Nice matching system you got there Gree

[groovdog]

Syn ranked 140 last time out. First three opponents, 20/49/24. This along with MW rival ranking and KA running three events at once has me about fed up with the stupidity and obvious money grab.

Hint Gree you need us, we dont need you (well the ones who do really need you need to quit anyways).

[PawnXIIX]

I can understand how it seems bad for you guys, but it's worse for the syndicates you are up against. It's usually pretty hard for the high level syndicates to score against the ranked 100+ ranked syndicates. Our biggest point gains usually came against top 25 teams, while we loathed getting matched up with teams outside the top 50.

[sez]

Yup agreed, we don't want to go against the lower syndicates AT ALL. Waste of hits, gold, and a matchup.

[dudeman]

It's oh-so-awesome to be forced to wait for a match up when the biggest competition gets a match straight after facing them and has an opportunity to close the gap while we just twiddle our thumbs.

It would actually be less frustrating if this was because Gree was also twiddling their thumbs, but I suspect their thumbs are likely lodged into some sphincters and are unavailable for twiddling.

[Grimmy11]

Yeah I just got matched up against the burger bar crew and their defense leader has 243k defense points.

[bald zeemer]

Yeah I just got matched up against the burger bar crew and their defense leader has 243k defense points.

I hate getting low stat teams too, but it's almost unavoidable it seems.

[mxz]

I hate getting low stat teams too, but it's almost unavoidable it seems.Lonely on top? :)

[PawnXIIX]

It's oh-so-awesome to be forced to wait for a match up when the biggest competition gets a match straight after facing them and has an opportunity to close the gap while we just twiddle our thumbs.

It would actually be less frustrating if this was because Gree was also twiddling their thumbs, but I suspect their thumbs are likely lodged into some sphincters and are unavailable for twiddling.

This ^

There's so many times where we're only a small margin behind and by the time our match comes in we've lost 2 spots because it's so crowded here where we're located. It's going to be a sleepless night it seems because it's so small of a margin ._.

[CohibAA]

It would actually be less frustrating if this was because Gree was also twiddling their thumbs, but I suspect their thumbs are likely lodged into some sphincters and are unavailable for twiddling.

LOL

Literally.

[groovdog]

Well update now 6-4 working on 6-5. We had one syn close to our old and current rank (~140), one just under 100, one 250+, and 8 Top 50 with 5 of those being Top 25. Only that good a record cause we caught 2 of the higher guilds in off hrs clearly as one didnt score >10K points.

And we have some solid 200+ targets (80-150k def) for you guys as their losses will show. We getting 200-500K run on us fairly often. Not as good a target as the Top 10 guys but plenty sweet for 25-50. We running wars 24/7 at this point just trying to get a matchup we can score reasonably on. Pretty frustrating when you have 25+ show up and you scan the old matchups see a Top 25, take your 2 hits, start regenning and call it for an hr.

Hint to Gree, most of us would rather sit in the queue an extra 10 mins for a better matchup than this crap. Alot of people just getting fed up with fighting people way above or below you ALL the time.

[bald zeemer]

Unless it's a personal goal the amount of points scored on you is irrelevant. And only a couple of top teams don't have targets for more or less everybody. Hopefully you made hay while the sun was shining.

[groovdog]

Unless it's a personal goal the amount of points scored on you is irrelevant. And only a couple of top teams don't have targets for more or less everybody. Hopefully you made hay while the sun was shining.No the points scored us give an indication of whether or not another guild finds reasonable targets. I would think that a Top 25 syn would wait for better if they had no reasonable options. My Top 15 KA guild does.

If you running up 500K on us and we are such a bad target (and you are not going for Top 10) that doesnt make much sense to me. Last war Top 25 was 7.25 mil assume 30 fights and you get 241K per fight. I assume many of you just gold refresh when you have the numbers on so its probably >30 which means average is even lower. So if you running 500K you either are fighting less than once every 2.5ish hrs or we arent such a horrible target. Just saying.

Funny how this is the only thing pretty much everyone of all stats agrees on in this game.

[scott(ST6)]

so the top teams dont want to get matched against top 100 teams??? Funny that didn't stop SAS for throwing up 1.3 mil against us while we scored 13k...ok i'm done crying now

[bald zeemer]

No the points scored us give an indication of whether or not another guild finds reasonable targets. I would think that a Top 25 syn would wait for better if they had no reasonable options. My Top 15 KA guild does.

