Alliance Wars match up

Can anyone tell me how the new method is more fairer then the titan score method.

As you can see. My alliance is only strong enough to face 7* titans and out of 5, 8* we’ve only beaten 1. This alliance is clearly versing 9* titans. We been put up against stronger alliances but this is the worst match up weve faced, How is this new method fairer.

1 Like

The match considers best heroes!! I know guys that have 7 maxed 4* heroes and 2200 cups! Then that increases aliance score.
Wait for the war. The aliance score is based on trophies and titans killed, and thats not important for wars, where you consider how many good heroes you have, how many great attacks you can make and how many points you can get.
This opponent of yours can have great teams yes! But they may have 1 or 2 good teams! This allows them to raise trophies and slay titans (good aliance score), but on wars they will use really hard only 1 maybe 2 flags! And thats not what wins wars


now the war is posted. our team strength is at 50.000, opponent beyond 70.000. our team has 6 players having a strength beyond 3000. Opponent has 18 above 3000 and 2 below (> 2700). this has been just a quick view. looks like approximately 7 of them are not activ… it doen’t matter if they have only 1 row to make a good strike. we have no team members who could beat them up 6 times… we are the clan Hexenkessel… we don’t think to have a breath of a chance…

1 Like

But thats the point! On wars you dont need to beat them 6 times. If you can put together your comrades and attack strategically you can use, lets say, 3 flags to kill each good player, but without using your full teams. If you have 20 active members, thats 120 flags, make each one count, analyse well, get at least one or two heroes per attack and finish the target on second strike. There is no secret in wars, and yes, you have the highest probability of losing! But that’s why you start to wonder what you could do better, which part of my team is the weak spot and aim for a better hero or change spots… just keep evolving, wars loot are crap even for winners anyway…


I agree with you that in stronger alliances that might be the case, and only the wars itself will show if the match was good. But at least in a beginners alliance where my alt is, the mismatch is obvious, as the vast majority barely have 1 team.
They have 1 3k + member, 3 2k+ members and 24 with tesms from 1.100 k to 1700 k teams. The opponent has 17 2k + members

Petri noted it’s based on top 30 for each player in each alliance. So in theory, you have better benches if you are getting matched with them. In practice, let;s wait and see if it plays out.


I think exactly like they did not change anything more than 5 wars that we fought with teams with more than 50000 difference and look now

What you show is that they have one more player than you (30/30 vs 29/30). What you don’t show—and cannot show—is the top thirty heroes for every player in each alliance. This is apparently what the new matchups are based on. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Do we know for sure it’s Top 30? Has that been confirmed?

(In the name of all that is unholy, I dearly hope not.)

Yes. I believe Petri said so. I have a screenshot somewhere…

The world is ending! The apocalypse cometh!

Top 30 is a terrible idea.


The ranking will always have issues, but should take into account metrics that have already been used, with some sort of weighted average.

–Top 5 heroes and troops (these have a disproportionate weight in AW due to defense and reuse of troops)
–Top 30 heroes to assess bench depth
–Titan score as an indicator of offensive prowess
–Raid score as another indicator of offensive prowess, especially if cup dropping can be minimized

There is no perfect solution for this, which is why there must be some sort of dynamic ranking based on past performance in wars. This may not work for ever changing low level alliances, but for higher level ones it is crucial.

1 Like

@Little_Infinity outlined how an Elo-type system might work for alliance wars.

That’s by far the best idea I’ve seen. I’ve previously been of the opinion that developing such a system wasn’t worth the serious effort I think it would require. But if Top 30 turns out to be a catastrophe (as I think it might, for reasons I have outlined in detail elsewhere) then perhaps Elo is the next step.

1 Like

I appreciate the answer but the amount of players does not say anything
an alliance with 5 players of level 40 with all their heroes of 5 stars to the maximum and the trots of 4 stars to the maximum is worth much more than an alliance with 30 players of level 15 and a war so the ali wins with best of level 40 what I was saying is that it is assumed that the score of the alliance is what should be equal
my alliance has a score of 73342 and the other 85004 there is a difference of 11662 and that is powers of heroes then as we do to win a war so it is impossible and it is not fair

1 Like

@ratabboypda, alliance score means nothing in the new matching, don’t even look at it.

The only thing you can see is the other teams’ top 5 players. You have no idea what they have beyond that. Just like they have no idea of what you have. Just because an opponent’s alliance has players with more team power doesn’t mean they have anyone on their bench beyond that. Maybe they’ll take out your teams easily the first time around, but maybe then they will have noone left to hit with. Maybe your teams will have to use 2 or three flags to take out a strong team, but then you’ll be able to do it again because you have depth on your teams.

Play it out before you decide that it doesn’t work.


For whatever it’s worth, the only issue we had with titan score was when we had 26 members and they had 30, other than that, every single matchup was fair.

If they just added in =/- one member into titan score I think that’s a pretty simple solution in terms of refining it.

Exactly. I’m looking forward to this next matchup. I have no idea how it will go, which is the point! If I knew I would win or lose beforehand, why bother playing? :wink:

1 Like

Let’s give it a chance and see what happens. Judging by the comments I have read so far, I am shocked (shocked!) to surmise that the new matching system has not immediately resolved players’ worries that they are being mismatched in wars. I suspect no matching system could ever achieve this, unless it copied existing alliances and matched them against themselves. (And even then I’m sure there would be complainers.)

If Top 30 is really the driving metric then there are some very obvious ways mismatches can occur. This is not itself a worry. What is more concerning is that there are some very obvious ways alliances could then game the system to generate favourable mismatches. That would be a bad thing.

But we’d be fools to rush to judgment before seeing the system in practice.

How can you game the new system? Previously the ways were present and obvious, but right now that would require deleting your stronger heroes, it seems.

Who is going to delete strong heroes simply to get better AW matchups??


Cookie Settings