Looking for the perfect MATCHMAKING

Matchmaking is (and it will always be) the real issue of Clan Wars: there is nothing worst than eagerly waiting the war-button-pressing-day and find out that your opponent is an hyper-engeneered clan too stronger to even fill your clanmates castles.

So Mammy Supercell hires the best developers in the world, locks them into a tiny room with no windows, no fresh air, no drinks, no food and she hides the key until they don't find a solution.
They estimate, they calculate, they adjust, they re-adjust, they re-calculate, they adjust again weights of defenses, troops, heroes, townhalls, walls, traps, obstacles, decorations and whatever you can imagine, but this will always lead to finding countermoves by the cunningest players to take their advantages.

What if the perfect matchmaking was no-matchmaking at all?
What if the way the System chooses the opponent clan in war was almost the same way it chooses opponents in a normal attack?

Exactly, no abstruse calculation, but only a ranking system (like the League system for single player) that determines which clans you will encounter. Your opponent will have, other words, a score close to yours. If your clan wins it will go up in ranking, if it loses, it will go down.

In a static system (no new clans, no clanmates coming and going, sigle-size war), after a certain period of adjustment each clan will reach a position truly descriptive of its war ability.

Now, let's face the reality: every day new clans come to light; every day clans welcome with open arms new clanmates and every time your leader can change the number of warriors to deploy in war. All these scenarios could falsify the clan rank, the rank position it could be not so stationary, but I think that this could be a good start to improve the Clan Wars and Clash of Clans itself.

Some additional considerations:
- the rank of a Clan could be the already present Clan Level with the only difference that the Clan can lose XP and, consequentially, perks.
- to speed up the period of adjustment, or in general the period necessary to a new clan to reach its equilibrium position, it could be wise giving more weight to the overwhelming victories; for example the score gained (or lost) could be the difference of the two actual XP scores.
- to prevent or discourage clanmates coming and going a war-cooldown of some days could start any time you change clan.
- it comes for free a brand new competition between clans.

Am I completely a fool?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I move this table that summarize the major differences between the actual clan war system and the system I propose.

	ACTUAL CW SYSTEM	PROPOSED CW SYSTEM
BASIS OF THE CW SYSTEM	Clan XP & Perks can’t be losed The system tries to find opponents of similar strength (MATCHMAKING)	Clan XP & Perks can be both gained and losed The system chooses opponents of similar XP (NO-MATCHMAKING)
CONSEQUENCES	Clan Level isn’t representative of war ability or strength of the Clans Clans fight only for loot (soon or later they will achieve all the perks anyway) Clans demands matched encounters There is no competition between Clans	Clan Level is really representative of war ability and strength for the majority of the Clans Clans fight for XP & Perks (losing is not convenient) Mismatch is accepted (no more complaints) A Clan Ranking fires up the competition between Clans

You have my support!

Everyone keeps complaining about match making being a problem. I just dont see that as a problem any more. It used to be a problem but after their last tweak about 4 to 6 months ago, I would say every single match we have had has been reasonably close.

There have been a few matches I thought one clan or the other had a very slight advantage but so small as to not make a difference in the results. In fact, I have been truly impressed with how close the match making is. Sometimes we opt in a low base to round up the count to 15 or 20 so we dont have to opt people out - so we might have 5 TH10s, 6 TH9s, 8 TH8s, and and TH4 tossed in, and darn is we dont match up with another clan 99.99% of the time that has a similar composition. When we are slightly off, it seems to be just at the bottom, where their lowest is a TH8 and ours might be a 7 or 6. But the bottom is meaningless anyway.

Its not that I dont believe you (well, maybe I dont) but out of all the wars we have run the last 4 to 6 months, not one has been grossly out matched. We got our butt kicked in one war but the match up was fair - they were just really good and we just made a ton of mistakes.

I'm not saying that the matchmaking doesn't work, but I'm saying that people always find a way to turn things at their own advantage and this causes bad humor and complaints. Anyway I didn't write my post to argue about this, I just write it to explain an idea that could be, in my opinioni, a valid alternative to matchmaking. It is about the idea that I would argue.

