I too think this is unrealistic, but I think the general idea is to make the tournament into more of like a bracket system rather than a point system with random matchups.
I don’t really care either way, I don’t have a dog in this race. But I guess it would be kind of cool if they actually pitted the top scorers against the other top scorers directly, rather than just assigning random targets.
Ironically, with the pseudo-RNG nature of the raid tournaments more players have a shot at top 10 as is than with any other way it could be set up.
Dave ,either respond nice or dont talk buddy ,check the thread first and read it correctly than write 
take care
This just sounds like “ I want to cry, if you don’t eant to cry with me, please leave…“ .
Im not crying this is your imagination im just asking a better tournament for all of us not only for me ,if its for me i can get 80% of the tournaments top 1% ,but same time i start the tournament hoping to get the top 1 position or at least top 10 ,and seeing my deffence being attacked only once when other deffences r being attacked like 15 times is not nice
There is actually a structure to the tourney scoring, though it may be hard to see depending on where you are at in a given tourney.
The elephant in the room is that the structure of the scoring makes it so that in a given tournament you have 1.2 million players in the same pool being told that they can compete for the same items, but a good portion of that player pool has zero chance at any of the top tiers from the start regardless of how many matches they win because the scoring will never allow them a high placement (and I’m starting to suspect other aspects of the scoring may be capped as well beyond what is a given…but I’m not there with the data…yet).
If I’m gonna complain about it, might as well point it at the real flaw here.
I’m sure there is a structure, but it could use some tweaking.
For example… when I did participate in raid tourneys (I don’t anymore), I noticed that sometimes I would hardly get attacked at all the first couple of days. I’d win a few, rack up some points, end up in whatever place before getting knocked out. And that’s fine, I was happy wherever I landed, even if it was just a couple of bad boards that put me there. Whatever, raids, bad boards, I’m used to it.
What doesn’t make sense is that once I was already knocked out of the tournament, I would continue to get attacked by teams with more points than I had. I got attacked more times after getting knocked out than I did while I was actually in the tournament. I’m already out, it’s already established that I’m not going to be the winner, why is my team even still in play? Unless they’re expecting me to shell out gems to continue on? IMO, once I’ve been knocked out, I’m out. The ones who are still in should be fighting each other. Isn’t that how a proper tournament is supposed to work?
Raid tournament is made of two parts: Attack and Defense
Even if you are out on Attack you can still be winning point with your defense team
What I can’t understand is why they can’t manage to get 5 attacks daily on our defense. Yesterday I have not been attacked so I got a C classification. Today I have been defeated once. The point deficit I already accumulated will make it hard to reach top 1% even if I’m lucky with board. But SG algorithm is already pushing me out even if my defense team is close too other in top 10…
As near as I can tell, defense being attacked relies on two criteria:
the strength of the best 5 heroes and troops in a given tourney for the player (weaker not going to see as much action)
how often it loses early; those that rack up a couple of quick losses in a day tend to not get attacked as much
Not totally certain of that, but from my experience in prior games, it doesn’t seem like it would be that difficult to match more of the players together by standing rather than pre-set tiers, so I can understand the complaints that it isn’t a tournament as much as a random exercise in raiding with prizes at the end.
There could be a lot of reasons for that, including RNG, but it’s also possible that not enough players in a tier are attacking enough to generate that many defenses for everyone. Even if we all agree the imbalance is real, nothing will ever guarantee an even number of defenses for everyone due to that fact alone. If 20 players are in a tier on a new day with 5 attacks (for 100 attacks total) and only 15 complete all 5 attacks, a defense is getting shorted there. It’s just the way it is.
