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

[S_How]

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.

Although you bring up some valid points, it's ultimately a perfect example of elitist ignorance that would be damaging for the game if those running it were to accept or think like this.

I dont know anything about Hobbit Zombies, other than they have some nice folks on the forums and are a fairly active alliance that probably is much like mine, somewhere inbetween your "not for fun, only winning pros" and the " just for fun back pack" (haha love that term for the 95% of active alliances not in the top 20). The fact of the matter is that both demographics need to be taken care of. Not once in any of these threads have people stated alliances like 1D, UA, USAE, KA, etc dont deserve to be the top war alliances. Most alliances not in the top 20 have equally as much fun trying to make the top 100 leaderboards, or even just winning a fairly matched war. And because they dont perfect every opponent, or arent as "good" as you doesnt mean they should be subject to a terrible game experience.

But, the ignorance part comes from the lack of your being able to recognize just how bad the sandbagging problem is. The top advancement alliances face zero risk of going into war facing a team that the top half averages two ages above their opponent. If you had to face a team of 20 space age max bases, and 20 iron age bases, with your global average - you would have no chance, any sort of strategy or ability is simply thrown out the window. And, if it happened war after war after war, Im pretty sure you would take your professionalism to another game. I know the space age example sounds silly, but that is exactly what the teams in the EA/IA/Early global average alliances are experiencing over and over again in war.

Top advancement teams deserve to shine, at least the very well coordinated and experienced ones. You are absolutely right that there is a difference in how the teams are organized and run, and that effort deserves to be rewarded. But, the best rewards should not come at the expense of ruining the rest of the community. Right now, the best rewards for any team, good or bad, come from manipulating war matchmaking equations at the expense of others. And for every 1st Dynasty (just randomly picking a good team, not singling them out), there are 20 Hobbit Zombie teams. The importance of the "back pack" is at least equal, if not more, than the top 20 teams. Both need each other to survive, and both should be very interested in seeing both sandbagging, and the factors encouraging it (stalemates, lack of defensive balancing, terribly flawed glory point award calculations, war matchmaking times, etc) fixed. Otherwise, the game dies for both.

 

[S_How]

Oh, and by the way Nexon, its been over 3 weeks since this post. How about an update? Surely there must be a more concrete plan to help your community by now, right?

 

[Max_imus]

Long posts, but worth of reading. Spot on.

 

[Nb4powerup]

Hi! I do not have a status update at the moment but I'll check into this further.

 

[Old Farmer Bob]

Nice post from Phil-Elite about Hobbit Zombies. To put in context Phil spent only a couple of hours in our alliance. Did not war with us. Was not given access to the parts of our our Ryver site where we discuss war tactics. We don't allow this for new members until it is established they do not have their heads up their own fundaments. Phil's post nicely evidences the wisdom of this. We don't claim to be the most professional of alliances but we do claim to have the best balance between fun and war. We are also honest! Btw Phil as a matter of fact to pick you up on one more point actually it is a game You have a nice day now

 

[BruceWayne]

Spot on Buddy, as always enough said really!!

 

[BruceWayne]

great post however you are and from,

 

[S_How]

Thanks NB4, I look forward to hearing timelines/actions. Would go a long way!

 

[Phil-Elite]

Empty vessels and even more noise.

I half expected a coherent response from at least one of you guys, but all of you to post mediocre moaning is a tad disappointing. Although in several cases perhaps not understanding the content I assume comes down to genuine language issues.

Just to clarify: I don't play 24/7, buy dirty crowns, support sand-bagging, endorse multiple identities, encourage spying, or kick players (unless racist or abusive). Yes, I have been deeply involved in many of the top 20 alliances. I know several of their academies and have been schooled by 4 of the top war fighters (who at this stage shall remain nameless). Yes I can tell the difference between top fighting teams and poor fighters. The language players adopt identifies them between the good and the bad - if that renders me elitist so be it; but I have also trained a lot of top players in return,which is also part of the game. I have also travelled a lot and helped several teams reach the top and can tell the difference between top and average alliances.