Carambola,
this is the way it works in chess. Every player has an ELO point. If yuo beat a player with a higher ELO point you get a lot of points, if you loose against him you dont loose so many points and a player can match with players that have a close range of ELO points difference. Everyone in love with chess know this algoritm and everyone is fine and happy about it. And this way of doing things is working from so many years... It is stable, fair and gives the great advantage to give a ranking also to clan.
we can think this is very similar even to the algoritm used in the single player ranking ( master, champions, etc...).
so supercell indeed has already this algoritm available!
they only need to apply not only to sinlge player but also to clans!
I think this is the best and easier solution!
Great idea! :-)

I'm glad to know that I'm not alone. Thank you alfdib for the chess example, I hadn't thought about it, but you're right.
I don't know if this is the best solution, but as you said it seems very simple, and semplicity is a great virtue, especially talking about games.
In a system like this people don't necessary expect to find a clan of the same strenght, but they fought for a rank posistion.
Now we only have to hope that someone upstairs finds this idea interesting...

One problem I see: MISMATCHES. There will be so many mismatches!! There is just too much randomness...You will have clans with maxed th10s at top facing clans without th10s.

There are other solutions out there I like. Like a sliding weight thingy nerf I think proposed, or just simply weighing offense properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotTheRealPaul

One problem I see: MISMATCHES. There will be so many mismatches!! There is just too much randomness...You will have clans with maxed th10s at top facing clans without th10s.

There are other solutions out there I like. Like a sliding weight thingy nerf I think proposed, or just simply weighing offense properly.

---

This and the other problem that clans don't always have the same lineups

I know that it could sound like a provocation, but in a world with matchmaking you demand an equilibrate match, in world without matchmaking mismatch is accepted... Who leads is the ranking position, not the absolute strenght of a clan.

Different lineups could falsify the ranking, but I think that finding the right score to assign to the victory and to the defeat this could be a minor issue.

The thing I can see is that in multiplayer, we can SKIP a base we dont feel comfortable with... we cannot do that in war, saying, "Eh, this clan looks a little too strong, let's skip them."

Personally, I think that the clans matchmaking system, by and large is pretty accurate, and I have been extremely happy with how well I have been matched up with many clans thus far! However, the issues come in where there are Engineered bases/clans. Even .5 THs can make a huge difference if there are enough of them. My current clan mismatches probably more often than not, because we have 7+ .5 Town Hall levels... Sometimes it is out of our favor, and other times it is in our favor. Frankly, it is an issue that WE as the clan need to fix, not the matchmaking system needing to fix... and it is a risk we take every single war. Honestly though, I have enjoyed being matched against a clan with a sllight advantage, because Otherwise I get no challenge... haha.

Where .5 TownHall levels are a minor issue, I can easily live with the slight mismatch that is inevitable regardless of our clan having .5 townhall levels or not, the True menace we run into as a clan is a clan with engineed bases... We have only lost one war in the past 20+, and that was to a clan with 25 engineered bases and .5 townhall bases out of 40 members. Now THAT is rigging the system. We literally stood no chance at all to them, and the otherclan unfortunately didnt even attack well at all... With their th10 level attacks they still couldnt even close all of our th9 level bases...Their max th11 couldnt even close all of our th9.5 bases and the dude had max offenses... We honestly would have crushed the clan in a fair fight, but they had such an overwhelming number of engineered bases honestly stood no chance and failed by a very small range.


