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

[Bobortvogel]

Yes, some improvements are needed. As in our current war, I don't see how 19 of 20 nations can be more advanced including all 7 on top by a significant amount and it still be a fair fight.

 

[Nb4powerup]

I don't have an update at the moment. This is an issue that will take some time.

 

[S_How]

Nothing to share after 2 weeks from this post is kinda disappointing. I know you can't control it, but would be nice to know if the next update was planned to help the problem, or if there were other things planned. What is a reasonable expectation for us to have as it relates to timelines?

 

[jmemira]

lmao "suckability" i love it

 

[jmemira]

I think a huge problem about rewarding the teams who are fastest in battles is that it doesn't take into account the fact that a lot of teams are either international or are battling against teams in different timezones, plus not everyone has the ability to attack right when war starts, even though they might be strongest. All our schedules are different and a lot of the time we see the most stars put up at unusual times depending on the countries/schedules of our attackers in the war. I agree with s_how that both need to be addressed at the same time, or teams will just want to go for the easy win. Only the top teams see stalemates impacting their glory on a consistent basis.

 

[jmemira]

"Statistically super uncommon" but our (not top 20) alliance has had 2/10 of our last wars end in stalemate and it was higher before some recent matchups, if we are facing this at our level I can't imagine what higher ranked alliances are facing.

 

[Riesch]

We have had 7 sandbagged opponents in a row. Before that we were on a winning streak. Waiting for "the next few months" for a perhaps and maybe satisfying solution is too frustrating. Nexon should be able to do better than that.

 

[Riesch]

Well said. Both should be considered. Not in the next few months but asap though. People are game in my alliance. Much repulsion against using sandbags ourselves, but we will break within the next few weeks.

 

[poop_]

There was too much to read here, so I didn't read it all, so I am probably repeating someone. Apologies in advance.

Within any system, there will always be people trying to find a shortcut so they can get ahead.

I have said this before, but you cannot claim that putting in multiple iron age accounts into your war line up is the only way you can deal with stalemates. Give me an f-ing break! This may make you feel good about yourself, but really, you are abusing the system.

Your other option would be to recruit real players who are lower levels. You could develop ea or even gp players, so we would all have more skilled players in the game. But, that wouldn't give you a big enough advantage, would it? As you stackers know, adding a few iron age accounts skews your war weight so much, that you get matched with Alliances that you have no right warring and definitely no right claiming a victory over. Would fighting 10 year olds in real life make you feel good about yourself?

Or, you could try working on your defense. I know this is harder without war replays, but I think we have a long way to go for developing good defensive bases.

Now, our alliance has been matched up against stackers in the past. 3 of our 4 loses were to stackers (props to Vikings for not stacking) It sucks to be matched with cheaters, but instead of joining them and being part of the problem, our alliance has just worked to be that much better. Because if you stack, it's kind of embarrassing to lose to someone who isn't.

I support the H2H idea, but that seems like a lot more work to do every war. Wouldn't it be more fun to infiltrate and fill their warbases with raiders? Even if we suggest this as a plot, they would be suspicious of every new join. Seems appropriate counter action to their stacking. I know there are plenty of trolls out there who might have a lot of fun doing this. And, I've got a ton of extra food to contribute to the cause!

It is "just a game" right? Let's have fun with it! Sabotage!

 

[Phil-Elite]

Empty vessels make most noise.

Interesting reading, five pages of people with largely little knowledge of the workings of the top 20 teams. Many of the top 20 today were in the top 20 in the old medal system. There is a reason for that, they know how to fight. It's no use Hobbit Zombies complaining about sandbagging when out of their top 10 only 2 players scored double 5* in a recent war against very weak opponents. Just looking at their chat forum highlights a significant absence of time and effort invested in running wars, battle tactics, and weapons operability. Compare this with the battle academies of teams like UA, USAE, First Dynasty, Elite Response, and the gap is huge. Much of that expertise has been constructed from top players who have worked consistently hard on researching methods for their comrades over the last 2 years.

The fact remains that a common theme runs in the management of most of the top alliances - command, communication, control and power. Outside of those factors players can moan all they like but the game boils down to winning. Teams that consistently perfect their scores with their top players all in double 5's wins are coordinated by top generals and excellent planning. Yes stalemates frustrate, especially if resolved on 0.01% error or similar in damage calculation. But the top teams move on, they don't fight only on Tuesdays and Saturdays, they fight everyday rolling constantly. This kind of effort separates the more 'professional' alliances from those who pretend to play for fun and joy. Well it's just a game say the back pack - NO ITS NOT - and certainly not to players who perfect their protocols for war.

This doesn't mean there aren't problems in the game. Players at the top have long been concerned about issues since the game started and have often had their input taken on board by Nexon. However, they have also been ignored by Nexon like for example when they led a players protest; and where was the back pack then to support them? Everyone is in much the same boat in this game but what separates them is the ability to fight. I would suggest some of you improve your fighting ability and earn the glory moan.

