AW _ Win By Default

My Alliance just got this notification , I assume coz the other alliance didn’t set any defense?

Loot was defeat level loot.

Anyone can shed any more light maybe please?

If your opponent withdraws their defense, you win by forfeit. The loot for that stinks.

1 Like

Soooo … if, say, some people are … hm … “not pleased” with how AW works at the moment, and this would add up to 30% alliances forfeiting, then … a whole bunch of crowd would be … “not pleased”?
Interesting.

2 Likes

I think it’s safe to assume a whole lot of crowd is very displeased.

1 Like

Sorry @Devil123 our alliance also defaults war by not setting a defence team. We will keep on doing that until the dev change the matching system…

2 Likes

I applaud this! I think you’re doing the right thing. My alliance believes that we should participate anyway, so i do, but i loathe aw. I’d much rather have a sparring function without any loot and a simulate attack function to test your defences than this crap.

The devs have changed the matching system over 3x times already.

By not setting a defence and not participating to the best of your abilities, you’re actually making things worse.

They continuously look at the outcome of AW after each itteration to see when things when wrong and what could be made better.

Your alliance and the other “lets strike”-folks are making things worse.
SGG is trying to make things better.

Stop sulking in a corner, suck it up and move on.

8 Likes

Don’t blame those who think it is crap.

Something that gets irritatingly frustrating doesn’t make you want to play and the game looses its fun. We’ve had wars for a while and they suck still, why should they play a part of the that only makes them annoyed? If my alliance said to opt out i’d do it in a heartbeat, but i support my alliance even though i don’t agree.

We’re not required to suck it up from a user/payer perspective, since we have found a way to both ignore it and protest. And it was rude to say that we should play parts of it that just makes us mad, just because you think so. Put the crap back to beta and do a redesign, but don ask us to waste our time on poorly implented functions.

And forcing people to participate is not a good idea. That would see people go in droves. Though it wouldn’t surprise me with the track record

5 Likes

When you pay my phone bill you can tell me how to play this game, I am currently looking for sponsorship so any google play cards added to my account by you will be taken into consideration.

2 Likes

You cant properly test it on Beta since it isnt realistic enough. Too few alliances, too homogenous players etc.

And no, I dont think its rude. I think its pragmatic. Especially when SGG explicitly has asked for players help in the matter.

It boils down to this:

  • Do you help out?
    or
  • Dont you help out?

And personally I think the second alternative is always worse.

3 Likes

When you contribute something usefull instead of “blahblah” maybe I will sponsor you.

What do you want me to say? Low level matchmaking sucks. One or the other side gets wrecked. These guys that don’t want to participate shouldn’t. I’m in a dead alliance, we have 21k trophies, we were matched against an alliance with 13k trophies. The war was even more mismatched than the trophy score. I am the strongest team at 2800 with 5 2400 teams behind me. Their strongest team is 2400, I smashed that team in one shot and wrecked 2 more teams twice. We are winning 2100 to 399 and 1150 points were from me, I could have nearly solo’ed their entire alliance. There are several hundred posts about similar situations, what more data is needed? @Fledoble can I have my sponsor bucks now?

Just to clear things up, I imagine that the other players did not attack because they would have been throwing troops against a brick wall. Complete waste of their time.

1 Like

Furthermore, any game that is cash transaction based should never depend on players for tuning purposes. It gives players a massive incentive to withhold vital information.

Thats great! Something concrete!

Strong player in a dead alliance.
Titan score matching failed.
Hero power matching failed.

Maybe and hopefully they will figure something out that takes this outlier into consideration.

Feel free to send me your info and I’ll gladly sponsor you with a buck!

And I agree, it should only be tested by players, but which is why it isnt. But players help provide feedback.

2 Likes

I was just playing about sponsorship.

1 Like

**what about using their time giving us the promised 2 nd map instead of trying to force us to play this game the ay they think we should? **

1 Like

You’re in luck! Season 2 is currently being worked on :slight_smile:

As well as a new event.

Oh, Alliance War matchup improvements are being worked on as well.

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.

1 Like

The devs are only do some stitches here and there, they are lost in this poorly implemented feature. They want us to make a bigger bench, to spend more and that’s all, and they want it fast. They didn’t care about the quality of the product they delivered. So we are supposed to help them? . I buy vip pass, gems that’s my help, your job is to give me something in exchange. I am not paying to be a beta tester and finding bugs.

3 Likes

I see both sides of this.

On one side our participation does help. It helps SG see margin of defeat, number of participants, etc. And SG could have tested something earlier that seemed like it might work, only to see how many play unethically like when players were able to remove their defense teams in the middle of war to prevent opponent from scoring…the list goes on and on. And while you can’t fully predict or totally eliminate “cheating”, it has made finding a solution more complex.

I also understand why players and alliances are protesting and refusing to fight in wars. The message is clear - ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! Time is out, we (E & P community) are tired of spending time, in some cases money, developing heroes in order to be competitive only to be matched in wars that are completely one-sided AND where loot doesn’t come close to being an incentive (Mystic Vision (30 secs of time) offers better loot than AW).

Back to matchmaking - after latest release when issues were being reported and the method used had actually made it worse for many alliances, examples were given so SG to check if matchmaking worked as intended. Do you think we got an answer for the specific examples and loads of data we provided - no. They didn’t cone back and answer that the examples given worked as expected or not…only answer was it’s better on average…this only adds to frustration.

If SG wants AW to be successful, they need to suspend wars and test, then implement, maybe on groups of alliances that accept the role of “beta” testing. Include alliances of varying levels and strength, not just top alliances. Once those pass and bugs are worked out, begin rolling out to entire community again.

2 Likes

Cookie Settings