If you feel disturbed please feel free to ignore responding, How old are you ?
Seems you don’t know how to escape anymore.
It’s ok, just forget all about it.
It never happened
All i can say after your reply is, i am really sad for you.
And sorry but you succeed on becoming the second user i ignore on the forum.
You are making an assumption lol…
Do you know both alliances depth & full rosters? No.
Do you know every individual members past 20 war performances for both alliances? No.
Do you know your OWN alliance members past 20 war performances? Possibly, but if you had a newcomer then probably not.
Fact is all you can see is the result. Not the inputs to the algorithm at the time of matchmaking.
Result Is AFTER the battles and boards and hero selection and human factor. Matchmaking and algorithm is BEFORE all that.
Also as an FYI, level means nothing, just a assumption you’ve made in your comparison. Just because two players are the same level doesn’t mean they have the same rosters or troops or even the same number or type of heroes levelled… There are WAYYYY too many other factors that influence stuff beyond “amount of exp farmed”… Even coming back to stuff like other activities in game… If one player does a lot more raiding and team experimentation then the other, that person will (on average) do a lot better in wars than someone who just does farming and titans, letting the autoplay do all their gaming anyways…
But anyways, I’m not going to argue the toss.
I commented only to correct the misconception that Alliance Numbers were the prime directive in matchmaking (they aren’t).
I also clearly stated regarding any apparent “increased occurrence”:
Guess better leave him be.
Do rethoric on a hypothetical bug, on a hypothetical scenario that matchmaking would actually never make it happen.
He just made this his personal crusade for a no real reason right now.
Thank you for your support, i stop feeding the troll now.
The second one we lost by around 500 points. The complain was not about the fact we are losing in the beginning of war, but about the fact we are uneven two times in a row.
So you’re saying that an even score on uneven players is a good example of ideal matching. When a final difference in war on even numbers is, for instance, 600, is it an example of bad matching, by your logic? Or it’s just some other factors as skills/boards etc?
Do you have any statistics on uneven wars in terms of what is a percentage of wins by smaller alliances?
Alliance numbers may be different ok. Due to different reasons. But giving a “weaker” player not only 6 more flags, but also more points for a oneshot is totally absurd.
You may call it not a bug however you want, but this is clearly an issue.
Wide gap can be counted on average hit points difference.
That 600 points are very different on a 2 vs 2 war (less then 1 hit, as an average oneshot give you 750 points) or in a 30 vs 30 (12 hits, as the average is 50 for oneshot).
In both cases is not a wide gap.
In a 30 vs 30, both alliances have 180 hits, and losing by 12 is not wide at all.
That’s not even 7% gap.
Is that enough for you?
So… again maybe the thing that bothers me the most. Weren’t those kind of issues solved?
We are at war with identical war score with the other team… but… we are 28 on field they are 29.
From start we on 6 flags less.
Not to mention that since they more on field every team we take down carry less points
I wouldn’t mind if they have bigger score… but i do mind a lot 6 flags less
I agree with you @00Nihal00. 6 flags difference is definitely a problem.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.