When I wrote this not a game I meant it. Having long been a war-gamer with miniatures, boards and computers, I can assure you all this is not a game. Last night, 12 guys in a London pub fought a wargame re-enacting the battle of Hastings in 1066. There were rules, guidelines and dice. Almost certain victory was stolen by an unexpected suicide charge by a regiment of axemen. There was no money differentiating the players of either side, no one was armed with tanks or aeroplanes, and no Glory points were applied to the winning side. Everyone shook hands and had a beer discussin the game - that's a game.

Dominations is more than a game, whether to the people who spend thousands, those who play every moment of their waking hours, or those who are would be paper dictators and plastic emperors. What separates players is the ability to win wars and fight battles. Many of those without money have perfected their skills to win fights, and many of those players have gravitated to the top 20. The leagues have issues, many old top 20's under the medal system have disappeared, and the present league is in a state of flux. However, I guarantee all the changes you demand in sandbagging and everything else is never going to reverse your positions. If you guys were going to be on top it would have happened in the first month of Glory when the league was in flux.

Dominations is a relentless brutal battle without mercy, and all you guys play in the same environment and community as me. For all your 'fairness' I bet none of you think twice before looting a weaker player for their oil or other goodies. This game is dog eat dog, get real and learn how to fight. Get off your self righteous soap boxes because you ain't convincing anybody, least of all those who know how to fight.

 

[Brand Marrow]

I have only one response to this trolling comment from @Phil-Elite...get a life, dominations is a game....its a phone app, its a free phone app, for f sake!. Your superiority in this game translates into nothing in real life....I recommend you seek counseling.

 

[GailWho]

Thank you S_How for an excellent post.

 

[BruceWayne]

Phil-Elite, elite at what exactly talking ***t? You never spent enough time at our Ali to form an opinion never mind give it. You play your game your way, we will play it our simple really. As for the drivel about you building other alliances so what? do you want a blue peter badge or something? I'm really not sure what that has to do with anything I couldn't care how superior you think you are, we have been an established team for long enough, we have a solid core and that's all that matters. Glory is a broken system I don't moan about it, you can search for any of my posts if you don't believe me, but people like you that spout p**h after a visit to a team for a day are just a joke. I think we were quite welcoming shame you felt differently. Hope we meet at some point in the battlefield, I actually like taking out bigger bases, so contrary to your take on preying on the weak, you'd be right up my street. Don't expect a reply anytime soon, I very rarely post here, but make an exception for Clowns like you.

 

[KingRichard71]

Ok.... well then. First, I think it is you Phil, who do not understand what everyone is tired of. Anyone of the people in here complaining about sandbaggers who probably be in the top 20 if they decided to stoop to their level and load their wars with a bunch of fake, low level accounts, to work the matchups in their favor.

Most of the top alliances may know how to strategize and plan their attacks well. They may even run a finely tuned alliance, but again most, but not all, have resorted to sandbagging to get an edge. THIS IS WHERE THE COMPLAINTS COME IN!!!!. If these leaders were soooo good at their post, they wouldn't have to resort to this tactice.

I believe that if you have to cheat/ sandbag to get to the top 20, you really didn't accomplish anything.

 

[Old Farmer Bob]

I really don't know why I am bothering to respond but I am just slightly gob smacked. 'Genuine language issues' Phil-Elite The siege of Aleppo is 'a relentless brutal battle without mercy' tapping on a phone or tablet isn't. I enjoy the game. I enjoy chatting to my alliance buddies about all sorts of things. Sometimes I even enjoy chatting here. I am just relieved that most posters on this thread have this game in context and can take it for what it is. A fun game that requires some but ultimately limited amounts of skill and as much or as little time or money as you care to put in

 

[poop_]

elitist phil-
"It's just a game" means different things to different people, and fighting over semantics is silly. Some see the game as something they play while they take a sh*t, and others spend a bit more time and effort because they enjoy the challenge it takes to win or be the "best." It's just how much people value it compared to other recreational activities in their life. Whatever way people decide to play, all sets of people should be welcome. The more people participating in the game, the better, right? Can you agree on that at least?

