“The Road to Better World War Matchmaking” aka Sandbagging!

[Sletteer1987]

Exactly there is no reason why a mainly all Global/IA team should matchup with a team that has less 1 global a few IA and rest EA and Down. But their are just some people that will say and do whatever to be up top. Yes we understand they have good players and teams but many other teams do too and are not sandbagging it. For a great example, I would like to shout out to Brasil Ronins who have NO low lvl players and are mainly or all Global and IA and are still 58 on the leaderboard. That takes real skill and dedication. There are others on the leaderboard like this but they are over sighted by the teams that are manipulating the system.

 

[Sletteer1987]

It is not needed at all their are Global and IA teams out there that are doing it right maybe these Sandbaggers need to work on recruitment and take a look at the real top Global/IA teams that are traversing the Leaderboards without doing this. I saw Brasil Ronins has been jumping up and they have no sandbag accounts and a full Global/IA team. As many of these Sandbaggers believe top alliances should be based on alliances which are based on high XP levels, they need to work on developing talent instead of finding loopholes. That is how 2.0 has been in the top since the beginning. We develop and work with all our members no matter what level they are. Yes stalemates are an issue but until Glory was founded many alliances were not making such a big deal about it. It is a great accomplishment as a high level Global team to be able to max stars and teams both teams should be rewarded for that.

 

[Brand Marrow]

good luck Sletteer1987 ! Keep us posted

 

[Vixen]

We are moving in the right direction.. Nexon is acknowledging an issue... lets keep the pressure on.. war balance.. sandbagging... stalemates.. they are all part of the same problem .. thanks everyone for their voices and efforts inc Nb4

 

[Green Master]

I would like to see that both attacks of each warrior count and each base must be attacked twice: In this case everybody would attack 2 equal strong positions and would be attacked by equal strong opponents. Now most people attack lower targets to get the easy 5 stars.
The problem of the sandy iron accounts would disappear very fast and stalemates decrease. Easy

 

[Max_imus]

Your last paragraph should be printed and posted in Nexon offices.

 

[Ekassor]

If this was Blizzard, its likely you wouldn't get a blue post about until the "fix" was coming out in the patch notes. I view the acknowledgement of the issue a good first step. Be patient.

 

[ccfoo]

Max_imus you do bring up valid points about offence outweighing defence. As much as we would like to push Nexon to correct this issue, it's going to take some time and honestly speaking, I can see some effort by them. University research with towers and mortars being easily accessible upgrades, the new SAM trap etc reduced the power of planes. Definitely more can be done, but hopefully it is not across the board as it mainly affects the global nations. It's still not easy for IA and below to attack up an age, that's why on the opposite spectrum others complain about sandbagging.

I'm happy that Nexon does recognise the problem of sandbagging, it's a first step. Hopefully they can do something to stalemates too. Some suggestions:
1. The fastest alliance to get full score wins.
2. Introduce a hardcore mode. Attacks deal 75% damage, Defence deals 125% damage. No coalitions, no mercs, and only limited to 3 tactics, 1 extra for Koreans.
3. Introduce death match, where everyone only gets 1 Attack.

2 and 3 earns more but also loses more glory.

 

[S_How]

If this was Blizzard, we likely wouldnt be having this discussion to begin with because they have such exhaustive testing and polished products. And, if there was a problem of this magnitude, say for example affecting any of their moba titles in multiplayer, I bet it would be solved in under a week.

Though, to your point I will try to be patient

 

[redprince]

I think you hit the nail on the head, in CoC getting 3 stars in wars is a tall task, especially against strong bases.

 

[Nakfarfar Titi]

You fix sandbagging before stalemates you will ban top alliances from top leaderboard and from having fun.

Some Alliances who are highly developed and already cracked and discovered every corner of strategy in this game and spend so much time and money not to play against 3-4 alliances forever get stuck in stalemates and not to be ranked below half IA or EA GP alliances. No matter how respected and fun these alliances are, the leaderboard wouldn't be fair, accurate and reflective about who is the best.

