PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

General topics, questions, suggestions, bugs, or anything Star Wars Commander related.
User avatar
DeathStriker
Moderator
Posts: 2316

PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#1 » Sun Jan 08, 2017 1:06 pm

I am starting this Thread to report what I feel is unacceptable and crazy PvP Matchmaking currently happening on Tatooine, but may also be happening on other Planets as well.

BACKGROUND:

After spending some time on Er'Kit, I finally had enough after the last PvP Conflict of which I reported my final Stats here.

So I moved my Level 10 Primary Base and my Level 5 Secondary Base to participate somewhat in the current Tatooine PvP Conflict discussed here.

SURPRISE / UNACCEPTIBLE / CRAZY MATCHMAKING NOTED:

OK, so while I was on Er'Kit both of my Bases got little or no PvP Defensive Attacks, and when I moved to Tatooine I expected to be attacked more.

What I didn't expect what just how unacceptable and crazy the PvP Matchmaking currently happening on Tatooine would be.

LET ME BE VERY CLEAR...

  • My comments going forward in this Main Thread Post relate to my Secondary Base - with Level 5 HQ
  • All other Structures are Level 5 or LOWER.
  • All other Units are Level 5 or LOWER.
  • I receive Level 1 to Level 10 varied Units for my Level 5 (20 UC) Squad Center depending on whom and what was donated.
SCREENSHOTS (to aid in Discussion):

Battle Log - Level 5 HQ - #1 - Taken 01-07-2017
Image
(Click here to view LARGER image)

Battle Log - Level 5 HQ - #2 - Taken 01-08-2017
Image
(Click here to view LARGER image)

ANALYSIS (Using Screenshots):

  1. (Battle Log #1): First I was attacked by a Level 7 Player - Hard to Defend Against - But Upper Level Expected for Level 5 Commander.
  2. (Battle Log #1): Next I was attacked by a Level 5 Commander - OK - Expected.
  3. (Battle Log #1): Next I was attacked by a Level 6 Commander - OK - Expected.
  4. (Battle Log #1): Next I was attacked by a Level 9 Commander - Unacceptable / Crazy - No chance for a Level 5 Commander.
  5. (Battle Log #2): Next I was attacked by a Level 7 Commander - Hard to Defend Against (but I got lucky).
  6. (Battle Log #2): Next I was attacked by a Level 6 Commander - OK - Expected.
  7. (Battle Log #2): Next I was attacked by a Level 10 Commander - Unacceptable / Crazy - No chance for a Level 5 Commander.
FINAL COMMENTS:

  1. First of all I am not complaining about the 3-Star Losses, as that is why I am on Tatooine, to upgrade and change my Level 5 Base Layout in preparation for Level 6+
  2. As noted above, I was NEVER attacked by anyone LOWER than Level 5 (either due to Matchmaking and/or Players Choice).
  3. A little over half of my recent PvP Defensive Attacks on my Secondary Base were from Level 7+ Honorable Opponents.
  4. The Level 9 and Level 10 Players (based upon the Units Used) were both using Main Units and not Squad Center Units.
  5. How can Players defend against other Attacking Commanders three or more Level HIGHER then them?
Post any comments about PvP Matchmaking below...
 
Image
Sons_of_Death is looking for Level 8+ Rebel Commanders Who Want to War - Apply Now!


stonejack26
Captain
Posts: 61

Re: PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#2 » Sun Jan 08, 2017 1:09 pm

Par for the course as long as I have played this game. Makes us Rebels stronger, right!

AND get off Tatoo ASAP young Rebels....Dando (A-Wing) and Er'Kit (Kessen) are much lovelier this time of year.


User avatar
Euph
Major General
Posts: 391

Re: PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#3 » Sun Jan 08, 2017 4:51 pm

The Tat conflict has been CNFOing hard for me, I was trying to compete but it basically became impossible, so I've bailed. If other Imps are seeing the same, then I'm not surprised if the matchmaker is searching wide. They gotta attack somebody.

FYI this has been a problem for a long time, on basically all conflict planets - at least for me. This Tat conflict was the first I've bothered to attempt in a while; I quickly remembered why I'd stopped. :/
Sith-Society
Mature HQ10. Immature meat-bag.
Make MHCs Great Again


User avatar
Piper139
Commodore
Posts: 222

Re: PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#4 » Sun Jan 08, 2017 5:08 pm

Agree euph. Especially since they nerfed the rewards. Unless I can seriously grind through bad matches, no loot and cnfo on both bases, best I can hope for is one or two frags. No more conflicts for me.
Leader Sith-Society HQ 10 Medals 35k 2 openings
Leader Havoc_u4ea HQ 10 Medals 17k 0 openings
Image


User avatar
rRr
Admiral
Posts: 516

Re: PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#5 » Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:03 pm

I have never had CNFOs on any conflict so far.

