Fix War Matchmaking

Instead of solely matchmaking using fiefdoms Flare should incorporate other alliance stats.

For example using the alliance member maximum number as a secondary mechanic. By using the maximum number of possible members it prevents cheating.

For example a level 40 alliance could not drop down to 8 members and avoid opponents at their level as it would rank them on how many members they could possibly have.

This combined with fiefdoms would make wars more fair, more challenging, more strategic and more interesting.

Let me tell you that it will never be perfect for everyone, whatever algorithm they use. Even with a perfect algortihm you win some and lose some. In fact with a perfect system a team that reached it’s top will not win a war season at all, they will be fortunate to become even second or third place. When you reach your top fiefdom, you will win one season a boost and next season you probable lose the season by becoming number 4, 5 or 6, unless you are able to improve and only way to do that is by activating more boosts (not so smart, it will work against you) or generating more spots for new members.

I forgot to mention that with more members, you generate more gold as a team. And that helps to upgrade the team and might give you the chance of activating a better boost.

Main problem in current war system is that you can win more fiefdoms than you actually are able to lose. That is main reason and has nothing to do with unfairness of current system. Say your team wins a season and conquers 5 fiefdoms. What’s the point of fighting teams next season that before last season had 8 fiefdoms more than you worst case? It’s very important that you become aware of this, since this is main reason of this unfairness. You can recognize those teams that can be way stronger than yourself on the fact they have no war boosts and a lot more members. That’s a hint that they lost some fiefdoms last season. teams with war boosts, probably won a few ones and that are the teams you maybe stand a chance against. You can better be in a season where everyone has war boosts, than being the only one with them. I just explained the reason why.

Even if the ones that lost have not retained war boosts, the advantage is still in favor of the team without (war) boosts, because likely their number of players outnumber your alliance by far, even when they lost a few players. Even in a good scenario where you just win three, the difference is still 6 fiefdoms. And you never know if that team that lost skipped a season or did not. Ask yourself why they have more spots than your team. Maybe they play longer, had players who spend gems or… their leader managed his team better and didn’t waste gold on boosting a lot, but focused on growth.

At a certain moment a team is on a point of no return considering the aspect of war seasons. The team needs many boosts to stand a chance in war and isn’t making any progress at all, since they can’t afford to open more spots due to lack of gold. You must recognize this situation and should be prepared to react as a leader and prevent it at all cost. When you need to spend way more gold than your members donate and are dancing around spot 3 and worse during a few seasons, you are way too late. The only way to escape this nightmare is that you really need become aware that to give up a season or two is the smart thing to do and you need to use the gold wisely to upgrade your team, before you start to lose a lot of members. Many free spots is a red flag for players, also many inactive ones is a bad signal.

Why you think Edward adviced to relax after winning a war season when this is the case and giving up a few seasons? We also have been there, done that and experienced same. We overboosted our team and didn’t get any step forward, in fact we were falling backwards without even realising it. Also our members were asking boosts and wanted us not to give up a season at all. What happened? Top teams started to pull on our strongest players and before we knew it, we lost one third of our members. It’s difficult to escape that negative spiral I can tell you. Only way you can do when it’s late is merge with another team or start a second team. Merge with another team is risky, since you get more captains on the same ship.

Players get used to all those boosts and when you don’t give them what they want, they will search a new home elsewhere, that’s for sure. You have to prevent this at all cost and all your team members need to be aware of this, even when they don’t like it, they have to understand why you do it. So communicate it and give arguments why you don’t need to overboost a team. Players get spoiled and can act like young kids, nagging on your head to activate more boosts. As a leader you have to be very strong to resist that, you have to recoginize this situation and recognize the red alert, like I said before. Better to give up a season or two and use that time wisely to take actions accordingly and improve your team. Give members a few offensive boosts and let them hunt for loot to keep them satisfied and let them improve their bases instead of fighting war seasons that can’t be won. Especially now that’s very important with the new upgrade.