 

[redprince]

That's not true, Blizzard and basically all big game developers do the same. Internal or even beta testing is not the same as releasing to the masses. This is inevitable because you can never scale to this size group in testing.

 

[The Huns]

The talk about stalemates being the reason behind sandbagging doesn't ring true to me. I would rather have a stalemate where it took at least a little skill to 5 star all the opponents bases than an easy victory where I only had to release my troops and know that I would 5 star my enemy. But then again I'd rather have a challenge than rank high on the leaderboard.

 

[S_How]

I can only comment on my objective experience playing this game vs playing numerous blizzard games in years past. Blizzard games had many fewer bugs and exploits, and when something did happen the response was swift and effective, especially when it came to PvP and rankings.

Of course no one can scale testing to production levels, but surely you would agree that comparative time, effort and resources dedicated to these things have an effect on the outcome. This was my point.

 

[S_How]

The talk about stalemates being the reason behind sandbagging doesn't ring true to me. I would rather have a stalemate where it took at least a little skill to 5 star all the opponents bases than an easy victory where I only had to release my troops and know that I would 5 star my enemy. But then again I'd rather have a challenge than rank high on the leaderboard.

To the top 10-20 advancement alliances, stalemates are a much bigger problem than sandbagging. To the rest of alliances in the game, it is the opposite and sandbagging is by far a much worse problem. Both sides need to consider each other because both communities are needed for the game to stay stable. They need to solve both problems at once, its the only way. (for what its worth, I am not in a top 20 advancement alliance, and sandbagging impacts me 1,000x more than stalemates, but we need to see both sides)

 

[Glacier]

We want to encourage diverse alliances, not punish them in matchmaking

Hmm, lol acknowledged all right. Sounds like promoting of sandbagging to me.

I gotta ask: is there a translation problem going on here? I'm fluent english only, never even thought to learn the korean language. I have always noticed that the answers from tech or any Nexon person has always left me thinking: "are they beating around the bush or what?", cause I swore I gave all the details of issues incountered only to get very vague answers. Mind you I'm not the only one to have these impressions left by responses from Nexon.

Maybe it is just me, I'm a man of details so when I don't get that, I feel I've been "getting the run around".

 

[S_How]

No Title

For a visual representation of just how bad this problem is, I can show you our current matchup. We have faced stacking/sandbagging teams in about 18 of our last 24 match ups. This is what it looks like for those who haven't seen it much yet:

We are against VN elite. They have 18 max or near max globals and about 15 undeveloped iron-classical bases that are unplayed and will not make hits. They have 17 players stronger than our number 1 player. The mismatch gets worse the lower you go on the roster. This is when a game ceases to really have any purpose of playing. It would be as if in multiplayer you were only offered bases that were at least two ages more advanced than yours. No one would even bother. And this is what is happening in wars all the time every single day. And, this is why it cannot wait months to fix, it will be too late.

Here is the matchup, and for illustration what our number 14 sees(as a mostly EA player) in his equal on the opposing team, a lv198 near max everything.


**Edit: Grr, cant get the base pics to be a normal size. Anyway, 14 on our side is an EA average base, level 10 gens, etc. 14 on their side is a 198 near max everything, all gens >30, etc.

 

[GailWho]

See my post on Ideas and Feature Requests Section

https://forum.nexonm.com/forum/nexo...de-the-box-gail-s-answer-to-world-war-problem

 

[Sletteer1987]

Here is a short video with an example of how broken the system is. This was The Borg 2.0's first loss and it was against a Global/IA Sandbag alliance. Not the best video but an example none the less. https://youtu.be/LdKy8M0t9ws

 

[Quovatis]

Not to diminish the importance of addressing the issue, but I would like to point out that even before alliances started "sandbagging", the difference matchmaking was already huge. From experience, we had matchups with alliances where our top base was weaker than their 11th, and we've had matchups the other way around. The matching algorithm needs to be addressed as well.