Alliance wars - matching manipulation



Stay for 5 wars, open a chest, switch. Repeat as necessary.

I agree that the fix is to address high TP variance strategies in general.


OK, and what does it buy you? Stay with the same team, you have the same weak teams and the same strong teams. Maybe after 3 months the weak teams become medium teams.

And it still come down to a know core issue.


This presumes entering on a 0/25 chest and having 5 straight wins. In practice the duration of stay would likely tend to be longer.

I agree with @General_Confusion, I don’t think the duration of stay/jump is particularly relevant, it’s more an issue that an alliance with a large split of strong/weak players is a hard match for an alliance of all similarly-middle-strength players.

And certainly there are plenty of posts on the forum saying as much.


Yep, the problem is while there are a number of posts describing this issue, I don[t know how prevalent it really is. Does it impact 1% of all wars, 20%? I’m sure SG knows, but they didn’t answer when I asked if this was viewed as an issue to them. If it’s 1%, don’t expect a fix anytime soon. If its above 10%, I sure hope they are working on something to fix it (either my suggestion or another way).


They’re clearly tracking consecutive losses (according to mhalttu). So I’m guessing it’s more a 1% kind of problem than a 10% kind of problem. But yeah, no one really knows.

When did you raise the issue to SG, out of interest? How long ago?


Hi I do agree it needs to be adjusted a bit and I do believe there a loopholes. They are based on top 30 heroes I believe. They should include the whole alliance main and bench teams. Our last war was very even it was awesome we lost but it was great we don’t give up heck bring on 7DD we’ll battle anyone and still have fun win or lose


Top 30 for each opted in member. With extra weight to the top 5 from each member…


I posted it in the APL about 17 days ago, and @ Petri and mhalttu to it about 10 days ago,

I also included some info on how I would approach fixing it, which is something I played with a bit and it seemed to work. It would have to be played with on a larger scale and likely tuned a bit, but since I was using a spreadsheet and not code there was only so much I was willing to do.

But that whole adding the solution thing may have been my undoing, since it made for a very long post, and may have decreased the odds of them reading it.


It is a truism that the more detailed the solution, the less likely it is to be read. :man_shrugging: But maybe they’re thinking about it?


FYI the strategy you laid out is essentially what the Aliiance War guide you linked to evolved into. That said, you are correct that it works best against alliances with high variation in strength of members. It is also a bit of a PITA to implement.


Good to know. Thanks! :slight_smile: My alliance is super tight on wars, using Line and close timing on kills. But yeah, I’m sure that more casual alliances would really struggle. Wasting flags is going to be lethal in high-variance situations, since you’re trying to squeeze every drop of juice out of those 500 equally-distributed points.


There are so many replies.
But here is my opinion.

I think it’s very stupid if they do that. Because when you leave an alliance to quickly go to a weaker alliance your War chest resets. So in other words, you won’t get that nice loot (if you get the luck to get any good loots).

So I just don’t see the logic in that? Or am I wrong.

But I agree with you, these kind of manipulations are just unfair for new players.

And I see the rest of the replies answered the scoring question/part.


This happened to us last war and it is exactly as Wrona points out.


Could probably be solved by a different point system.

One can earn more points by attacking a stronger team. Each fallen hero 10 if team stronger otherwise 5. Victory adds the difference of teampower, if the opponent is stronger, otherwise no bonus.

Strongest can’t earn bonuses :sunglasses:

Ok, everyone would place 1* as def in that case… mmm…


I know that this is an old thread, but I have noticed an increase in opponents, where their alliance is not very old, the current one being only 12 days old, where they have some very high TP guys and play very strategic (same colour tanks & resets).

We are relatively small and only have 15 players opted into wars.

It would seem that to get war chests quickly, some players have worked out a strategy to split their large alliance up and have smaller teams instead (or just keep creating new alliances/joining old but very small ones). This means it is much easier as obviously, teams lower down the ranks are less organised and don’t use the same game-play tactics.

I did note that someone said that previous war wins/losses makes little difference to matching, but any advantage still is an advantage.

We play this for fun, but still try and win (our members are requested to use all their war flags) and we do quite well against evenly matched opponents, but get whitewashed every time one of these ‘young’ alliances comes up against us.

It is accepted that this is not cheating, but it is still unfair, because instead of us having an equal opportunity to win (close matches are quite a lot of fun), we know that we will only get a single point each time one of these teams comes up.

It seems every time one loop hole is closed, someone finds another way to benefit!


the eaist way tonlose a war is to be afraid to take down a team just cause their power level is higher. sure you may not be able to one shot them, but they may not one shot you either just cause they are bigger. sooner you learn how to “chop” down bigger opoonents the less this will bother you. shed the fear of they are bigger than us and change that to what team can i use to take some of them out and you will see a change in your war score.


We use all our war flags (generally but not always), and I am willing to hit much bigger players, if only to tank bust for someone else to clear.

Everyone in our team play different strategies, I am sure, I personally use mono type teams, which tends to mean that I am normally somewhere near the top in war points, but does not always work.

The issue here is that we are increasingly finding ‘new’ alliances matched with us that are highly organised, that have no difficulty in beating us everytime, by massive margins!

This is obviously a strategy to gain war chests every five wars and then reset their alliance and start again.

They keep their alliance small, because this makes it very easy to achieve over the smaller, less organised alliances.


not sure what mono teams means about being in the top but its a team event no matter how you fight it has to be together and each person has to maximize their roster. one guy might be able to clean up any team around 3k but not strong enough to take them out directly. some can mono most cannot mono and still have teams even past round 3. the more ways you learn/ teach to fight the more ways people with different rosters can find a way to help. you are putting to much conspiracy on simply that some people like bouncing into one or more alliances cause they have frtends there, they flirting, there is no one online in the home one. someone is a leader in multiple alliances. even thougn frowned upon there is no conspiracy in moving around. we win most of our wars because we stick together we know our teamates well. bouncing around is whatever power levels dont scare us anymore.


I understand what you are saying Oddhobgoblin, we too have come across this issue. Our alliance is quite old but we come across ‘new teams’ that have no way of being where they are in such a short time. It is possible that the odd 1 or 2 people bounce alliances but 15 of them all at the same time is definitely ‘playing the system’. I too play mono ( attacking with one colour) and try to pass on information to my alliance but as we are from different countries we cannot coordinate times.
DoctorStrange, i am not sure that you understood the original post nor some of the replies.
SG need to do something about this, not sure what as i am no expert but i can see a problem occurring.


So, you are saying that a load of high level players joined a low level alliance just before matchmaking started giving them an unfair advantage? the only way that would really skew the matchmaking is based on the win/loss record as the higher TP’s are still taken into account

That may be true but I would say that is very rare.

I certainly wouldn’t want to burn my war chest refills just to have a better chance of winning a single war.

I also wouldn’t necessarily say it is cheating. Maybe it’s a group of hardcore players from a top alliance that have just got burned out and decided to join a more relaxed/casual alliance?