**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Options

Kabam...AW match making frustrations boiling over

1…911131415

Comments

  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Cobs said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Cobs said:

    Heres another example of whats going on. The NBA finals are raptors vs warrior. To get to the finals the raptors faced the bucks and the warriors faced michigan state. Yes they both technically won there games to get there. But beating a college team isnt the equivalent of another top ranked NBA team. This is exactly what this new prestige based matchmaking is doing to the top of war. Everything other then this point is just noise and can be ignored. This is the issue. It can be solved by changing the scoring (which would also eliminate tanking), or they could remove seasons all together because it is toxic as hell for the game and distribute a % of season rewards every war win. Prestige has no place in AW, prestige is an arbitrary value given to champs. In no way does it represent anything to do with your strength in war, its an accurate measurement for the number of sig stone deals you have bought tho haha

    What do you think measures your strength in War? Besides playing the Map, what do you think determines the strength of what you're putting up?
    Up until this season ..... your war rating. Thats literally what its there for. Factoring the arbitrary number given to your top5 champs maybe sounds like an ok idea until you dig even a tiny bit in. Its not, its a terrible idea and this season is showing that.
    The issue is tanking you say? Then stop tanking, dont break war matches even further.
    How do you stop tanking? I just told you in my last post.

    Breaking matchmaking more isnt the answer, end of story.
    It was there for that at one time. Then they introduced a Seasons metric that's interconnected to the Tier you're in and thus, War Rating. So people decided to exploit that in order to try and gain easy Wins for Season Points. Which means it stopped being a true measure of fairness for the areas Tanking. I'd be curious to know how many of the Allies who are noticing War Rating discrepancies were actually Tanking, and whether or not they're the same areas. In any event, it's only a fair system if people are playing fairly.
  • Options
    QuikPikQuikPik Posts: 806 ★★★★
    I'm sorry you lack the basic understanding to see how a 7 million alliance is out of place in Gold 1. Square peg meet round hole...
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    You Top Champs ARE equal to your capabilities in what you put up agaisnt others. For starters, people put up the best of what they have. The other aspect is you're not capable of more than your Top.
  • Options
    CobsCobs Posts: 103 ★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Cobs said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    Cobs said:

    Heres another example of whats going on. The NBA finals are raptors vs warrior. To get to the finals the raptors faced the bucks and the warriors faced michigan state. Yes they both technically won there games to get there. But beating a college team isnt the equivalent of another top ranked NBA team. This is exactly what this new prestige based matchmaking is doing to the top of war. Everything other then this point is just noise and can be ignored. This is the issue. It can be solved by changing the scoring (which would also eliminate tanking), or they could remove seasons all together because it is toxic as hell for the game and distribute a % of season rewards every war win. Prestige has no place in AW, prestige is an arbitrary value given to champs. In no way does it represent anything to do with your strength in war, its an accurate measurement for the number of sig stone deals you have bought tho haha

    What do you think measures your strength in War? Besides playing the Map, what do you think determines the strength of what you're putting up?
    Up until this season ..... your war rating. Thats literally what its there for. Factoring the arbitrary number given to your top5 champs maybe sounds like an ok idea until you dig even a tiny bit in. Its not, its a terrible idea and this season is showing that.
    The issue is tanking you say? Then stop tanking, dont break war matches even further.
    How do you stop tanking? I just told you in my last post.

    Breaking matchmaking more isnt the answer, end of story.
    It was there for that at one time. Then they introduced a Seasons metric that's interconnected to the Tier you're in and thus, War Rating. So people decided to exploit that in order to try and gain easy Wins for Season Points. Which means it stopped being a true measure of fairness for the areas Tanking. I'd be curious to know how many of the Allies who are noticing War Rating discrepancies were actually Tanking, and whether or not they're the same areas. In any event, it's only a fair system if people are playing fairly.
    So fix tanking so war rating can do what its designed to. All this does is make things worse. My car has a flat tire and is pulling to the right. Do i fix the tire or deflate the other one so my car doesnt pull anymore? That’s what this logic is
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    QuikPik said:

    I'm sorry you lack the basic understanding to see how a 7 million alliance is out of place in Gold 1. Square peg meet round hole...

