Please return the 30 minutes delay between matches. An hour is too long to wait. Even 30 minutes is long, but I suppose it cannot be reduced further.

+1

Dear KONG, Please "lighten up" on the Giggitys. I am a paying costumer, and in my opinion....you have restrained too far. Its one thing to pay for cards to be competitive, but it is entirely "GREEDY" to make us pay "TWICE", to upgrade them into play. You have gone to far. I love the game, but the offerwall has presented alternative games to spend my efforts on. I will try to give my support here, but interest is "FADING" into frustration, very quickly.

> _Originally posted by **[podzaborom](/forums/726779/topics/1710914?page=1#12796483):**_ > Please return the 30 minutes delay between matches. An hour is too long to wait. Even 30 minutes is long, but I suppose it cannot be reduced further.

> _Originally posted by **[podzaborom](/forums/726779/topics/1710914?page=1#12796483):**_ > Please return the 30 minutes delay between matches. An hour is too long to wait. Even 30 minutes is long, but I suppose it cannot be reduced further. I support this. ➕1️⃣

Looks like the matchmaking never going to change so I agree why do we need to wait so long between matches?

I think it should be reduced back down to 30 minutes. If you follow this [website](https://sites.google.com/view/siegebot), it seems pretty obvious where matchmaking is going and I don't think it requires much further review.

All that show me is current ranking/MMR. First match was the only decent matchup(points rank 62 vs 63 was close match we win. Next match is rank 50 vs 23, 3rd match is rank 58 vs 90..2nd we lose by 10k+..3rd we will win by 10k+ and I expect the rest of rumble to be the same type of blow-out matches. 4th match 55 vs 23

> *Originally posted by **[crizz1231](/forums/727068/topics/1710914?page=1#12798402)**:* > All that show me is current ranking/MMR. First match was the only decent matchup(points rank 62 vs 63 was close match we win. Next match is rank 50 vs 23, 3rd match is rank 58 vs 90..2nd we lose by 10k+..3rd we will win by 10k+ and I expect the rest of rumble to be the same type of blow-out matches That's why I've been suggesting to the devs for at least the past 3 or 4 Rumbles that they need to tweak the MMR formula to take into account margin of victory. The wider the win or loss, the greater the movement. The narrower the win or loss, the lesser the movement. That tweak would make for much more competitive and enjoyable matches.

I think it more than 4 rumbles that we have been giving suggestions on matchmaking but I am beginning to feel as if we all are being ignored since it has been so long and haven't seen any attempt to address the matchmaking.

> _Originally posted by **[crizz1231](/forums/726779/topics/1710914?page=1#12798461):**_ > I think it more than 4 rumbles that we have been giving suggestions on matchmaking but I am beginning to feel as if we all are being ignored since it has been so long and haven't seen any attempt to address the matchmaking. Well, if the mods aren't talking to you, then by definition, you're being ignored. It's what they do if they don't like the idea.

+1 for reduced delay, and +1 for factoring in margin of victory Will margin of victory bring back the sandbagging issue?

> *Originally posted by **[Haze01](/forums/727068/topics/1710914?page=1#12800278)**:* > +1 for reduced delay, and +1 for factoring in margin of victory > > Will margin of victory bring back the sandbagging issue? I don't think it will since sandbagging was a tactic used to get easier opponents. But with the implementation of the MMR ladder and "Victory Points", I don't think it will be an issue. But they can do something like adding a small random amount of MMR points into the calculations so it won't be as easy to point-target.

> *Originally posted by **[werenarc](/forums/727068/topics/1710914?page=1#12800500)**:* > > *Originally posted by **[Haze01](/forums/727068/topics/1710914?page=1#12800278)**:* > > +1 for reduced delay, and +1 for factoring in margin of victory > > > > Will margin of victory bring back the sandbagging issue? > > I don't think it will since sandbagging was a tactic used to get easier opponents. > > But with the implementation of the MMR ladder and "Victory Points", I don't think it will be an issue. But they can do something like adding a small random amount of MMR points into the calculations so it won't be as easy to point-target. > Based on a comparison of the past data presented at the website I posted earlier, the MMR looks to already take into account the margin of victory. Or is there something else you were referring to? I saw drops as large as 4499 and low as 3494 for losses. For a win, I saw it ranged from 0 to 1945. So it seems like there is some adjustment for the margin of victory already taking place.

> *Originally posted by **[gfore25r](/forums/727068/topics/1710914?page=1#12801946)**:* > > Based on a comparison of the past data presented at the website I posted earlier, the MMR looks to already take into account the margin of victory. Or is there something else you were referring to? I saw drops as large as 4499 and low as 3494 for losses. For a win, I saw it ranged from 0 to 1945. So it seems like there is some adjustment for the margin of victory already taking place. Perhaps the margin is being taken into account but the adjustment isn't very large. Or the differences are simply due to the MMR ladder position only (e.g. more MMR points lost for a loss when ranked at #12 than when ranked at #32). I reviewed the data from the last three rumbles for our guild and here's what I saw. For example, for the 7/5 Rumble, we lost to Black Lotus by 594 points and we dropped 4102 MMR ranking points (from 91347 to 87245, MMR #32 to #64). Then in the 7/26 Rumble, we lost to SupAH Smashed Bros by 10979 points and we dropped 4369 MMR ranking points (from 90349 to 85980, MMR #12 to #37) so there may be a small adjustment but it isn't enough to prevent wildly uncompetitive matches in the next round. In that Black Lotus example, losing by 594 points shouldn't drop a guild 32 places on the MMR ladder. It should be in the single digits if not 3 or 4 steps only.

