Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The new matching is terrible

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

  • #31
    I don't think it's fair. If we get 10 industrial bases also it will not be fair.
    Matchmaking should find similar ages and similar lv bases for war.

    Comment


    • #32
      Well, I disagree. I think matching is most time not so bad if you are not looking on the number of ages but on the overall capabilities of both teams. Just take your last war: 16 Space sage versus 16, you have had some 300+ in the team, but also 4 or 5 Bags. Therefore it should not a big surprise for you matching an alliance with a lower spread of participants.

      Comment


      • #33
        Current war:
        Glory: 60/-580

        We are a very low weight alliance for the rank we are at currently (top 20).....Our top has CWA defs (not all buildings maxed) and a pretty good spread. The teams above and below us are HUGE in levels but we do not match them simply because we DO NOT have the amount of offense/defense but we do match similar teams. So, a small/medium team can still get on the ladder as they will more often than not face similar alliances and the odds are pretty even.
        Packing in huge accounts will match you will other alliances with huge accounts. I love it how the concept of stacking huge bases and iron accounts is not that good anymore. Now these kind of lineups meet similar lineups. Fun!

        Comment


        • wrathchild_78
          wrathchild_78 commented
          Editing a comment
          same thing happens to us. if all goes well, soon we will be in top100 for the first time!

      • #34
        But see that's the problem is many teams like ours have been friends for over 4 years so breaking up the good team isn't fair nor is having to sit out just to have a chance most of our bases are over 260 and are both the offense and the Defense so leave them out sure you get less 300s but who is to stop the attack and who is supposed to attack if you leave out the space age. What fun is a game if you cant actually play it . Like size war is ok if that is what your looking for is to be #1 and spend 50-100$ per war on cards for offence and cards for Defense but I know I don't want to hit 300s constantly and the cost that goes with that . Plus the museum factor I refuse to spend on the museum what it's asking it's like a separate game account as the cost goes . I could easily spend 2 thousand on it which is equal to what j spent on space age so far , not counting cards just too expensive

        Comment


        • Mountainking
          Mountainking commented
          Editing a comment
          Heh just a note. We fill 3-4 bases in like 1 out of 10 wars with POLO cards (good/crap polo cards). Also, most use POLO/chest cards with mixing occasional 1 premium cards when required. Like size war is fun. Packing big accounts will make you match similar accounts. So it's still like size. If you are 300's and don't want to be hitting 300s then there is a problem unless your idea of fun is bashing 250 CWA bases with IA towers....
          Not having a go at you chad but the logic of not wanting to hit big accounts when you/your friends are wielding SA offense/Defense.

        • domas
          domas commented
          Editing a comment
          Come on, the Matching of our two Teams was not wrong. We have had 16 SA bases , you 13, but 3 or 4 300plus (all 3D...), all of Ours were below 290. Ok, you have had some bags, we only one. Therefore the system matched right.


          What is the issue?
          Last edited by domas; 06-14-2019, 10:54 AM.
      Working...
      X