We used to be in a successful alliance, until our leader went MIA and no one else could start wars. We formed our own. We have a good group of active people, anywhere from level 60 to 197. We have three people in early-mid Global, and no one higher. We have several Industrial, Enlightenment, and Gunpowder, and a few way behind.
I attached our last 5 wars. We tend to get grouped up with alliances with a couple of Cold War players, and up to 10 Atomic players, both of which we have none of. These alliances also throw in ten level 10-20 players. Then we get curb stomped by their top 10, and our best manage to land 2-3 stars against their players who are nearly maxed Atomic and sometimes Cold War.
I have seen numerous complaints about matchmaking, and the "changes" that were supposed to positive only made r worse. Surely, with all the people involved in this game, someone can come up with a better way of matchmaking other than taking an average level and nothing more. Alliances like ours are penalized because we average level 135-140, and have only a few low level members. We are now forced to create second accounts or find several more low level members to drop our average. It's pitiful we are forced to sandbag just to find competitive matches.
I am on the verge of calling it quits, and I've played for years. My other top guys aren't enjoying us taking the 1/3 spots in each war and being matched up against guys 1-2 ages and 30-40 levels higher than us. They can roll us without tactics, and we have to load up four strong tactics just to have a reasonable shot. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. That is a really ridiculous model for a game that promotes a matchmaking system like this.
Nothing stops an Alliance from throwing in 10 level 200s and 10 level 10s, and destroying all opposition. Those level 10s don't have to show up, and the top half don't need tactics because they're grossly overpowered in comparison to opposition.
Why can you guys not add weight to ages? Why not avoid matching up Alliances whose top guys are Global against Alliances with Atomic+? How hard is that algorithm? At this point it's laziness. Matchup groups with multiple Atomic and Cold Wars against similar groups. Find a way to end this sandbagging because it's literally taking a game that I ranked far above similar competition down an unfavorable path, and it's not going to be easy to reverse it if it continues for much longer.
I attached our last 5 wars. We tend to get grouped up with alliances with a couple of Cold War players, and up to 10 Atomic players, both of which we have none of. These alliances also throw in ten level 10-20 players. Then we get curb stomped by their top 10, and our best manage to land 2-3 stars against their players who are nearly maxed Atomic and sometimes Cold War.
I have seen numerous complaints about matchmaking, and the "changes" that were supposed to positive only made r worse. Surely, with all the people involved in this game, someone can come up with a better way of matchmaking other than taking an average level and nothing more. Alliances like ours are penalized because we average level 135-140, and have only a few low level members. We are now forced to create second accounts or find several more low level members to drop our average. It's pitiful we are forced to sandbag just to find competitive matches.
I am on the verge of calling it quits, and I've played for years. My other top guys aren't enjoying us taking the 1/3 spots in each war and being matched up against guys 1-2 ages and 30-40 levels higher than us. They can roll us without tactics, and we have to load up four strong tactics just to have a reasonable shot. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. That is a really ridiculous model for a game that promotes a matchmaking system like this.
Nothing stops an Alliance from throwing in 10 level 200s and 10 level 10s, and destroying all opposition. Those level 10s don't have to show up, and the top half don't need tactics because they're grossly overpowered in comparison to opposition.
Why can you guys not add weight to ages? Why not avoid matching up Alliances whose top guys are Global against Alliances with Atomic+? How hard is that algorithm? At this point it's laziness. Matchup groups with multiple Atomic and Cold Wars against similar groups. Find a way to end this sandbagging because it's literally taking a game that I ranked far above similar competition down an unfavorable path, and it's not going to be easy to reverse it if it continues for much longer.
