I feel that sometimes the alliance wars/battles are not that even for instance the war we just fought in alliance had 14 players above 2900 in power to our alliances 8 which on the whole doesn’t seem very fair matching, I would like to have the choice not to battle against an alliance for this reason and I think it should be vice versa as well, alliance wars should be where both sides agree to battle with each other to give a fairer chance to both sides
And you think a way stronger alliance seeing easy 5 points to chest would just “agree” not to fight an easy war.
Yes of course they would but the weaker side wouldn’t have to agree and if they did well it’s up to them
Power is not everything, there is also participation, raiding skills, depth, strategy and luck. We have beaten alliances that looks stronger for the first sight.
I’m afraid being able to change mind after matchmaking would slow down filling the war chest without any benefits for anyone. Alliances don’t loose anything (rss, heroes, mats) but time and pride with a lost war, there is no reason to skip one.
I look forward to each war and would be disappointed if we would need to miss a war just because opponent changed their minds. Those alliances that don’t want to fight can opt out already.
I feel this change would make the game slower and more boring.
Everyone here is missing the point, once you agree to fight an alliance it would be binding just being given the opportunity to pick who we fight would be a step forward but we are given no choice, in every other aspect in this game we are given choices…except for raids on us…why not this as well…
Let’s say for example that my alliance is matched with yours in war. What should happen with us if you decide to reject us as an opponent? Either we miss our chance for war or SG needs to run another round of matchmaking (usually takes up to 3h for them). What happens if the opponent of the second matchmaking also reject us? 3rd, 4th, 5th round of matching? It’s not easy and would make our war coordination more difficult as our war would keep getting shifted several hours.
What do you gain by not fighting us after the first matching? Worst case you get 1 point in your chest, best case 5 points. Loosing war happens with all alliances.
once you understand how to properly participate in wars you won’t feel the way you do.
win or lose you learn how to work as a unit and the more chances you have the better your unit becomes. I beat teams of 4.1k with teams 3.2k by learning my heroes and countering. I take on teams with lower heroes to punch holes so some of our new players can learn how to do clean ups.
wars show not just your work on your team but your collective group as an alliance to achieve a common goal. we just got annihilated in a war totally mismatched, but we won our last four previously so this match up wasnt surprising, and even outmatched,we still teamed up to make sure we flipped the board on them once meaning, as an alliance we, figured out how to take down every opponent we faced. this will lead to more wins and also forms the bond that make alliances either grow or falter.
avoiding wars isnt gonna make you guys any stronger no matter how you look at it, its detrimental to your whole alliance
Either way… The fight is unfair to begin with… How is the matching properly matched?? When you see you dont stand a chance against the other team … And… Out of the 30 players, only 25 to 27 players are on and most times its either there top players and our weak players. But an agreement between both Alliance sounds like a great idea… if an Alliance has been turned down twice. Then auto matching.
Giving the choice would probably negate half the matches set up. Alliances are not going to voluntarily agree to fight if they feel they could lose. And from the complaints here many feel that they generally will lose.
all you are doing is poisoning your alliance with this stuff. no one trying to learn is gonna learn anything with a leader whose answer is to RUN.
I didn’t understand how war matching worked and once I discovered the forums, and started reading all the facts, I understand it much better now. That has pretty much eliminated the frustration for me and most in my alliance.
I know there’s a chance of it being a tie, but very unlikely, So there will almost always be a winner and a loser. We have fun, and learn and help each other either way.
This war we lost…by a lot. The last war, even though the teams on the field for both wars looked similar for heroes, tanks, and team power, and war scores were very close, we won by a large margin. The other team just didn’t work together as well, and didn’t have the bench depth to follow through on clearing our teams.
Funny thing is, this war that we lost, was more fun…it was against an alliance where we knew some members, and we set up a Line group and shared some videos of battles and just cut up a little.
@DoctorStrange, I like your view, that it can be a great bonding experience for an alliance…that has been my experience as well. Even members that are usually the quiet types come out of their shell a little during wars, as we encourage and cheer each other on.
You don’t know if the matching is unfair before fighting the war. We don’t see skills, teamwork and participation level in detail - but all these factors are condensed into the war score that is the basis of the matching.
If I understand your description correctly, your alliance has an issue with participation. That’s hurting an alliance in war, especially if your big ones are not hitting. As matching uses their heroes and troops also the second round with automatching likely to bring you an opponent of the same size.
I agree with the point that it looks like you’re making:
The things you can externally observe in evaluating a War matchup (at least in the current system) are:
Player levels — which means very little, though people seem to often care for some reason
Regular Defense Teams — which aren’t super helpful, because lots of people cup drop
Player Cups — also not super helpful, again because of cup dropping
Titan Score — doesn’t give a very accurate indication of bench depth, defense teams, or War competency/participation
Alliance Score – this is just Titan Score plus total alliance cups…no new info here
Time in Alliance — also not very relevant, though it comes up often in discussion anyway
So, in upshot: all of the things you can currently observe in evaluating a War match aren’t very good indications of the War strength of an alliance, nor the quality of the match.
Enter: The War Score — which ignores every single one of those things above, and focuses on internal metrics of War strength
The War Score includes things that generally actually do impact War performance, unlike all the things above:
These are better metrics, because they indicate things like bench depth, attack team strength, likely defense strength, and the effectiveness of the alliance in War.
And the thing is: it’s nearly impossible to know any of those pieces of information looking at an alliance match — you can’t browse through all of their hero rosters, troops, and War history.
But the War Score sums that up for you.
And the War Score is what’s used for matching.
I feel like the reason that this is brought up is because people who dont bounce around usually have spent more time with their teammates thus, had more actual war experience talking with one another to coordinate attacks.
That’s an interesting subjective measure, and probably depends on the alliance.
I spent a month in my first alliance, and in that whole time, fewer messages were sent in chat than an average day in my current alliance.
was same in my first we got lucky with the one we are in currently.
I’ve been a broken record lately in my alliance about checking their raid defences and cups to guage anything about the other team for those very reasons.