1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hey please check out our new forum Suggestions and Ideas found in the area "The Bay" - as we love all your ideas and want to collect them in one place, - please use it going forward. :) Thanks already for helping to make Battle Bay an even better experience. Remember: If your idea already exists - simply add your comment or like to an existing one so we avoid duplicates.
    Dismiss Notice

What's with guild rivalry matching...

Discussion in 'Suggestions & Ideas' started by TheWarNet, 26 Sep 2018.

  1. TheWarNet

    TheWarNet New Member

    Joined:
    29 May 2017
    Messages:
    9
    The matching is not balanced or fair... 4 guilds are around the same infamy 30k-40k, but than two are just insanely un fair with 1k and 4k...

    Let me guess... these are guilds with inactive players... let me know in the comments section below please xD
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Ash KOT

    Ash KOT MVP

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2017
    Messages:
    2,100
    Its all about number of quests completed, infamy doesn't come into the equation.
    All of the guilds from your screen shots completed 13-14 quests, hence the game has matched them together.
     
  3. Reorge

    Reorge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13 Feb 2018
    Messages:
    443
    And that's why it's broken
     
    BattleRascal likes this.
  4. Ash KOT

    Ash KOT MVP

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2017
    Messages:
    2,100
    Before it was changed, people complained that Rovio should match rivalries based on number of quests completed, they listened and everyone complains now.
    Same as matchmaking never used to take into consideration the ships MK level, community asked for devs to implement it, they listened and now everyone prefers the old system.
    This community never learns, be careful what you wish for...
     
    YerJokinArnYer and ShipCrusherCz like this.
  5. Reorge

    Reorge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13 Feb 2018
    Messages:
    443
    Idc what other people asked for, cuz i know I'm Not one of them. Imo matchmaking based on ship mk and infamy is alot better than only infamy. But let's be honest bout the guild rivalry matchmaking system here. There are some ways to make it better, but they clearly don't wanna implement them
     
  6. Stelmo

    Stelmo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Apr 2017
    Messages:
    1,302
    Infamy based matching was an absolute disaster for top f2p guilds.
    We were a totally f2p guild in the top 10, so we got top whale guilds as rivals every week and we couldn't even complete half as many quests as they could with all vip and limitless superboosts.

    "What could possibly be a better measure of a guild's questing ability than the number of quests a guild can complete?" - Kitterini or at least close enough ;)
     
    YerJokinArnYer and Ash KOT like this.
  7. PastelPiku

    PastelPiku Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    27 Jan 2018
    Messages:
    1,715
    Occupation:
    Security
    Location:
    America
    The system as it is now is fine, just don't push for 1st every week. Save boosts and chill for a week or 2, then when the matching looks good, push as hard as you can together.
     
  8. xArrogance

    xArrogance Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2017
    Messages:
    767
    Obviously it's not the best system...

    But, if you're doing 48-60+ quests per week, the end rewards aren't really that big of a deal ..

    As in, it's better to just do the best you can each week .. You'll earn more tokens than taking weeks off ..
     
    ShipCrusherCz, PastelPiku and Ash KOT like this.
  9. Reorge

    Reorge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13 Feb 2018
    Messages:
    443
    But I think I never said infamy based matchmaking was better
     
    Last edited: 28 Sep 2018
  10. Ash KOT

    Ash KOT MVP

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2017
    Messages:
    2,100
    So if it shouldnt be based on infamy, or on guild quests completed, what criteria should the rivalries be decided on?
     
  11. Reorge

    Reorge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13 Feb 2018
    Messages:
    443
    Yeah because of the faulty system we need to chill for weeks and sacrifice tokens in hope for a fine matchmaking. That alone explains how much of a balanced matchmaking it is
     
  12. Ash KOT

    Ash KOT MVP

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2017
    Messages:
    2,100
    You dont need to chill and take a break, you will lose more tokens this way.
    Our guild always reaches board 5, and for clearing the first 4 boards we earn 114,000 tokens.
    So taking 3 rivalries off we would lose 342,000 tokens, just to ensure we win first place and earn 42,000?!
     
  13. Reorge

    Reorge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13 Feb 2018
    Messages:
    443
    Like Captain level along with Gearscore based matchmaking - Guild matchmaking based on captain levels and gearscore of the players of all the 5 guilds. The highest amount of Gearscore each player can pull off in a boat(Or maybe the amount of Gearscore each player carries most of the time) will only count in the matchmaking. That way there won't be any loophole to manipulate the matchmaking system. Captain level(after infamy) tells alot bout one's experience and strength. And Gearscore tells bout power(strength). So only the most active guild will have the most chances to win.

    I understand my idea might not lead to a perfect matchmaking, but still it should be alot better than infamy OR Number of Quest completed based matchmaking which is utter bs and disappointing.

    Yeah some of the people would say that this current matchmaking is fine cuz their guild is not much competitive in terms of questing. But I, as a leader of a questing guild find it painful to watch us ending up in 3rd-5th place most of the time even after putting nearly the same amount of effort the winners do. Maybe the grand rewards are not big of a deal when you complete over 50 quests but trophies do matter for me as well. Just like most of you guys like winning the 1st-3rd place in season infamy i like to win 1st-3rd in guild rivalries. Working their arses off and still ending up on bottom places and as a result getting no trophies or tokens is just disheartening and encourages the players to look for a different guild
     
    Last edited: 28 Sep 2018
  14. Ash KOT

    Ash KOT MVP

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2017
    Messages:
    2,100
    That would be a terrible idea.
    Gear score and strength are not linked to activity levels and quests completed at all.
    Ultimately Rovio needs to match people who can complete a similar amount of quests to keep the matches fair.
    They currently look at the number of quests your guild completes, and faces you against opponents who completed a similar amount in previous rivalries.
    How can you get a better system than that?

