Tired of wars without option in victory

[jogomo07]

I'm so sorry Dominations and Nexon, but it sSorry Dominations and Nexon, but this should stop already, we can not follow.

I am the leader of Barcelona Elite, Lannister, we have a small alliance of 45 members who like to participate in war but every time we look for a rival, we are TOP rivals. This last search has been a disaster, because an alliance of 16500 glory is paired with an alliance of more than 21,000 glory? Does it make sense to you? Not for us. And I think for 1st WarLords Alliance either. They are going to be bored and so are we. Moreover, we do not plan to attack or spend resources for a war that is lost, it does not make sense.
Is this the model of wars that you want? We wait for an answer.

Ah, and no, this is not the first time it happens to us, it's the last. There you have an image with our last rivals, Lithuania Elite, HK (2 times), Danmark and Iran Empire, if you check those rivals, HK and Lithuania in the TOP, Danmark and Iran on the 19500 glory.

Can you tell me, where are those 16000 alliances of glory similar to us and who are fighting in war? Because I think it's everyone's problem and it can lead us all to stop participating.


My colleagues and I look forward to a response and a suggestion to improve it.

Thank you.

 

[Tower]

jogomo07 We have had the similar problem.
But remember, glory amount is not what you should be looking at - it tells you nothing. What is important is age and level of the players and alliances like 1st Warlords artificially lower their level and matchmaking by adding low level Iron age bases.
Untill Nexon fixes the sandbagging problem you should set your medal requirement to 0 let the beginners join you, take them to war and hence drop your war level and then getting more fair matches

 

[Danix den Andre]

Or just keep at it, furthermore, neither Age or Level have anything to do with matching, it's all about strength in war, a level 129 IA with lots of library and uni research, and no roads or economics etc will weigh as much as a 192 atomic with fancy roads, caravans and farms

 

[Ironblood]

You could try joining Discord app. Dominationsprime. They organise H2H wars with non stacker alliances. You can communicate and then both press search at the same time. Our alliance Hobbit Zombies have had some good battles doing this.

 

[Vixen]

jogomo07 - are you running 45x wars everytime?

 

[Europeos]

1st Warlords don't use any sandbags.

 

[Europeos]

The opponents mentioned, 1st Warlords do not stack.

 

[Centurion96]

I agree with OP. We have also decided recently to stop wasting resources on impossible wars, which are much commnon recently. We are not using sandbagging, nor our opponens, however, our opponens are often more advanced in every way (age, military, level). This is no longer sustainable. We will be making false attacks during these wars to save precious resources. Fun of playing wars will go down not for us, but also for our opponens.

BTW: I would rather wait tens if minutes for proper opponent selection, then have selected first opponent in a queue after few seconds (based on current experience).

 

[Manifesto]

Fancy Roads? You mean, with flowers and flashing lights?

 

[Veldan]

Yes the matchups have been terrible lately for my alliance too. Our top player is industrial, yet we are against enemies where top 3 have full atomic troops, and their nr 1 has atomic mortars and tank depots. We might as well not bother queueing for war like this...

It's because the stupid matchmaking system doesn't account for 2 attacks per war. If everyone could do one attack, we would have a chance at winning. But with 2 attacks, the strong enemy top 3 will 5 star our top 6, and then the war is over.

With 2 attacks per base, the top half can 5 star every enemy base. Therefore, the matchmaking system needs to be based 100% on the top half players and 0% on the bottom half. That would be the only way to get even remotely fair matchups, besides glory-based matchmaking.

 

[Wendy]

as Europeos tried to point out, this is no longer a sandbaggind issue, this is a matchmaking issues. whatever size you search in war, you can get a mismatch in your on in your opponents favor.
I guess you were unlucky, jogomo.
lately we have had several of this wars, both in our and opponent's favor, while fair matches seems totally out of the equation, or anyway very hard to find.
i guess this is nexon's solution to stalemates. You win against a weak opponent or you lose against a stronger opponents.
fix it quick!!!

 

[Vixen]

agree... fix it quick!

 

[Castein]

Maybe 1st Warlords don't stack but the rest of the 1st family does, we faced one a few weeks ago. A quick search and a look at the bottom members isn't hard to do.

 

[Sjnk77]

Not all alliances sandbag. The Annihilators go to war every 2 days and our players range from Iron - Atomic. However if you look at our results most of the time we use all of our available attacks per war missing 1 or 2 at the most. So do the "sandbaggers" do a 20 person war for example and only the top 10 attack? or what determines sandbagging in your opinions?

 

[Max_imus]

Maybe 1st Warlords don't stack but the rest of the 1st family does, we faced one a few weeks ago. A quick search and a look at the bottom members isn't hard to do.

I dont know for which alliance you play but 1stD and 1stV fight with such heavy teams where sandbagging doesnt matter. Its not deciding at all because when they play top teams its how it is supposed to be.If they have 0 irons or 4 irons in matches with other heavyweight teams (korean trio, or 50hk, valk, ua, 50, war etc) doesnt matter anyway.