I noticed exactly the same. Russians enter before the draw are really strong and they leave immediately after the war. I do not know what exactly it has. An influence on the war but it actually has it. Cards are unmatched, harder to kill them have a large back-up (over 30 cards) can use any mono color. There is definitely a problem and it needs checking. I am Polish in the Polish Alliance but I have many friends in alliances from other countries I live in Ireland. I talk to them, most of them get only Russians in the war and nobody likes to fight them because it’s really not easy to win with them and it’s not about player skills (we play over a year), it’s about something else.
Russians are always hard… it’s true! 
but I think it has to do with the popularity of the game in their country and different strategy and view in aw…
I always check the strong players that look suspicious (Russians or otherwise) and they are always there for long time before and after! It could be happening just with me and others do what you say, it would be good to have some screenshots or names to check… 
But even if they were changing teams, losing war chests, what would that mean??
The important thing is to check and compare war scores right after matchmaking the war scores…
We have lost many wars that we as an alliance had done excellent work, with not a single attack left and with great coordination… but the enemy was too strong and most of the time they even leave 20-30 attacks… and this is were I believe the key is from a strategic point of view.
Even if they had 5-6 3500+ And we had only 1-2… for the matchmaking to come to this result, and to be really close in war scores when matchmaking occurred, after we had 2 defeats in a row. This can mean only one think in my opinion… The weak second teams of the enemy are far more weaker than ours, or they do not exist…
And even if it is becoming a really big post… this is my theory: many middle alliances have seen the six teams for war that most bigger alliances ask for their members. so they ask their members to have six teams and 30 heroes even if they are 1 team of 2500 and 5 under 1800 or even 1200 with untrained common/uncommon…
This means an average level 20-25 player before the matchmaking would have for example a total of 2500+1800+1400+1300+1200+1200= 9400… and if we assume that the first team gives a 10% more would mean 250 points, so 9650 would add up with only 1-2 teams to be able to do damage… and 5100 points that would do almost nothing! In the other hand an enemy, same lvl but only 3 teams with 2600-1800-1400= 5800… again +10%= 260 points 6.060… and will make around the same damage with the previous… so 9650-6060=3590 points with almost the same damage…
Now if you multiply this number with 15 members… would mean 53.850 points that have no value… so if both teams would be around 210.000, the actually war score that matter for the first alliance would have to be 156.150… and this is huge difference…
When alliances are getting bigger and have 6 teams with +4-5star only in their rosters everything goes smoother… because both alliances won’t have “junk-teams”…
So back to the Russians I believe they use this strategy, on the other hand english speaking alliances use the 30heroes-6attacks-no-matter-what strategy, so when two full packaged before matchmaking alliances fight looks “fair” because both of them have much more war score that their actually “damage-score” should be…
I believe small-middle alliances should have not a 30 hero roster rule, but a 1800+ team rule…
2 Likes
We all think that change the alliance always means reset of warchest. But, reading literally description I think, that you reset your warchest only if you take a part in a war with another alliance. If you have second alliance only for titan you can rejoin your temporary war alliance without reset. So the strategy to join week alliance for fire wars for the groups if switchers seems to be more logical once more.
Yes. But the lack of advantage is still the same. All you get at most is erasing of the small delta multiple wins would add to your war score. BTW I still think the flow is just the reverse of what you state, they come back to alliance for war and Merc titans the rest of the time
3 Likes
I also think that the titan alliance is their main alliance, and they join war alliance just before the war. And I still think that if they have a group of 6-7 very strong players which joins a very week alliance it give them advantage.
Still if they are joining a weak alliance, this alliance would get like 16-20.000 war points for each member joining!!! Think and try to understand why the matchmaking formula gives you a similar score with them making it look like a fraud? (Cause most of the times it will give you a similar score with them…) Now add their winning row, that you think they would have, so they should be weaker than you especially near 5th victorious war…( 5/5 is a very difficult accomplishment to reach especially without coordination and worked teamwork… having just 3-4 strong experienced players won’t win a war if the other 25 members can’t play properly…) And finally add your previous loss… that would mean that the enemy should be even more weak…
The only way that they could maybe manipulate the mechanics is by putting fake-double accounts with just one as strong as they can defense team and then keep them low in war score, advancing tc and keeping one team until they will advance to tc13 or tc20 better… having one strong hero of each color wouldn’t help titans hunt or raids much, so this could be why they are low in alliance scores…
But for your alliance’s better chances… Try to check all the teams of each member of your alliance before the matchmaking, how many could kill you last player and how many are less than that defense? if you have like +10% of your strike teams less than your last player’s defense, then you most probably just increase your war score with junk teams… when you want to keep it low… If they can’t harm you most probably the same strength won’t harm the enemy… and even if they can harm 3-5 of them that would be 9-15 attacks… having +36 attacks out of 180 in total (20%) with 0-4 damage means you didn’t need to have those teams before matchmaking… You would be better not having them and have unused attacks (or you could make teams after the matchmaking phase, that would make similar damage), because you would have lower warscore and better matchmaking with “weaker” enemy
They can join and move in match making, bt not in prep, you will see alliances im global during match making asking high lvl members and mercs roo join them jst for the war, i see it before every war in global
I don’t work for SG, and wasn’t even a forum moderator when I made the comment you quoted. So my opinion certainly doesn’t sway things one way or another.