Yes, Tatooine is annoying cuz you are getting like lvl3 bases that offer literally no loot with 190 medals, but I have learned how to live with it. Thats extreme ofc, usually I get like lvl6 or so bases with 300-400 medals so I can grind.
Empire fresh HQ X, 28 000+ medals, living mainly on ErKit.
Contrabant addict (Sentinel @lvl27, Opressor @lvl20).
Sith-Society
LINE: rrr-firstlorder


Shelendil
Major General
Posts: 371

Re: PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#6 » Mon Jan 09, 2017 5:55 am

It seems like imps have been flocking to Tatooine lately. Not really sure why, perhaps the green planets are less hospitable with the armory upgrades in place. Being a rebel on Tatooine has been getting worse for some time; I can only imagine trying to start playing the game now as a rebel.
ShadyRebels24
Level 50 squad perks
#23 in squad wars
You know you wanna be shady ;)


User avatar
Sixace
Captain
Posts: 71

Re: PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#7 » Mon Jan 09, 2017 6:03 am

Went to tat yesterday. I'm L10 and was getting a constant stream of what appeared to be brand new L1-2 dev bases. Some had no shields. Could have probably cleared them with 2 jumps. No thank you.
Empire Player Lvl10

“He who only sees the obvious, wins his battles with difficulty; he who looks below the surface of things, wins with ease”
― Sun Tzu


Planetbleeder
Commodore
Posts: 101

Re: PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#8 » Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:00 am

Deathstriker that is normal on ALL the planets except Erkit. I unlocked erkit after Yavin,Dandoran, and Hoth. The reason being I wanted that vanguard,hawk,and shield buster unlocked. Finally I had enough and unlocked erkit. I went thru 9 conflicts on those planets always being matched up on offense with bases two levels higher and getting clubbed on defense by imps 2 or more levels higher than me.

Match ups like these occur even when there is no conflict.


User avatar
DeathStriker
Moderator
Posts: 2316

Re: PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#9 » Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:05 am

Thanks everyone whom has responded so far in this Thread. :D

Since my Primary Base (which I have been maintaining since September 2014) is Level 10, I often when playing using that Base don't see the "issues" that a new Player or even a Lower Level Player sees in the "current state of SWC".

The above is the "reason" that I created a Secondary Base, which is now at Level 5, so I can understand and help Players whom are currently just starting out or mid-way up the Level Ladder in SWC.

While most are reporting "similar PvP Matchmaking on other Planets" I feel that the current PvP Matchmaking is not "balanced".

I am not asking for an "easy ride" but a better or more fair playing field.

IF I HAD CONTROL RIGHT NOW I WOULD....

  1. Limit PvP Matchmaking for Level 2 HQ to Level 9 HQ to:

    • One HQ Level Lower than your current HQ Level.
    • Your current HQ Level.
    • One HQ Level Higher then your current HQ Level.
  2. Limit Level 10 HQ PvP Matchmaking to Level 8 HQ and higher.
  3. To prevent Can Not Find Opponent (CNFO) Alerts I would use "Advanced Pseudo Bases" (Developer Bases) where the Player would see a Base complete with:

    • Full / Maxed Resources (no more fake bases with only a few Credits / Alloy / Contraband).
    • Appropriate Turret "mix" for the Base Level.
    • All appropriate Traps that are ALL LIVE and must be destroyed (I love "challenges")
    • Completely Filled Squad Center - with random Units (no more empty Squad Centers).
    • All the "challenges" that a Player would find Attacking a "real active Player".
    An internal "code" would be used to identify this Base as a "Pseudo-Base" and not a "Real Player Base" and be used to reflect that information in the Battle Log > Attack Tab.
SO UNTIL WE SEE SOME KIND OF CHANGE...

All Players should expect that they will be attacked by a Player 3+ Levels above them and plan their Base Design / Defenses accordingly...

Post any comments below...
 
Image
Sons_of_Death is looking for Level 8+ Rebel Commanders Who Want to War - Apply Now!


User avatar
lurker
Commander
Posts: 40

Re: PvP Matchmaking 2017 - Discussion Thread

Post#10 » Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:29 am

The HQ level is irrelevant for a good PvP matching.

What is relevant is the defense level of the defender (which is, sort of, the sum of all base points for defense buildings), vs the attack level of the attacker, which should be somehow the base points of all attack buildings, plus some points according to the research level of attack units.

If what you want is balanced attack and defense, then one should match if Defense(defender) ~ Attack(attacker). If you take into account revenge opportunities, one should add (a part of) the defense level of the attacker and (a part of) the attack level of the defender.

If you want to give thumbs up to sandbagging, just do the sum of both. It's more or less what I think is done currently, unless they count medals (which may be true, or not, I don't know).

If you want to penalize/reward skill, just add to that some kind of victory points that accumulate when winning. They could be called medals. The balancing factor would be delicate to set up, because too much of it and good level 5 players are matched always against level 8+ adversaries (attack and defense). Hey wait! That's what is happening ! Wondering...

It would be even better if the skill was measured in medals, but I think it isn't. Base points already exist, though. I think it would be better if they were separated in attack and defense, but I think not. That's why sandbaggers thrive...


Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Alpha, Badtoro, Bravefan44, Dolphin75, marcelomelomf, Nevermind, Schruaf, Shiva, spiderx, vinsanity and 18 guests