 

[Warlord1981]

Empty vessels make most noise.

Interesting reading, five pages of people with largely little knowledge of the workings of the top 20 teams. Many of the top 20 today were in the top 20 in the old medal system. There is a reason for that, they know how to fight. It's no use Hobbit Zombies complaining about sandbagging when out of their top 10 only 2 players scored double 5* in a recent war against very weak opponents. Just looking at their chat forum highlights a significant absence of time and effort invested in running wars, battle tactics, and weapons operability. Compare this with the battle academies of teams like UA, USAE, First Dynasty, Elite Response, and the gap is huge. Much of that expertise has been constructed from top players who have worked consistently hard on researching methods for their comrades over the last 2 years.

The fact remains that a common theme runs in the management of most of the top alliances - command, communication, control and power. Outside of those factors players can moan all they like but the game boils down to winning. Teams that consistently perfect their scores with their top players all in double 5's wins are coordinated by top generals and excellent planning. Yes stalemates frustrate, especially if resolved on 0.01% error or similar in damage calculation. But the top teams move on, they don't fight only on Tuesdays and Saturdays, they fight everyday rolling constantly. This kind of effort separates the more 'professional' alliances from those who pretend to play for fun and joy. Well it's just a game say the back pack - NO ITS NOT - and certainly not to players who perfect their protocols for war.

This doesn't mean there aren't problems in the game. Players at the top have long been concerned about issues since the game started and have often had their input taken on board by Nexon. However, they have also been ignored by Nexon like for example when they led a players protest; and where was the back pack then to support them? Everyone is in much the same boat in this game but what separates them is the ability to fight. I would suggest some of you improve your fighting ability and earn the glory moan.

I want to say that of all the different statements of I heard that were not directly against stacking, I respect yours the most. You have broken the entire argument down to its most basic form; stackers are winning and everyone else struggles to keep up.

I agree that even when using tactics that some are not a fan of, an alliance must still have an incredible leadership and be incredibly precise and coordinated. However your implying that the other alliances are not so disciplined and do not have a strong leadership core.

I must point out that it's easy to appear calm, collected, and superior when you are winning all the time. Your decisions aren't countered because they are winning.

Try doing that after 3 losses in a row, or4 losses, to alliances that didn't even have there bottom 10 attack, and their middle 10 were stronger than your top 10 and their top 10 made your best base look like a brand new Bronze Age Base.

True leaders can keep their people together and coordinated even under the worst conditions. While the alliances you named in the top of the Leaderboard may have all the qualities you mentioned, I'll point out that they chose to avoid alliances that were their equal by padding their numbers. The leaders of those alliances succumbed to the pressure of facing equal odds and chose instead, the path of least resistance.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not judging or even saying that their choice was wrong. I'll simply point out that the alliances you mentioned as whiners did not succumb to that pressure and have instead stood fast to their desire to lose to the best, not beat the easiest.

 

[poop_]

Hmm. Do you know the workings of all the alliances making these comments? You visited them? Joined their outside app? Participated in a war? They must be crap because they aren't you, right?
We can beat any alliance that is evenly matched with us. I have complete trust in my team. We have worked hard on our offense and defense, and we know how to work together.
In fact, because of stacking, we have been working to even beat sandbagged alliances. Not that we can beat them all (we are still working on that; you guys are good at cheating).
Is it possible the top alliances who before attacked for medals were not ready for a new system? Instead of learning the new strategy or thinking of a more honest, fair way, they decided to take a shortcut?
I don't care that you think you are better than everyone else. I don't think that stacking is fair or honest, and it definitely does not encourage alliances of players that are still learning to join wars. It doesn't even encourage decent alliances to join wars. Why would you pick a fight with someone who has 100 lbs on you?
There is some expression that is on the tip of my tongue right now... something about candy... and babies...
Sandbaggers are cheaters and bullies.
If you claim you only do it because others do:
-First, that's a dumb reason.
-Second, I would expect when you face a non sandbagged alliance that depending how uneven it is, a certain number of your top players don't attack. Otherwise, you are contributing to the problem.

We all have a choice here. The game does not force us to sandbag. That is an absurd argument.

 

[poop_]

No, I wouldn't think you would do that... because gp, ea, and ia players wouldn't skew it as much for you. You'll just include iron agers level 9 so you can get easier opponents. Because that will make you feel like the best! I can beat up children! I must be awesome!

Do you see how that doesn't line up?

I will say outright, I don't mean to be rude, but I dislike people like you. You can go stroke your ego elsewhere.

 

[Christopher-Outlaws!!]

That must hold some validity. I'm sure I know nothing of the math or the community for that matter. There's a specific reason most top alliances don't comment on it, it's because there's an understanding that it's destroying a community, and more importantly, it's a problem that Nexon itself is addressing.