FWIW, this thread has been brought to SG’s attention, along with others about War matching. SG staff have commented before about War matches (e.g. here), and perhaps will again at some point.
It might be worth adding some questions to Upcoming AMA chat with SGG team - Submit questions here in addition to your other ones, specifically about War matches.
1 Like
Yes, that is why I call it cheat. I think that limiting participation in war for „new” members is simple and efficent way to eliminate it. A week or two before you can be part of war team in new alliance.
When you say “two teams” do you mean that there are, say, 10 members who cycle in or out depending in whether alliance leadership has decided that a particular war is going to be a win or a loss? Or maybe that a group of the best players opt out of, say, every other war?
Either way seems to be a slow way of filling up the war chest.
1 Like
It took nearly 70 messages to get close to maybe explaining the possibility of an existing War ‘exploit’.
There was so much misinformation and misunderstanding in the OP and follow-ups that it was almost lost on me.(Titan score, hero roster, prep vs timer, etc…)
Is this what the issue is?
2 Alliances (A&B)with 15 members. 2 teams per member. Weak team(on A) and strong team(on B).
Alliance A loses ‘x’ amount of wars (whatever it takes to get the War score into the dirt). When Alliance B eventually legitimately earns a chest, they then swap alliances, putting strong teams on the low war score alliance(A) and weak teams on B.
War score advantage means A can now win a few more easily, eventually getting a chest, then rinse and repeat…
Sweet baby buttered biscuits, IF that’s what’s happening, that’s a lot of work for low rewards, isn’t it?
And that it is happening so often that it gets noticed, and a forum thread is created.
If my scenario above is the issue, I’ll need more proof and some explaination as to why it is worth it.
Enjoy your day!
6 Likes
I am trying to understand the issue here, but it seems to me from the explanation that the swingers are taking advantage of losing team’s war history, so they move into a team that has recorded consecutive losses? Thereby get matched with less strong opponents? But would this evade the entire AW matching algorithm?
This may create additional process in the AW matching to stop this possible exploit ; in which case if more than 3 players of high power teams should recently( or just before AW match making) join a team that has recently lost consecutive wars, then the chance of matching such alliance with less strong opponents would be ignored.
2 Likes
Those that claim they have seen and investigated such alliances, should give names and screenshots…
If they feel uncomfortable doing it in public, maybe they could pm moderators and let them check this or even monitor the changes of these alliances…
Otherwise we are chasing ghosts…
1 Like
No, please. Do not use the forums for “naming and shaming.” Contact support directly if you learn of any mechanics abuse. contact-support
5 Likes
You use your alts. 20 people 20 alts. Make 2 alliances with 10 alts each and have them lose wars. When the mains fill war chest, take over one of the losing alliances and that 10 alts make a new one.
I agree! I really wanted to understand this issue, and just couldn’t figure out what the problem was, based on all the descriptions.
I also agree with the above posters who say it seems like a lot of effort for small rewards.
I’m not sure if it’s even fixable. Surely it must be a very small number of players involved in this practise.
1 Like
Yep you are right! Support is the right people to give names… sorry for that…
But isn’t this topic “shaming” russians alliances this way? Making everyone suspicious against certain alliances?
We just had a russian enemy that fit the description 5-6 huge players and then small ones… and I went checking each one… when they joined the alliance and if they had a “double” alliance and all… nothing suspicious found btw… except that small online players didn’t used more than 3 attacks even if they were losing…
And back to the possible exploit, if that was accurate that would mean that the other half “double alliances” used for losing would be out there… having a great war score from the consecutives wins before and really weak players… had anyone found one of those?
Someone suggested somewhere that the win/loss record be tied to individual members and not the alliance as a whole. If this truly is happening and it makes significant differences in war matches wouldn’t that solve the problem? It may solve this one but would it create even more problems for regular alliances who recruit new members? Or could it be exploited as well by only recruiting new members with a heavy loss record? I’m not sure that any solution would be a perfect fix if this truly is an advantage some alliances are exploiting…
2 Likes
Are you saying to drop using the win/loss record from war matching and only base it off the top 30 heroes and top 5 troops? Would there still be an emphasis on the top 5 heroes? Or all heroes in the 30 are weighted the same?
My theory is:
- swingers is a group of 6-7 very strong players let’s say they are all above 35 lvl, their main team is 3,8k or above, usually all heroes 5*
- their main alliance is titan alliance, but they also want participate in wars and winning every time, so…
- they find a week alliance, week not loosing, let’s say 13 players all bellow 20 lvl with main team 1,5-2,3k. If they don’t play for a long time they don’t even have 30 heroes.
- swingers join them just before the war,
- they are match with my alliance, we have a group of leaders of course, but only our strongest player’s team is about 3,8k
- we can’t even scratch the strongest swingers, and the weekest players don’t give us a lot of points,
- they win war, and the difference is huge 1000 points or more,
- swingers leave week alliance sometimes they don’t wait for end of war,
- their warchest doesn’t reset if they don’t participate a war in their materiał alliance.
Stoping it is quite simple, you just block participation in wars for new members, let’s say for a week or two week.