the Final Rankings. All we know is there is movement and people think things should never change. That's the problem. People are convinced Allies "belong" somewhere based on where they were before, but it's a competition. There's supppsed to be movement each Season.

Cranmer00 · May 2019

It might seem dramatic but everything stated is true. Why make alliance wars for alliances to compete to be the best alliance in the game if kabam is going to reward a #40-60 alliance with top 3 rewards. Oxymoronic, and needs to be fixed. There’s Just no arguing that

Maybe they should just let people with lower prestige run act 4 level content and get act 6 rewards. Or let them run map 5 and give them map 7 rewards.. those analogies fit here because that is what is happening.

It should be clearly obvious that they fked this one up, it’s time to come out, own up to it and say we will fix this.

Ignoring the issues/Not responding and not owning up to the problem is not helping either ..

Worknprogress · May 2019

Using prestige wouldn't really work though. An alliance with mostly 30 people with 5 R5 champs and one with 30 people with 10 R5 champs can have very similar prestige. Hell the 5 champ alliance could technically even be higher.

There's a large difference between an alliance that's barely scraping R5 attack teams together and one that has a full R5 attack and defense

Greywarden · May 2019

Fyi tanking has no effect on war matches being setup solely on prestige, rating isn’t being taken into account at all. My group has had 10/12 wars with a +40/50 -10/-20 spread the whole season.

My idea for a way to make everyone happy is IF prestige based wars become a thing (sounds like an oxymoron) then multiplier should go up depending on what prestige bracket you’re in. Same logic as in aq which is apparently the only thing that matters now. Higher prestige = higher points.

No offense to the groups in master and platinum 1 who don’t even have members at level 60 but one of your wins in tier 1 against gold level alliances shouldn’t be worth the same than a win against the groups the higher prestige alliances are facing.

Mng
Fnx
J11
Asr
Iso8A 3 times
Kenob 2 times
Unull

^^^ that’s what my alliance had to face this season which makes seeing low level alliances at the top even more aggravating. If you want to give a 12-0 little league team the World Series trophy then they should be playing some MLB teams.....

Markjv81 · May 2019

The winning alliance should get the lesser multiplier of the 2 competing teams.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Greywarden said:
Fyi tanking has no effect on war matches being setup solely on prestige, rating isn’t being taken into account at all. My group has had 10/12 wars with a +40/50 -10/-20 spread the whole season.

My idea for a way to make everyone happy is IF prestige based wars become a thing (sounds like an oxymoron) then multiplier should go up depending on what prestige bracket you’re in. Same logic as in aq which is apparently the only thing that matters now. Higher prestige = higher points.

No offense to the groups in master and platinum 1 who don’t even have members at level 60 but one of your wins in tier 1 against gold level alliances shouldn’t be worth the same than a win against the groups the higher prestige alliances are facing.

Mng
Fnx
J11
Asr
Iso8A 3 times
Kenob 2 times
Unull

^^^ that’s what my alliance had to face this season which makes seeing low level alliances at the top even more aggravating. If you want to give a 12-0 little league team the World Series trophy then they should be playing some MLB teams.....

Tanking is the reason we're here now. Without something regulating people zipping up and down the system, very few are able to progress. Progress isn't being measured by actual Win/Loss skill. It's a stalemate. Go down during the Off, go up during Seasons, rinse and repeat. This has a terrible effect, not only for the people who have to come up agaisnt them and miss out on Wars in Seasons which are gauged based on ability, but also on the system as a whole. There's very little progress at all because it's stopping others from moving anywhere, all in the name of edging up a bit. The fact is, before people started manipulating War Rating, it was a reasonable measure of what an Alliance was capable of, simply because it was based on efforts through Wins and Losses. Now, it's just a farce that people use to manipualte the Seasons Points.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

GroundedWisdom said:
That depends on what you define as chill. Having a reasonable range to Match with is pretty much as it should be. If you're calling chill Wars just taking out weaker people because it's easier, then I'm going to have to say sorry about chill. Lol.
I don’t usually agree with you but u, but this seems like the best solution. If we use a prestige based rating system to determine AQ map difficulty, I see no problem with matching similar prestige alliances. This also gets rid of alliances that heavily sandbag

There are also other reasons that Prestige gauges progress, but I fear it's falling on deaf ears here. Lol. Prestige is a measure of progress because it increases as Allies grow through Ranking. In any event, I doubt people will see how because they don't see it as much of a significance. Lol.

Markjv81 · May 2019

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

GroundedWisdom said:
That depends on what you define as chill. Having a reasonable range to Match with is pretty much as it should be. If you're calling chill Wars just taking out weaker people because it's easier, then I'm going to have to say sorry about chill. Lol.
I don’t usually agree with you but u, but this seems like the best solution. If we use a prestige based rating system to determine AQ map difficulty, I see no problem with matching similar prestige alliances. This also gets rid of alliances that heavily sandbag

This has been covered, you’re then forcing alliances who rank champs for prestige in AQ to compete at the same level in AW which is ridiculous. Plus prestige doesn’t determine strength of an alliance seeing as it only incorporates top 5 champions meaning in that scenario every player that has 5 r5’s is equal to players that potentially have 10+ r5’s.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Markjv81 said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

GroundedWisdom said:
That depends on what you define as chill. Having a reasonable range to Match with is pretty much as it should be. If you're calling chill Wars just taking out weaker people because it's easier, then I'm going to have to say sorry about chill. Lol.
I don’t usually agree with you but u, but this seems like the best solution. If we use a prestige based rating system to determine AQ map difficulty, I see no problem with matching similar prestige alliances. This also gets rid of alliances that heavily sandbag
This has been covered, you’re then forcing alliances who rank champs for prestige in AQ to compete at the same level in AW which is ridiculous. Plus prestige doesn’t determine strength of an alliance seeing as it only incorporates top 5 champions meaning in that scenario every player that has 5 r5’s is equal to players that potentially have 10+ r5’s.

Yes. God forbid they play at an equal level instead of overpowering. Lol.

Greywarden · May 2019

GroundedWisdom said:

Just because tanking is the reason we’re here now doesn’t make it right.

I agree that tanking to game war rating was wacky but this is not much better if at all. Prestige matchups do make sense but then multipliers need to reflect that.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

It does measure the strength of the Alliance because they're using their uppermost Roster. Not the middle of what they have. In War, an Alliance is only as strong as the best they can put up. Numerically, that's a fact.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Greywarden said:

GroundedWisdom said:
Just because tanking is the reason we’re here now doesn’t make it right.

I agree that tanking to game war rating was wacky but this is not much better if at all. Prestige matchups do make sense but then multipliers need to reflect that.

Wacky? No. It's ruining the system and the whole point of running the game mode to begin with. It's not a conpetition if you take away the possibility of progress.

GroundedWisdom · May 2019

Jamiefyffe16 said:

GroundedWisdom said:
It does measure the strength of the Alliance because they're using their uppermost Roster. Not the middle of what they have. In War, an Alliance is only as strong as the best they can put up. Numerically, that's a fact.

My god you do realize that once you have 5 ranked 5s most alliances have very similar prestige? It’s like talking to a wall...

Yes. Do you realize that's the most any Ally can put up, aside from 6* R2s? Which means that's the strength plateau.

Kabam...AW match making frustrations boiling over

Comments