Best tip I can give you is to use minimum boosts during a season, a protective one (tough barricade) and max two other boosts. As a leader keep the focus on your team goal and that’s improving by going forward. I know, many members will ask to boost as much as possible. Convince the players it’s for their own best not to do this, spending gold on alliance upgrades is more important. What’s the purpose of spending tons of gold during a season you aren’t able to win? Better save it for better times, if you really need those boosts to win, you know next season is going to be too hard anyway, so why make such illogical decisions? Are you afraid that players that players will leave? They will leave anyway, there will be always boost seekers out there, you want team players not selfish players.

Agree

I forgot to mention that as soon as you are able to get more members, your boosts become more expensive, but… also more strong. And with new members you can afford them, since you are already used to only use a few. It all helps you to progress.

Where other teams get into a negative spiral and fall apart, a wise leader makes sure he makes progress. Later you will get the rewards from your smart action and win more seasons than the ones who don’t focus on their goal. Your main focus should be getting more members, with more members you increase your chance of winning, it’s as simple of that. Members should never become dependent of boosts.

When you run a business and spend more cash than you earn, you are doomed to go broke. So run a team like a healthy business, spend less than you get. In alliance terms, never spend more on boosts than the team donates.

And last but not least, when a player starts to activate a boost with his own cash, don’t ever feel bad and it isn’t your duty to return a favor by extending the boost. You give a negative signal by actually showing you support that boost. Only do it when it’s worth it and you can win the war by that extra boost. Even then it’s tricky. Also, tell generals to act same like you, never overboost a team, that’s asking for problems.

Dena I thank you for your advice and I already do run minimal boosts. There is also a lot of war diplomacy between leaders during war that can help.

I am not discounting you or Edward when I say that the war mechanics can still be improved even if they are never ‘perfect’ for everyone.

There are more low and middle players and more low and middle alliances than there are high players and alliances. At the moment the war mechanic gives far too much advantage to alliances with higher members as they are often matched against developing alliances with half or less possible members.

Flare has the ability to make war matchmaking more complex as they have with regular matchmaking (based on relative level, base strength, trophies etc.), they just choose not to.

I posted this topic and probably will again in future until it is changed.

order by (fiefdoms+alliance_level) sounds fair

It would not be a complete solution. But  most alliances (99.9%) would see a things better, every season.

!!! This does not exclude the possibility  to give up the season to reduce the fiefdoms, and getting weaker opponents! But each map in the season will be more balanced.

 

http://forum.hugogames.com/showthread.php?423

I totally understand that this game will never be perfect…however there is room for improvement…my alliance has just completed war season 2 …in second place…it was NOT an easy fight…we have 9 active members… all but 1 player ( which was a level 47 ) and the rest mid level 50…now one opponent had 20 active players… top 2 mid level 80 a few in the level 60 and the rest down to level 43, the other opponent the winner in this case had 20 active players…well scattered from level 43 to 70+ …both of these opponents were alliance level 15 mine is a level 14 …explain to me how this is fair!!! right off the hop the other 2 alliances can shield 2 players each…when doing the math… that relates to 1800 + or - a couple hundred or so less skulls over one 24 hr war period…add to that the extra players in this case…out numbered by at least 10 players  from each side…then you have to deal with an opponent intentionally loosing a pair of matches to gain an upper hand on bonus skulls…wow lets add in that we also have 4 players with window platforms ( no farm boosts ) it’s a real hard grind…happy to have gotten 2nd place…

 

Just saying there is definite room for improvement!!!

 

 

I still want to state matching isn’t the problem.  Cause even if it’s a perfect match!  I’m still fighting the same battles 3 times a day (minimum) for 5 days!

The war system needs a total re-design!

 

agree

the war match making is still not fix right now my team and i ass is handed to us by a team 2x us.

SOME ONE BEST FIX THE FUCKING MATCHMAKING SYSTEM

I give up leave war match making alone. :slightly_frowning_face: