AW matchmaking

rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
in General Discussion
Season just started and we have matched the same opponent back to back. Last season we matched 3 alliances two times each. Soooo....is there anyone else who doesn't recognize how absolutely poorly conceived this "system" is.

Comments

  • rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
    Hmmm....it seems you're back to using prestige and or total rating...that makes no sense. We should not be matching the same alliances over and over again.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • UppercutUppercut Member Posts: 158 ★
    You lost the war and now worried about losing again? It’s your chance to fight back, no issue with matchmaking here. AW is a little harder than AQ isn’t it
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • FrostyFrosty Member Posts: 485 ★★★
    INTEGRAL said:

    AW matchmaking is broken. Top 10 alliances keep facing each other over and over. Plat 4 level alliances keep facing weak alliances.

    Shouldn't top 10 alliances be facing each other?
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • UppercutUppercut Member Posts: 158 ★
    They do need to match based on season standings at some point in the season, it’s the same playoff type matching I’ve seen mentioned many times here.

    First two weeks can be random based on war rating, prestige etc. In second half of the season you can match mostly based on season standings (E.g Master 1 vs 20, 2 vs 19) and ignore prestige, alliance war rating and other factors. Just need to make sure alliances that move into Master during that playoff phase are tested at the Master level before season ends
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
    Uppercut said:

    You lost the war and now worried about losing again? It’s your chance to fight back, no issue with matchmaking here. AW is a little harder than AQ isn’t it

    Nope. We won. Try again.
  • rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
    Noone said:

    INTEGRAL said:

    Andrewkole said:

    They should be facing themselves. Should the top 10 face someone in the top 40? That is an instant win... What is this, college football? Your record means nothing if you are near the top and play your peers + inferior teams. You should play your peers, until a new peer emerges.

    In the current structure, good teams will keep rising... teams in the top 10 that keep losing will fall out. There shouldn't be any matches that are not competitive. That is the point. If somethign else is happening in Plat 4, I cant speak to it. Probably way more shell alliances that effect that tier.


    INTEGRAL said:

    Frosty said:

    INTEGRAL said:

    AW matchmaking is broken. Top 10 alliances keep facing each other over and over. Plat 4 level alliances keep facing weak alliances.

    Shouldn't top 10 alliances be facing each other?
    Not everyday.
    LOLLL yeah in Spanish Football League Real Madrid and Barcelona face eachother every day.

    Why should a 10 times weaker alliance rank in top 20 in Master instead of an alliance that will crush them by 5-120 kills when they face?

    You want to reward garbage alliances bu giving them easy matches but you are punishing the real strong alliances.

    Why should my alliance keep facing Kenob, NY and Iso8a while an alliance that my alliance will beat by 10-100 face a garbage defence?
    LOL if you can’t beat iso8 you don’t deserve to be in master
    As I said. We won. It’s not appropriate to see the same alliance every war.

    We’ve been in master every season. Try and keep up.
  • rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
    Frosty said:

    INTEGRAL said:

    AW matchmaking is broken. Top 10 alliances keep facing each other over and over. Plat 4 level alliances keep facing weak alliances.

    Shouldn't top 10 alliances be facing each other?
    Frosty said:

    INTEGRAL said:

    AW matchmaking is broken. Top 10 alliances keep facing each other over and over. Plat 4 level alliances keep facing weak alliances.

    Shouldn't top 10 alliances be facing each other?
    Every war? Do we get more points in a win then two bad alliances that die 40-50 times? We don’t? Then no.
  • rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
    edited September 2019
    Andrewkole said:

    They should be facing themselves. Should the top 10 face someone in the top 40? That is an instant win... What is this, college football? Your record means nothing if you are near the top and play your peers + inferior teams. You should play your peers, until a new peer emerges.

    In the current structure, good teams will keep rising... teams in the top 10 that keep losing will fall out. There shouldn't be any matches that are not competitive. That is the point. If somethign else is happening in Plat 4, I cant speak to it. Probably way more shell alliances that effect that tier.


    INTEGRAL said:

    Frosty said:

    INTEGRAL said:

    AW matchmaking is broken. Top 10 alliances keep facing each other over and over. Plat 4 level alliances keep facing weak alliances.

    Shouldn't top 10 alliances be facing each other?
    Not everyday.
    That is absolutely not how it works. You don’t pay much attention. If you have a high rating you will face the same 3 alliances most the season. Over and over. If you have a low rating you get to coast and not match anyone and get the same rewards. Look who finished 3rd last season.

