AW pause and back to design table?

More and more people are complaining about AW. AW gets nerfed on and on again.

Wouldn’t it be time, development team, that you accept your loss and go back to design table? And then test in Beta?

I think AW is a very good idea, but it never has been worked out quite. I think it’s better to throw away AW and totally redesign it and test it good. If you have a beta testing team, then something like this has to be tested. Don’t use us as Beta team in real play.

You can’t get good figures now because some people/teams are boycotting the AW. You are now basing matches on titans and will do it on heroes next week… it’s quite amateuristic.

For instance current war: My team has several people with strenght 1600 and has been matched with a team with minimum 2500… So please go back to design table and redesign it and test it utterly. :smiley:


We are having the opposite experience. We have had our closest and most competitive wars since the 1.12 update. One which we won by just 9 points.

The matchmaking seems to have the hardest time with alliances that don’t have full participation or alliances under the 50k score total.


And that’s what’s adding to the difficulty in fixing the method. For our alliance it’s been the exact opposite. We are a mixed alliance with an overall score of 77k and have been badly mismatched for all four wars, both in our favour and in the opponent’s favour. Not even a close battle in any of the four wars. I miss that excitement of watching the clock right up to the final seconds and not knowing if we were going to win.

1 Like

@Rook, don’t we have enough threads about AW’s problems?

This is no complaint about problems but advising to stop topic.

As stated in more topics there ARE some minor problems, but this is a thread that’s not meant to speak about them but, as not mentioned in other titles, to advice SG to just stop with it and redevelop it and then put it back as it works properly.

If something isn’t working on first design, redesign it and put it back. It’s a nice thing when it’s working :smiley:

So again SG please stop in real game, and redevelop it. It’s worth it.

Yep, all that threads are unique. And each post has deep, unrepeatable thoughts.

1 Like

I agree. Since I’m not sure which thread is the “offical” one and actually read by the devs, I end up posting on each thread in the hopes of giving them my feedback, hopefully my constructive feedback.

1 Like

I suppose this one

Posted previously

Step 1: Divide alliances into groups by number of players at level 12 and above.

Step 2: Total the team power of top five heroes of each player in the alliances. These are the most likely defense teams that will be used.

Step 3: Match the teams within those groups.

Yes depth of a players heroes will be a factor in the war but many level 12 players have no depth. However, most higher level players have about the same depth as another with the same defensive team power.

I just checked that one and the ones with AW balance titles seem to be more constructive.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with alliance war. Titan score, alliance score, hero roster match-up I’ll take on all challengers no matter who I get matched with. I love alliance war and always anticipate it starting. It’s not like you lose anything if you lose. You don’t even have to participate technically if you don’t want to. Also the only way to get a lot of data is by letting the majority of players play instead of the small percentage in beta.

I also love the alliance wars. What I don’t like since the update is seeing the moment we open the war banner which alliance is going to win. No more challenging battles, no more waiting for the final minutes of the war to see who will win, no more nail biting… that last one is much better for my manicure though!

1 Like

List of nerfs or they didn’t happen?

Hey, I get the point of your post. You’re disliking being used as a guinea pig for AW. I get that, there’s a reason people don’t participate in betas and when you’re using the live game as beta, well, that doesn’t usually sit well with the playerbase.

I do disagree that they can’t get good figures because of boycotts. You’re oversimplifying the way they can look at the server data. They can easily flag out alliances that didn’t participate. And they can mathematically compensate for players that didn’t spend all their flags.

What -is- indeed somewhat awkward is that they have to use Live for their testing. You’d think they’d have a virtual playerbase to run tests with. But I digress, they don’t, so we’re the guinea pigs. They are taking a methodical approach with us though. It’s not for nothing, nor in vain. They’re using the Power of Math and Statistics.

Give them some faith. They’re trying to make this work better for as many of us as possible as fast as possible.

But nerfs? Where, when, which?

1 Like

It’s agile software development

I suppose that sounds a lot sexier than trial and error :wink: :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

I have another idea to add to the wish list. We aren’t supposed to fight the same alliance in a war but I would love a rematch option for really close fights. It would be fun to see if we could win/lose against an alliance that we won/lost by under 100 points.

Likewise. We’ve without a doubt had our closest matchups since the latest update. Previous match metrics always had us up against weaker teams that we won easily against. Wars are down to the wire now, really fun.

Our last war was the closest yet; these points changed hands in the last three minutes. GREAT war by our opponent!

I am looking at all the threads. Some will be merged. Some closed. The fate of all is unknown at this time. Carry on.

I’m so envious. I miss those close battles. Hopefully we’ll get some of them again and IF we do, I’ll be sure to post.

1 Like