Just a little funny axample, that axplains why. I live in Moscow, Russia. All gov taxes direct on those who work hard. For lazy and people who just want to drink vodka there is no actual penalties, no taxes at all. So more you work, more responsibilities on you. I traveled all over the world, but I love my country, and will stay here as long as I won’t be too tired of this. But I get no benefits from my decision to stay, only more and more taxes and responsibilities. Fair? I think that fair. If the balance of love/too tired will move, I’ll move to another country where I’ll feel myself comfortable.
So, the same in the game. Love your alliance, and you are ok with slow play of your teammates, carry your alliance and don’t expect any benefits. If you want more, more rewards, just move to another alliance. Fair? I think so.
I love how this moved towards Moscow and their vodka loving habitants haha. 
I understand your point. I also agree that if you want more or better rewards than you now obtain, you will have to change to another alliance. It’s not reasonable to expect the game to simply hand them over from time to time.
Not rewarding an alliance at all (even if it’s just 1 out of 8 times) is a different topic. If SGG wants their players to feel engaged to the game then they will have to reward them. Every single on of them. If Putin wants you to stay in Russia, he better makes sure you love the country enough in order for you to accept the taxes you pay!
Of course, higher commitment has to receive better rewards. But clearly it already does, right! Losing 1 war, which appears to be an unbalanced match, does not mean your commitment doesn’t get rewarded. Look at the bigger picture and you will most likely agree that your commitment gets so much better rewarded, compared to the lazy alliance you were up against once upon a time.
At the top end, there are lots of losses, to other top alliances. Only 7DD is unbeaten. So no need to worry that those at the top,of the ladder will get bored of winning too much.
I like the idea of tiered war loot. It addresses the question of why alliances should push hard to win, if all it means is that they will face even harder foes in the future. There’s a reason to push to stay won 12* titans—the loot is better than at, say, 10*. The difference makes up for the higher item costs. There is no comparable bonus for winning wars against ever-tougher alliances.
I totally understand your point of view, but still will stay with mine. Thanks for the nice conversation. I hope that in few war the system will be more stable.
Likewise. Please come back after a few wars to share your experiences again. Until now I think my alliances has a perfect streak of win-lose-win-lose-… 
Sure! I’ll right here as soon as I’ll have more statistics.
Let me add to your statistics. We play together well as an alliance and keep it positive no matter. Wars have been mainly unmatched. Win/lose either way. Before last update seemed to be better matched however this last war was gravely unmatched. I thought the best 5 heroes and 30 looked at as well as troops. This cannot be accurate as this war we were reset in the first 30mins and our opponents hadn’t used most of their teams or flags. There is still much work to be done as we lost by almost 900pts. They had 15 unused flags while we had only 2 left. Something is definitely off in matching.
What was your Alliance War Score ?
Our alliance score was 3056
The best reply in this whole thread!!
Tom, the same situation. We are not even close to the opponents power. Lvl of player make the difference.
It ain’t over till the trumpets blow.
We have often been pitted against a stronger opponent…those 4K defenses really bite when we have fewer 4K players than they do. It may take more strategy (staggered attacks against the tanks), or simply grim determination. We use all flags.
If we win, we win. If we lose, there’s always next time. 
We always use all flags. We’ll see tomorrow. But I don’t think we can deal with that. We got, I think, perfect strategy, but 5 50-s lvl vs 5 40-s, and so on. That’s it.
Same thing is happening here…
This game is starting to be pending to the russian and finland players and teams, in 6 strikes against inferior russian opponents, just won 1, the game seem to be viciated to the devellopers country players…
You know, I’m from Finland and my other alliance is facing matchmaking problems all the time. And Finland and Russia are two different countries. Countrys have nothing to do with matchmaking. This game is very popular in Russia and those alliances are very well organized. That’s why they are very tough to beat.
This time we are facing alliance, which has 16 over 3000 teampower WAR defence teams, we have 9. Their strongest player has over 4000 teampower and our strongest player has 3500. They have 8 players between 2700-3000 teampower, we have 6. So they have 6 under 2700 players and we have 11. Many our players haven’t play this game very long, so they don’t have deep bench. They are basically using 1* and 2* heroes in those attacks. Maybe they have lost many wars, but we haven’t won many either.
My main alliance haven’t had that many problems ever in wars. Couple of weirf matches after update, some where we, where much stronger and one where we much weaker. So I think problems are more common on those mid level alliances than those stronger ones.
Russia and Finland are different countries? Shut the door!
I had the same thought yesterday, but was too sleepy to write it. This system don’t harm a lot if players of both alliances have 6-7 teams of max lvl at least 4* heroes. But if not, matchmaking could be really weird.
What is your war score and what is their war score?
Same for you, what is your war score and their war score?
It can be found by clicking on the question mark near ‘score’ and then at the bottom ‘war score’.