If you running up 500K on us and we are such a bad target (and you are not going for Top 10) that doesnt make much sense to me. Last war Top 25 was 7.25 mil assume 30 fights and you get 241K per fight. I assume many of you just gold refresh when you have the numbers on so its probably >30 which means average is even lower. So if you running 500K you either are fighting less than once every 2.5ish hrs or we arent such a horrible target. Just saying.

Funny how this is the only thing pretty much everyone of all stats agrees on in this game.

1. It only takes one target to make a decently targetable team.
2. Depending on the tactical situation you may have to take what you can get. It certainly doesn't matter to the very top teams whether they're average points take a bit of a hit - aggregate is all that counts, and quantity is just as good as quality in this regard. Gold preservation is for end-game, not the cut-and-thrust, if at all.

[MattThomas08]

so the top teams dont want to get matched against top 100 teams??? Funny that didn't stop SAS for throwing up 1.3 mil against us while we scored 13k...ok i'm done crying now

Tell your friend he has our condolences :-/, I assume there was one in particular who was feeling a little queasy after the battle.

Ideally we'd find everybody a great target every time, but most of the time the team's ranking we face doesn't have much of an effect on how good the targets are. We probably could score more over Top 100 teams than Top 10 teams, just because oftentimes the Top 10 teams are structured around not providing a bunch of good targets to opponents, but it only takes one and he can rack up a couple thousand losses in no time. One of the Top 10 teams in particular has done well at that (Not FC).

With that said, it does suck sometimes waiting 25 minutes for a matchup and then getting a Top 100 team.

[Big Joe]

Matching seems ok. Will say however when I saw " you're now at war with Indians" followed by "you're at war with Fight Club" I cried a little, turned my game off and went and hid in the corner... Lol

[PawnXIIX]

There was just one point where we played against our own brothers (HTC Blue) and then after losing to them since we were in a defensive battle, it put us up against FC. Which we though was very strange because both Red and Blue hit the battle button at the same time and we ended up playing a lower ranked team than them even after coming off a loss. I think they ended up playing Cacci's sniper team (no idea where they are).

It did however give them the points to get into first, and it's rather interesting to watch the number of leadership changes in the works :p

[mxz]

You'd think they could just match #1 and #2, #3 and #4, etc..

If we're waiting 20 minutes between fights, anyway, why not make it more fair instead of less fair?

No one likes uneven matchups. Why not have the teams who can actually battle for each other just battle each other?

[BigMoney]

You'd think they could just match #1 and #2, #3 and #4, etc..

If we're waiting 20 minutes between fights, anyway, why not make it more fair instead of less fair?

No one likes uneven matchups. Why not have the teams who can actually battle for each other just battle each other?

This actually sounds like it would benefit weaker teams (i.e. those just outside the range you're considering) much more than it would benefit top teams. As a disclaimer I have no idea what the actual defenses of the top syndicates look like, but I'll just make the assumption that everyone is really strong for their level with no obvious mismatches (e.g. a level 200+ with a weak defense). If this is the case, the top syndicates would be stuck attacking players around their level, which provides much less points on average than if a team just outside the range you're considering (let's say #11) would be able to put up huge points because they got a top 25 team with a weak spot (e.g. level 250 player with weak defense). Either the top teams would have to spend a disproportionate amount of gold to make that gap between top teams and the rest insurmountable, or they get screwed over by being given significantly less opportunities to score big points. Hopefully I'm articulating my point clearly enough. I'm sure they try to match the top teams when they can, but I'm guessing the top teams are in battle so frequently that it's less frequent that two top teams are available for battle at the same time.

Also, I thought the whole reason they opened up the match range was because of complaints over waiting times for top syndicates to find a match after the first syndicate war. Or am I mistaken?

[mxz]

When FC gets matched up with NGF after 20 minutes it's a problem. If they got matched up with IN after 40 minutes, SAS after 10 minutes, and INF after 20...I think they'd be perfectly happy with that.

The problem arises when #1 takes long to get matched up while #2-4 slip through and get matched with a top 10 and #1 waits but ends up getting matched with a top 100.

If they made it more like a challenge system where FC/SAS/IN could declare on each other it and the top 10s could challenge each other it'd be a lot smoother, no matter if the wait was 5 minutes or 20 (which seems to be the norm, anyway).


