Estoc Trials - Week #2

Discussion in 'Past Events' started by admin, Dec 4, 2012.

  1. Looking at Rocket's post, perhaps we should have had the 53 and the 73 should have been matched up with our 78...I'm sure that Rocket's match up must have happened in the round of wars prior to ours.
     
  2. Thanks devs, matchup was totally unfair. We had at least 2 guys on us at once all because devs matched us up with a clan twice our size! amazing
     
  3. If this is your idea of "fair" I'd hate to see what you think unfair is! :lol:
     
  4. Matching stats combined of the whole clan isn't enough, 10 players with my stats can take down 5 players with twice my stats, plus scouting and assassin is easy for small players, and they can hit big stats as well, also I think spilt buildings have huge advantage in this war, they can pin someone just with assassin, attackers can't do that, so either there should be a command that allow troops to hit spies too, or spies cost for assassin should be raised so they cant assassin so often. We also had a member who casted veil of evasion included in our roster, he was a free plunder. And even if he gets his gold back his inclusion in the roster affected the whole clan
     
  5. Agreed. Its absolutely essential you pair guys up taking into consideration the number of people in each clan.

    Numbers negate strength and make it totally unfair, one sided and impossible to come out of pin as other team have time to regen.

    Ideally a league system would be the best idea (as has been said before).

    There are problems with it due to the changing of members but there is ways to make it work if you guys think :)

    Perhaps some sort of membership system where certain conditions have to be met, ie. Must have x members, be able to take part on x dates. Etc. Etc. You guys are the thinking apes! :-D
     
  6. I suspect the veil is screwed. We jus fin our war (se7en s1ns vs kip). We do hav more actives than opponent but why those on veil are open to hits and pay war tax!!? Likewise seems some of our members on veil ends up on the roster so they joined the war anyway.

    If the veil are indeed screwed, it shd explain y so many bad match up this week. The match only seems logical if u take compare the clan strength including both warring and non warring accs. Those on veil shd not be in the equation when arranging matchups.

    Even the 1st beta is better than this week blehh
     
  7. Do the losing side not get a small portion of Mith back, i'v got noting back from my wars.
    Didn't get the two Xstals from last weeks war either, did anyone get them and Mith back?
     
  8. Whatever change you devs did in matchmaking this week... it wasnt good lol also why Vail didnt work for some peeps both in our clan and others... hope you do as you did some time ago, give back estoc edge and a portion of mith...

    Is it really that hard to matchmake fair?
     
  9. Ok devs. Not sure what in The world you are thinking but out last 2 wars were 80 vs 38 and 82-37-and the one b4 that we were outnumbered by 20 but managed to pull it off.

    If you want to make stupid matchups then great-nobody will play-but unfortunately you've compounded a ridiculous mistake (matchups) by making new equipment enchantable and obtainable only through warring where matchups are stupid.

    So either fix the matchups for real-or do something about how equip is obtained and/or enchanted.

    If you go with the way you've Done matchups then the only way to make it fair is somehow give outnumbered teams the same amount of troops and spies as other team-which would mean in our case that we would have at least twice as many troops and spies per unload.

    The way it is now is simply absurd. Not even sure how you could take yourselves seriously with these matchups.

    Fix something.....so many places to start
     
  10. Totaly agree with hat and rig. Any size kingdom can be brought down when swarmmed by 5-6 people simply cause u r out numbered 3/1. These only seem to be trials for a select few and give aways for some. There has to be more balance between size and clan strength.
     
  11. Support last few posts!! It is clear that volume of troops needs to be a factor!! 2vs1 sucks with exactly 15 min regens!! Staggered regens might help some but never stand a chance 2v1!!
     
  12. Way too many crazy factors to these Ewars. Devs cannot make impossible things happen, they should scrap this idea. More n more clans opt out of this nonsense then theyll go away. Remember devs are NOT forcing clans to participate. There are still regular SWs, sure the payoff is lousy, but atleast warriors can war without having a desk-jockey background. Just my opinion
     
  13. Week #3 thread is locked ATM so I'm posting here.

    I think that the reward system is unfair as it is now. The unfair part is that which adds the pots you caused the enemy to spent to the reward pool. Most players (I guess) hit with full pots. Big builds do it even if they don't need it, because the cost is meaningless compared with they plunder. Small builds do it in order to have more chances to hit. But small builds don't receive as much attention from the enemy as the big ones (they are less dangerous). This causes big builds to be knocked out (or self KO) more often than smaller builds, which can scape the KO if their bigger clanmates help them. This way, smaller builds get more pots spent on them from the opponents than their bigger clanmates. Simply, because they spend less time knocked out.

    Instead of using pots on that part of the formula, it would be more fair to use the troops you caused the enemy to spend. Or even better, the number of troops multiplied by their stats.
     
