Update to World War Glory Matchmaking

[Toliphar]

Imo, warmatching should be alot less based on total war weight and more depending on how much glory the alliance is at. I’m currently the leader of an extremely active alliance. We knock the socks of almost all when it comes to triumph, but for war….? We’ve lost 12 wars (30-30) in a row and the oppenents are not getting easier.

Current war are vs an alliance with almost 24k glory, we are at just over 18k now. Their top 15 are at so very much higher levels and ages it’s rediculus. Our highest level is 389, they have 6 players over level 400. Nice? Not so much. They’ll get full stars on us with out even trying, we’ll likely end up at some 130 stars.

I like the idea of only having one attack per player…. That would surely make these extremely uneven wars dissapear. Another suggestion is, if the matchup is all pending on total war weight, then let it be based on the top half only. Most often wars are settled on those accounts anyways…

 

[nobodyknowsthetrouble]

この投稿は取り下げられました

 

[Doc-Sandy-Baggy]

Imo, warmatching should be alot less based on total war weight and more depending on how much glory the alliance is at. I’m currently the leader of an extremely active alliance. We knock the socks of almost all when it comes to triumph, but for war….? We’ve lost 12 wars (30-30) in a row and the oppenents are not getting easier.

Current war are vs an alliance with almost 24k glory, we are at just over 18k now. Their top 15 are at so very much higher levels and ages it’s rediculus. Our highest level is 389, they have 6 players over level 400. Nice? Not so much. They’ll get full stars on us with out even trying, we’ll likely end up at some 130 stars.

I like the idea of only having one attack per player…. That would surely make these extremely uneven wars dissapear. Another suggestion is, if the matchup is all pending on total war weight, then let it be based on the top half only. Most often wars are settled on those accounts anyways…

Allowing only one attack per player makes risk-taking very risky. I think this would have a strong negative effect on alliances' welcome of new players. We allow junior players to join our wars -- because the PvP experience is so different from wars, letting them make war attacks and coaching them based on replays is a very important activity for supporting their advancement. For alliances like ours (SYNERGY), which consider welcoming and supporting new players to be an important part of the game experience, this would not be good for us.

 

[Toliphar]

Allowing only one attack per player makes risk-taking very risky. I think this would have a strong negative effect on alliances' welcome of new players. We allow junior players to join our wars -- because the PvP experience is so different from wars, letting them make war attacks and coaching them based on replays is a very important activity for supporting their advancement. For alliances like ours (SYNERGY), which consider welcoming and supporting new players to be an important part of the game experience, this would not be good for us.

Yea, I will have to agree, one attack is a bit risky... However, matching still has to be fixed... The best idea I can come up with, and that likely would be the easiest to do, is to have the war weight solely based on the top half of participants. Basically all wars are settled on those players anyhow.
Edit: We are now in war #13 (could be more actually) that we will lose without standing a chance. We’re soon dropping below 18.000 in glory and we’re still up against 23-24k glory alliances. I really don’t care how they fix the match making, as long as they fix it. This is getting rediculus, frustrating and it’s destroying the game for many of our members. I find it rediculus to create 10 crappy accounts to get better matchups. Utterly rediculus.