I suggested this in MW, too, but think I've got the idea down a little better. You could declare but set the parameters to filter to leaderboard #min-#max and it would only match you up those (the first one that fit). To make sure groups didn't try to pansy out they'd have a % modifier on influence points. So #1 would only get 100% influence points against, say 2-4. 5-10 they'd only get 80%, 11-25 only 60%, and 26+ only half the amount. A #25 going against a top 3 would get, say, 120% bonus to IP for playing up.

It encourages tougher matchups and docks you for accepting weak matchups. The higher seeds would like this since it would be more "fair", give better targets, and allow them to size themselves against the competition; the weaker syndicates wouldn't get stuck fighting against teams they have no business being against, and if they're up against a higher seed at least they get extra points for being good sports.

[mxz]

I just FC all over my MW and then I SAS on to a INGlad someone gets it. Everyone loves a (CK) Durdeness.


Now give me some L3 Dragons. :)

[BigMoney]

When FC gets matched up with NGF after 20 minutes it's a problem. If they got matched up with IN after 40 minutes, SAS after 10 minutes, and INF after 20...I think they'd be perfectly happy with that.

The problem arises when #1 takes long to get matched up while #2-4 slip through and get matched with a top 10 and #1 waits but ends up getting matched with a top 100.

If they made it more like a challenge system where FC/SAS/IN could declare on each other it and the top 10s could challenge each other it'd be a lot smoother, no matter if the wait was 5 minutes or 20 (which seems to be the norm, anyway).


I suggested this in MW, too, but think I've got the idea down a little better. You could declare but set the parameters to filter to leaderboard #min-#max and it would only match you up those (the first one that fit). To make sure groups didn't try to pansy out they'd have a % modifier on influence points. So #1 would only get 100% influence points against, say 2-4. 5-10 they'd only get 80%, 11-25 only 60%, and 26+ only half the amount. A #25 going against a top 3 would get, say, 120% bonus to IP for playing up.

It encourages tougher matchups and docks you for accepting weak matchups. The higher seeds would like this since it would be more "fair", give better targets, and allow them to size themselves against the competition; the weaker syndicates wouldn't get stuck fighting against teams they have no business being against, and if they're up against a higher seed at least they get extra points for being good sports.

I think the problem with the system is that it could also be easily abused. If you could pick who you get to fight, two syndicates could easily collude together and add one weak high level player to their team, trade info with each other on who it is, and then slingshot each other up the ranks-- team #1 takes a turn pounding on the higher ranked syndicate team #2's weak player while the higher ranked syndicate (team #2) conserves their gold, team #1 rockets up the leaderboard, and then team #2 takes their shot pounding on the higher ranked team #1, etc. Each team saves on gold and specifically exploits this system.

Even if you don't specifically get to "pick" your opponent and you can only choose a range (e.g. "top 10"), you could still have this same problem of collusion, since these teams are already pretty well established and the majority of the top 10 are going to end in the top ten again, etc. If the current top 10 teams colluded in this way, it would make it unfairly difficult for a team just outside the top 10 to crack into it without spending absurdly more gold than the teams already in it.

[MattThomas08]

When FC gets matched up with NGF after 20 minutes it's a problem. If they got matched up with IN after 40 minutes, SAS after 10 minutes, and INF after 20...I think they'd be perfectly happy with that.

Just from a time perspective, I'd take a lower matchup if it meant I wasn't waiting 40 minutes or even 20. That's a lot of time sitting around hitting refresh and waiting. Makes any kind of scheduling impossible.



I suggested this in MW, too, but think I've got the idea down a little better. You could declare but set the parameters to filter to leaderboard #min-#max and it would only match you up those (the first one that fit). To make sure groups didn't try to pansy out they'd have a % modifier on influence points. So #1 would only get 100% influence points against, say 2-4. 5-10 they'd only get 80%, 11-25 only 60%, and 26+ only half the amount. A #25 going against a top 3 would get, say, 120% bonus to IP for playing up.

Interesting idea, but if the top groups were well organized it would get a little gamesmanship going on also. Slow play your way into the Top 100 through the weekend and then set your parameters for a Top 5 team and score huge points to finish. Meanwhile, the disorganized team that didn't slow play their way in would be getting crap points and fall out of the spot they may have unknowingly been spending gold to retain. That kind of stuff will happen regardless of the matchup parameters. If it can be gamed, it always will be. I like something like that though. It would actually require some strategy.