  14. Agree Splatz.

    A couple more things for you to think about devs. Take a look at my build and others in my clan. We like to war-and we were fully behind EE when the concept came out. But MANY of us have spent a lot of real dollars on nobs rebuilding our builds to fit the war system. We have also spent lots of real money throughout our kaw life.

    But if this is what we can expect from you as far as creating matchups that are essentially slaughters from the start then we are on strike. We are too tightly knit of a clan to allow something like this to divide us. But I hope you can see how you flatly robbed us. Nothing against our opponents-we would have done the same thing-and they deserve their rewards. But at the same time you robbed us of arguably four levels of EE, countless billions in pots, mith, and most importantly you've robbed us of our time. What a waste of time that people have sacrificed.

    If you are at all thoughtful about what u should do in a situation like this, full restitution is the very least u owe each of our clan members-and others in similar situations.

    If not I believe you run a very real risk of losing A LOT of your income stream to those of us who provide you with a fairly stable revenue base.

    We look forward to your response.
     
  15. 100 % agree with Hatfield!!!!! You devs are being cheap in not fixing this, its shameful!!! I know I will not be spending a penny more on a game that doesn't support its players!! Do the right thing please devs I love the game, but am highly disappointed in ur actions as of late!!! You should stills be calling this a beta test with all these issues!!!!
     
  16. Clearly there is something wrong with matchups. A bad matchup is not fun for either side. Please fix this problem.
    Thanks.
     
  17. @Inglorious @Hatf1eld @ Kaw admin

    Devs, this weekends matchups were completely desastrous, and Inglorious and Hat, full support for your previous statements.

    Devs, let me start by saying that I fully support all your efforts to bring KaW back to a more warstyle game, however, these matchup issues are this big, they should be resolved before further enrolling it, PLS STALL AND IMPROVE FIRST WHAT ALREADY IS THERE !!!

    It must be hard to make proper matchups, but losing twice in a row being outnumbered over 2:1 has nothing to do with warskills, it's just heading towards the inevitable defeat, with consequences.

    Winning clans have won there mith by simply doing what they had to do, but should losing clans due to absurd matchups lose both EE and both mith and pots invested due to a mismatch they are not responsible for ??

    I think you should determine criteria and draw a line somewhere to reimburse the victims of this system. All mith earned in inevitable wins are Red Paladin presents in fact !

    I think for matchups based on combined CS and with a max difference in numbers of 20%, relatively fair matchups can be made.

    Pls exclude all peeps that have cast their veils from the final matchups, it's not about comparing clanstrenght, it's about comparing warroster strenght. If matchups take 15 min longer, then pls let it take 15 min longer !

    Since matchups are so hard, you can either make your anticipated improvements all alone, but why not explain to all KaW players how your algoritm on that one works. The KaWmunity has more than enough bright lights to help solve these issues with you. Sharing info and filtering good response might solve these issues way faster for the benefit of everybody !

    We can have many discussions about camping , but that is only fighting consequences, instead of tackling the issue by the source, perfecting matchups. There is a difference between camping due to warskills, and camping due to mismatches !!

    I honestly hope to get response soon, and most of the current feedback will be adopted in a more honest system of Estoc Trials very soon 
     
  18. Way to go Devs seems to me your leveling the playing field yet again...I'm having fun
     
  19. Seems like the thing a lot of you are asking for is some sort of Pwar. There are only so many clans in Kaw that are participating. It is very likely that it's hard to find just the perfect target for every clan to whack.

    If veils truly did not work for someone that is one thing. But from what i now understand from those that it failed for today, the time on the veil expired prior to war ending, and in those cases the players that had it timed in such a manner were automatically active at start. Nothing wrong with that, particularly since that would be exploited if it wasnt so.

    My own clan had a rough opponent slightly missmatched, but that's a chance. eg 35 against 50 isnt that way off. And it has gotten progressively better. There is only a small chance of it being a perfect match unless devs put in a minimum and a mximum participant barrier. And even then one side is going to lose and be unhappy. Some comments..eg Hermagesty, seem very much like a request for pwar even if not explicitly worded, we already have ebs and some of them give equip, we dont need pwars back just because their now is equip that requires an actual effort to attain.

    Anyway, warsystem still has flaws, but unless we want a system where it is basically a turtle war from start to finish, then it is going to have wildcard element to it like the occasional missmatch of opponents.

    @Hatfield. if you had estoc lvl4 then in atleast 4 wars you got a decent matchup, likely one to easy somewhere in there. My own clan had 2 good matchups and one that was less fortunate. It is inevitable that such a thing happens, alternatively, you will get week after week of canceled wars because the system cant find perfect matchups for registered clans. That would be as damaging to those clans as losing a war is now.
     
  20. Oh and anyone that has ever tried to set up an old SW knows that finding the right opponent is damn near impossible, not sure why anyone expects a cpu or whatever it is that calculates this to do a better job.