AW Scoring problem (and fix!)

AW scoring is unfair to alliances with different numbers of members. The current matching sets a maximum number of players difference; last I read from the devs, this was capped at three. That helps, but the problem is still there, plus in addition, members of an alliance can leave after matchmaking, either before the war starts or partway through, making this problem worse.

It is actually a double whammy against the smaller alliance:

  • A larger alliance gets more hits, (six per member, more members)
  • The average team is worth 2000 / members when killed, so the kills by the larger alliance are also worth more.

My spreadsheet multiplied them out to show the maximum score possible for each side and then the difference between them. The farther apart in size the alliances are, the bigger the advantage is. (Yes, every member having six perfect kills is very unlikely, but the advantage is proportionally there with only one, two, or three kills on average)

I realized that this scoring problem is readily fixable. Make the average team worth 2000 / (# attacking members) instead of 2000 / (# defending members) Relative point differences between stronger and weaker teams in a given alliance need not change.

In the fair case where both alliances have the same number of members, the scoring is exactly the same, but there is no longer a structural scoring advantage to a larger alliance if they aren’t.

A1 A2 A2-Kill A1-Kill Advantage A2-Kill (fix) A1-Kill (fix) Advantage (fix)
30 30 67 67 0 67 67 0
30 29 69 67 814 67 69 0
30 28 71 67 1657 67 71 0
30 27 74 67 2533 67 74 0
30 26 77 67 3446 67 77 0
30 15 133 67 18000 67 133 0
30 1 2000 67 359600 67 2000 0

A few more supporting columns and the formulas are in the google sheet, or other member numbers can be tried out:


Yeah, we calculated the differences of actual players vs 30 players on one of our recent wars. The matchmaking went from 99% (divided by 30), to 92% (divided by actual # of players). Interestingly, we had more players but the numbers showed we were clearly at a disadvantage (only going by the showing defense teams; we cannot see bench). Interesting war.

You have of course seen the new adjustments for this current war:

Testing some balancing changes for the next war - August 3rd

Will this affect the numbers? I have a feeling you’re going to say no.

Schoolmarm voice “Show your work!” :grin:

For the math dumb among us (raises hand) can you write the words “divided by” instead of using the commonly known symbol that I should have no issue with, but…

It will change the numbers; my total score column will all change…because what used to be a 67 point kill will turn into a 50 point kill.

In other words, all my numbers will drop to being 33% lower, and so will the advantage that bigger alliances have … but the % advantage will be exactly the same as before.

This change will impact the strategic value of cleanup kills, perhaps leading to different strategies being optimal, but I don’t see it fixing any of the bigger problems with AW.

A way of describing how points are allocated now:

Clearing the board, i.e. killing the number of members in the opposing alliance, is worth 2000 points (1500 this war), no matter how many members are attacking or defending, and the number of hits a side gets is 6x their members.

And what I’m proposing:

Each member of the alliance making one kill is worth 2000 points (1500 this war).

And as I said before, in the “fair” case where both alliances have the exact same number of members, both these things are true. This only works out differently when the two alliances don’t have the same number of members.

I’m not suggesting anything good will come of a 30 to 1 matchup, or even a 30 to 15.

But with a 30 to 26 matchup there is a 25% scoring bonus given to the larger alliance, and that can be fixed.

The current matching limits the difference in size already, and I think that should be continued.

I’m very confused by how they spread the points across aliance members I have my aliance’s top point defense team at 3940 I’m worth 69 points the highest in the aliance now the other aliance top power defense team 3880 is only worth 59 points while they have a 3550 team worth 62 points the most points in there aliance how do they distribute points? What are the factors we have teams that are 2800 power teams worth 60 points there team has less the 6 teams under 3000 points we have 12 teams less then 3000 points so its easier for them to get points from weaker teams

And as a side note 2 weeks 2 a row now I’ve taken on a 3550 power team and a 3445 power team and lost both time easily with my diamond raid 3940 power team and fast how is this possible I can see losing but it should be competitive so I had to finish off with my number 2 team but number 3 team of 3300 power easily beat their 3240 team so I’m just lost help or maybe I’m not being clear enough I get that way typing a conversation over verbal conversations.

It’s based upon total number of hitpoints of whole team.

I later created a similar theme. Wrong assignment of points to teams for wars with different number of teams on the field
Alas, the developers do not want to correct their mistake in scoring.

An example of wars, showing the fallacy and even absurdity of the current system of calculating points.
Our alliance and the enemy alliance have 5 teams each. We used all the flags and the last attack destroyed the last command of the enemy. Got 1500 points. The enemy also used all the flags but could not destroy our last team, there remained 1 hero in it. The enemy received 1480 points and lost.

Now the war is almost the same, but the enemy has the 6th player X. We attacked as in the previous war, and X remained on the field. All other teams were destroyed. We got 1500 * 5/6 = 1250 points (we didn’t destroy team X). The enemy also attacked, as in the previous war and earned the same 1480 points. Player X attacked very badly and got 0 points.

The enemy played worse than in the first version of the war, but now he won, and we lost!

Cookie Settings