test

Announcement

Collapse

Bookmark the new forum URL!

Reminder! We have changed the URL of the DomiNations forums to https://forums.bighugegames.com/ Be sure to update your browser's bookmarks today!
See more
See less

War Matchmaking Iteration

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    BHG_Muet we just matched against 11 digital and 9 space. It was a very quick match and our lineup is 3 digital, 7 space, 2 cold, 7 atomic and 1 gunpowder.

    It doesn’t matter what the algorithm does if war weight is bonkers every time a new age comes out. Surely someone checks this stuff?

    Theres no point even to bother filling war bases, wasting blessings and oil or NTGs for the next 2 days.
    Last edited by FrostMr; 12-05-2019, 11:46 PM.

    Comment


    • #32
      Over two wars I maxed two bunkers. I dropped from 11 via 14 to 18 in line up. Definitely the calculation on line up is broken again and pretty sure also the war weight.

      Comment


      • #33
        Very very bad match we have 15v15..completely useless to do the fight, except for the XP

        we: 1 CWA, 1 AA, 4 GA, ...
        they: 2 SA, 5 AA, ... (all high levels).

        We loose 200 against 400.

        I understand that finding a perfect match is not possible, but presenting a fight that is just impossible to win from the first second, is useless also. We are loosing 48h of our time, and the other alliance too I guess.

        The extended margins are too wide. I do not mind to wait, but only for an interesting match.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by FrostMr View Post
          BHG_Muet
          It doesn’t matter what the algorithm does if war weight is bonkers every time a new age comes out. Surely someone checks this stuff?
          Yes of course, we are doing this for them each and every time.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by BHG_Muet View Post
            Hm. a 2000 Glory difference should have been denied at 27min and there should have been a minimal difference between the top/bottom of both of your Alliances. I'll pass this along to QA to look into. Thanks.
            BHG_Muet
            In fact, one of out last wars, in one of the alliances where I am, was against the LordStark263AC alliance, 19139 glory, against 17100 of ours (Difference 2039) the search takes 20 min. We dont have Digital players, and just 1 SA beginner.

            2 DA, 4 SA, 4 CWA, 4AA, 6 GA, 4 IA, 2 Enlightment, 2 GunPowder, 2 medieval. Against our: 0 DA, 1 SA, 2 CWA, 3 AA, 5 GA, 5 IA, 2 Enlightment, 6 GunPowder, 4 medieval, 2 clasical

            Comment


            • LordStark263AC
              LordStark263AC commented
              Editing a comment
              That's right. It was a mismatch. 166 Glory. We've won 148 - 136.

            • Xabar
              Xabar commented
              Editing a comment
              BHG_Muet. Any new about it?

          • #36
            BHG_Muet. OBJECTIVELY. Without complaining, just to mark what to improve, the MM has several problems:
            -The glory cutoff seams not to work, or at the least 2000 is to much in less than 12 hr. Pair an alliance ranked 300-500vs1-100 or 1000-1500vs300-500, is not a funny war
            -The offensive/defensive war weight, is minimizing undervaluing the hihger level players, DA and SA.
            -The offensive/defensive war weight is taking the Sand Bags
            -The Ages distribution, is not detected correctly.
            -When the MM is bad, the glory lost is too much. In a war where one alliance is ranked 300-500 vs another ranked 1000-1500, the 2nd alliance could los 200-300 of glory

            Comment


            • SomeRandomPlayer
              SomeRandomPlayer commented
              Editing a comment
              I don't think glory should be included at all (or, only have it be a minor component) as a team can switch their players around, or heck, start a new alliance. Glory is a general indicator of alliance strength and not current lineup strength.