I dont know what they did this time but mmr matching is terrible. There is no way #30 should ever play #5 and i have seen even worse matchups from other guilds. I dont know what the devs did this time but please tell them to fix it because this is ridiculous. At this point you might as well drop the entire mmr system and match up guilds randomly. Should be just as fair.

> _Originally posted by **[Pirkes](/forums/726779/topics/1710914?page=1#12805064):**_ > I dont know what they did this time but mmr matching is terrible. There is no way #30 should ever play #5 and i have seen even worse matchups from other guilds. I dont know what the devs did this time but please tell them to fix it because this is ridiculous. At this point you might as well drop the entire mmr system and match up guilds randomly. Should be just as fair. At rank 50-60 my guild been dealing with match ups like that for past 4-5 rumbles, basically since they changed to the new rumble system

We fought 3 hard top 100 guilds in a row all of which are in top 100 or higher! We weren't even close to the 100 at the time and thanks to those battles we lost so many ranks having to try to fight our way back to 100 hopefully its such bs! Please do something about this it cant be just our guild. The guilds were (#120 for us) Nut house(#66), (#120 for us) Beers Beers Beerz(#139), and (#138 for us) WhaleKrill (#257)all in a row and our final rumble against family guild of Slurmloco top 15th they were 120 mmr we were 171 mmr or so really bad matching! Superslurm was guild I believe.

Still no rewards from rumble for me yet. Others from the guild all have gotten their rewards already.

> *Originally posted by **[werenarc](/forums/727068/topics/1710914?page=1#12802029)**:* > > *Originally posted by **[gfore25r](/forums/727068/topics/1710914?page=1#12801946)**:* > > > > Based on a comparison of the past data presented at the website I posted earlier, the MMR looks to already take into account the margin of victory. Or is there something else you were referring to? I saw drops as large as 4499 and low as 3494 for losses. For a win, I saw it ranged from 0 to 1945. So it seems like there is some adjustment for the margin of victory already taking place. > > Perhaps the margin is being taken into account but the adjustment isn't very large. Or the differences are simply due to the MMR ladder position only (e.g. more MMR points lost for a loss when ranked at #12 than when ranked at #32). > > I reviewed the data from the last three rumbles for our guild and here's what I saw. > > For example, for the 7/5 Rumble, we lost to Black Lotus by 594 points and we dropped 4102 MMR ranking points (from 91347 to 87245, MMR #32 to #64). Then in the 7/26 Rumble, we lost to SupAH Smashed Bros by 10979 points and we dropped 4369 MMR ranking points (from 90349 to 85980, MMR #12 to #37) so there may be a small adjustment but it isn't enough to prevent wildly uncompetitive matches in the next round. > > In that Black Lotus example, losing by 594 points shouldn't drop a guild 32 places on the MMR ladder. It should be in the single digits if not 3 or 4 steps only. > It looks like the MMR adjustment is not solely tied to rank as the changes ranged similar at the top and bottom ranks on the website. BTW, just saw the [rumble report](https://sites.google.com/view/siegebot/rumblebot) and it seems like most guilds in the top get 6 wins and 4 losses. Top 16 have 7 wins or better. This seems like rumble is achieving whatever the spread was intended and eliminating the sandbagging, with not a whole lot of significant movement. Perhaps additional adjustment for margin of wins could tighten the range even further, but then it seems like the rankings start to get set in stone.

In the last 2 rumbles we've won a match but still dropped a rank. Scoring needs tweaking, cos that shit makes no sense.

> _Originally posted by **[REDBeard46920](/forums/726779/topics/1710914?page=1#12806313):**_ > Still no rewards from rumble for me yet. Others from the guild all have gotten their rewards already. Did you score at least 1000 points (helmets)? That's the minimum you needed to have scored to qualify for rewards.

> *Originally posted by **[LeonCoopOTea](/forums/727068/topics/1710914?page=1#12811293)**:* > In the last 2 rumbles we've won a match but still dropped a rank. Scoring needs tweaking, cos that shit makes no sense. What was your MMR ranking when you won? Matches won at lower MMR ranking yields fewer points. That's probably why you dropped in ranking. You were beating up on a lesser opponent (according to MMR) so that couldn't maintain your point ranking. I have links to more info on MMR in this Tips & Tricks post: http://www.kongregate.com/forums/727066-general/topics/878105-throwdown-tips-tricks?page=3#posts-12516940