Matchmaking

zombieornottobe

@Lexia

This matchmaking system is garbage. My guild has worked hard to achieve gold level and what is the reward? 1 win per week and teams that routinely  beat us by 1000 - 1500 points. This is to the point where we are going to ask ourselves if we want to skip a week so we can get matched with teams closer to our level. I really don't believe that this is the intent, but it is the result. Please, before you cost us members and we have to go recruit from an already shrinking player base, do something to fix this. 

eaglesnest

Completely agree with this post. We have some extremely good players in our guild. We're playing the right strategies, not wasting lives, battles or talent, discuss plans
and still getting smoked. I was taking 35-37's on and have pushed myself to 38-40's, using more tools, and gold, and still getting smoked 1000 to 1500 every week. I think I've had one win in 3 weeks, whatever algorithm you guys are using is absolutely ridiculous. 

IcePeter

Unless the whole guild is stacked, achieving master level is more punishment than reward. Your lvl 37-40 guild just gets matched against lvl 42-45 guilds more often than not. Someone always has to be at the bottom of every tier, but when going 0-for-24 still gets you to Master, it’s hard to get placed properly. 

zombieornottobe

IcePeter said:

Unless the whole guild is stacked, achieving master level is more punishment than reward. Your lvl 37-40 guild just gets matched against lvl 42-45 guilds more often than not. Someone always has to be at the bottom of every tier, but when going 0-for-24 still gets you to Master, it’s hard to get placed properly. 

Exactly. So as on of 2-3 highest performers we are all 3 unable to maximize our ability as we seldom get to all play on the same day. And for our efforts we get to regularly lose. No point in spending anything in game now until the rest catch up. If I have to change guilds to enjoy gw, I'll just put gw in the box with outpost and become even less engaged. 

n00b

It might be the case that you've played against not full guild, like 10/20 members. More realistic reason is that they run out of resources (tools and gold) and decided to take it easy during the last GW week.
I think matchmaking may work correctly, NG just need to fix GW, so teams will stay in their league. For example, if they add rewards for making it to top 10, top 20, top 40, etc.. then more will stay in their tier and you will face equal opponents. And they should also limit tools or make them more available for free

eaglesnest

So Zombie, if I'm understanding this correctly, because we are scoring high enough to get Master level, we are being teamed with 42-45 level teams, but since we have enough members that fight level 33-35 attacks, we are basically losing almost every war anymore. If that's the case then what, we have to purposely throttle back to be matched appropriately. That's probably exactly what's going on because when I joined this guild, I was taking on 35-37 levels, then went 36-38, 37-39, and now with tools taking on 38/39 and even 40. We were always winning early on but if I'm doing this others probably doing it too and now we can't win. We are at the bottom of the next higher tier basically. 

echonap

The problem is, this is a zero sum game. There will always be a winner and a loser every match. Do you think the 42-45 guilds have it any easier? We get matched with 45-49 guilds. 

Unless you’re the top guild(s), you will always be matched with superior scoring guilds.

Warlord

The problem is the current matchmaking system can be gamed.   Lets say Guild X can score 75k points per week and they get to master level.  However, they want some easy wins so they don’t have to burn tools, gold, etc.   They set up guild X2.   Next guild war they all move from guild X to X2.  When the start bonus is figured, X2 has zero points last war, so no start bonus and they start with the low level guilds.  So they get some easy wins in first week getting matched up with guilds with a really low level start bonus.  Second week, especially the first couple of days, they can feast on some lower level guilds too.    Here is an example: guild X2 scores 75k in first week and that is their total.  Then in week two, they get matched against guild A who only scored 35k, but with the start bonus, guild A’s total is also 75k.  Seems like a fair fight?  Not.  It really is a 75k a week guild vs a 35k week guild because the start bonus skews it.   No perfect solution to this, but NG does need to remove the start bonus when matching guilds based on points to improve the algorithm after the first couple of fights or first week.  I suspect this is how some if not many of the lopsided fights happen. My guild was guild A on the first day of week 2 and we got blown out by 3k+ points.  @Fluxxx or @Lexia care to comment?

ATLAS-Z

Make it so ALL brand new guilds start out in Gold III for the first war period after their creation

Most low level rookie guilds are not playing guilds wars right out the gate so it won't even affect them.