    Maybe no one watches sports. Kabam would reward Mount Union College as national champs if they went undefeated in division III if say Clemson,Ohio State, or Alabama lost 1-2 games even though they would crush Mount Union.

    If that makes sense to you you’re a Mount Union alum.
  • UppercutUppercut Member Posts: 158 ★
    Congrats on your win, you can win again then so still not a big issue. Overall matchmaking can be improved, I agree. Kabam devs are a little busy with upcoming balance changes for champs like Cull. Matchmaking? Ain’t nobody got time for that
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
    edited September 2019
    Andrewkole said:

    I hear what you are saying. I think this will even out eventually after a season or two after locking in ratings to prevent tanking. Eventually every team’s rating will truly reflect their talent level.

    Go mount Union! lol




    rwhack said:

    Andrewkole said:

    They should be facing themselves. Should the top 10 face someone in the top 40? That is an instant win... What is this, college football? Your record means nothing if you are near the top and play your peers + inferior teams. You should play your peers, until a new peer emerges.

    In the current structure, good teams will keep rising... teams in the top 10 that keep losing will fall out. There shouldn't be any matches that are not competitive. That is the point. If somethign else is happening in Plat 4, I cant speak to it. Probably way more shell alliances that effect that tier.


    INTEGRAL said:

    Frosty said:

    INTEGRAL said:

    AW matchmaking is broken. Top 10 alliances keep facing each other over and over. Plat 4 level alliances keep facing weak alliances.

    Shouldn't top 10 alliances be facing each other?
    Not everyday.
    That is absolutely not how it works. You don’t pay much attention. If you have a high rating you will face the same 3 alliances most the season. Over and over. If you have a low rating you get to coast and not match anyone and get the same rewards. Look who finished 3rd last season.

    Maybe no one watches sports. Kabam would reward Mount Union College as national champs if they went undefeated in division III if say Clemson,Ohio State, or Alabama lost 1-2 games even though they would crush Mount Union.

    If that makes sense to you you’re a Mount Union alum.
    It hasn't. Last season we had a high war rating. We got Ny719 twice, chinese twice, Kenob twice. This season we are 23rd in AW rating....over 400 points lower than kenob. Already matched them once and we have them again or Ny718....they are using prestige and or alliance rating...or manually matching.

    Prestige and alliance rating has nothing to do with war. We will have a top 3 with two nobodies who play no one and Kenob again. You try taking a steady diet of top 3 in AW every war and tell me how fun it is. When you award masters and top 3 it's supposed to be because you're good...not because Kabam lets you match no one.

    Alliances are competing for the same rewards but the way matches are determining the degree of difficulty is in no way similar.

    We are two seasons into this and your system creates multiple repeat opponents and makes no sense. Back to back +55/-6 match ups are proof of that. Pure cash grab. I suspect it’s being done manually.


    @Kabam Miike

  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
    Andrewkole said:

    rwhack said:

    Andrewkole said:

    I hear what you are saying. I think this will even out eventually after a season or two after locking in ratings to prevent tanking. Eventually every team’s rating will truly reflect their talent level.

    Go mount Union! lol




    rwhack said:

    Andrewkole said:

    They should be facing themselves. Should the top 10 face someone in the top 40? That is an instant win... What is this, college football? Your record means nothing if you are near the top and play your peers + inferior teams. You should play your peers, until a new peer emerges.

    In the current structure, good teams will keep rising... teams in the top 10 that keep losing will fall out. There shouldn't be any matches that are not competitive. That is the point. If somethign else is happening in Plat 4, I cant speak to it. Probably way more shell alliances that effect that tier.


    INTEGRAL said:

    Frosty said:

    INTEGRAL said:

    AW matchmaking is broken. Top 10 alliances keep facing each other over and over. Plat 4 level alliances keep facing weak alliances.

    Shouldn't top 10 alliances be facing each other?
    Not everyday.
    That is absolutely not how it works. You don’t pay much attention. If you have a high rating you will face the same 3 alliances most the season. Over and over. If you have a low rating you get to coast and not match anyone and get the same rewards. Look who finished 3rd last season.

    Maybe no one watches sports. Kabam would reward Mount Union College as national champs if they went undefeated in division III if say Clemson,Ohio State, or Alabama lost 1-2 games even though they would crush Mount Union.

