What do people think of the new "Tournament of Glory" then?

[Arashii]

With the first gauntlet coming to an end, we've had a real chance to adjust to the new leaderboard systems.

How have people found it? Personally my alliance found we were matching harder alliances (even ones in the next division above us).

We also noticed that lighter weight alliances seemed to get much better match ups and thus have climbed higher than their heavier counter parts.

The end of gauntlet rewards are a much needed addition and something nice to progress towards however they still feel a bit lack luster? (alliance i'm in is at prestigious and we get a hanger and some recruitments cards?.. I've got that from my conquers chests already). After some serious competitive gridning, would be nicer to at least get some decent speed ups perhaps?

I also find it inconvenient that you can't see how other alliances are fairing in divisons out side of yours? would be nice to be able to see who the top dogs are via ingame means, rather than third party website.

Hoping there will some adjustments for the next gauntlet! How did your allaince do?! better or worse off than the last leaderboard system?

Here's some things I've learnt along the way, hope others may find them useful!

 

[oddin]

For some years, I have been writing here that we need a new leaderboard that will be like a ladder.
The higher you go, the better the opponents, the harder the WWs you fight and the better the rewards.

The new ToG, brought a new fresh air, new rewards and a much needed reset of the leaderboard but accomplished absolutely nothing else.
The alliances that got the most profit out of all this are:
1. the really strong ones, like ARES or Purgatory for obvious reasons. They are top. They deserve to be at the top of the leaderbboard cause they give their 100% every war.
2. the lightweight teams or the ones that sandbag (hiding their true strength). They do not deserve to be at the top as most of the time they are completely ignorant of the most advanced techniques used in battles and they only rely on 1 or 2 defenders that nobody else can five star at their level of play.

The above is not just my opinion. The proof is right there for everyone to see.

So, in my opinion, I would limit matchmaking within each alliance's division (regardless of stars). This has the undesirable effect of taking more time to find an opponent. Therefore, make all WWs, do the searching on fixed dates and alliances entering that pool by pressing the red button (regardless of time zone). So, for every problem there is a solution. You just need the will to fix it.

 

[GeeGee]

I think the Gauntlet system has been an absolute nightmare from start to finish. We (The Aesir) are by no means push overs. Yes we are a little too heavy, and definitely do not have stellar Museums/Councillors throughout our typical war roster. But we are definitely nothing like a ‘top 100’ team. And yet from the start of this Gauntlet season we’ve been in way more mismatches against such teams than before. I really hoped after the first few wars against crazy big teams we might have fared better, but no!

 

[GailWho]

I think the Gauntlet system has been an absolute nightmare from start to finish. We (The Aesir) are by no means push overs. Yes we are a little too heavy, and definitely do not have stellar Museums/Councillors throughout our typical war roster. But we are definitely nothing like a ‘top 100’ team. And yet from the start of this Gauntlet season we’ve been in way more mismatches against such teams than before. I really hoped after the first few wars against crazy big teams we might have fared better, but no!

We are in the same boat GeeGee. Because of our weight we attract top tier teams. All but 1 of our heavy weights have stopped warring hoping that will make a difference. We also lost a valued team member who has played with us since the beginning in 2015. He quit the game altogether because it’s not fun to match in these impossible wars and was hoping this new leaderboard would be the answer to what we have asked for, it’s not. We seem to be winning occasionally now but it’s not the same team without all our players warring .

Like @oddin I feel we should only match teams in our division that way where you sit in your division is a real reflection of your team’s strength. I look at the teams above me in my division that I’m sure we can beat yet we never match them unless we lose like 9-10 in a row. Otherwise, we match teams in divisions well above us.

I keep playing the game because of my friends. If they don’t fix this problem, there will no longer be a reason to play.

 

[GeeGee]

Hey @GailWho good to hear from you; and great to see you are still playing. It was a shock to see peekay (and presumably his alts) quit for good, but I think I get the reasons why. It’s also sad to hear that your big players (presumably Hooo, Dbear, Doth etc) are feeling like that they need to step away to try and ‘engineer’ a better warring experience. We’ve been doing the exact same thing, even building alts to try and lower war weight.

The game is basically not fun when wars searches end up in constant mismatchs. I won’t go there with Munitions and the Drone Command that now make attacking so much harder in both forms of the game. I think all we’ve ever really wanted is meaningful and fair tweaks to the game. But the Gauntlet system has made warring ridiculously bad for teams who happen to be heavy but don’t have the benefit of stellar Museums etc.

As you’ve said, @oddin is right…a system of sensible divisions, with no risk of matching teams in the top leagues would help. Dare I say it, but that’s kinda what makes CoC ‘feel’ like it has the right balance.

 

[Steppenwolf]

Both of you - Aesir as well as HobbitZombies - were fighting against Top-Teams in the last months very rare - Aesir two times, only one was lost. It seems to me, the matchmaking is much more balanced than ever...

