[MASTER] War mismatch - 136k vs. 108k war score (and other similar mismatches from other alliances)

Same with our last alliance war. Sharing…

The silence on the resolution to this problem is deafening, I think they are taking the Kimi Raikkonen approach

@Petri and @KiraSG
Will this issue be fixed before the next war?
Or you still haven’t been able to identify the issue?
Would be great to get an answer, about your current progress.


We were assigned an alliance with more than 5000 points of difference in the war and the result was predictable from the beginning. The smallest player of us has 1800 attack, the second 2400, theirs 3800 and 3900.

Please fix the problem.

I am surprised they haven’t given us updated information about this problem.

Some of the pictures I have seen look like totally broken matches.

It seems like a huge problem that should be getting high priority and it certainly doesn’t look that way.

1 Like

My apologies for not commenting sooner, and for the reported mismatches.

As I posted here War Matchmaking Issue -- Proposed Solutions (Developer response: post 107), we have been working on an improvement on the war matchmaking.

In the past two weekends, we have been testing the new model. We do this using a so called AB test where 50% of the alliances get matched using the old model and 50% get matched using the new model. The benefit of this approach is that we can actually see if the new version is producing better results or not.

Some of the mismatches are probably caused by the fact that the pool of alliances is temporarily 50% smaller because it has been split into two groups. The bigger mismatches (when it comes to the difference in the war score) are probably related to the fact that we still show the old war score in the UI, even if the match has been made using the new logic. So in those cases the new logic has made a clearly different decision than the old one would have.

So far, the results have not been very promising. According to our metrics, the new model is indeed performing worse than the old one. Today’s matchmaking was again performed using the old model for 100% of the alliances.

There is still one more thing we want to try with the new model, and we are planning to run one more AB test over the weekend. If the results don’t clearly improve, we are most likely going to stick with the old model. If the results do improve, we will probably want to conduct further testing.

At the same time, we are working on a separate change that should make it more likely that you’ll get a good match even when an AB test is running and the pool of potential alliances is halved.

I want to remind you that the goal of this project is to improve the matchmaking in the long term. However, I do want to apologize for the problems and for not keeping you guys in the loop.


Why do I feel like a white mouse in the test laboratory?

Anyway, good to get some response after that long time waiting and speculating what’s going on.

1 Like

Why don’t you announce such beta tests, in the game, with a message?
You got the system, to push messages.
So you could have told your customers, that you decided to use them as beta testers in the live version and they would have known, that some mismatches might happen.

And why don’t you use the midweek wars for those tests?
Those are the wars, where some aren’t able to fully participate, so it’s not that horrible if it’s a mismatch, as you before already know that some flags might be unused.
But a bad matching at the weekends is real annoying.


Thank you for explaining what happened with the matchmaking recently. I appreciate you being open and clear with us.

However, if you decided to do this test in a real game (and not in beta) you should communicate this in advance to let us - customers know. Also each matched alliance should get 5 points regardless who won the war. This 5 points rule should last for the period of testing on live data. That would be fair enough to call it “appropriate customer treatment”. Otherwise, you just made many of your customers angry and dissatisfied.


Oh… So you guys nearly killed my alliance twice and saying it was just a test. Beat someone and say it was just a test. what will the victim do? obviously police or court. We need a reward for 2 massacre for last 2 weeks. You can see the info as i wrote a lot in this.

How do you decide, whether a new matching system is successful? I guess you wanted work against switching alliances (for players who want easy wars). The opponents of my alliance were somewhat easier, but probably we now took benefit from being a quite stable alliance where we before suffered from others using a hole in matchmaking. I guess these players are now discouraged to really fight (because some of them tried to get easy wins). I ask you to not give up on improvements just because off not seeing close results.

1 Like

Can’t agree more. Let people know about this test in advance and give them the full points of a war win, just in case the test doesn’t go as expected, as apparently happened.

Normally I don’t want to trust him, so our alliance got 2 points with 10 for your testing? Are you kidding us? We are in a live game! No one with our alliance is a beta tester, so feel free to give us heroes to test for results. actually it has already happened we tested tellurium and vela and we also paid for it and not in beta … The fact happens with this totally garbage game …

Unfortunately, I can’t reply to everybody’s message, but I want to address one thing.

People have been asking why are we doing these kind of tests in the live game instead of the beta. The answer is simply that we wouldn’t get enough data to draw any conclusions.

Doing changes in the live game is something that cannot be avoided - otherwise we couldn’t make any improvements. It sounds like some people don’t like the idea that we are testing those changes. It is true that we could have just deployed the new model without testing, but that would have been a mistake because the results are not where we want them to be.

However, I freely admit that we should have been more proactive in communicating about these changes.


I agree that it should have been communicated better, and that some changes are hard to test outside of live game, but testing war matchmaking doesn’t seem to be that hard.

I’ve already tracked over 60 wars for our alliance - I have stored in database all heroes in defenses (both sides), their TP, their emblems and troops and without looking at war scores I can tell you in few minutes by typing few SQL queries what was a mismatch and what was probably a fair fight. We had one against Avengers few months ago when they were climbing to top 100 (so they didn’t have full 20 records of their wins/loses back than) and second time when you changed the matchmaking so we were matched by the new way.

So don’t tell me you can’t run test matchmaking, store results somewhere and analyze the results according to what each alliance have - and while I am able to compare only defenses you have access to all best 30 heroes.

I really hope you’ll do better next time - either test it well / implement it in live game well or just revert it to the previous war matchmaking with it annoying flaws.

Just leave it here

The selection of the enemy for the war is perfect in this game :slight_smile: No need to fix and improve old features - we need more summons, HotM and Golin’s balloons

20 LOL.

First I didn’t get it, best war matching ever.
Let us know later if you earned one point or two for the remis result. :rofl:

Automatic win immediately after the start of the war and +5 to chest. Thats all :slight_smile:

While watching again I saw it.
War chest went from 22 to new chest with 2.

Strange why not +6 because it is both a defeat and a win at the same time :slight_smile:

1 Like