New Matchmaking and Glory Observations

Obamanation

Approved user
Joined
Feb 26, 2017
Messages
10
I don't give a rat's as about glory points, it was another worthless "improvement" to the game that took away enjoyment from casual alliances that played for fun. Now, all my alliance seems to play anymore are sandbagging alliances that pay to win, although that's not really necessary since lately our topped rank guys ( 3 industrial ) seem to face atomic aged opponents. Domination is very, very close to jumping the shark, unless the greedy game makers do an emergency patch to fix this mess I see people dropping out in droves.
 

Empire

Approved user
Joined
May 28, 2015
Messages
1,000
I don't care about glory either. But its no fun to lose wars to these sandbaggers and people who fill their strongholds with overpowered Elephant Archers, which btw Nexon is selling. Matchmaking is completely messed up and all alliances are facing the brunt of it.
 

S_How

Approved user
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
688
After a few weeks of having fewer sandbaggers, we're facing them frequently again. Bringing undeveloped accounts to war in order to manipulate your competition strength remains more rewarding than almost any other strategy in almost any situation. Unbelievable that its gone on for a year now.....when they could have so easily just taken out the bottom 25% of war rosters for the matching calculation.
 

KniferX

Approved user
Joined
Sep 22, 2016
Messages
186
The solution is not that simple..
You make the bottom 25% of the team not count, then they'll sandbag with 40% bottom. If you make 40% bottom not count, then teams will put as much high levels into that 40% which will make mixed teams with higher and lower age players get unfair matches.
The problem stems from the 2 attacks system and favoritizing of offense, which makes it viable to have up to half of the team being low dummies for pulling down war rank.
 

Vixen

Approved user
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Messages
843
40% sandbagging... they will lose! Plus they will lose team members because no-one enjoys hitting bags
 

S_How

Approved user
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
688
This is not accurate Knifer. There is already an effective penalty in place for sandbagging above 25% or so. We've seen it numerous times, the glory you can win was next to nothing, its why teams stopped doing this and moved to the sweet spot of 10-25% sandbags, where the impact on matchmaking is game breaking and the glory penalty is negligible. On top of this, even if a team tried to sandbag above this threshold, their returns would be massively diminished, a 40% sandbag in this scenario would still be significantly less impactful than the 20-25% sandbags we see today.

The solution really is this simple....
 
Last edited:

KniferX

Approved user
Joined
Sep 22, 2016
Messages
186
So? Some teams won't give a damn about glory but just to mess with the matchmaking system.
And with 25% bottom not counting, you'll make new low age players absolutely undesirable in any established alliance.
The only simple thing this will create is more problems.
 

Pepyto

Approved user
Joined
Sep 18, 2017
Messages
182
We can ask Nexon to make some kind of War League, with limitation of maximum number of players from every age per war? For example: max 4 atomic or less, max 4 global or less, max 7 industrial or less, and so on in war participants... of course thay can keep random wars as well... In that case, there is no way we face much stronger opponent .
​​​​only one problem with this idea is how to make war schedule?
 
Last edited:

yemen

Approved user
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
680
If Nexon set this up, everyone interested could jump in during a day or two, and they would start all wars at the same time. That would give them a large pool to match from, and it would give us predictability on start times. With 24 hour planning and war days, the exact start time doesn't matter too much.
 

Empire

Approved user
Joined
May 28, 2015
Messages
1,000
Our current war at Dominion Elite vs. blatant sandbaggers

지원전문길드

1 - AT Level 238 (매맞는남편)
2 - AT Level 234 (초록물고기)
3 - AT Level 222 (Lee)
4 - AT Level 211 (호바라기)
5 - AT Level 189 (eonho)
6 - GL Level 212 (몽접주인)
7 - AT Level 213 (티아라)
8 - AT Level 206 (함재현)
9 - AT Level 206 (김보영자)
10 - AT Level 210 (살려는드릴께)
11 - AT Level 198 (디에치초이)
12 - AT Level 208 (잉여킹)
13 - GL Level 194 (이해원)
14 - AT Level 185 (마리아)
15 - AT Level 169 (Dana andy)
16 - GL Level 177(Thomas)
17 - IA Level 137 (설렘이)
18 - GL Level 155 (BlackPink)
19 - IA Level 159 (manjoo)
20 - IA Level 93 (쿠쿠리스)
21 - GP Level 56 (군주르)
22 - Ir. A Level 12 (도민희)
23 - Ir. A Level 14 (김군주)
24 - Ir. A Level 8 (워민희)
25 - Ir. A Level 10 (고봉순)

Dominion Elite

1 - AT Level 208 (lord ikram)
2 - AT Level 203 (G0d 0f W!ll)
3 - AT Level 203 (Empire)
4 - GL Level 184 (ScubaSteve)
5 - AT Level 197 (Al the Great)
6 - AT Level 189 (Adrift)
7 - GL Level 182 (Wild Weasel)
8 - AT Level 186 (Milion)
9 - AT Level 159 (Stormcrow)
10 - IA Level 164 (Thunder)
11 - IA Level 176 (Kaz)
12 - AT Level 182 (Sandra)
13 - AT Level 154 (CrazeeDino)
14 - GL Level 145 (Cool Angot)
15 - AT Level 157 (Munchma Quchi)
16 - AT Level 170 (The Conquerer)
17 - IA Level 138 (Nick)
18 - EA Level 135 (ADI)
19 - EA Level 140 (The Conquerer)
20 - GL Level 149 (Lightning)
21 - EA Level 107 (Empire III)
22 - GP Level 93 (Damonsen)
23 - MA Level 74 (Raphael_PeeWee)
24 - GP Level 61 (Criss)
25 - MA Level 50 (Darebear)

We have fought sandbaggers and won. But these guys are way above us. Not at all a fair matchup. Hate fighting cheaters like this team.
 

