Unfair Alliance War Match-up (with video)

We are having a war with an alliance whose total team power (based on war defense) of 56,434. Their top 5 members have powers of 4286, 4058, 4035, 3829 and 3734.

Our total power is 54,723 (1700 points short) with the top 5 members at 3791, 3790, 3779, 3703 and 3665.

More detailed breakdown can be seen in the video at the following link:


How is it fair? The war match-up system is clearly broken.

1 Like

Matchmaking is based on War Scores, which don’t directly count War Defense teams at all.

Instead, they’re based on:

How do your War Scores compare?

You can find them by clicking the :grey_question: icon next to Alliance Score:


That I know, and I want to point out how stupid it is to do match up based on war score. Instead of using the war score as a matchup consideration, Small Giant can make it as War Skill indicator, putting the alliances in respective scoring leagues, which will affect the rewards from war (War Chest).

Matching has to be based on actual strengths to ensure high competitiveness. The war score is simply indicator to the war skills, increasing/decreasing based on wins/losses.

Ok, what would you suggest should be included in that other than heroes, troops, and win/loss record against alliances with similar bench strength?

1 Like

But your war scores aren’t that far apart either, they have obviously lost a few wars and thus you’ve won a few in a row and this is where the 2 meet in the middle.

Unfortunately this happens to all of us and all you can do is your best in the war, it will take them back up and back down to where your alliance has a better chance.

We have come across this many times, sometimes twice in a row. It bound to happen no matter what changes to matchmaking you make or use, there is literally no way around it.

What you could do instead of worrying about the matchmaking part of it is use it as a training field to teach your alliance to kill bigger opponents which will help you in the future.
When we see a team we more than likely won’t beat,that’s exactly what we do by letter our lower levelled players hit bigger than they normally would teams giving them offense team options based on their roster.

Every downside has an upside if looked at from a fun point of view, so you lose one, so what.

I’d like to add that the current matchmaking system has never been better and is right on the mark.



As strength is the true indicator, war matching should be based on powers. I like the idea of taking into account the top 30 heroes of each war participant with additional emphasis on the strongest team. However, this part still needs adjustments, especially when including powers as the results of troop boost. The current troop boost adds 1 point for each % the troop offers. In actual battles, each % may account for much bigger power boost. If a hero has 700 attack point, 1% gives additional 7 attack points, which translates to about 2~3% of power points.

In addition to that, difference in team powers, especially the war defense teams for strongest members, should not vary by over 300 points between the strongest team, and no more than 1000 points in total between the top 5 members of each side. The deciding battles have mostly depended on the strongest members.

I have been doing tons of raid battles, and since my best team is just maxed and partly talented 4* heroes, I have never been able to beat a team with over 3900 power (mine is about 3630 max) with hero skills on AVERAGE speed. I have only once beaten a 4k team but the heroes were low on defense and skills between AVERAGE and SLOW. Not only do defending team gets additional 20% defense boost, it gets additional 20% attack boost which affects poison/burning damages too.

Power gaps from 4* and 5* heroes alone affect the battles so much already, not to mention the existence of Overpowered heroes (Last month’s HotM Grazul is insanely strong). War boosters like healing aids (the worst) make it even worse nightmare when doing uphill battles.

@Ozy1 we won the last war before this, but lost 3x in a row before that! I have almost always been the top damage dealer in my alliance despite having only the 7th strongest team, thus my position of Leader now (given to me as recognition by actual owner and older members). Trust me, I have practiced enough to make the most with whatever heroes I have, but bad boards occur more than good rolls with combos. I once lost a battle with my 3600 team against a 3200 team with 2 avg + 3 fast skills, and I kept getting tiles of colors I didn’t have in the roster.

Actually that’s quite wrong as we won the last 3 or 4 and lost 2 in a row before that.

Not sure where your guesses come from.

As for strongest hitters yes I am one of them also taking most if not all teams depending on how many there are over 4000 plus, the bigger the better.

I screenshot the message board stats we get but not the war reward section otherwise I would show you, but I will from now on though.

Trust Me! I defeat 4300 4400 plus teams with my within 3600 plus teams all the time, it’s what I do best. I have clips on it also.

I also clean up left overs with unlevelled 1 and 2 stars because that the only roster I had at the time. My alt acc at 3100 takes on teams at 3600 to 3700 and wins, I mean you trying to tell me here? I don’t get it.

Not getting tiles or having bad boards doesn’t mean the matchmaking is out of wack at all and thus boils down to my original comments in the post above.

1 Like

The matchmaking is a total of all teams thus you have 3 at 60, 4 in the 50’s, some in the 40’s and most likely some in the 20’s, it averages out.

Learn to coordinate your team mates, again communication is key during battle.
Know when to use your strongest teams.

Do you think we win because all our stronest teams hit first, far from it.
Maybe you think we win because we don’t have many players under 30 level, far from it.

This war alone our oppents have 4 teams over 3900 and 5 teams over 4100 with 2 being over 4200 and the rest below if i remember correctly their lowest is 3600 and we are neck to neck at the moment but based on what we are seeing we will win if not it will be only a few points difference.

Nothing you stated so far can’t be fixed with communication and alliance team work I’m affraid.

1 Like

@Ozy1 I dont know how to do that quote thing, so just a regular reply like this. I was referring to our alliance having 3 losses and 1 win before this ongoing war we are discussing about.

the next issue is the battles, which I have not been clear about. I was referring to single flag full wipe victory. Perhaps you have got a series of great heroes, and I have only got that team you see, plus 2 more Caedmons, a Sonya, a Boldtusk and a Gadeirus. I have not had any maxed 4* except for a slow skilled panda. Skill speed affects battles greatly, and he often dies out before he could even use his skill.