THE POINT OF MY LONG WINDED RANT:
... is that we need to fix Engineered bases, and I watched a Youtube video that explained it PERFECTLY. To sum up the video, he says that we need to adjust defensive weighting so that the absolute minimum weight a Town Hall can have sould be the absolute max weight of the former atown Hall level. That means that if your base has the red level 10 Town Hall on your base, the absolute minimum weight your base would carry would be that of of a 100% max Th9 base. And to extend on that idea a bit, I think I should throw in my own two cents on the idea in saying that it would cater exclusively to the defensive weight of the base and that an individual with rushed heroes or other offenses wouldn't be at a weight disadvantage. I hate to fight for the rushers, but it is inevitable that a very large percentage of the clash community is rushed offensively over defensively, but from a war perspective, these are also the guys that cannot attack very well regardless... It is no loss to the serious war clan community and I think those guys would be taking a big enough hit defensively, because many of those people might be going to the next townhall level without levelling up every single defense anyway.

Either way, the video explains everything a bit better than I perhaps have: Start at 4:10 for what I am talking about

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dqEDr3BHAjk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flamjetxx

The thing I can see is that in multiplayer, we can SKIP a base we dont feel comfortable with... we cannot do that in war, saying, "Eh, this clan looks a little too strong, let's skip them."

Personally, I think that the clans matchmaking system, by and large is pretty accurate, and I have been extremely happy with how well I have been matched up with many clans thus far! However, the issues come in where there are Engineered bases/clans. Even .5 THs can make a huge difference if there are enough of them. My current clan mismatches probably more often than not, because we have 7+ .5 Town Hall levels... Sometimes it is out of our favor, and other times it is in our favor. Frankly, it is an issue that WE as the clan need to fix, not the matchmaking system needing to fix... and it is a risk we take every single war. Honestly though, I have enjoyed being matched against a clan with a sllight advantage, because Otherwise I get no challenge... haha.

Where .5 TownHall levels are a minor issue, I can easily live with the slight mismatch that is inevitable regardless of our clan having .5 townhall levels or not, the True menace we run into as a clan is a clan with engineed bases... We have only lost one war in the past 20+, and that was to a clan with 25 engineered bases and .5 townhall bases out of 40 members. Now THAT is rigging the system. We literally stood no chance at all to them, and the otherclan unfortunately didnt even attack well at all... With their th10 level attacks they still couldnt even close all of our th9 level bases...Their max th11 couldnt even close all of our th9.5 bases and the dude had max offenses... We honestly would have crushed the clan in a fair fight, but they had such an overwhelming number of engineered bases honestly stood no chance and failed by a very small range.


THE POINT OF MY LONG WINDED RANT:
... is that we need to fix Engineered bases, and I watched a Youtube video that explained it PERFECTLY. To sum up the video, he says that we need to adjust defensive weighting so that the absolute minimum weight a Town Hall can have sould be the absolute max weight of the former atown Hall level. That means that if your base has the red level 10 Town Hall on your base, the absolute minimum weight your base would carry would be that of of a 100% max Th9 base. And to extend on that idea a bit, I think I should throw in my own two cents on the idea in saying that it would cater exclusively to the defensive weight of the base and that an individual with rushed heroes or other offenses wouldn't be at a weight disadvantage. I hate to fight for the rushers, but it is inevitable that a very large percentage of the clash community is rushed offensively over defensively, but from a war perspective, these are also the guys that cannot attack very well regardless... It is no loss to the serious war clan community and I think those guys would be taking a big enough hit defensively, because many of those people might be going to the next townhall level without levelling up every single defense anyway.

Either way, the video explains everything a bit better than I perhaps have: Start at 4:10 for what I am talking about

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dqEDr3BHAjk

---

No...Giving weight to the town hall is always a horrible idea. If you wanna know why just read thru previous engineering threads

I agree! Windows 10 update would be great too!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotTheRealPaul

No...Giving weight to the town hall is always a horrible idea. If you wanna know why just read thru previous engineering threads

---

The point of my post is really this: there is no perfect MATCHMAKING. Removing the matchmaking by introducing a clan ranking system based on war victories and defeats is a way, in my opinion, to calm down any controversy on matchmaking.