 

[Arashii]

For some years, I have been writing here that we need a new leaderboard that will be like a ladder.
The higher you go, the better the opponents, the harder the WWs you fight and the better the rewards.

The new ToG, brought a new fresh air, new rewards and a much needed reset of the leaderboard but accomplished absolutely nothing else.
The alliances that got the most profit out of all this are:
1. the really strong ones, like ARES or Purgatory for obvious reasons. They are top. They deserve to be at the top of the leaderbboard cause they give their 100% every war.
2. the lightweight teams or the ones that sandbag (hiding their true strength). They do not deserve to be at the top as most of the time they are completely ignorant of the most advanced techniques used in battles and they only rely on 1 or 2 defenders that nobody else can five star at their level of play.

The above is not just my opinion. The proof is right there for everyone to see.
View attachment 13335
So, in my opinion, I would limit matchmaking within each alliance's division (regardless of stars). This has the undesirable effect of taking more time to find an opponent. Therefore, make all WWs, do the searching on fixed dates and alliances entering that pool by pressing the red button (regardless of time zone). So, for every problem there is a solution. You just need the will to fix it.

Agree with everything you've said. I don't think people would be a fan of longer queue times. It could be that the matchmaking algorithm differs depending on what division you are in e.g. lower down more focused on weight, higher up more focused on allainces within same divison. Certainly some tweaking is needed!

 

[Arashii]

We are in the same boat GeeGee. Because of our weight we attract top tier teams. All but 1 of our heavy weights have stopped warring hoping that will make a difference. We also lost a valued team member who has played with us since the beginning in 2015. He quit the game altogether because it’s not fun to match in these impossible wars and was hoping this new leaderboard would be the answer to what we have asked for, it’s not. We seem to be winning occasionally now but it’s not the same team without all our players warring .

Like @oddin I feel we should only match teams in our division that way where you sit in your division is a real reflection of your team’s strength. I look at the teams above me in my division that I’m sure we can beat yet we never match them unless we lose like 9-10 in a row. Otherwise, we match teams in divisions well above us.

I keep playing the game because of my friends. If they don’t fix this problem, there will no longer be a reason to play.

I hear ya! Over at Rebel Wizards, we were around rank #40 before the new ToG was introduced. We were excited for the new system, then BAM, we were faced with back to back losses due to being matched against teams in the top 20 over and over again. Many dishearted players over at Wizards for sure!

 

[Seek]

I think the system is about as fair as it can be. Why should teams be stuck fighting the same 10 teams if your ranked in top 10 this will become very boring real quick. Even if team drop then that team will over power till they rank back into top 10. This is pointless cycle and will just lead to ranking with same results with allot more boredom. ( which also will lead to stacking of lower ranked alliances ie sand bagging, which will mainly benefit only large alliance families, small alliances will be eaten up)

The system they put into place may not be perfect but it’s much better than sticking to same division.

Y’all say it’s not fair to fight a top team but y’all are not going beat them when you rank up to just get beat back down. Then what will the next complaint be about. Plus how fair is to make Aries to fight top ten every fight and spend top stuff every war while lower teams get to feast on weak alliances. Seems to be more than unfair .

 

[GeeGee]

Both of you - Aesir as well as HobbitZombies - were fighting against Top-Teams in the last months very rare - Aesir two times, only one was lost. It seems to me, the matchmaking is much more balanced than ever...

In the last 15 matches, we’ve only won 6. HZ won 5.

 

[Steppenwolf]

In the last 15 matches, we’ve only won 6. HZ won 5.

But you have lost not against Top100-Teams

 

[GailWho]

But you have lost not against Top100-Teams

I wasn’t talking about top 100 teams. I don’t think it is unreasonable to match teams within our league as I feel top 100 teams also should do as there are many more than a pool of 100 within each league. In the last month (13 wars) we matched teams in our division 5 times. They were the most exciting wars where you didn’t know what the outcome would be until the time ran out. The other 8 wars, it was clear who the winner would be. This is what I am talking about. The star ranking doesn’t mean anything because it isn’t based on competition within the division of similar weighted/museum/skill level. We have 3 stars in our division even though there’s a good chance we could beat the 4 and 5 star teams above us. But we will never know because we will never match them And they will continue to match teams in the lower division.

 

[Seek]

I wasn’t talking about top 100 teams. I don’t think it is unreasonable to match teams within our league as I feel top 100 teams also should do as there are many more than a pool of 100 within each league. In the last month (13 wars) we matched teams in our division 5 times. They were the most exciting wars where you didn’t know what the outcome would be until the time ran out. The other 8 wars, it was clear who the winner would be. This is what I am talking about. The star ranking doesn’t mean anything because it isn’t based on competition within the division of similar weighted/museum/skill level. We have 3 stars in our division even though there’s a good chance we could beat the 4 and 5 star teams above us. But we will never know because we will never match them And they will continue to match teams in the lower division.

