Alliance Wars Matchmaking (Discussion & Developer Response) MASTER

The Alliance is falling apart, the strong players are leaving. They do not want to wait until the new selection system starts giving equal opponents.

I want to stop playing. I want to get positive emotions and not to deal with the growing dullness and greed of the developers.

so fun to read messages from players who, until the last update, were constantly losing, and now they finally managed to win.

Until the last update, the selection took into account the strength of the heroes of each player. And this is the only objective indicator that, rejecting the ability to play, organization and teamwork, could influence the outcome of the war.

And the fact that some earlier lost more often, while others won more often, says only one thing - some of them played worse and less organized. And the second tried harder, and got a well-deserved victory.

Now, justifying it with a "ladder", those who played responsibly were brought down from an objectively stronger opponent, who has a lot more TP.

And this difference in the TP negates the possibility of winning at the expense of better commitment, because the players with the teams of 3200-3400 cannot objectively oppose the players of 3400-3800 on equal terms.

My alliance before the upgrade won in 9 out of 10 wars, given that the level of the defense teams of rivals was almost identical. Now 4 out of 5 times we meet opponents with a huge difference in the average TP. And the war, which previously looked competitive, turned into a distressing appendage of an already monotonous game.

1 Like

Another person who thinks the sytem was good because they won and now after some losses they say the system is bad. :slight_smile:

4 Likes

The important thing is not that we won before, but now we lose. It is important that earlier won against opponents who are slightly weaker or slightly stronger than us. And now all opponents are much stronger and we constantly lose.

The fact of the matter is, the new matchmaking system created an artificial win percent of 50% for everyone. That’s just boring. I would rather flip a coin and not waste my time strategizing and coordinating. What’s the point if the outcome is the same?

The problem with this statement is that you have no idea whether they were stronger or weaker than you. You can’t see their heroes. Of course you’d like to think you were being equally matched and maybe you were… But you don’t actually know.

1 Like

today’s war.
I am a leader, my level is 39 and my team in the war has a strength of 3,610 (there is one 5 * in it on a full). My team is second in strength in the alliance.
Leader of the opponent, his level is 53, his team is 4080, all the heroes are 5 * totally pumped. And his team is also the second in strength in the alliance.
Do you believe that his other heroes are weaker than mine? I have been playing and fighting for months, and I do not believe it. And by the way how and who the player attacks, I can quite accurately understand the level of his characters.
If you believe, then you, excuse me, do not understand anything about this game.

1 Like

Actually this is exactly the correct feedback.

Why?

Because the whole concept and implementation of AW is so flawed that the only positive people get from it is the box of loot at the end.

So when they don’t even get that, what’s left? A miserable experience.

That is the type of match my alliance had before this most recent patch. So it wasn’t fair then either despite what some of you seem to think. Changes had to be made, this is likely not the final iteration of changes to MM. We have had better matches since the change, you have not. We all need to keep participating and giving the developers data.

Quitting won’t help make matchmaking better.

Edit: and for the record we haven’t won all our matches since the patch, but they have not been the kind of blow outs we had prior. We are almost certainly going to lose the current one since we can’t break their biggest teams.

1 Like

It would be nice if you would read my posts so you would understand why you are wrong.

Just as a reminder:

Out of curiosity……how does a fair matching sytem according to you work ?

A lot of people seem to forget the win/loss ratio might even out by 50/50 at a certain point in your ( your alliances ) career when you stop improving.

Meanwhile if you win you will be paired against a stronger team and if you are good enough and progress fast enough you might loose some but you will still win the majority of your fights.

When you dont progress/improve anymore you will be paired against alliances on the way up or the way down the ladder and you can expect a 50/50 win loss ratio since you are now in a certain strength class, for example 2. league, 1. league, national league…whatever.

When you start geting better again you will rise and win the majority of your fights again and on so until you are at the top where you will win most of your fights until someone comes around who is better than you.

So keep playing and progressing as good/fast as you can/want and you will find your place on the ladder.

Hopefully one day in the future it is the top spot.

Good luck

1 Like

And what about the (up to) 28 other players…? The matchmaking is based on both the top 30 hero power of all participating members and previous war history. Are you saying that not only are your hero powers significantly lower, but you’ve also been consistently losing? That doesn’t sound right to me, but if so it sounds like a bug. It seems more likely that you’re either not losing as much as you say or that your total hero powers are not actually lower than your opponents (which again is impossible to confirm).