[mxz]

I like something like that though. It would actually require some strategy.Yep, that's it...make it worth the while to have a head on your shoulders rather than just an auction.

[kimberleyj]

we have now been put against slient assians , fwd and hellcalls . thanks alot greed

[cooch]

Interesting first day only top 100 plus and not much scoring for us...then balance and lower since. Not too impressed with matching system. Wonder if they should weight it for how syn finishes in each war or at least the last two to bring some balance to matching..even if it means waiting a long time to make the battle happen.

[scott(ST6)]

6 minutes in and FC is only beating us by 6k....i thought these guys were tough hahaha

[TZora]

hi dear, u guys are doing good. all the best for the event :)

[I am a cow]

Trust me it is so annoying when you are a top faction fighting a faction thats top 100 top 500 etc they get easy points off you but who wants top spend gold for 100 points a hit much better to get 300 points a hit or even 400

[Polarbear]

Yay for matchups!

http://i1153.photobucket.com/albums/p503/Polar2Bear/f654c4c0ba95735a6ebbc4008ed240ef_zps5b5da60f.jpg

[Rastas]

Yay for matchups!

http://i1153.photobucket.com/albums/p503/Polar2Bear/f654c4c0ba95735a6ebbc4008ed240ef_zps5b5da60f.jpg

Now that is just plain mean.

[TZora]

omg lol.. poor guy

but who's the "poor guy" here? think again :rolleyes:

[Rastas]

str8killa should be a defence leader

[Polarbear]

67 points was with wall down :) Awesome!

[Rastas]

$10 might not seem like much but to a guy on level 2, shame on you, lol

[Brian G]

Gree,
we were led to believe that syndicates were paired with other syndicates of equal or close to equal power but this isn't happening. As leader of BoB, we've been hovering right at 50 for most of the event but have been matched against Indian Nation and many other top 10-25 syndicates. We even only have 55 players in our syndicates which should reduce our overall Attack/Defense when comed to others. As of this morning close to 1/3 of our battles have been against top 25 or better. This is BS!

[Big Joe]

Gree,
we were led to believe that syndicates were paired with other syndicates of equal or close to equal power but this isn't happening. As leader of BoB, we've been hovering right at 50 for most of the event but have been matched against Indian Nation and many other top 10-25 syndicates. We even only have 55 players in our syndicates which should reduce our overall Attack/Defense when comed to others. As of this morning close to 1/3 of our battles have been against top 25 or better. This is BS!

I feel your pain. We were at 24/23 going into the last fight. Got the team sitting at #3 which let to a bad fight/ not enough points and us getting bumped to 26th =/

[gunny22]

Yay for matchups!



Well, his stats must have improved significantly by now, maybe the biggest leap of all players:
he gets the same prizes as everybody else in his syndicate!
So he goes from 70 to what? 3000, 5000?
Not bad at all for a low-level starter account.

[gunny22]

Did gree change something about the matching system since the previous syn war?
I was not attacked a single time this weekend.
I initiated 25 battles this weekend, that leaves us with 47 hours that we were not in battle.

In the previous war I remember being attacked at least a few times.

[BigMoney]

Did gree change something about the matching system since the previous syn war?
I was not attacked a single time this weekend.
I initiated 25 battles this weekend, that leaves us with 47 hours that we were not in battle.

In the previous war I remember being attacked at least a few times.

What? Not sure if you mean you weren't attacked by opposing syndicates or by rivals off the rivals list, but either way, no. I still got attacked by plenty of rivals during the war. I had been camping for the next boss event (this one) since I'm really close to going into the impossible Tier 5, so it's not like these are revenge hits since I haven't taken a swipe at anyone in weeks. I have a pretty high defense stat for my level too, so I'm definitely not an easy target either.

[archambeau]

I am level 207. I just take the wall so others at lower levels can find 400+ targets. Rarely get more than 250-300

[panty sniffer]

This problem sound like one for the Gree wishlist thread. A mutual "decline" button for both matched syn's and your off to find a better match-up. :)

I wonder how a "search and challenge" feature would work. If the other syn accepts, there's no waiting for a match-up and both syn's want to battle each other.