My NEW Matching Algorithm Suggestion (and solution to SH):

Discussion in 'Ideas + Feature Requests' started by OfMouseeAndMan, Aug 1, 2014.

  1. I won't bury the lead:

    USE PLUNDERING POTENTIAL INSTEAD OF OR IN ADDITION TO HIT RATIOS FOR GENERATING MATCHES.

    Wars are decided by who plunders the most. Almost by definiton, a good match is one where the final score can be expected to be close, and the prevailing clan simply uses a better strategy or executes their strategy better than the other side. This is what wars should be like.

    Instead, the current matching system roughly bases a fair fight in terms of size, not in terms of what whether the war can be expected to be close. This is an obvious problem, and it is a diagnosis of why so often one can just look at two rosters and know the winner. For instance, one looks at an all sh clan against a clan of mixed builds or mids and you know the sh clan will win simply because they can plunder and can't be plundered by the opposing side.

    So what is meant by plundering potential?

    I don't have a specific formula in mind, but the idea is that instead of looking at dtw/dts restrictions in matching, use the amount of gold one would make on a successful hit against every member of the opposing clan.

    (This could be based solely on ally bonus, on ally bonus+plunder, incuding or not including defense pots, whatever works best. The devs can play with different scenarios. Also, pure spies would need some small workaround since they can't plunder)

    You would simulate a fight win and record the plunder of every member of clan A against every member of clan B, and vice versa, add up all the plunders and if they are comparable, then you have a good match.

    So if we summed up all the plunder everyone in clan A would make hitting everyone in clan B once, and it came to 1.5b, and if every member of clan B hit every member of clan A and it came to 1b, you would have a “plunder ratio” of 66%. Establish a minimum “plunder ratio” for a match and this will go a long way to fixing matching.

    The idea is to have this system replace or work in concert with the hit ratio system that filters potential matches, not to replace the matching based on size (cs, BFE, BFA, etc.) that is the second step in the matching process.

    Frankly, the hit ratio system is badly broken. SH with relatively small BFA are capable of hitting very high on the LB, and the preponderance of such SH now makes the hit ratio system a joke. I can understand if the devs want to retain the dts/dtw mechanics inside or outside of system wars (for any of a variety of reasons), but using the dts/dtw mechanics as a proxy to determine what would constitute a “fair fight” is not in the cards and has been exploited.

    But beyond the fact that the hit ratios no longer serve their intended purpose in filtering matches, the issue with sh/gh is, and has always been, the disparity between their plundering potential and the plundering potential of their opponents. So there are two solutions:

    1. Change sh/gh plunder mechs: This is the solution you see bandied around in forums every day. Clearly, this is not going to happen. Devs are reticent about changing core game mechs, and there's no guarantee that some other exploit won't emerge under new plunder mechs. They already changed gh plunder mechs to “solve” the gh problem, and look how that turned out!

    2. Work with the same mechs, but do your matching differently. Again, the suggestion here is to attack the problem of genrating fair matches directly in terms of plunder, and thereby eliminating the problem of sh being able to outplunder their opponents just based on their mech advantage.
    You want to run an all sh clan? Fine. You'll match another all sh clan instead of a clan full of people whose cs are too high to plunder you. Done.


    Again, I want to reiterate that this is intended as a fix to hit ratio filtering, and could work alongside it or replace it entirely, which would need to be the subject of further investigation and playing with the algorithm.

    Also, how the plunder is calculated/simulated is to be left to investigation. How ally bonus, plunder, steals, ps, pots would figure into it is something that would need to be determined.

    I welcome reasoned comments and thoughts.
     
  2. In this scenario, better bfa and bfe would dominate. Much like s1.

    However I do agree with most of your ideas:)
    I'd be thrilled to see clan wars be more balanced again.
     

  3. Are you ******* kidding me?

    BFE and bfa still dominate
     
  4. I think it's a good idea but bfa and BFF would need to be considered
     
  5. Indi wars fixed SH. Get rid of clam wars all together.
     
  6. This seems to be a bit like the Indi wars.
    During the indi wars I would only have all SH vs all SH. I believe it's the same for others too according to their build types: mods vs mids.
    I'm partial to the idea, and am happy that for once someone has a reasonable answer instead of "kill the SH's plunder".
    Support.
     
  7. Very nice thread, I agree with all points posted here. And I'm a SH! Support
     
  8. I've been sh n my alt is gh going sh ATM but great idea
     
  9. Support. Indi wars are ok, but if the next season is all indi wars ill quit this game. Simply put, indi wars kill this games competitive nature. And to be honest s1 was the best so killing bfe as a way to make matchups is also a dam good idea. The devs have done all these eb events where decent equipment has been made available to all so why not take it out of the matching system? But this is also a great idea mousse. SUPPORT!
     
  10. This would be very easy to do, the same way tariffs work for international trade. Just adjust the war tax on each hit. The smaller your cs, the higher your war tax. If all sh faced all sh, there tax would be identical. Same with all bigs. Give some incentive to grow and do ee.
     
  11. One of the best things about season one is that you could easily get one of the "good equips". The first equip you got was the leg piece, then the morning star. I have two of the best type of equip from season 1 because you got the good equip first, and the crown with higher rancor tiers.
     
  12. I agree that the ability to make plunder must be taken into account. As long a plunder decides wars, the potential to make plunder (or restrict the loss of plunder in the case of an SH/PS) must be taken into account.

    I would also suggest that part of this formula be the potential for actually winning against an opponent (percent chance of success for lack of a better term). For example, if I am matched against a LB player, I may make a lot of gold if I successfully hit them, but the odds of a successful hit are minimal.

    Again I leave it to minds better than mine to figure out the mechanics, but it seems that a formula which uses both percentage of success and potential plunder payout would make for fairer matchups--and still allow both LB players and SH players to participate.

    Good post OP.

    Cheers,

    Kage.
     
  13. No support noob sh can kick your ass
     
  14. Uhhhh



    Sh need a lot of bfa to hit lb

    You're obviously not a sh I guess

    Lmao
     
  15. A very good idea.  mail this to devs if you haven't already, after you get significant support in this thread
     
  16. I just like seeing the community bring up decent ideas that are possible fixes to the system.

    I think one thing we can agree on is the matchup system sucks , unless it's in control of all matching factors ie Indy wars.

    Why we as players are able to realize this, and the devs are not, is one of the greatest mysteries of the universe.
     
  17. Seems like with s5 proposal and ppl making suggestions this is worth bumping.

    Never got any attention because it was originally posted a few days before primal wars were unveiled.