Alliance Wars Matchmaking (Discussion & Developer Response) MASTER

I’ve never seen that said. All I’ve seen was that past performance affects the war score. Since that score is at an alliance level, I would think history is tied to the alliance. Basically, this would be the equivalent of a confidence rating in ELO, which is essentially what we know is used for raid matching.
I think there’s strong evidence it is tied to the alliance, not the individuals.

1 Like

I suspect they are using more than one two alliances and using alt accounts to keep titans at a fairly high level. That way the titan penalty is minimal as they would never get below and 7-9 9 star if their alts are of a reasonable level.

Currently it is. This is the whole issue (though I think the issue is blown out of proportion).

1 Like

That’s sounds about right. And these guys are jumping from one ghost Alliance to another just to get easier opponents (alts are used to keep ghost Alliances alive. Then, they are coming back to collect war chest, and they are still getting a decent loot, as war participation rate is stored in database referencing player identifiers. We’ve also faced one Russian Alliance (> 25 members) which was much stronger than ours and they just smashed our organized Alliance with 61xx points VS 29xx points. And, all the members of that Russian Alliance were marked as Ex-member way before the end of the war.

1 Like

Just got matched with another one, all guys less than a week in the alliance. Pretty frustrating.

You are referring to the plan of keeping a bit longer list of previous opponents. This change would only affect the very top alliances. And if we do implement it, we will obviously monitor the situation and reserve the right to revert the change.

3 Likes

You’re wasting your time dude… SG will and can spin it however they want to divert focus from the root of the issue and moderators will all but play “good boys”, it’s kinda part of their job you know. So don’t expect to get any objective communication on this matter. And many others for that matter. This is exactly why I don’t usually participate in 99% of the discussions.

Anyway, FWIW, even though I think you’re full of ■■■■ at times, I’m with you on this 100% and might expand on my personal thoughts at some point later today…

6 Likes

Just read this thread and had one of those ‘aha’ moments. Lately have not been able to win at war. And when I keep seeing these alliances of lvl50+ players who all join together 2-3 days before war. It seems to be happening a lot lately. Very demoralizing to us lower placed alliances. I came looking to see if something was up as we have been seeing it so often this past month. It’s ruining Wars for us, making the game less enjoyable, and now has even caused people to quit.
Perhaps they need to make new players wait a week before they can do war? I do not know if that will stop it. But it is hurting the game, imho.

1 Like

I can see how one would come to that sentiment

But i would hate the idea of getting a new member in our unexploitive alliance and they have to sit out a week before they can be a true part of the team just because some players decided to exploit the system(we’ve already seen players caught in the mercs vs devs crossfire, i wouldn’t want to see a similar situation arise due to these war exploits)

I would prefer if devs found a way to just make it less rewarding to exploit the system somehow

I’ve suggested it a few times but making chest points based on depth score instead of the current point system would be my ideal solution but I’m just 1 guy.

If your team beats a stronger team, it should be worth more chest points

If your team beats a weaker team, it should be worth less

This would deter the exploiters since it wouldn’t fill their war chests any faster by pickin on lower teams

If a win vs a weaker team is only worth 2 points instead of the current 5, then they’re better off facing teams of equal or higher depth

Sure new alliances started by veteran players would be on a losing end of this change for a bit but that’s already the case with titans so why not make it the case with wars…

Game rewards should be based on progress and the challenges that come with it

“Same for all rewards” typically leads to the sort of exploits we’re seeing

4 Likes

That’s an interesting way to address the war shuffle (?) issue.

1 Like

I’ll get back to ya tomorrow

Thanks, I agree I don’t want people just sitting there either, or feeling they are being punished. But this just sucks! Lol
I like your suggestion :grinning:

1 Like

Unfortunately, our alliance is stuck at the bottom of a higher bracket of alliances, and we are going to get our @$$es kicked by every team we face for a while as has been the trend the past two weeks.

Current opponent has 7 defenses at over 4000+ TP (and we are talking about the Gravemakers, Perseuses, Liannas, and the like in those defenses, not your passive Margarets of Inaris).

Six more defenses sit between 3800-3999.

Compared to us, we have four defenses over 4000 TP, and two in the 3800 range. None in the 3900s.

If we win this, it’s because the opponent didn’t want to win and didn’t care to fight.

2 Likes

Good luck to you!! Hope you pull out the W.

1 Like

Hi everyone!

Hope this gets fixed ASAP!

We were matched against these “young” alliances twice over the last 3 wars. We were no match. This has become both frustrating and annoying. Unbelievable the lengths some will go through for lousy war chest rewards. Some really do get scared of challenges. This is still a game, isn’t it?

The first alliance ceased to exist right after the war. We’ll see what happens with the second one, after the current war.

2 Likes

Well, we were beaten handily. Never really had a shot once all of their top players used their war energy. 7 of 10 of the Top 10 Attackers are from the opponent.

2 Likes

Ouch.

Sometimes a loss is just what you need… it humbles us and makes us reflect on what went right and what went wrong.

3 Likes

Lol nevermind

20 characters

my alliance 5 wars in a row get much much much stronger opponents. we have 2 players 4k team power, opponents have 10 players 4k and much more.

When some of the Russian alliances want to increase chances of getting a weaker match up, they drop a player for a war and it changes things up putting them against a weaker alliance.

Cookie Settings