If you make it by division of 100 the top 20 of each division will eat the rest of division if you leave it open then all get a chance to feed.

This all will still result in alliance having same rank as they have now. Just with allot more boredom.

The system they have in place is better tham what has been suggested with division. People will be crying to change it back if this was ever implemented. Makes zero sense in big picture so there fore y’all probably will get them to cave. Watch what wish for this will come back to bite its supporters.

In the end if your alliance is not ranked as high you wish then try harder. Cream rises to the top so teams like Aries will still come out on top. Instead of getting madd about mismatch’s use them measuring sticks to improve.

 

[Dhruv patel]

the rewards for 3 months of fighting need to be in the double digits for all rankings (event buildings excluded)

the lower ranks 10, middle 15 and the higher ranks 20.

 

[Archimedes]

This thread is like a whos-who of long-time players! Thank you all! Great discussion in here on what 'good' matchmaking looks like. As noted, just being in-division would cause those at the top to just continuously battle it out, which could be deemed as either perfect or boring Some questions to throw out for discussion:
- what do you think makes a good match? i.e. When you scan your opponent after a match occurs, what are you looking for? (we need to add spying ALL buildings, it is on the list! I'm curious what you quickly glance over to see if you feel it is a good match.. are you all making spreadsheets? if so what is on them?)
- in a perfect world, what would you like to happen if you deem that you've found a 'bad' match?

 

[oddin]

Those are long discussed things but maybe you werent on the team back then. To make long story short:

- a good match is one that you do not know the final outcome before war starts. So you start preparing and try to do your best and fight till the end. If you make mistakes then the war is surely lost. If you play to your best of your ability and everyone else does the same then you have chances of winning. Same goes for the opposition. My alliance is a top 10 alliance in Prestigious division with 15000 glory. Our matches have been within acceptable limits and some were interesting. Our roster is almost always only auto age players.

- the first thing that we look is if the enemy has only auto age players like us. The second is to count the number of defenders+zook sentries, the air strikers and those that play Lego. The final tally will decide our coalitions.

- we take note of the museum stats. If they are exceedingly high (ADTD/ADTH 150+) or Fighter/Bomber HP of 150+ then we know we are in for a tough fight.

- a white flag button is the answer and it has been suggested ages ago tbh. If both leaders press the button while in prep mode then the war is ended prematurely. The team that pressed it first will get absolutely nothing. The other that accepts the "surrender" should get the glory but nothing else. Result: both teams go to the next WW as fast as possible without having 2 days of boredom (eliminate the mercy rule in that case. Those 2 teams must not rematch)

 

[Husher]

My team is strong. But we can’t get out of the renowned level. It doesn’t seem to be a tournament. There is no end in sight. Just move to a true tournament where teams get eliminated. you can put us in leagues that play a season then qualify for a playoff. You don’t have to have your alliance be involved. Not everyone will participate. we really just need true tournaments. Look at premier league soccer in Europe. Teams get put in the top division and moved down based on how they finish each season. Try that. it will keep the top teams playing against the top teams.

 

[Seek]

Having a mix of match ups is best.
Fighting top =knowing most of time who is going win
Even match = gets expensive is TT and etc but most glory
Poor match = save and get less glory

Having the mix of this stops boredom and makes it attainable long term without breaking bank constantly

 

[Mahakaal]

The time for gautlet is too much and rewards except top 2 are not satisfactory . Small teams will grind forever . There is no incentie for anyone to join a little less team which is practical.
the alliance level system should be overhauled nd based on number of wars won or fought. otherwise teams with less members will always be on marginalisation area .
inter alliance chat would be fun in wars .

 

[Danicus]

With the first gauntlet coming to an end, we've had a real chance to adjust to the new leaderboard systems.

How have people found it? Personally my alliance found we were matching harder alliances (even ones in the next division above us).

We also noticed that lighter weight alliances seemed to get much better match ups and thus have climbed higher than their heavier counter parts.

The end of gauntlet rewards are a much needed addition and something nice to progress towards however they still feel a bit lack luster? (alliance i'm in is at prestigious and we get a hanger and some recruitments cards?.. I've got that from my conquers chests already). After some serious competitive gridning, would be nicer to at least get some decent speed ups perhaps?

I also find it inconvenient that you can't see how other alliances are fairing in divisons out side of yours? would be nice to be able to see who the top dogs are via ingame means, rather than third party website.

Hoping there will some adjustments for the next gauntlet! How did your allaince do?! better or worse off than the last leaderboard system?

Here's some things I've learnt along the way, hope others may find them useful!

I can say that nobody in our Alliance pays attention to it. We’re focused on the Seasonal Leaderboard.