Peugi

Approved user
Joined
Feb 25, 2017
Messages
20
We just finished a 30vs30 war with Chinese stacking alliance 夢幻猩球.

Us - 8 AA players, rest equally distributed among ages, GA, IA, EA, GuA, all active players. I estimate average lvl170.
Them - 22 AA players (all above lvl200), one IA and 7 lvl10 Iron age villages. All AA full lvl15 walls.

We had zero chance against them. As this was our second stacking oponent in a short time period, we are all a bit depressed and lost interest in the game. When we complain to Nexon, they say that stacking has been dealt with as all stacking alliances gain so little glory that they are discouraged from the practice and rather play fair. We are just below TOP100, they were a bit above us so we lost almost 600 glory... so dear Nexon, should we be glad that we lost ONLY 600 glory to stackers who are all but discoured from stacking and are enjoying their free 600 glory and ticket to TOP100 alliances? Is this your idea of the TOP100 chart - cheaters, stackers and other exploiters? Does this game and its glory system have a point?

The current matchmaking is a joke and greatly favors stackers. We even had a poll in our alliance to start staking as well - we wanted to create 10 Iron age accounts named STACKER1-10 to make the issue as obvious as possible. Luckily most ppl voted against it, we will never lower ourselves to such practices. Please make the game playable for those, who want to play fair. I beg you!

Thank you.

EDIT: our previous stacking war oponent is also relevant to this thread, you can read about them here:
https://forum.nexonm.com/forum/nexon...k-beyli%C4%9Fi
They even fine-tuned the stacking practice by making 4 of their Iron age accounts unattackable as they had an older version of the game. Nexon failed to resolve this issue during the two war days despite us reporting the issue repeatedly. They just promissed solutions but the bases remained unattackable until the war ended. They did not reimburse us for this in any way.
 
Last edited:

yemen

Approved user
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
680
Suggestion: Don't allow matches where the bottom age of one team is more than an age below the bottom age of the opponent. If my lowest is industrial, I can't match anyone with an included war base lower than enlightenment.

Granted, this might mess with a few legitimate teams. But they wouldn't have to rearrange much to avoid the issue, and stackers that couldn't find a match would have to drop those iron ages quickly. Then sandbags start to have to be at least medieval - enlightenment age, which doesn't pull down average as much. Teams with a legitimate distribution including iron ages can still match with each other, but their average should be low enough not to match the atomics with sandbags.

But Nexon - sandbagging has not been dealt with, and it is frustrating that company line continues to be that it is a minor problem for a few teams. We can't prove how many teams it impacts - only you have that data. But anecdotally, it hits a lot of us on a regular bases and is a major problem and frustration. So we DO NOT BELIEVE YOU when you say it has been fixed.

People have proposed many fixes on here. Pick some or find some of your own, start trying them, and let us know what you are trying so we can work with you and provide real feedback on how they are working.
 

Spaceboy

Approved user
Joined
Aug 18, 2016
Messages
550
Guys,

We all know why this problem is not fixed : the top sandbagging players are the ones that are buying peanuts and crowns and troops. They have spend a lot of time & money in this game, and probably they don't attack very well, so you have to give them something in return no ?

The loss of glory points is now compensated by the alliance XP points. Great move !
 

Manifesto

Approved user
Joined
Sep 26, 2016
Messages
1,920
What if war matchups only had limited ages per war and, of course, you can only matchup to the same on the other team?
We could have 3 leagues in wars:
Gunpowder League: Gunpowder and lower ages
Industrial League: EA and IA ages
Atomic League: Global and AA ages
This way your lowest may only be one age below the opponent's highest. The difference between your 1 and their 20 would be 'manageable'. #1 would find #20 challenging, and #20 may still be able to beat #1 (with help :) )
And no team can have more than 70% of the highest age?
 

Pepyto

Approved user
Joined
Sep 18, 2017
Messages
182
Full support for war league concept! ✌ Like single players, maybe there should be war league for alliances, so your alliance couldn't face others from higher or lower league. Maybe even reward for wining the league? That should be fun 😁
 

Spaceboy

Approved user
Joined
Aug 18, 2016
Messages
550
yip...the notion of leagues like in any sport would resolve this problem greatly by adding a feature and not by nerfing current product features...
 

S_How

Approved user
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
688
I am disappointed this thread was taken out of sticky. Just makes it like the issue of sandbagging is being even further ignored. We just faced another sandbagging alliance with just 3 sandbags that pulled down their overall level avg by 25. It was an absolutely horrid mismatch. I dont care about glory either way, but mismatches like this are just an awful experience.

Sandbagging remains the most rewarded war strategy in dominations.. So disappointing that it hasnt been solved by the simple solution of not counting the bottom quartile in matchmaking.
 

S_How

Approved user
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
688
Sorry knifer, that is patently false. The reason sandbagging is so prevalent is because it is the most rewarded strategy in war. Stop rewarding it, and the behavior will start. It is why we almost never saw sandbagging pre-glory. As for making new age players undesirable, this also makes no sense - people are only very low age for a small amount of time, and any good intermediate team should be interested in taking in and developing new players in the age range they generally fight wars in. On top of that, you are implying their primary value is their low war weight....
 
Top