Here is the problem right now for many alliances: you keep winning little bits of glory at a time, you get on the glory board, you then get matched with a sandbagger, you lose a sh*t ton of glory in 1 war, you fall off the board. Repeat.
And, I am guessing for other alliances it is even worse and they get matched with sandbaggers often with not chance of gaining much glory.

I don't agree with the choice, but now, more alliances are choosing to sandbag as a way of preventing being sandbagged, which continues the downward spiral.

I am glad lying to yourself makes you feel good, but you are being a bully and hurting the enjoyment of the game for everyone else.

Btw, I don't come from the gaming community. I have terrible gamer language, so you can judge me as dumb or unskilled, but I run a damn fine alliance and have brought people into the game and turned them into damn fine attackers. (I won't take full credit, it was a team effort.)

I know there are a ton of alliances like mine who advance the game by increasing involvement and enjoyment as opposed to your method, which clearly has the opposite effect.

So, my question for you: why do you choose to ruin the game for everyone else? (hint: it might be something to do with a cell or a fish.... I can't quite think of the word.)

 

[jmemira]

this is a perfect summary of the issues teams are facing in war that need to be addressed to make WW viable again, great post.

 

[jmemira]

i feel like... you just described... a game...? that's exactly what a game is dude.

 

[Phil-Elite]

Those empty vessels again.

Threats, trolling and people who can't read. Do you really think I care if you win one battle, one war, or even a whole campaign against me. LMAO that is so funny to the point of side splitting. Your collective criticism is like being wrestled by a dead sheep - and even less eloquent. Guys, try reading what I have written and stop banging the drums of your little agendas.

You may attract a bit of attention from Nexon but they and we know what turns the dime - power/aggression, the kudos of fighting, and winning wars. They get the dime for piling on the means of destruction - we get the pleasure from crushing opponents. I notice none of you lot want a Prisoner of War function or come to that a peace movement. I saw the elation of victory and deflation of defeat in all of your teams and especially the noisiest vessel of them all. Play the hypocrisy cards as far as you can but in the end when you get trashed for weak tactics and poor planning that's down to you. Don't go running to Nexon or YouTube when you get slapped by a third rate crew screaming at sandbags - that's down to you.

I don't set our wars but if we do meet in future war I look forward to receiving your collective wrath - shaking in my boots at the prospect, LOL!!

 

[Phil-Elite]

Truth hurts hey, old Batty boy and your starred out rude words!!! The caped crusader from the team that can't reach more than 2 double 5's in their top 10 against a third rate outfit. You spent most of time chatting about going on to YouTube and complaining about Sandbaggers and Nexon rather than understanding why you lost. Anytime on the war front old boy, whatever helps you throw those toys of yours out of your pram.

Ps. Just a heads up - stick to to rarely posting here, you have little flair, and rude words are a tad passé.

 

[Chadwicke]

Seriously , trying to say stacking makes you better at war well I bet it does when your mirror is 30 levels below you , your a extreme competitor for sure , like being an all america linebacker in division 1 playing with pop Warner and celebrating touchdowns , let all of know when you take the training wheels off and any of the non stacking alliances will bury you ,your glory will he back to 12000 the day you decide to face each and everyone of us , we here waiting..... Crickets......

You just said you play the system to win ,yet your top alliances "adapted" we adapt this grow up become a power alliance and fail when you match a equal level opponent as your mirror , got to be a bit rusty as a 198 plowing down 150s every war I thought I had read some dence responses here but those few take the cake . When your ready to make your alliance with a 80 as the minimum call me ASAP of anyone I know we we gladly help you it will take some time but I'm sure you will figure out how to war eventually. Good luck ,I would say see you soon but competition isn't your style