the algorythm which searches for an ennemy alliance should take in consideration the number of Tellurias in each alliance. An alliance with 3 tellurias should never face an alliance with 15 of them.
I get what you are saying, but then surely you would need to add in all the other top tanks like Guinevere, Black Knight, Kunchen etc etc to even it all out.
1 Like
Telluria by herself is not any worse really than facing Guin or Ursena.
Really? Lol
What data do you have for ALL alliances?
Fwiw we don’t have data for ALL alliances, but we do have enough data for SOME alliances to counter your point and disprove your ALL statement
It’s clear you don’t grasp matchmaking
Don’t grasp how to war with math
And simply want easier matchups because your team can’t perform up to par at the level you’re at
That’s a personal & team flaw. Not a game flaw.
What you do to improve this situation:
Step 1. Coordinate the most effective uniform defenses you guys can even if it doesnt involve green tanks, use another color more of you have access to…common sense.
Step 2. Develop a strategy and coordinate with your teammates about the strategy. Use math and timing as the basis.
Step 3. Recruit, recruit, recruit. 30 v 30 wars is the most stable matchmaking. And that’s where you guys can shine.
It’s not impossible. Others are doing it.
Get to it or stay behind. Choice is yours.
You don’t speak for ALL alliances
Have no clue how matchmaking is for ALL alliances
And expecting a game to restructure a system to suit yourself and your team is bit naive and selfish
Too many players hit this thread and other threads b*tchin & moanin about things that are completely within their control.
Improvement always starts with I
4 Likes
You say I and my topic are funny. Yes it is. If you sit and do nothing.
I don’t know anything about the game. Probably. My other account for 14 months is only 47 levels.
If you attack someone who is trying to change the game. Instead of helping him. Then we will be where we were. And this place is called … you are smart people and understood everything.
Lol
If that’s all you took from that, you’ll be complaining for a very very long time
If you would read the material proposed to you, you would finally notice that player level is a bad parameter to add.
Defence teams are variable after the match is made! How do you want to include them into the matching process???
Tell my alliance that the level does not affect the selection. In the last two wars, the level of the enemy is 41 and up to 49. My maximum in the alliance is 28. Is the result to say or guessed?)))).
My suggestion on entering player levels in the selection parameters is relevant. On defense. 5 of the strongest heroes do not go anywhere. The defense team is also relevant.
My topic was moved here.
Why change something?
You can just kill the topic in endless chatter.
Stupid will kill my proposal faster than developers)))
That’s how developers work without working)))
Draw new heroes whom they will seek.
They will spend money on them.
It will pay off better than solving problems.
I don’t see the need to discuss something on the forum.
The developers are killing us with our own hands.
And consider the money of our transactions
1 Like
You didnt bring anything new to the table
The “proposal” was dead on arrival
And yea you guessed what killed it…
I’ve read quite a few posts here about how the match ups were calculated. What I fail to understand is how it could possibly be true. If it counts the 30 strongest heroes of each member then my Alliance who’s weakest member is barely over 2k power with no legendary heroes and maybe 3-4 epic heroes and a few members who aren’t quite at 3k power gets matched against an alliance who’s weakest member is around 3500 power with a full epic hero team fully ascended. We have about 7 members who can put together a defense team over 4k but the other team had 15 members over 4k, 5 of which were over 4200. Lowest level member we had was 15 while their lowest level member was at 36. We have to lose a few wars before we get an even match up. Then we might win 2 before we are pitted against another op alliance compared to ours. There is definately still a flaw in the match making process given those facts. If the matches are based how it has been stated then we should be facing alliances with at least 5 members under 3k power and only 7-9 over 4k with the remaining members being between 3300 to 3800. SG needs to look back into these unfair matches. I know there has to be many alliances that face the exact same problem.
Well when discussing the matchmaking based on the depth of members
Probly best to keep in mind that it doesn’t use individual 1vs1 comparisons of each member of each team
But uses the totals of all 30 of each team
So when it comes to the total, bigger members can offset smaller members and vice versa and a mixed bag can end up with the same total as an alliance that is all on an even que, the even que is typically stronger due to each individual havin the same amount of depth and strength across 180 flags where the mixed bag drops off sooner(sometimes much sooner)
I get what you’re saying but it doesn’t make sense when even our strongest member drops off to 4* heroes by his 4th flag. It says it counts the 30 strongest heroes of each member. So I don’t understand if we face an alliance who’s weakest members still have legendaries in their defense and we have multiple new members who only have maybe a handful of epics and the rest are rare heroes. If it calculates based on that theory then we shouldn’t face a team that all members have legendary and epic heroes while some of ours are still using rare heroes in defense. There’s a huge leap between the strength of legendary heroes from rare heroes. Even epic heroes are much stronger than rare heroes. We only get a fair match after we’ve lost 2-3 wars against an alliance that is considered op to our own. It’s not counting our heroes for the lower members. If our opponents have more members well over 4k power than what we have then the metrics of the match up calculation should catch that and not mach us (or any similar allianceto ours) against a team that we simply can not beat unless they don’t use their flags. It has been pointed out in this thread that alliances are quitting and making a new alliance to get easier matches for themselves. I’m wondering if that still plays a part in matches, or if alliances taking a dive, so to speak, to lower their score affects it. All we tell ourselves is we just have to keep growing. Our weaker members will build and will be able to contribute more when they are stronger.
Whats your war winning % for the last 10 wars ?
As of now in the past 10 wars I think we’ve won 2. We have several members under 3k power and face alliances who’s weakest member averages between 3200-3500 and they have more members over 4k than we have. Overall there is a clear disadvantage in almost every war match up we encounter. I have some screenshots, one shows the opposing alliances weakest member on the field, the rest is of our weakest members on the field.
1 Like
I’m so ready to quit this game. They seem to not care about their steady players. They don’t care about the issues we are having. Such a shame. I’m already looking into some other games to play. Possibly going back to WoW. At least the devs there care about their players.
Because of alliance wars? Or are you just off-topic?
This is why. I submitted this once and they seem to not want to let people see it. Tell me how this match is fair!
We have the exact same issue, 10% difference on alliance levels is not acceptable. The algorithm must be adjusted to allow only max 3% difference ratio.
I tried to post a reply. But now all my posts have to go through a moderator. Guess they want to take our 1A away here too.