If I understood correctly, within the span of a few days you changed from an alliance with 4k+ teams and now you’re the leader of a much weaker alliance that is “losing all it’s strong members” and loses all its wars? Is this a new alliance or did you join and take over an existing one? How was this existing alliance doing before the recent patch?

I read your posts and I understand how swiss pairings work. I believe that fairness is when both teams have relatively equal roster strength and numbers of players. Just like in a race when everyone uses the same starting line. Or how arrows are shot from the same distance in archery. Or how golfers have access to the same clubs and use the same holes. The field of play is the same (equitable) for everyone and it’s their talent, skill, and strategy that separates them.

The difference of opinion here is happening because of different ideas of what’s “fair.” Some, like me, believe the starting line is what should be fair (pair alliances with similar rosters). Others believe that it’s the finish line that should be fair (pairing based on record).

The reason I believe the latter is unfair is because you have to move the starting line so that people will finish in relatively the same amount of time. It’s like saying Usain Bolt is too fast so we’re going to move up everyone’s starting line until Usain Bolt is only winning about 50%. Or Michael Phelps is a faster swimmer than the other swimmers, so everyone else gets to start further ahead than him until they’re all winning about 50% of the time, head-to-head. Or if you could compete against Robin Hood in archery, but he’s so much more accurate than you, so we move you up closer until you’re beating him 50% of the time. This is what SG is doing when they pair two alliances at totally different points of roster development simply because of their record.

This is not how pairings happen in almost every other truly competitive arena…so why are we doing it here?

2 Likes

Maybe focus more on your golf comparison and think of the previous record metric as a handicap. We tee off from the same box, same clubs, etc. Only you consistently shoot 2 under what I would, therefore you face similar players as yourself until I improve or you start to struggle. Pull a tiger woods and you are there with 7DD.

Your examples (e.g. Usain Bolt’s opponents starting further up) all give some kind of handicap. No handicap is given in Alliance Wars. Everyone is playing with the same rules. Instead of making up sport examples, how about other video games which you believe have a fair matchmaking system? I’ve yet to hear any suggestions on this. All fair matchmakings end up with 50% win rate, that’s inevitable. Most good matchmakings are based on ELO (or some similar variant). Would you also argue that ELO is unfair? Because it also will skew to 50% after a lot of games unless you’re constantly improving.

Sure, in an ideal world matchmaking could pair up alliances with the exact same power levels. The problem is that such as an algorithmn is impossible due to the nature of how the game works. There’s just too many variables and no accurate way to measure hero effectiveness. If you’re against a system which gives fair matches from an ‘equal chance to win’ perspective and would rather fair matches from an ‘equal power’ perspective, what exactly do you propose they base matchmaking on to achieve this?

But there is another point of view.

To stay with your example.

When Hussein started his career he ran in the lower leagues against other opponents in this leagues.

When he got better he ran in higher leagues against opponents of approximately the same strength that had qualified to.

In the end he ran in the top league against top opponents and won most of his races.

You can do the same in AW if you are good, persitent and lucky enough. :slight_smile:

So go and get them and one day you might be on top and win most of your matches. :wink:

The good thing is to get there you HAVE to win most of your matches. Exactely what you want.

I think you have it wrong - as far as I know, matchmaking is still taking place on a comparison of teams - the 30 top heroes with extra weight on the 5 strongest, plus also the strength of troops and number of players in the alliance taking part - and then, matching those with a winning streak.

Just one thing, because it looks like you don’t get it right. Usain Bolt still running against opponents with just 2 legs, just like he has. But if he would run in SG’s ladder sooner or later he would run against opponents on sport cars

Explain to me how you can play against an opponent who has almost the whole team in the diamond league and in the war almost all teams are 4000+, and we have only 8 members in the diamond league, and 4000+ teams have only 4 players?

Since the pairing takes into account many different factors including top 30 heroes of each player I dont expect to see many sports cars after the system has had time to adjust itself and if I see one it would be interesting to see how good the driver is and what is used for the other 5 races. ( a snail maybe ? )

Cookie Settings