Forum: empire-en
Board: [590] Ideas, Suggestions & Feedback
Topic: [368302] Kingdom League Matchmaking is Garbage
[-368302]
SirWalnut (US1) [US1]
:: Oct. 20, 2019, 4:50 p.m.
The KL matchmaking is no matchmaking system. If it's supposed to sort players into brackets based off of level, it's wrong. If it bases it off of skill, it's wrong. If it bases it off of potential, it's wrong. I'm a level 57 being put into brackets with lvl 70/800 players. I don't have NEAR the equipment, troop types and count, resources, funding, boosts, etc. that they have. Not to mention that they gain more tokens per hit in nomads and samurai events and have better targets in glory events.
This isn't matchmaking, this is random placement. It doesn't even go off of medals. Someone in my KL bracket for nomads has no gold and someone else has 8.
Please fix this and allow a better competition between players in KL instead of just giving the gold to one player and making it super unfair for everyone else. I get it, GGE has always been like this, but you could at least make one thing good since it lasts for two months.
This isn't matchmaking, this is random placement. It doesn't even go off of medals. Someone in my KL bracket for nomads has no gold and someone else has 8.
Please fix this and allow a better competition between players in KL instead of just giving the gold to one player and making it super unfair for everyone else. I get it, GGE has always been like this, but you could at least make one thing good since it lasts for two months.
[5079339]
Tom_67 (US1) [US1]
:: Oct. 20, 2019, 7:29 p.m.
I am a level 25 and I am in a bracket with almost all level 70's with one being a legendary level 800. How am I supposed to compete with them?
[5079355]
Jacnife (US1) [US1]
:: Oct. 20, 2019, 10:03 p.m.
I agree with both of you I'm a lvl 70/223 and being placed with 70/800 players and they are in the top 5 alliances
the KL is un fair and from now on all I will be attacking are towers F*** the KL until GGE fixes it
the KL is un fair and from now on all I will be attacking are towers F*** the KL until GGE fixes it
[5079361]
Venom (ASIA1) [ASIA1]
:: Oct. 21, 2019, 1:25 a.m.
I'm 70/62 (new account), and placed with a guy called, James Cook - who won KL last time, and has scored 60K+ already without a booster.
[5079399]
bernhardt (US1) [US1]
:: Oct. 21, 2019, 8:27 a.m.
There is some interesting matching with the KL. In my alliance there are 3 guys who each got 3 gold going into the last glory matching. Two of them are around lvl40 and another is lvl14 or 15(with 2k might). The lvl 40 guys got what I would consider reasonable matches: Mostly under 70 and a couple of low lvl 70's. The lvl 15 guy had 2 LL800s and a couple more ll500+ all with 1M+ might. The rest were all lvl70 too. Go figure.
[5079405]
Herveus (AU1) [AU1]
:: Oct. 21, 2019, 9:39 a.m.
It's easy to game the system when you're a top player as well I tanked first event aka did nothing last kl and got easy leagues till the last 2 ones, finished second over all
did same this kl and free gold medals afdter first event and am up to 9th already without much effort, meanwhile I've had level 30's in my league who ofc can't do 30m glory, matchmaking might as well be a rigged lottery
did same this kl and free gold medals afdter first event and am up to 9th already without much effort, meanwhile I've had level 30's in my league who ofc can't do 30m glory, matchmaking might as well be a rigged lottery
[5079587]
Kyriakos (GB1) [GB1]
:: Oct. 22, 2019, 9:11 a.m.
Things I've noticed about the KL matchmaking and medal systems.
Player level is NOT as prominent as medals when matchmaking. A level 20 with 10 gold medals is more likely to be put in a group with other players who have 10 gold medals (or similar number) than they are with other level 20s.
Matchmaking sorts 'inactive' players together. This, I presume, is what Herveus mentioned about gaming the system. By tanking a couple events the system thinks your inactive, and lumps you with other inactives.
The matchmaking system seems to be based on the following (in priority order)
Medal count -> Might Points -> Player Level
Medals have different 'values'
I've been in several high-level leagues with the top players on the UK1 server. Even if I come 4th/5th my overall standing in the KL goes up, whereas in some leagues where I'm with lower level players my overal placing goes down even if I win the gold medal. I can only assume that the amount of 'points' each medal is worth varies based on the strength of other players in your KL.
Player level is NOT as prominent as medals when matchmaking. A level 20 with 10 gold medals is more likely to be put in a group with other players who have 10 gold medals (or similar number) than they are with other level 20s.
Matchmaking sorts 'inactive' players together. This, I presume, is what Herveus mentioned about gaming the system. By tanking a couple events the system thinks your inactive, and lumps you with other inactives.
The matchmaking system seems to be based on the following (in priority order)
Medal count -> Might Points -> Player Level
Medals have different 'values'
I've been in several high-level leagues with the top players on the UK1 server. Even if I come 4th/5th my overall standing in the KL goes up, whereas in some leagues where I'm with lower level players my overal placing goes down even if I win the gold medal. I can only assume that the amount of 'points' each medal is worth varies based on the strength of other players in your KL.