Loophole closed

ATLAS-Z

Exaggerating... Silver 2

ATLAS-Z

Whatever the elites normally start in after reset honestly I don't pay attention in week 1

WellyLuga

More needs to be taken into account than tier and VP. Things like camp level, average mission level played (removing human maps from the mix), average score per player. Christ, even average number of tools per tool bag...

I'm sure there are other variables that can match teams more closely. Instead of just lumping everyone who reached master tier together and have a week of free for all before things settle down. I also think if team numbers were more fixed you would have more chance of being matched with someone your level, let's say you're 20th on the leader board and you go with 8 players. It might be that everyone above you except for the guild in 1st is fighting with a different number and so you're unfortunately the closest match that day to the high rollers at the top.

I think the main point is perhaps if you didn't set the game mode up to be such a huge cash grab then guilds wouldn't look to take advantage of a broken system

Burmeliinis

My suggestion is to make it so that every match would be an even one. 

Formula: Average VP of participating players of the previous 10 battles. 

So if your 3-player team of the day has 1 high hitter at average 800 points per battle, one mid-level at 600 points and one PVP player at 360 points, your average would be 587. That would be matched against another 3-player team with around 587 points average.

This would mean that it would be extremely hard to win all battles of the season, so to reward guilds playing tougher maps the Reward Points (guild shop cash) should be increased for higher levels. 

This way a guild that always plays island 20 and other top islands but loses 50% of their battles would still get more RP than a guild playing only low level maps but wins all of their battles.

Now I get that also this system would have its issues. For example, pushing higher than you normally play would obviously be needed to secure a win, but it would punish you in the next battle. Therefore a big enough pool of previous battles (for example the 10 I suggested) would be needed to not let any one single battle affect the average VP too much.

n00b

NG needs to reduce healing costs, limit tools or make more available for free, add rewards for leaderboard rankings, otherwise players will keep finding loopholes in that matchmaking.

[Deleted User]

tier reset its a stupid joke, not work at all
for example next season GW at least 493 guilds start from 40k silver1 and can match up against Mavericks, TLOU or RM in day 1 battle, but if some brave new guild with same name can start from 0 vp whey will be in matchmaking list with guilds who get place 600 last season and down.
one of the most idiots thing that NG do with they game. 
all guilds should have same start Vp rating
for better matchmaking need Liga system

find2046

I'm not sure my situation match with the topic
PVP is crazy.  e.g. vs 7-8 stars freeman at Island #8, 9-10 stars at island 4 & island 9.  As we known, they are RSL +7 to +12.  

[Deleted User]

Burmeliinis said:

My suggestion is to make it so that every match would be an even one. 

Formula: Average VP of participating players of the previous 10 battles. 

So if your 3-player team of the day has 1 high hitter at average 800 points per battle, one mid-level at 600 points and one PVP player at 360 points, your average would be 587. That would be matched against another 3-player team with around 587 points average.

This would mean that it would be extremely hard to win all battles of the season, so to reward guilds playing tougher maps the Reward Points (guild shop cash) should be increased for higher levels. 

This way a guild that always plays island 20 and other top islands but loses 50% of their battles would still get more RP than a guild playing only low level maps but wins all of their battles.

Now I get that also this system would have its issues. For example, pushing higher than you normally play would obviously be needed to secure a win, but it would punish you in the next battle. Therefore a big enough pool of previous battles (for example the 10 I suggested) would be needed to not let any one single battle affect the average VP too much.

every time remember Star Hero when suggesting something like this  

[Deleted User]

WellyLuga said:

More needs to be taken into account than tier and VP. Things like camp level, average mission level played (removing human maps from the mix), average score per player. Christ, even average number of tools per tool bag...

I'm sure there are other variables that can match teams more closely. Instead of just lumping everyone who reached master tier together and have a week of free for all before things settle down. I also think if team numbers were more fixed you would have more chance of being matched with someone your level, let's say you're 20th on the leader board and you go with 8 players. It might be that everyone above you except for the guild in 1st is fighting with a different number and so you're unfortunately the closest match that day to the high rollers at the top.

I think the main point is perhaps if you didn't set the game mode up to be such a huge cash grab then guilds wouldn't look to take advantage of a broken system

they can't even made Best person results ladderbord for GW such in challenge mode and you talking about such difficult things

Burmeliinis

Crocodile said:

every time remember Star Hero when suggesting something like this  

agreed that it seems a real overhaul of the matchmaking seems to be impossible for NG. So at the very least they should do as you also suggest: do away with that tier reset and have everyone start at zero, as it was before.