WAR matching

Dear Admins,

Isn’t there another way to generate the war matching, than just by the number of fields you own?

We are ranked around number 150 and fighting no. 25,42,43,48 and 94

The main problem is the number of players the ally has.

We have 30 members and our best result with 100% actives was 57000 skulls.

After only 30 mins of war the 25 ranked clan with 58 members had 74000 !!!

After 2 hours of war every opponant on the 3 warplaces had more than 60000 skulls.

With 28 members more… Sorry the others only have 10-14 members more… We are punished

for having an active clan with good results in the first 2 wars.

Jona, i hope you get a chance to report this huge gap of balance to the right places and find a way

to calculate rank and number of Players to the matching.

Rückfragen auch gerne auf deutsch, schade, daß Aktivität so bestraft wird.

They’re just hoping the matchmaker evens itself out in time…

 

And it’s a bit of an overstatement when I say “They’re just hoping”…

At least the max number of members should be added.

Same problem happening to my alliance.

There are alliances from rank 22 - 99 in the same war map.

We are doing our best but its impossible when they have more members. Every extra member can make +2k skulls(!), how are we supposed to beat that???

true that this is not entirely fair but guess they dont want an alliance to win war every single time , the high rank alliance you faced could be the losing alliance in previous war.Its kind of a cycle to get everyone a chance to win war every few season.This kind of match making will also force lower level alliance to upgrade level , good strategy by FG when more alliance spend money to level up and get more members  :grinning:

Shouldn’t it be like every war I have a chance to fight and win, instead of ”I climbed 5 tiles, next i get matched with alliance 5-10 level stronger than us?”

I mean tiles is such a bad measurement of relative strength. Now it seems like i win once, lose once, win one, lose once, … Until my alliance levels up and able to add more members.

If you take strength of king and bases as the criteria, wouldn’t that be more fair and draws out a clear line between pro and active alliances v noob and casual alliances?

You guys are absolutly right, watching the ranks 200-400 or 600-800 but…

the differences in the top100 are huge! The top 25 are pros,having 55-60 members

The next 25 already have about 10 members less, etc.

So the differences are much much bigger than in the 200’s.

We have a lag of 28 players, not 3 or 5.

Not mentioning they have a daily donation of 30.000.000 to our 3.500.000.

This is Champions League vs. 3rd polnish League (sorry Poland).

And it defenatly not forcing any member to spend gold or jewels because the difference is too huge.

Our opponants neither using gems,cause for them its too easy.

Only thing happening is: we quit the war and wait

(Between we switched to white flag)

Difference between top15 and top20 is huge :slight_smile:

It would be so easy to calculate the average value.

Total number of skulls divided by number of players, or rather by the number of attacks.

the alliances in any war map must have equal number of members and also the average trophies of members of that alliance must also be near to other alliances in that war map

We are also matched against alliances who are 300 ranks above us with 8 to 10 more members making the war extremely unfair. Flare games please match us fairly so that it is fun to play and gives a sporting chance to win.

I think the admins should change the wars rules  for one of these  two options :

 

Average : Number of skulls that one clan obtain in the war is divided by the number of clan members who have participated in the war (not for the number of clan members only by participated members) but  minimum number for divide is 10  (or a number calculated by the number of members that have the clan with less member, but not all members and minimum 10).

 

Limited number : Number of members of the clan that can participated on a war are equal for the six clans that are making the war.

 

First I want to explain why we need a minimum number for divide, if don’t make that, only the best player make the battle and obtain the best possible result. We need to divide for a minimum number to force at least to 10 members to participate. The number could be calculated by the clan with less members, but I think that it shouldn’t be all their members, if not, they are in disadvantage because if all of them don’t participate, sure they’ll lose.

 

These two form make more balanced the wars between the clans with more members and the clans with less members. But personally I prefer  first option , because the  second method  in my opinion have a little problems:

  • how to balance the clan with more active players.

  • how to decide who members go to a war? more throphies? more level? what happend if the players choosen automatically for the war can’t play… I think that it should be selected by the leader (or general) of the clan like in for example clash of clans, because the clan could be speak for decide who could play and who couldn’t.

 

The first method don’t have this problems, I think that is more just and for a programmer is more more easy to do.

 

I posted a poll into suggestions & improvements section. but this section is only for a members of the forum, if you want to participate, make a member of the forum an visit the following link:

http://forums.flaregames.com/topic/3423-the-wars-are-unbalanced/?p=24662

An other possibility could be to balance the amount of sculls that can be obtained. If weaker alliances get a factor (f.e.) 5 more sculls per win, they may still beat a top level alliance. Of course equalibrating this factor out is not an easy task. just thinking.

 

 

@Flare: Your matchmaking system is a kind of neural network, right? self-learning, self-adjusting, …