    ONE Alliance that seems out of place, which could have a number of reasons for being there, and you think the whole system is falling down. Once again, the Rating of the Alliance doesn't have much to do with it at all. If it was a 2 Mil Ally, maybe there would be some cause for concern. 7 Mil isn't that alarming. They put up the Points to get there. You seem to think the Brackets should be a reflection of Total Alliance Rating, and that's not how it works.
  • Options
    QuikPikQuikPik Posts: 806 ★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    You Top Champs ARE equal to your capabilities in what you put up agaisnt others. For starters, people put up the best of what they have. The other aspect is you're not capable of more than your Top.

    Exactly. That 7 million alliance is only capable of placing R4 4* on defense. How are they in Gold 1 unless they are solely playing other alliances in 5-7 million range. I'll put my top champs against theirs but in Kabam's formula they are better at war than me.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    QuikPik said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    You Top Champs ARE equal to your capabilities in what you put up agaisnt others. For starters, people put up the best of what they have. The other aspect is you're not capable of more than your Top.

    Exactly. That 7 million alliance is only capable of placing R4 4* on defense. How are they in Gold 1 unless they are solely playing other alliances in 5-7 million range. I'll put my top champs against theirs but in Kabam's formula they are better at war than me.
    Did you come up against them? No. Do you come up against everyone in the Season? No.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Drooped2 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    You Top Champs ARE equal to your capabilities in what you put up agaisnt others. For starters, people put up the best of what they have. The other aspect is you're not capable of more than your Top.

    Not true at all fine ignore 15 he has 8 same prestige but his entire defense and attack are max r5s.

    Or r2 6s.

    I can do full defense but not attack (not equal)

    Now factor in diveristy I lose a spit for domino on defense so thats 4.
    Now remove stark and captiw to attack or aq.
    That's 2 left for defense.

    Now let's check in on him 5 r5s diverse check.
    3 attackers r5 check
    Aq team yea we can have those r5 as well.

    What you put up is up to you.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    That's not what I'm doing at all. I'm trying to explain things, but it's not going over because somehow people are convinced the old way still works, and nothing should change on the Leaderboard. Most frustrating.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    I'm also curious if it's just being used as a balance mechanism for Allies that have been lowering their Rating some way or trying to throw the system off. If that's the case, the only solution is to stop Tanking. Lol. No issues with a deterrent at all.
  • Options
    CobsCobs Posts: 103 ★
    Are you trying to argue about why you are arguing now hahaha
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Cobs said:

    Are you trying to argue about why you are arguing now hahaha

    You got an argument from that? No. I was explaining my position. I feel I have the right to do that when people are trying to explain my behavior for themselves. Lol.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Drooped2 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    I'm also curious if it's just being used as a balance mechanism for Allies that have been lowering their Rating some way or trying to throw the system off. If that's the case, the only solution is to stop Tanking. Lol. No issues with a deterrent at all.

    Weve never tanked qe dont wven do off season wars so
    Just a thought.
  • Options
    QuikPikQuikPik Posts: 806 ★★★★
    No you are the one that is frustrating that you can't comprehend how competition works.

    - Rank 861 Gold 1, 7m lots of people under level 50
    - Rank 950 Gold 1, 8m they have someone on their roster that's level 37
    - Rank 59 in Gold 2, 3m alliance !
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,249 ★★★★★
    edited May 2019
    Let’s put it this way.

    Alliances are rated for their war abilities based on war ratings. When Seasons were introduced with a FIXED multiplier for respective tiers, tanking was resulted as it gave alliances an incentive to drop to the bottom of their tier for the exact SAME multiplier, and grab some easy wins on the way up to their equilibrium rating, where they have a 50% win/loss ratio on average.

    Hence, there is a need to remove the fixed multiplier system in order to remove tanking.

    Now that that’s out of the way, war ratings should be the only metric being considered when matchmaking 2 alliances. If alliance A and B both have 3000 war ratings, at a glance, one would assume that they have similar warring abilities, which is what the war rating metric was designed to do.

    The big issue now is, it is possible that a 15m alliance and a 30m alliance have the same war rating of 3000, which means, war rating no longer serves as an accurate measure of warring capabilities. In short, the system is going haywire.

    In order to rectify it, War matchmaking will need to be solely based on war ratings moving forward and allow alliances to eventually win/lose their way to their equilibrium ratings, while simultaneously changing the fixed multiplier system to disincentivize tanking.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    You're focusing on what their Rating is, and that has nothing to do with how they performed in the Season. That's in the Points.
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,249 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    You're focusing on what their Rating is, and that has nothing to do with how they performed in the Season. That's in the Points.