            • wrathchild_78
              wrathchild_78 commented
              Editing a comment
              true. What should be done then in cases like the one I describe? You believe it is fair a stronger team with 15000 glory, gain 500 glory in a WW against a lesser alliance that has 17000 glory? This is not fair either

            • Cannibals
              Cannibals commented
              Editing a comment
              I agree with Some that glory shouldn’t count at all. Glory should be a measure of sustained strength over time. In the case you mentioned I don’t see an injustice. The higher glory alliance should have maintained its strength if it wanted to keep its glory.

          • #37
            Longer waiting times..Yea no kidding....when you wait 24 hrs for a match you extend the WW another day..Lots of WW players are not all available for the extra day...The reason the wait is so long is because there are not enough mid alliances to match up with...PAY TO WIN is to blame...Lots of Mid and upper mid players have quit or are no longer participating in WW..The top alliances are World Waring with each other since there are very few alliances that will pay to win to get to the top alliances anymore....Your comments...

            Comment


            • #38
              Hello Muet.

              Alliance, at least the top 30 or 40... let them meet each other.
              My team has been enjoying a terrible poor world war for months.
              The poor quality of the war is not pleasant to the team that is being beaten or attacked.

              I want you to create a benefit based on glory scores.
              Our team's war isn't attractive these days. The opponent gives up without a challenge when he meets our team.
              It's been over a year since the match improvement you're talking about, but we're enjoying a worse game than before.
              Comparisons are not pleasant to me. But I want you to benchmark the case at the COC next door.

              I hope it'll be a better game.
              Thanks

              Comment


              • #39
                Both of our last 2 matches were 10v10, took just over 2 hours to match, and their top guy was 200-is AA while our top guy was SA. Not better.

                Comment


                • #40
                  BHG_Muet , what ever you have done with the war weight bug - it is back again. I am dropping in line up war by war since I went to digital age one week ago. The only thing I have done is crowning the most important buildings as airstrip, factory, fort, two bunkers and silo. Nothing else, all other buildings are upgrading the normal way.

                  Comment


                  • #41
                    Missing old days, before SA released( war weight broken since first day of SA released)), can’t get back anymore.

                    Comment


                    • #42
                      hi BHG_Muet ,
                      Any new about MM?

                      thanks

                      Comment


                      • #43
                        War weights for Digital Age upgrades are wrong, A lvl 350+ DA player is ranked #10, while lvl 299 SA is ranked #1, it is plain wrong, all university and library researches done for that #10 (lvl 350 guy).
                        You can have whatever tweaks to the search engine, if the weights are incorrect...
                        Cheaters can't attack

                        Comment


                        • Kanechoigo
                          Kanechoigo commented
                          Editing a comment
                          I know, right? But someone doesn’t want to accept, lol

                      • #44
                        We've been investigating the weight reports and there do seem to be a few Digital Age buildings that have incorrect weights. Audit hasn't completed but I'm hoping to have it finished and pushed live to you all this week.

                        For the new wait times, I've been monitoring and the average wait time to find a matching Alliance has certainly increased (as expected) but it does seem to be generating positive results in average match quality. That said, there will of course continue to be the handful of outliers like you all are reporting (please keep highlighting them, they're good to reference when tweaking!).

                        Comment


                        • domas
                          domas commented
                          Editing a comment
                          11 ->> Bunker —> 14 ->> Bunker and Silo —> 16 —> one trap —> 20

                        • Cannibals
                          Cannibals commented
                          Editing a comment
                          SA buildings seem have reverted to incorrect weights also.

                        • jagadeeshgarapati
                          jagadeeshgarapati commented
                          Editing a comment
                          Muet time and time we are in this nostalgia, new buildings missing weights. please just consider complete XP. without considering any specific buildings. this will reduce future issues and just makes yours and our life better. you can also ask for voting to consider.

                      • #45
                        Adding to all of the stuff above, and for context, we were matched against a 30v30 lineup which has a Space Age L260 base in the #30 spot. Our guy at #10 is his peer in our lineup, more or less. War in progress, current score 85-9. Good times.

                        Comment

                        Unconfigured PHP Module

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X