[5079610]
Herveus (AU1) [AU1]
:: Oct. 22, 2019, 10:57 a.m.
Naw gold medals always worth the same
Gold medal 7 points
Silver medal 6 points etc.
14 points required to the next rank every time
Gold medal 7 points
Silver medal 6 points etc.
14 points required to the next rank every time
[5079796]
Kyriakos (GB1) [GB1]
:: Oct. 23, 2019, 11:38 a.m.
Maybe my wording wasn't the best.Herveus (AU1) said:Naw gold medals always worth the same
Gold medal 7 points
Silver medal 6 points etc.
14 points required to the next rank every time
What I mean is, in the overall rankings, a Copper medal has pushed me up several places when I'm in a league with the top 20 players (as an example), whereas a gold medal has pushed me down several places in the overall rankings when I'm in a league of lower-level players (typically below level 70).
[5079800]
Venom (ASIA1) [ASIA1]
:: Oct. 23, 2019, 11:51 a.m.
No, that is just timing, all medals are worth the same no matter what rank.
You just happened to notice that when you got the gold you went down - because other players ranked up. While when you earned the 4/5th you went up because you ranked up.
So basically the ranking is decided on your rank - then the amount of gold decides placement between those ranks, and silver if require etc until all placement, and if same medal tally and rank, it will be random (like what you see at the start).
You just happened to notice that when you got the gold you went down - because other players ranked up. While when you earned the 4/5th you went up because you ranked up.
So basically the ranking is decided on your rank - then the amount of gold decides placement between those ranks, and silver if require etc until all placement, and if same medal tally and rank, it will be random (like what you see at the start).
[5079815]
Philt123 (GB1) [GB1]
:: Oct. 23, 2019, 1:40 p.m.
GGE have decided that there is just one group that can all earn the same rewards in theory a level 20 player could win the whole event.
Once you have decided this then the only fair way of doing it is a system like GGE are using it which will always place you with players that have the same (or as close as possibe) number of "points" as you do. (apart from the first round).
which basically means the more sucessfull you are you are going to be sorted against other sucessfull players. which generally means stronger and higher level players so yes this can lead to pretty massive mismatches.
But the only other real way of doing it would be to split the levels up as gge does with most other competitions ie under level 20, under level 50 under level 70 level 70 and over for example.
The issue with this is that for that system to be fair, there have to be different prize levels, its not really fair for a player hitting on average 100 camps per event as someone hitting 1000 camps per event (for example) there also has to be an incentive to climb the ranks to perform at a higher an higher level. a little like a league table in football.
but that means that there is no way for a very high performing lower level player to get better rewards than a pretty inactive higher level player. at least this way all players can potentially beat other players regardless of level. Whilst still giveing an incentive for lower level players to become higher level players, so they can access all the advantages of doing so.
its not perfect by any means, but it does make a nice change from the different divisions most events have and over the space of 40+ days of events you do normally find the most consistant, and the most active players are those that get best rewards.
So i guess from that point of view I guess its working. And if you are a lower level player that is performing with players way above you level you should see it as a massive compliment that you can compete with someone that has some pretty massive advantages over you, and more than that push you to level up as hard as you can so you can get the same advantages as they have, and when you are on a level playing field those same players will be just a dust in your wake.
Once you have decided this then the only fair way of doing it is a system like GGE are using it which will always place you with players that have the same (or as close as possibe) number of "points" as you do. (apart from the first round).
which basically means the more sucessfull you are you are going to be sorted against other sucessfull players. which generally means stronger and higher level players so yes this can lead to pretty massive mismatches.
But the only other real way of doing it would be to split the levels up as gge does with most other competitions ie under level 20, under level 50 under level 70 level 70 and over for example.
The issue with this is that for that system to be fair, there have to be different prize levels, its not really fair for a player hitting on average 100 camps per event as someone hitting 1000 camps per event (for example) there also has to be an incentive to climb the ranks to perform at a higher an higher level. a little like a league table in football.
but that means that there is no way for a very high performing lower level player to get better rewards than a pretty inactive higher level player. at least this way all players can potentially beat other players regardless of level. Whilst still giveing an incentive for lower level players to become higher level players, so they can access all the advantages of doing so.
its not perfect by any means, but it does make a nice change from the different divisions most events have and over the space of 40+ days of events you do normally find the most consistant, and the most active players are those that get best rewards.
So i guess from that point of view I guess its working. And if you are a lower level player that is performing with players way above you level you should see it as a massive compliment that you can compete with someone that has some pretty massive advantages over you, and more than that push you to level up as hard as you can so you can get the same advantages as they have, and when you are on a level playing field those same players will be just a dust in your wake.
[5079916]
blueninja691 (US1) [US1]
:: Oct. 24, 2019, 6:53 a.m.
Well said Philt