    That’s where you’re wrong. Performance in Season is directly correlated to the matchups they get in Seasons, which is related to what their rating is.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    edited May 2019
    xNig said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    You're focusing on what their Rating is, and that has nothing to do with how they performed in the Season. That's in the Points.

    That’s where you’re wrong. Performance in Season is directly correlated to the matchups they get in Seasons, which is related to what their rating is.
    The point I'm making is the OP seems to think the Leaderboard should reflect Total Alliance Rating, when that's not much at all. People aren't even using their total Rosters. You can have strong guys with less Total Rating, and you can have an Alliance with a high Rating that aren't that strong. Rating is only the total PI of the Ally. Not an automatic reflection of what they brought and how they fought.
    If that's the logic, throw away fighting altogether and award people from least to highest-Rated Ally. No need to compete. Doesn't matter.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Then you have to factor in the discrepancies of it being a live Leaderboard, and the fact that they make adjustments for cheaters.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,247 ★★★★★
    Drooped2 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    RagamugginGunner said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    RagamugginGunner said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    RagamugginGunner said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    RagamugginGunner said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    I know exactly what I'm talking about. What I don't have the energy for is to open peoples' minds when they refuse to see something. So I need a break. Lol.

    What are the odds that you're right ant everyone else is wrong?
    Statistically.....LOL.
    You don't fight in high tier AW and refuse to listen to those who do. Why do you think you're right and those who actually live what they talk about, not guess and assume, are wrong? Can you answer that simple question?
    ....and you refuse to accept that someone has the intelligence and capability of knowing much more than what they fought. Now that we've established each other....
    Are you talking about yourself? those with true intelligence learn from those who know, not try to argue facts with assumptions.
    So the only people who know anything are the ones playing in a certain Tier? Interesting way to approach a discussion. Bit closed-minded if you ask me.
    They know the most. They don't have to guess or assume.

    Your refusal to admit you don't know something as well as those above you is your great undoing on this site. Your few creditable posts are dwarfed by the plethora of dribble where you are clearly incorrect. instead of learning from the people who know what they're talking about, you dig in your heels and double down by playing the victim and not talking about your level, like everyone doesn't know where you are.

    What happens first, your ally finishes in Platinum or you hit 30k posts?
    People don't know more automatically just because of what Tier they're in. You can't measure knowledge based on where they're at in the game. That's an egotistical outlook that remains ignorant to the thoughts of others. It's also not old on this Forum, but it's still just as disappointing that there's a great deal of understanding and learning that's missed, just because it's ignored by a position in the game. Nevertheless, you don't need to be at a certain level to understand the system. You just need sufficient knowledge and intelligence. You want to keep thinking I don't know anything because I'm not "on your level", you do you.
    Lol what you vant measure knowledge based on experience?

    Real.world perspective that for a second. High school drop out doing open heart surgery?
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Cobs said:

    Heres another example of whats going on. The NBA finals are raptors vs warrior. To get to the finals the raptors faced the bucks and the warriors faced michigan state. Yes they both technically won there games to get there. But beating a college team isnt the equivalent of another top ranked NBA team. This is exactly what this new prestige based matchmaking is doing to the top of war. Everything other then this point is just noise and can be ignored. This is the issue. It can be solved by changing the scoring (which would also eliminate tanking), or they could remove seasons all together because it is toxic as hell for the game and distribute a % of season rewards every war win. Prestige has no place in AW, prestige is an arbitrary value given to champs. In no way does it represent anything to do with your strength in war, its an accurate measurement for the number of sig stone deals you have bought tho haha

    What do you think measures your strength in War? Besides playing the Map, what do you think determines the strength of what you're putting up?
    The rank of your champions if one team.is placing all r5s and the other mostly r4s.
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Drooped2 said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    RagamugginGunner said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    RagamugginGunner said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    RagamugginGunner said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    RagamugginGunner said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    I know exactly what I'm talking about. What I don't have the energy for is to open peoples' minds when they refuse to see something. So I need a break. Lol.

    What are the odds that you're right ant everyone else is wrong?
    Statistically.....LOL.
    You don't fight in high tier AW and refuse to listen to those who do. Why do you think you're right and those who actually live what they talk about, not guess and assume, are wrong? Can you answer that simple question?
    ....and you refuse to accept that someone has the intelligence and capability of knowing much more than what they fought. Now that we've established each other....
    Are you talking about yourself? those with true intelligence learn from those who know, not try to argue facts with assumptions.
    So the only people who know anything are the ones playing in a certain Tier? Interesting way to approach a discussion. Bit closed-minded if you ask me.
    They know the most. They don't have to guess or assume.