I can’t agree that. If only 15 players complete their 5 attacks them they should be distributed in a proper way every day. 15 players should be attacked 4 times and 5 others 3 times. On next days the game should start with them balance attacks. It’s that simple
I play for chance of free loot, would never continue. Its pretty darn easy to push into top 10% or better, sure bad luck happens but i think i have pushed into top 10% 8 out of 10x and thats with a 95% roster of TC20 heroes. Does it needto be improved? Heck yes but they never will, these devs are worthless as teets on a boar.
i just play them and get whatever i get free. fill up a few raid chests easier.
i would have preferred they changed matchmaking so everyone has the same chance at the same number of points per attack first win is worth like 100 second win is 200 etc etc.
also would have preferred they shorten the length to 3 days and have 2 a week. More content is wanted not less
I hear you brother but… Can we all please stop using this line? " there is a team of developers with families that need to be fed" … It’s a small company valued at $700 million for crying out loud. I don’t know where it became the norm that micro-transactions are the key for Devs to make money when they are relatively new and we got examples of super successful game Dev companies long before micro transactions existed.
Nobody at SG is starving… trust me on this one.
"there is a team of developers with families that need to fed " is clearly a euphamism. I am obviously aware that they are very, very well fed.
The point I am making is that people play this game for free and then complain. They complain that people that pay to play have an easier time. They complain that if they don’t spend any money that they don’t progres quickly enough. About pay to win in general. They forget however that this game isn’t a charity but a business. They forget that behind their screens there is a company , with actual people that need to be paid and investors that need to see some return on their venture.
So this begs the question. If I don’t pay to play this game then how does SG pay their staff? Well the answer, obviously, is through micro transactions. Micro transactions that need to be interesting enough and give you enough of an edge to consider paying for. I don’t want to go too deep in to how micro transactions work, no need to beat a dead horse, but the fact that someone is having an easier time because he/she chose to use actual money is the entire reason you can actually play the game for free in the first place.
You are right. There were plenty of succesful Game Dev companies before micro transactions but I will bet my account that they didn’t get there by making free games without micro transactions. Either it is free and there are microtransactions or you pay up front for the game ( nowadays you have both CoughFifaCough ).
The only reason anyone can play for free is because somewhere there is someone else that is prepared to pay to beat you. However, rather than being happy they have something to enjoy for free, or that they get new content, people would rather complain.
There is a saying : Don’t look a gifted horse in the mouth. Feels like all I see nowadays are Horse dentists…
It really is that simple. When I play a game that operates off of micro-transactions I will either pay to play or play until I hit a buy wall and get bored with banging my head against it, then go find another freebie game of the same genre, ad infinitum. I vote with my feet. ::shrug::
So far E&P is the only casual game I’ve been interested in enough to buy into.
Dear people the topic was about Same Power Deffences giving same points for everyone ,and That Every Deffence should be attacked same amount of times for all the players im just talking about this kind of fair things and not about free to play or pay to win or whatever ,Maybe adding gem eater confused everyone (even that i think its like that since thwy added the 5th day) but that has nothing to do with having a fair competition.
Can my spending boycott start after Atlantis?
I like the raid tournies with the exception of the rebuy. I can’t think of any competitve event with a rebuy except some poker tournies. Should be based on skill not rebuying. Can you see a team losing the Superbowl, but wait, they’re rebuying for another shot.
I only use these cheesy tournaments to help fill hero chests. Could care less about hitting the top 1%. However, have managed to hit 1% a couple times. Once on 3* rush attack and another on 3* bloody battle (and only that time because I kept getting matchups against players that forgot the rules and put healer(s) in). The rewards are decent yes but definitely not worth 75 
unless you are already in 1% on the last day.
If SG really cared about the future of tournaments here is my 2 cents, which is more than I plan to spend until some changes are considered…
Since they added a 5th day, also increase the amount of defeats needed from 4 to 5.
Individual war score (strength of top heroes and bench for the * level allowed) could be used more for matchmaking and score calculation. Getting constantly pitted against teams of insanely emblemed teams that don’t give a proportionate amount of extra points, should you manage to beat them, is total BS. Ex: in the current 4* tournament, beating an equal team of around 3400 TP earned 584 points and beating a team just shy of 3800 earned only 608. 