Devs, how am I supposed to get the Rancor achievement for pre season, of we get no matchups?! I think anyone who opted in to war should be given it, as those who got no matchup still provide valuable data towards improving the system. Please consider.
As mentioned earlier, BFA has always been used to calculate matchups. We tweaked the paramters this week to make the BFA difference tighter.
@ King_of_all_the_lands. Actually devs have answered that several times, a few times on this very thread. The answer was yes, BFA considered. And it is now given more weight in matchups.
Devs it seems you replied to the other posts early, I would appreciate if you gave me even 1 sentence on whether or not what I said could happen. Thankyou.
Just a small question. What does special WAR-ONLY equipment means? Only available for use in war or only obtainable through war? @community Ty for answering
Guys, I had some thoughts about how to make more fair matchups, which I believe should be the primary goal. The thread was largely ignored . Thought I would repeat here; so sorry if I am breaking some forum rules. link: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=132377&start=0 There are a couple of problems with the current EE matchup algorithm. (1) Matching algorithm appears to overweight stats compared to bfa and equipment. This is probably because the algorithm measures strength at full troops – wars are fought from KO meaning 10 – 15% troops typically. This error could easily be corrected simply: assume full mith and full pots and 10 – 20% troops when calculating strength. Using full mith and pots will also help correct the problem with value of low stat clan members: with full pots and mith they too can do plenty of damage. (2) Matching algorithm weights stats, not plunder. If a player is so large they can't be hit, this is not really captured by their stats alone. In addition, the stat measurement has led to a proliferation of guild hansels in EE. While there is nothing wrong with this, if the matching algorithm were to measure plunder instead of stats that would largely eliminate the exploit and result in more even matchups. In addition, the KO mechanism creates a positive feedback loop that can amplify small differences in clan strength to result in a very one-sided war. That is, the clan that wins the first exchange (although the edge may be very little) can generally increase their advantage over time as they rapidly KO the clan that is slightly weaker. A relatively easy fix for this would be to give the player that is KO’d a small edge – perhaps immediate regeneration of 1/12th or troops so that in 15 minutes they have 1/3rd of the troops instead of ¼? If the match is close, a very small advantage to the team with more players in KO should be enough to keep a close war close until the end.
Honestly. My bounty hunter would've been way better. It allows everyone who wants to war, TO WAR. It's a war game. Everyone should be given a 100% guaranteed chance to war if they want, not maybe. The more no matches you get the less income you make devs. People can't use / buy more xstals if they can't war.
Its really gonna suck when some one needs to win one more war to get all equipment and it's the last war but there clan gets a no match up so the player doesn't get all equip.
dear debs, this no match is really nonsense, the game is a strategy game, people create strategy to win, the strategy include getting good players, active in war and include even create an easy match up, whatever can help a team to win without cheating, but cry about getting killed in a no even match up is not suppose to be a strategy, and by keep people out from playing to stop those cry is not how we should play this game. So please, stop the no match, the loser of the war need come up with better strategy to win next time rather the ask for dev give them an easy match. and if you look closely to those so called "no even match", the losing team always have some inactive ppl, so get all your player active and stop crying. If you really have to create no match, please give those clan with no match a chance to match up against each other, for example, with those 14 clan without a match today, match them up and give them each an option to withdraw from the war, that will count as they lose the war but without losing their gold and mith, only their ee, and rancor lvl, and give the winning clan a win and some mith payout (maybe like 40 or something) for their time and effort of the preparation. And please bring back the FF. its good for both winning and losing team.
I believe i have a good idea on how to make the no match up fair. What if there was a match up counter? The clan with a match up gets a +, and the clan with no match up gets a -. Using an example. Clans A, B and C have 40 people. Clans A and B war, getting a +, and clan C gets a - for having no match up. Then say clans A (+), B (+) and C (-) have 40 people again. Clan C wars and goes to 0. Clan A wars and gets a 2+. Clan B doesn't war and goes to 0. Finally, the same clans A (2+), B (0) and C (0) have 40 people again. B and C war, and then all 3 clans have 1+, and so on. Then each clan had 2 matchs up out of 3. It would turn what's now random into something as fair as possible. To make it even better, the match up counter could appear on the clan's profile, so that everyone could control it.
@devs- whatever tweak you did to the bfa calculation. Plz tweak back Our sub clan warlor hellhounds got a no match 2x in row. And our war was 7lb against 1. I'll run along and apply my ointment now
@Kaw_admin. Can clans with "No Match" be matched anyway and given an option to leave war or stay and try to beat the odds. I think that would satisfy many people. Atleast we get some sort of cotrol. Our clan did had three "no match ups" in the row. We would have been ok fightng bigger clan but never had that option.
An opt to war for those clans who get no match seems fair enough ... If they want to play out a slaughter I see no reason not to let them kaw admin ... But the match ups u have let thru lately have been 100% better then in the last few week .. I think the matching system is working great ...
@kaw admin Quite a few people have been asking for a table showing clans numbers and strength who sign up to show what clans can do to get a matchup. Your response to why this won't work is that there will always be a natural no match because, if, as you said, there were 3 28's, the 3rd 28 would get a no match. You claim there is no way around this. The problem with that assumption is that clan owners can have more of their members opt in, or some leave clan to change their spot from 28 to 30 or 25, thus possibly giving them a matchup. In addition to that logic, if you still think there will be a natural no match, why not just put in the table anyway, to PROVE that there is a natural no match. That will only help your point, and satisfy the players who keep getting these no matches, while not being at ALL detrimental to you.
Blame the no matches on Station Hiney's bfa calc rant. Yup. That's why there are more no matches than ever.
Not sure if there's a perfect fix for the "No Match" scenario or not but just my 2 cents. There will always be the "odd clan out" situation but how about trying something like this. Adjust mithril payout based on variance in clan strengths. Allow clans to war with the possibility of being overmatched and reduce the payout to higher ranked clan proportionally. Now I'm not saying to match clans that far apart. I'm just throwing out ideas to reduce the amount of "NO MATCH" situations and maybe get more clans opting to participate. Something like this could be applied to all war scenarios with payouts adjusted due to advantage. Lets say Clan A has an winning advantage of 10% based on size, build or bfa over Clan B. If Clan A wins, payout is reduced by that percentage. If Clan B wins, payout is increased by same amount. Lots of players are wanting to war but its getting more challenging o avoid "NO MATCH". More clans are jockeying builds opting to try and balance. It's getting to difficult to keep members home or allowing everyone to war.