Why bother having Alliances when 2v2 matchmaking is just a big ****up?

People generally join Alliances for camaraderie, or with friends. The idea being that you do things together, as a team or with a partner. The current … Ummmm… Mess (not nearly a strong enough term but one that won’t cross any PC lines… Hopefully) that is 2v2 really works against those principles. This has been an area of concern from players for some time now and the “we have some tweaking to do” party line is old, stale and tired. Tweak already! Tweak long and hard! Tweak for as long as it takes! Tweak with fervour! Tweak with vision! Tweak so 2v2 becomes an enjoyable part of the game and not the ugly stepchild it currently is. Tweak NOW! Thanks​:beers::facepunch:

Hi @KillingJoke! Thanks for the post. We actually have a long list of things we’d like to improve in 2v2. The list is so long it would take like 6 months to do it all :slight_smile: which things in regards to 2v2 do you think would be most impactful?

Well for starters a if I can’t partner with someone 800 medals below me in rank I shouldn’t be matching a duo where neither player would be able to partner with me, it’s pretty absurd to think they can beat me if teaming up with me isn’t possible and is considered unfair. Just some food for thought.

1 Like

Fairness is not in this games catelog of priorities

1 Like

Hi @Chucklesb011 as far as I know that shouldn’t be possible right now. If you know of a way to do this, please let us know so we can deal with it

Pretty sure the more important point he was making was the fact that you’ll still match against people you wouldn’t even be allowed to partner with

1 Like

haha oh ok yeah you’re right i read the message incorrectly.

Well, ok … do other people agree “better matchmaking” is the very top of the priority list of things to fix in regards to 2v2?

I think better match making in general is what we are asking for in every mode

1 Like

Hey Boss, thanks for the reply. Well, right now we seem to get about 10-20% of the matches as what I would classify good. Those where the fight is back and forth, up and down, and if really good it goes down to the wire. Where the 4 players are actually closely matched in levels etc. In the other 80-90% we are either the obliterators or the obliteratees, neither of which is fun. I mean I like winning but when it is a total washout the victory is very hollow and gets old quickly…as does having your ass handed to you without even a nice ribbon or wrapping. So the algorithm needs some Tweaking :wink: it is working but in a lower percentage of cases than it should be methinks. Others have made comments here which are valid as well. Thanks for listening. I don’t want to give up on this game, I think it has great potential, but the frustration factor is rising.

2 Likes

Better matchmaking will come naturally with more players. So like I’ve said before: this game needs Android players.

2 Likes

Yea the android release should be a top priority in general but 2v2 MM rules should Be just as restricted as it’s partnering rules.

Lol they censored the title

Seriously is this a real question? Matchmaking is priority 1 for all players. What else would it be? Why would we want to play a game that revolves around skewed competition? If it isn’t the highest on the list, what is?

I’ve lurked these forums and in reading all the responses there is a serious disconnect between devs and players. What did your recent in game survey find out?

More players are necessary! Maybe Android is the answer, but it seems there’s a structural problem with the P2W model. The game won’t get more long term players without making it somewhat fun/reasonable/competitive for F2P players. This is coming from someone who’s paid a little bit on this game.

3 Likes

I think this game has some pretty good free to play incentives, I am currently ranked 11 in my event with no diamonds spent. It has taken a record of 18-2 so far to make that happen but it certainly isn’t impossible, and my factions are by no means equal or balanced. I also managed to take first two events prior with only 600 diamonds spent, which is fairly reasonable last hour push even for a free to player hoarding their diamonds for that moment. I’ve seen games be too rewarding to free to players and the result was the most hardcore players for the events had the most godly decks because event time was more valuable than money in the right clan. The game died after 9 months in production. Upgrade time should be within the window of an hour though, that strikes me as silly and overly restricted.

1 Like

It’s also worth adding that free to play players are not why the game was made, it doesn’t make the developers money and just as you like getting your paycheck for going into work every day, so do they. This game cost money to make and it isn’t reasonable to expect to play and have a fair chance with no spending, elite is something I haven’t seen before in the many similar games out there and is a really unique way to get players minimally and consistently spending to greatly improve the speed of their grind.
Major patches cost money to implement and usually come with bugs.
Bugs cost money to fix.
It costs money to have someone answer your complaints here and to maintain the forums.
It costs money to develop new units, maps and missions.

I’m sorry, but free to play players are not and should not be a priority, there is most certainly a place for them in this and every game but I’m tired of seeing how entitled people seem to feel with respect to using a product for free. You wouldn’t expect to sit down and get served a meal for free in a restaurant, why do you think it is any different in a paid game? Free to play is a choice, not a right. A choice you are only able to make because of players like me and sunsets and crispy who put considerable support into the game.

2 Likes

I’m gonna preface this by saying I’ve spent over $90 and don’t mind paying for games I enjoy but right now from the explanation we got, it’s necessary to either lower the price to hold player retention at a higher rate, or do something entirely new. I agree that they shouldn’t be the priority, that’s like saying the homeless guy in Olive Garden peeing in the faux bush should get the bread sticks as soon as they’re out of the over lol but it is necessary to have a healthy player base so we have opponents and the game doesn’t end up completely drying up

Restoring the former value in event packs or providing similar value more often than hitting a new rank would be nice, there isn’t much value left for the top players who have gone through all those ranks and all the initial packs in the store. At this point diamonds are the most valuable for a player like me for the coins I can convert them too, the 60% off doesn’t mean anything to me if I can’t even utilize diamonds for an efficient coin purchase, it isn’t worth buying fewer than 100k at a time and the pack no longer allows for that. Give us the extra 2k maybe and it won’t feel as bad? That’s not even asking to meet us in the middle and the ability to purchase 100k coins would get top players buying them on occasion. I’d argue since they are event packs 11k diamonds would be reasonable, such that one could get 100k coins and still have some left to get extra event tickets.

1 Like

How much are you paying for coins? I keep hearing people are buying gems for coins but only 100k. I don’t understand because after each event I get around 300k

The currency section in the shop

10k diamonds for 100k coins