    Just to put it into a scenario for clarity:

    Among the top guilds, some are F2P and some are HEAVY P2W.
    Both have strong players in terms of training and infamy, as they are at the top of the leaderboards.
    Lets pull some numbers out of the air for effect:

    The F2P guilds will use minimal boosts, and will complete 48 quests or so per rivalry.
    You then have heavy P2W guys, using constant 5x boosts and they will complete 90 per rivalry.

    Under current rules, the F2P guys will face other guilds who completed 48 quests.
    Changing to your system, they would be matched against the guys who complete 90 quests per week.
    Against the similar guilds (48 quests) they can play harder and creep up to 50 and win the rivalry.
    They have zero chance of managing 90 quests, so guaranteed loss.

    Also with the current rules, rivalry matchmaking is done on a rolling basis.
    So on the 4th rivalry, the data from the first is removed from the calculation, so if they had a couple of players leave and now could only complete 35 matches, then soon the rivalries will change to match them up with other guilds who also completed 35 quests.

    With your idea these guys would be guaranteed to face the heavy P2W guilds, and lose every week to the guys doing 90 quests, with no solution other than to kick players (sounds like great team bonding) to get easier rivalries / tokens.

    What you are pushing for is like the old system, which was heavily flawed.
    We have seen so many bad "fixes" pushed for by the community, be careful what you wish for.
     
    Stelmo likes this.
  15. xArrogance

    xArrogance Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2017
    Messages:
    767
    There are numerous 8+ month old threads with the same complaints. People have long been mad that new guilds get 42k coins while they work so hard to get 3rd or 4th place.

    I've suggested brackets ... or leagues - with each league awarding more and more tokens - 1st place moves up, 6th place goes down - with your league listed on your guild profile.

    But at the end of the day, tokens are largely worthless (for the amount of effort required), so players want to see the devs use their limited time to fix other larger issues.

    It sucks, I know .. but you'll have to learn to live with it.
     
    Reorge likes this.
  16. PastelPiku

    PastelPiku Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    27 Jan 2018
    Messages:
    1,715
    Occupation:
    Security
    Location:
    America
    Nuu just save the boosts from a couple rivalries and use them to push together in the next one. You can keep playing and get a lot of quests done!
     
    Ash KOT likes this.
  17. Reorge

    Reorge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13 Feb 2018
    Messages:
    443
    The top f2p guilds that only complete 48 quests per week ? Ok then I would put them in a "lazy chill guild" category which doesn't care bout rivalries and deserve to win. Those F2P guilds won't be matched up with the "HEAVY" P2W guilds unless they have similar captain level of players and amount of Gearscore. And what do you understand by similar gearscore ? Similar questing power right ? So then it's completely a fair competition, the one who works harder will win. Lol how is that terrible ?

    Under current system, the lazy top F2P guilds that complete 48 quests are getting matched up with hard working lower ranked F2P guilds that hardly reaches upto 48-50 quests. Explain how is that fair ? Cuz the lazy top f2p guild clearly have more questing power and chances to win. They would easily complete 50-52 quests and win the rivalry. So better rewards for people that works less ? Hmm

    In my suggested system, winning depends on guild activity. Ofcourse the p2w guilds will still have the advantage of Guildboosts because they pay, and we can do nothing bout it. People needs to be disciplined in order to achieve a goal. If they don't have any goals and decide to be lazy then they deserve the consequences, it shouldn't be a surprise. If you want success then you will definitely need to be willing to make the necessary sacrifices, not sure why is that so hard to understand
     
  18. Ash KOT

    Ash KOT MVP

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2017
    Messages:
    2,100
    48 quests is not lazy / chill, its just their maximum capacity without buying boosts.
    I still feel that the current system is much better giving every guild a chance to win without forcing guilds to buy boosts or lose week in and week out.
    You are against gullds who do a similar amount of quests to your guild, so if you want to play hard then you can win, I am not sure how this is unfair?
     
    PastelPiku and Stelmo like this.
  19. Stelmo

    Stelmo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    5 Apr 2017
    Messages:
    1,302
    Okay
     
    Reorge likes this.
  20. Reorge

    Reorge Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    13 Feb 2018
    Messages:
    443
    Wish it was that nice and accurate bud. Over 70% of the time I end up facing guilds that usually completes like 9+ more quests than us, we are currently a #105 ranked guild and we always ends up being matched with top #15 ranked guilds, ok probably you won't be seeing much difference between #105 and #15 rank but same was happening when we were above #200 ranked, but we still do put up a good fight, because we work hard and try to stay disciplined yet we dont get the deserving result. Our highest number of quests completed is 70(only for once), we dont try to push over 70 anymore in the fear of matchmaking. We nowadays complete upto 65 quests and not much loooking forward to go higher. But honestly matchmaking can't be worse anymore we end up meeting guilds like silencio, dream team etc anyway because these guilds chill and complete low amount of quests from time to time, but their 'low' is like the 'highest' for us. I'm not even exaggerating
    Then you should've mentioned 'without buying boosts' before. If a guild doesn't buy boosts then it means they have zero concern for questing and rivalry position. And why F2p guilds can't spend pearls on boosts ? I'm a total f2p player, and I always manage to buy 1 super boost every week without much difficulty tbh, because i dont spend my pearls on unnecessary things. And I don't think it's like everyone in an F2P guild is like "never spent a penny on this game" type player, there are few little spenders in F2P guilds too.
     

Share This Page