Which leads back to what i said

Just put a next button so both those clan leaders who start the war can chose if it's a fair match up. You have 5 minutes from when the match is made to accept it or next it. Like regular match making.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Carambola

The point of my post is really this: there is no perfect MATCHMAKING. Removing the matchmaking by introducing a clan ranking system based on war victories and defeats is a way, in my opinion, to calm down any controversy on matchmaking.

---

Agreed. Matchmaking will never be perfect unless our freedom to base build as we please is taken away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lonewolf1234

Just put a next button so both those clan leaders who start the war can chose if it's a fair match up. You have 5 minutes from when the match is made to accept it or next it. Like regular match making.

---

This will lead to another bullying where clans skip tough clans and look for easy targets.

Karma hit me hard this weekend. I commented above we havent had a bad match in a long time. And then this weekend we had a bad match. Technically speaking we had a shot to win but had less margin for error, which ultimately cost us a win.

They had 3 very strong 10.5s, 4 solid 10s, 6 9s and 2 8s. We had 1 TH11, 1 10.5, 4 solid 10s and a 9.5. We had 3 TH9s and 5 8s. Ultimately lost at the top.

Not complaining though. We *could* have won with some better attacks. Always have to focus on the path to victory and travel that path as best you can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zelonius

Which leads back to what i said

---

I think you're talking about the question of showing up at war with different lineups.
In my opinion, in Clan Wars leaded by a ranking system, you have to change perspective: a mismatch means that at least one of the two opponents is in the wrong position of the ranking.

A mismatch, always results in a overwhelming victory (or a critical defeat for the other side). This leads to an increment of the ranking position of the winner and viceversa for the loser. If the loser clan already was in the right position of the ranking, the next time it will have more probability to win and to return to its former position. If the winner already was in in the right position of the ranking, the next time it will have more probability to lose and to return to its former position. The opponent that was in the wrong position (and caused the mismatch) is going towards its right position.


A clan which often change its roster, it will often be in the wrong position of the ranking, so it will oscillate up and down... Let's suppose that this clan has two lineups: the first is composed by TH10 and TH11, the second is composed by TH6 and TH7. Let's suppose also it is a brend new clan: it means that it starts from the bottom. Whatever roster is deployed by the leader, the first times it will probably always win, because at the bottom ofthe ranking there probably are clan weaker even than the second roster. The clan starts to climb the ranking. At a certain moment the weakest roster begins to face opponents of its level, but the stronger roster still wins. Overall the clan still climbs the ranking. Going on, the point of equilibrium (unstable) of a clan like this is a position of the ranking where the strongest roster always win, while the weakest roster always lose.


Now there are two conditions:

• A) the weakest roster is composed by real players;
• B) the weakest roster is a fake roster composed only by secondary accounts;

In case A, I guess it is very frustrating for the rostrer that always loses.

In case B Yes indeed, the strongest roster (the real players of the clan) always wins its wars, but overall the Clan does not gain position in the ranking and (if the ranking corresponds to the clan level, as I figured) it does not gain perks. In addition this sort of cheating could be discouraged by the fact that the personal loot is obviously lower than the loot that you could obtain in an encounter between similar teams.


This is obviously an extreme case of different lineups, but all other cases could only be better.

In order to make my proposal more readable (I know, I always venture in long digressions and my english is not even so good), I try to summarise the major differences between the actual clan war system and the system I propose.

	ACTUAL CW SYSTEM	PROPOSED CW SYSTEM
BASIS OF THE CW SYSTEM	Clan XP & Perks can’t be losed The system tries to find opponents of similar strength (MATCHMAKING)	Clan XP & Perks can be both gained and losed The system chooses opponents of similar XP (NO-MATCHMAKING)
CONSEQUENCES	Clan Level isn’t representative of war ability or strength of the Clans Clans fight only for loot (soon or later they will achieve all the perks anyway) Clans demands matched encounters There is no competition between Clans	Clan Level is really representative of war ability and strength for the majority of the Clans Clans fight for XP & Perks (losing is not convenient) Mismatch is accepted (no more complaints) A Clan Ranking fires up the competition between Clans