Or perhaps you have often get great rolls of tiles, allowing you to defeat much stronger teams that many times. The thing is, power indicator has not been a good measure itself as certain heroes should show higher powers to actually reflect how good they are. The whole mechanism still needs balancing IMO. I notice many times that my Caedmon deals less damage than my Sonya when both have the exact same skill, with Caedmon actually having higher attack points (tested on same target with troop boost taken into account).

Very simple! Just keep you pointer on the start of where you want to quote and drag it to where you want it to end, then let go, a small panel will display below the where you ended, then just click on the small panel that says QUOTE and it will appear into the following text box.

I do apologise. Sometimes I do tend to read too fast and I missed the WE at the beginning of that sentence. Again my apologies.


As for the rest I am sorry to say (and I jnow it’s not what you want to hear) but I do totally understand your delema and queries as I also have 2 alt acc’s which are smaller and more like what you stated your have if not much less as these acc’s don’t have any maxed heroes, ( sorry 1 of them does have 1 maxed 4*) but both have taken me to where I am now on a single team that hasn’t even reached maxed 3rd levels or are just above and all the rest that I use for wars are all unleveled 3 and 4s, so beleive me when I say I understand, but I still including just now in the current war can clean up 2 to 3 5 heroes with full mana using my unleveled 3* and 4*s.

Your problem isn’t that you don’t have a roster to match or that the opponents are 300 points above your team, it is simply that your alliance doesn’t communicate enough whether it be before or during the war to coordinate your hits.

If you yourself are after better war results and your alliance isn’t providing that for you, just change alliances till you find one that meets your needs, there is no shame is moving around till you are happy with your alliance and your results.

Good luck


In our war our opponent has 16 teams above 4k. We have 9. And no, their bench is not weaker than ours. I have seen this in a number of occasions in our matchups. We are losing not because of poor skill or poor coordination but because of a poor matchmaking system.

@GrootBeard, you would also need to take into account unused flags, bad hero choices that result in losses, coordinated attacks (using your lower level members as tank/flank busters on the stronger teams, players not participating etc).

Like @Ozy1 already stated, we have all been on the losing end of AW matchmaking, sometimes teams are just stronger and better organized than other teams. My alliance has beaten much stronger teams because even though there are only 16-18 (many new, learning players) they all listen, use their flags and make smart choices. We have however also been smashed by teams we supposed would be easier to beat. It’s all part of the RNG game. Finding 2 alliances perfectly matched is impossible, heroes/troops are constantly being summoned, leveled and emblemed. But this matchmaking seems to be the most balanced way to have close matches.

Good Luck!!!

P.S We began using LINE for better communication with our alliance mates. It’s much easier to share links, video’s, hero advice all around. Since we are a teaching alliance it’s made a world of difference over the almost useless in game chat. We use that to make fun of each other when we get wrecked in war :joy::joy:


Actually I’m surprised that Elowar ever faces a stronger opponent since by their posts they must be constantly 0-10 in wars.


You seem to be assuming that they’re using straight Power of the Troop as the contributor to the War Score, without any scaling.

I don’t think we have any reason to believe that’s the case.

Since Defense Teams are set after matchmaking, this would also require changing how War Preparation timing works.

It would also get a little wonky with real-time leveling updates, which are currently reflected in War Defenses before and during War, after matchmaking had occurred.

It might be possible, but I can see where this would be a potentially big programming change.

I think it’s also questionable whether prioritizing War Defense matches would be better than prioritizing bench depth, as the current system does. You could end up with alliances who had similar strength Defenses, but radically different bench depth.

Are you color stacking? A 300-400 tp gap isn’t huge at all, team composition plays a bigger role than just TP.


I regularly take out 4000+ teams with my 3600+ 3-2 stacks in raids and wars.


Personally I think one of the biggest points that is being missed here with wanting to change matchmaking is that no matter which system or alliance, troop, hero etc scores you use to create a matchmaking program there will always be winners and losers thus when big teams lose and smaller teams win, there will always be a point in the matching where the 2 meet up, cross paths (what ever you want to call it) as that is an absolute inevitable unavoidable occurrence and the players that are complaining are the ones in the center of it one the losing end, that’s all.

For the smaller alliances that reach such heights, there are 2 points/suggestions I would like to add.

  1. You should be proud that you won that many wars that the system deems you worthy of competing agaisnt those stronger opponents
  2. Try your best and have fun with it and accept the loss with grace if you loss that and even maybe the next.

A positive attitude always goes a long way to having fun rather than worrying about winning.


We lost our war this round, slaughtered actually for a change, We congratulated the victors and ourselves and better luck next time. Done Forgotten and carry on with your day. We all had fun, boths teams mucked around in the Line App together during the war and it’s all over.

1 Like

It feels like some people just want to win every war, and when they lose it’s an unfair matchup.


1 Like

This is what is left of an alliance’s war score with no troops or heroes involved:

Now if matchmaking typically tries to match alliances within 500 points of war scores then yea I’m pretty sure an alliance starting fresh each war chest and dropping their score by 3k+ points(if that’s the score they have but not sure how far it goes back, believe 10 wars but will have to dig in earlier notes to be sure) could very well land them in noticeably lower war brackets and easier matchups

So theoretically the OP could actually be onto something

1 Like

that is 5 out of 30 for them. you dont know the rest of their benches.

I’m coming to understand war scores. A single person with 2 x ~3600 TP teams and a ~3000 third team (defense at 3600) is worth around 1720 pts while a person with 3 x ~3100 and 3 x ~2800 teams (defense at 3200) is worth the same even though person 1 can flip person 2 twice and then score decent damage to ensure victory without their war score increasing whereas if person 2 pulls off a miracle and wins they are penalised by having an extra 60 points added to their war score.

Cookie Settings