    If that makes sense to you you’re a Mount Union alum.
    It hasn't. Last season we had a high war rating. We got Ny719 twice, chinese twice, Kenob twice. This season we are 23rd in AW rating....over 400 points lower than kenob. Already matched them once and we have them again or Ny718....they are using prestige and or alliance rating...or manually matching.

    Prestige and alliance rating has nothing to do with war. We will have a top 3 with two nobodies who play no one and Kenob again. You try taking a steady diet of top 3 in AW every war and tell me how fun it is. When you award masters and top 3 it's supposed to be because you're good...not because Kabam lets you match no one.

    Alliances are competing for the same rewards but the way matches are determining the degree of difficulty is in no way similar.

    We are two seasons into this and your system creates multiple repeat opponents and makes no sense. Back to back +55/-6 match ups are proof of that. Pure cash grab. I suspect it’s being done manually.


    @Kabam Miike

    Yeah we got some poor matchups last year. This year has been better for us. Not sure if there is something in the formula that is off for you guys
    It's either being done manually or they are using prestige and/or alliance rating...which has nothing to do with war. They backed down from that awhile ago and obviously shoved it back in.

    I can't think of a system designed by someone who has any level of competency that has you face the same alliances all season or have nothing but +56/-6 wars.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
    Noone said:

    rwhack said:

    Andrewkole said:

    rwhack said:

    Andrewkole said:

    I hear what you are saying. I think this will even out eventually after a season or two after locking in ratings to prevent tanking. Eventually every team’s rating will truly reflect their talent level.

    Go mount Union! lol




    rwhack said:

    Andrewkole said:

    They should be facing themselves. Should the top 10 face someone in the top 40? That is an instant win... What is this, college football? Your record means nothing if you are near the top and play your peers + inferior teams. You should play your peers, until a new peer emerges.

    In the current structure, good teams will keep rising... teams in the top 10 that keep losing will fall out. There shouldn't be any matches that are not competitive. That is the point. If somethign else is happening in Plat 4, I cant speak to it. Probably way more shell alliances that effect that tier.


    INTEGRAL said:

    Frosty said:

    INTEGRAL said:

    AW matchmaking is broken. Top 10 alliances keep facing each other over and over. Plat 4 level alliances keep facing weak alliances.

    Shouldn't top 10 alliances be facing each other?
    Not everyday.
    That is absolutely not how it works. You don’t pay much attention. If you have a high rating you will face the same 3 alliances most the season. Over and over. If you have a low rating you get to coast and not match anyone and get the same rewards. Look who finished 3rd last season.

    Maybe no one watches sports. Kabam would reward Mount Union College as national champs if they went undefeated in division III if say Clemson,Ohio State, or Alabama lost 1-2 games even though they would crush Mount Union.

    If that makes sense to you you’re a Mount Union alum.
    It hasn't. Last season we had a high war rating. We got Ny719 twice, chinese twice, Kenob twice. This season we are 23rd in AW rating....over 400 points lower than kenob. Already matched them once and we have them again or Ny718....they are using prestige and or alliance rating...or manually matching.

    Prestige and alliance rating has nothing to do with war. We will have a top 3 with two nobodies who play no one and Kenob again. You try taking a steady diet of top 3 in AW every war and tell me how fun it is. When you award masters and top 3 it's supposed to be because you're good...not because Kabam lets you match no one.

    Alliances are competing for the same rewards but the way matches are determining the degree of difficulty is in no way similar.

    We are two seasons into this and your system creates multiple repeat opponents and makes no sense. Back to back +55/-6 match ups are proof of that. Pure cash grab. I suspect it’s being done manually.


    @Kabam Miike

    Yeah we got some poor matchups last year. This year has been better for us. Not sure if there is something in the formula that is off for you guys
    It's either being done manually or they are using prestige and/or alliance rating...which has nothing to do with war. They backed down from that awhile ago and obviously shoved it back in.

    I can't think of a system designed by someone who has any level of competency that has you face the same alliances all season or have nothing but +56/-6 wars.
    How was your last war? Was it the same alliance again? Or did you play someone else ?
    Our last war was KenOB. Our next war is KenOB or AW. They are 500 points ahead in AW rating.

    They’re using PI like it has something to do with war. Great news, you can suck at war and finish in masters or even top 3
  • rwhackrwhack Member Posts: 1,061 ★★★
    edited September 2019
    It’s obvious AW rating isn’t being used at all.
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
Sign In or Register to comment.