Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

War matching is terrible it was actually better before the changes that were made

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

  • War matching is terrible it was actually better before the changes that were made

    The wars that are being given are absolutely terrible same teams over and over either with a huge advantage or the other team has a huge advantage most wars are already won in planning day BHG_Muet . Current war seached for 8 mins we have 20 war 16 space age 6 300 bases then a couple 270s and the rest 250-260 then 4 global to make the 20 we get a Vietnamese team that has 16 space age with 13 300+ including a 333 ,322,322, 333 9 300s the first 4 were started a month ago to max now obviously using the archive hack and resources hacks 4 level 70 zhuklov with zucklov on the fort means that they had level 1 generals and did the growth all at once if all general are 70 then at Best with Zhuklov being new he gets the Pentagon so clearly all gens to 70 same day... anyway our 20 16 space age 6 max ( full offense and defense) them 16 space age (13 max and another 3 only missing towers to age. War is over before it starts out of a 20 war sample size line up the same here is the breakdown
    Ours 16 space age

    Vs 11 7 300s
    Vs 20 space 18 300
    Vs 4 space no 300s
    Vs 9 space 2 300s
    Vs 18 16 300s
    Vs 4 1 300
    Vs 17 14 300
    Vs 19 16 300
    Vs 1 no 300
    Vs 20 20 300
    Vs 18 7 300
    Vs 5 5 300
    Vs 7 3 300
    Vs 3 1 300
    Vs 20 no 300
    Vs 18 18 300
    Vs 16 15 300
    vs 5 no 300
    Vs 8 1 300
    vs 16 13 300s

    ​​​ This has to change winning big is about as boring as not logging in for 48hrs because the war is impossible sandbags at least let you have some control over a always terrible now completely broken war system

  • #2
    i have a better idea...instead of having all SA 300+ players in one alliance, spread out guys a bit. Come join smaller alliances and help us out!! hehehee
    Hellas Empire
    Ψαχνουμε παικτες για πολεμους απο επιπεδο 100 και πανω.

    Comment


    • joelegiao
      joelegiao commented
      Editing a comment
      You dont want us SA players in your ally, cause as soon as you have 2-3 SA forget it wars become crap

  • #3
    Why give up during planning day? Numbers don't tell the whole story. We faced a similar chinese alliance that had all 20 players over 300 including 12 over 320 (we only have a few over 300). Looked terrible on paper, but they were mostly rushed/hacked bases and we were able to win.

    Comment


    • #4
      For us, the main issue is facing the same alliances over and over since the matchmaking change. We have probably only faced 20 or so different alliances. I suppose this is the logical result of attempting to create matches between alliances that are closer in strength, but it gets a little old seeing the same ones over and over...

      Comment


      • #5
        I need some help strategizing BeerMan 10v10

        Our team: 2 SA 3AA 4GA 1EA them: 10 SA. Only one of their bases looks rushed

        Comment


        • No Angel
          No Angel commented
          Editing a comment
          The best strategy is having tequila until war is over. 😆

        • BeerMan
          BeerMan commented
          Editing a comment
          No, the tequila helps! That looks like a rough matchup... I wasn't saying the matchmaking is always good, just that it's not always necessary to give up when a match looks bad on paper.

      • #6
        This sounds like the bug related to Horsepower's post. Several building upgrades beyond the first in Space Age have incorrect (low) war weights so the system is thinking those bases are much weaker than they really are.

        We investigated it after one of Horsepower's previous posts and confirmed the bug. It'll be fixed in the next major release (7.4, which should be dropping soon) and we've taken steps to help ensure we prevent it from occurring again.

        Comment


        • wrathchild_78
          wrathchild_78 commented
          Editing a comment
          that is good to hear. Can we have a release date pls?
          Also, when are you gonna address seriously the cheating problems? (matrix, archive, infinite TTs, iron age vs SA players etc)

      • #7
        BHG_Muet what about the way (archive, workers and resources hacks) that have allowed the game to become unbalanced with max bases everywhere...it's obvious on generals alone if you have played to get 4 generals to level 70 that is 3 on the fort and one on the Pentagon these hacks show because zhuklov is often on the fort on these accounts and having 4 generals to level 70 previously no way zhuklov makes the fort unless he and the others we done in order at the same time which on a 320 level plus base the odds of that happening natural are slim to non

        Comment


        • #8
          BHG_Muet In regards to all the issues of hacks, cheats and glitches suffered by the players who play fair, and have now slowed way down on spending within the game, would it be possible to have a glory reset or some other method to give us all a fair playing field, We can never catch up with those who game the system, they have had these unfair advantages for a long time, it would generate huge interest from the fair players, the only objections would be from the ones who have abused the system for a long time costing the game revenue from fair players who are reluctant to spend anymore, thanks for reading

          Stan

          Scots Guards
          Last edited by Scots Guards No 1; 09-10-2019, 10:58 PM.

          Comment


          • #9
            BHG_Muet will this update fix the alliance perk 3 issue as well? We still don't have access to troop capacity on defense that we've worked to get.

            Comment


            • #10
              Originally posted by Chadwicke View Post
              BHG_Muet what about the way (archive, workers and resources hacks) that have allowed the game to become unbalanced with max bases everywhere...it's obvious on generals alone if you have played to get 4 generals to level 70 that is 3 on the fort and one on the Pentagon these hacks show because zhuklov is often on the fort on these accounts and having 4 generals to level 70 previously no way zhuklov makes the fort unless he and the others we done in order at the same time which on a 320 level plus base the odds of that happening natural are slim to non
              Actually if a player has more than four level 70 generals, the game will use what he has activated on his base when war begins. We have a player in our alliance who has done this. Not denying there are still cheaters out there, but having Zhukov in fort doesn’t require that you be one.
              Try our alliances:
              Tactical 31 - focused primarily on war, Tactical Raw - training alliance for T31, and Tactical Chill - still warring, but more laidback.

              Tactical 31 best fit would be Industrial and above. Tactical Raw welcomes all ages who wish to learn and be active. Tactical Chill - gunpowder on up.

              Comment


              • #11
                The war matching is also being actively manipulated via code (likely in an effort to exploit this Space Age weighting issue mentioned above), I just don't know how it's done. Yesterday we paired with a Russian alliance (30v30), immediately after being paired we saw they had 29 Space Age bases and one Iron Age base. Less than five minutes later, though, we observed the ages of their bases changing in real time--adding or taking away base ages at will. The formerly Iron Age base (level 159!) at #30 turned into a Space Age base and then back down a bit to Atomic. Seven other bases were adjusted here and there, eventually landing some of them at CWA and others at Atomic. Their leader's username turned into some sort of weird code for a bit, then went back to normal just before War Day began; I suspect this relates somehow to what's going on. It's laughable.
                Last edited by phil_dee; 09-11-2019, 06:34 PM.

                Comment

                Working...
                X