Your logical falacy is. complimented with godwins law and I think we're done regarding the blanket statement regarding a large group can't be wrong. but to continue, that's certainly not the voice of the top alliances stipulating what makes a "top alliance", moreover this attitude is not theirs, it's yours. You should own it. and I'm pretty sure it is a game... I didn't find it under productivity apps?

Yes there are problems in the game, but exploiting them at the expence of others is your problem, not the games. It speaks to your character sir. And the defense therein speaks volumes. And as poop and others have stated, it's the ability to manipulate the system that is the separation, making a valid decision between adding and supporting a community vs. taking advantage of a broken system in order to classify yourself as "good".

I'm sorry that you don't feel you can compete. It's quite sad really. However, short this failure I will as I have before offer a hand to line up in a valid matchup and I'm sure as in the past we would do our best to put you in the right place. we've got 24 Alliances over here dying to test you.

 

[Max_imus]

You are the biggest shame of your alliance. 1st Dynasty is a group of good people but you respresent them in the worst light possible.

 

[Max_imus]

Empty vessels make most noise.

Interesting reading, five pages of people with largely little knowledge of the workings of the top 20 teams. Many of the top 20 today were in the top 20 in the old medal system. There is a reason for that, they know how to fight. It's no use Hobbit Zombies complaining about sandbagging when out of their top 10 only 2 players scored double 5* in a recent war against very weak opponents. Just looking at their chat forum highlights a significant absence of time and effort invested in running wars, battle tactics, and weapons operability. Compare this with the battle academies of teams like UA, USAE, First Dynasty, Elite Response, and the gap is huge. Much of that expertise has been constructed from top players who have worked consistently hard on researching methods for their comrades over the last 2 years.

The fact remains that a common theme runs in the management of most of the top alliances - command, communication, control and power. Outside of those factors players can moan all they like but the game boils down to winning. Teams that consistently perfect their scores with their top players all in double 5's wins are coordinated by top generals and excellent planning. Yes stalemates frustrate, especially if resolved on 0.01% error or similar in damage calculation. But the top teams move on, they don't fight only on Tuesdays and Saturdays, they fight everyday rolling constantly. This kind of effort separates the more 'professional' alliances from those who pretend to play for fun and joy. Well it's just a game say the back pack - NO ITS NOT - and certainly not to players who perfect their protocols for war.

This doesn't mean there aren't problems in the game. Players at the top have long been concerned about issues since the game started and have often had their input taken on board by Nexon. However, they have also been ignored by Nexon like for example when they led a players protest; and where was the back pack then to support them? Everyone is in much the same boat in this game but what separates them is the ability to fight. I would suggest some of you improve your fighting ability and earn the glory moan.

Stop all this bs of "not a top alliance" for god sake. I can offer your alliance a H2H matchup in 30,35,40 people, its your call. I bet you are so eager to prove how not top ProdigalThieves is! Write me here your avarage lvl (in 30,35,40 whatever) and start time and we can do it tomorrow or the day after that. Simple as that.
Lets see who is top and who is not brother.

 

[Nakfarfar Titi]

Max_imus For gods sake, I represent no one. There are other people with the alliance pictures, logos and mottos that represent it. Stop pulling this stupid card on me.
And spare me your emotions, everyone touchy here! It's my bad I assumed we all are big boys and we can handle some banter.
Anyway these are facts based on experience and observation. No insults, no belittling, no ego. Nothing wrong with stating facts no matter what they are and nothing wrong with the gaps! Everyone and everything grows..

 

[Max_imus]

Those are facts, I agree. But the stance on this issue (I mean in the moral way and understanding what it does to the game) is very wrong.

As for the first point. People dont care about freakin logos and motto. I know people who would probably consider joining 1stD if there was no bending rules issue and mainly people like You. So yeah. You play a huge role because since this is public forum.

And just and advice to the future. Its better to admit yourself your ego...you will not live in self-delusion.

 

[Nakfarfar Titi]

Well Max_imus honestly speaking I thought there's still some people here that can handle a little banter and reply back without getting touchy and personal. It seemed to me that you are one of them.
Basically because that's what I'm used to do in life with an open heart and a smile on my face. Here it seems everyone is insecure and turns everything to bad vibes.

Obviously I was wrong. Made a mistake by thinking this way... Many mentalities, many opinions, many egos..

 

[KingRichard71]

Personally, I see Phil-elite point!!! It takes a certain amount of dedication to stay up 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week, planning and plotting war strategies on a free to play game, to improve your alliance and be the best of the best. And when that fails, and you feel inferior, u just add a few iron/classic age bases to your alliance, get easier matchups, and you feel superior again. AWESOME PLANNING!!!!! To bad you didn't come up with that strategy on your own.