    Your refusal to admit you don't know something as well as those above you is your great undoing on this site. Your few creditable posts are dwarfed by the plethora of dribble where you are clearly incorrect. instead of learning from the people who know what they're talking about, you dig in your heels and double down by playing the victim and not talking about your level, like everyone doesn't know where you are.

    What happens first, your ally finishes in Platinum or you hit 30k posts?
    People don't know more automatically just because of what Tier they're in. You can't measure knowledge based on where they're at in the game. That's an egotistical outlook that remains ignorant to the thoughts of others. It's also not old on this Forum, but it's still just as disappointing that there's a great deal of understanding and learning that's missed, just because it's ignored by a position in the game. Nevertheless, you don't need to be at a certain level to understand the system. You just need sufficient knowledge and intelligence. You want to keep thinking I don't know anything because I'm not "on your level", you do you.
    Lol what you vant measure knowledge based on experience?

    Real.world perspective that for a second. High school drop out doing open heart surgery?
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Cobs said:

    Heres another example of whats going on. The NBA finals are raptors vs warrior. To get to the finals the raptors faced the bucks and the warriors faced michigan state. Yes they both technically won there games to get there. But beating a college team isnt the equivalent of another top ranked NBA team. This is exactly what this new prestige based matchmaking is doing to the top of war. Everything other then this point is just noise and can be ignored. This is the issue. It can be solved by changing the scoring (which would also eliminate tanking), or they could remove seasons all together because it is toxic as hell for the game and distribute a % of season rewards every war win. Prestige has no place in AW, prestige is an arbitrary value given to champs. In no way does it represent anything to do with your strength in war, its an accurate measurement for the number of sig stone deals you have bought tho haha

    What do you think measures your strength in War? Besides playing the Map, what do you think determines the strength of what you're putting up?
    The rank of your champions if one team.is placing all r5s and the other mostly r4s.

    Which team is likely to win? And deserve a master spot?
    If you think the only people who know what they're talking about are the ones in a certain position in the game, not much else to say besides what I said to him.

    As for the strength, the Rank of the Champions you put up. Correct. How do you determine Prestige?
    Again your top 5 doesnt equal your war team .
    And 5 r5s doesnt equal 15 r5s. Prestoge is terribly flawed in this.

    Or are you really claiming an allaince with 5 r5s each should be able to fight an allaince with 15 each in a fair fight? Chase prestige says they are equals
    Let me get this straight. It's unfair because you have to come up agaisnt an Ally with 10 extra R5s, but you expect to hang out where people barely have one typically? Hmm...
  • Options
    LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,638 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Which means it's then a measure of true skill in War. If both sides are of equal strength, that's a fair fight. It then boils down to strategy and playing ability in War.

    Equal prestige doesn't mean equal strength. That's kind of the point...
  • Options
    xNigxNig Posts: 7,249 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    xNig said:

    GroundedWisdom said:

    You're focusing on what their Rating is, and that has nothing to do with how they performed in the Season. That's in the Points.

    That’s where you’re wrong. Performance in Season is directly correlated to the matchups they get in Seasons, which is related to what their rating is.
    The point I'm making is the OP seems to think the Leaderboard should reflect Total Alliance Rating, when that's not much at all. People aren't even using their total Rosters. You can have strong guys with less Total Rating, and you can have an Alliance with a high Rating that aren't that strong. Rating is only the total PI of the Ally. Not an automatic reflection of what they brought and how they fought.
    If that's the logic, throw away fighting altogether and award people from least to highest-Rated Ally. No need to compete. Doesn't matter.
    This I agree with you. Alliance rating is nothing but a very rough indicator of how advanced an alliance is, but is very easily manipulated.

    However, what the OP mentioned, were oddities amongst the leaderboards, where there are alliances that are way below the average alliance ratings of other alliances within the same rank/rating, beyond reasonable comprehension.

    True, people might have sold off their champions but it will be hard to get all 30 members on board with the same idea of doing so.
  • Options
    LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,638 ★★★★★
    GroundedWisdom said:

    Markjv81 said:

    Wow! So you’re now more intelligent than everyone else. You’re just some kind of **** yeah?

    Yeah, that wasn't what I said at all. I said people are capable of understanding more than what Tier they fight in. No one said more than anyone else.
    Capable sure, but you don't seem to be doing it lol.
This discussion has been closed.