We’re normally getting very close matches. We either win or lose by not more than a few hundred points, often less.
Here’s our last 18 battles, in descending order.
-
The green line is this weekend’s battle, with new rules.
-
The Red Line represents a protest battle with an alliance game enough to participate with all 1*
This data is all AFTER the last major change in matchmaking (top 30, top 5 more heavily weighted, matching player counts) from June 5. Prior to that we won more than we lost, but from what we can reconstruct after the fact, it seems we were fighting below our own belt class, so I’m glad changes were made…just want a few more. 
2 Likes
Based on some of the comments it looks like we’re double unlucky … strong opponents who are also Gung Ho!
Maybe one war we’ll face an alliance with a “whatever” attitude but so far they are very enthusiastic fighters 
We’ve been having great matches and the last 2 were a win and a loss, both in the ±200 points interval
We came across one alliance who obviously did not care. Put their weakest team in as defense team. Their leader
Who on their alliance board had a team over 4K puts a 1700 team as defensive team in war. It was not fun knowing they weren’t even trying
We are a 75-80K training alliance. We have a core group (10-15) that are at or near 3000 strength def teams. We have a leader who also gives a war summary before each battle e.g. 11 teams over 3500 (them) vs. 4 teams (us), etc. We do have some cup-droppers, which negatively impacts that portion of our alliance score…but we are ALWAYS at least a 10K underdog when looking at the aggregate alliance score. Both sections, trophies (which I would expect) and titans (although, titan score at times is relatively close, 3-4K) do we have the lower scores. And when our alliance leader gives us the pre-war summary, we ALWAYS hold the disadvantage. I think that, relatively speaking, we may have deeper benches than usual and this may be inflating our matchup ‘score.’ But as there is no way to look at a completing alliance’s bench, we have no way of knowing. I am pleased to say that for whatever reason, we have on several occasions outperformed my expectations and have pulled out some close wins…so that was fun.
1 Like
Even though we are much lower in Ally score the matches have been close Iver the last 2 wars
I’m in alliance with ~120k alliance points, 30 members, and since version 1.12 we have only very good matchups. Lots of wars was settled in last minutes, and the score difference usually does not exceed 300 points (sometimes we got 3-10 points thrillers 
)
1 Like
130K. Reasonable match ups over the last month or so.
We have won almost all our matchups since my alliance began 30 days ago. In a couple of cases they were total slaughters (like victory by 2000+). Most of the time the victory has been a lot closer—less than 500 points.
Loot is still crap though.
Anyway, my team is an odd hybrid—the main core of 7 split off from a more established alliance, and in an effort to fill the ranks, we took all comers at first. So we have 6 or 7 with tp over 3500 (a couple of those are over 4K), then we have a couple near 3k, then the rest are around 2200 or less. I think the algorithm has done a remarkable job finding opponents close to our average skill level but it hasn’t been super challenging.
For strategy, we have enacted some stuff but it’s poorly coordinated because the vast majority of my players have no bench to speak of. As a result, the heavy hitters carry most of the load and are almost enough on our own to win the wars. This causes many of the players to feel disenfranchised and my war participation is slipping as a result. It’s a catch 22 though, because harder matchups will result in battles my less experienced players simply can’t win, and they might play less. It would be interesting to find out for sure.
1 Like
My best theory as to why so many blowouts is that matches are done based on team power, and team power badly overstates the relative power of unleveled or partially leveled heroes when compared with maxed heroes of lower star levels.
My alliance has a high percentage of people who have paid to pull heroes and have a roster full of 4* and 5* heroes that are waiting patiently behind the ones we are currently leveling up. Some have a set of maxed 3*s; some got better heroes early and didn’t bother.
A free/cheap player, (who has a similar top-30 team power score, and has been playing longer) probably has one or two 5* heroes if any, will consist of mostly maxed 4* heroes, maxed 3* heroes, and perhaps get to unleveled 3* it 2* at the end, with only 5-10 partially leveled heroes.
There is no question that the latter team is way stronger. And my experience over the last dozen wars is that they seem numerically more common, as we keep finding them!
5 Likes
I have been saying this for weeks.
1 Like
Same here in twenty chsracters
May I ask, how many players participated from your Alliance in the last 5 AWs? Your avg, TP?
How many players from your opponents side on those 5 AWs? Their avg. TP?
Thanks
For mine, we have usually 100% participation. Occasionally if someone will be away, they withdraw their team during prep phase
We have a wide range of player levels (12-44), defense team power (1400-3950), and average team power among the six teams for each player (1400-3200). We coordinate attacks, we stack strong colors, we take advantage of holes to ghost tiles. We have tried all one color tanks for our defense.
None of that makes a difference when our opponents outclass us by any measure you care to name. We’re usually outclassed by 3-8 levels on average player level, by 300+ points on average defense team, and by 200+ points on average trophies. I can’t see their bench depth, but I can extrapolate from player level to assume that by virtue of time in game, they have deeper benches.
Most of our wars, we use 95%+ of our available flags and our opponents use about 70-80% of theirs.
1 Like
The one time we were outclassed six ways to Sunday, we put up all 1* and invited our opponents to try for a perfect 12,000 score…
(They were great sports.)
Same here. We have not won a war since before the testing period. We’ve lost almost all of them by over 500 points, with many over 1,000. We’ve never been paired with an alliance that had less 3000 power teams than us. Additionally, we have several members at or under 2000 but rarely face alliances with any close to that. I think that I get factored in way too much because I can field five teams at 3400+ with a sixth at around 3000. But I only get six attacks but seem to be weighed for like 12.
1 Like
Dear @NPNKY,
From what you described, your AW alliance seems to be fighting against enemy teams with higher TP than your team. The information you provided above can be valid if your team 30, 1400-3200 TP is fighting against 25, 3200+ team(s). I can not be certain unless I have the data I requested earlier.
Thanks,
TEN
In order for the alliance war to be more closer in terms of the score difference than developers should remove the heroes usage ban> Much more people, have a team of 5 good or very good heroes but not all of them have 2 or more teams. So the teams with more heroes they will always have the highest chance of winning and with hgiher score difference.
I believe there is a matching variance of ±2 players for each alliance, so the other alliance could not have 25 teams while theirs has 30. Or did you mean that an alliance with 25 3,200+ teams AND 3-5 other teams would make the difference? Just curious 
1 Like