Actually we a huge amount of complaints during Chaos Wars. We also explained how and why you could get ranked with a clan 8 ranks above you. There are a number of clans that have very close stats, within 15% of each other. So we might match clan 10 with clan 18 for example because clans 10 to 20 are all within a close stat range.
Everyone decided that gh/sh was the "solution" to get good matches, they've yet to comprehend that gh/sh is the problem and it has crippled ee. When ppl stop being sheep, trying to follow a trend and get back to warring actual clans, ee can progress.
@ kaw admin: you say it's acceptable to get matched with clans 8 ranks above us when you say they are 10%-15% apart? Firstly, that is a BIG difference, specially when bfa isnt weighted as heavily and acceptable for clans with 2 top 50 LB vs a clan with 1 top 200. We all know you dont weigh bfa as heavily so that 15% is actually a huge number. But now let's do some math and work this out mathematically: Let's assume I am clan A. And lets say we set clan A at 100% strength and we are at rank 8. And every clan above clan A will be 3%-5% stronger than the next. to keep it nice i'll use 3% So setting that up we will have: 8)clan A: 100 7)103 6)106.09 5)109.27 4)112.55 3)115.92 2)119.41 1)122.98 So by the time we get to 8 ranks above us we end up matching a clan 22.98% stronger than us. I know this is not the point of the thread, but since you replied to argue about it, might as well throw it our there. You need tot fix this mathing system or do something, and very soon.
btw, my example about clan A has nothing to do with the actual clan named clan A. That was just a name I used for arguments' sake
Bfa balance clearly is not in the algo which allows the LB to war - clear point....we r against 4 LBers to our 1.....they have more bfa in their top 2 LBers then in the whole of our clan. Kaw_community please explain this one - i challenge u. Looking fwd to the response. Rasher
If two clans are too far apart we wouldn't match them. I don't understand what you mean? Are you saying the current threshold for stat range is too wide?
Imo from experience. We, -Elysium-, are getting matched against SOTRA. Which is an unfair match. I think matches need to be revised to include both threshold and their build types.
I've had plenty of run ins with sotra from last season. We lost to them alot, however, I feel that, at least in that instance, every war was winnable. Those wars were fun. I have a lot of respect for that clan and would enjoy warring with them again. I thought their roster and war tactics were not exploitive.
We should probably not bag on individual clans in this thread, but, should, instead, post viable solutions to perceived issies. I found a fantastic thread yesterday that addressed some community issies. I'll see if I can find the link
Without being specific about individual clans, how would including build type work? Can you elaborate so I'm clear on what you mean?
You have not answered my question related to bfa and balance. And its not specific to one war but most wars every day. If you really considered bfa then u wouldnt match a clan where 2 peeps has more bfa then all other peeps in the opposing clan put together. Also i had GH hitting me due to huge bfa. Please explain how you can match such clans.
It's not exploitive in any sense. They have, in my opinion, a perfect roster. However looking at the match ups; the threshold was find, but the build types we're totally out of proportion (i.e. 2nd to smallest has max EE BFE) And I'm stating an instance to reference as an example for the developers to see. Small accounts with massive BFE/BFA bump the player up to the same size as a mid size player. After matching from the threshold, comparing the largest to the largest and smallest to the smallest may be effective on getting fairer matches. Just food for thought, not 100% sure it would work but something is better than nothing
The problem isnt the current threshold the problem is the way strength is measured. In the current system an individuals strength is measured (assumedly) to include the combination of their raw power and bonuses (i.e. cs x 50 + bfa + bfe + clan bonus % + pro pack bonus %). The problem with this is that its truly only measuring their strength at full troops/spies when the majority of a war is fought from well below this amount. This is causing clans that use experienced guild hansels for roster stacking to have an insurmountable advantage. Because at least 75% of the strength of many of these guild hansels comes from bfa/bfe, they have a higher average strength than would ordinarily be expected. Measuring strength by heavily weighting static power or by using an average strength measurement instead of a full strength measurement for clan comparisons will result in much more realistic and feasible matchups.
so long as there is an extreme advantage given to clans who can get high hit ratio, high static stats, amd low cs…roster stacking won't stop.