mismatch?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SupremeCleave

SO i went to the enemy clan of DL to see the match and they did indeed have the offensive advantage and a slight defensive advantage up top.


However DL left out some facts about the outcome of the war... the enemy clan JOEMAMA did not even need the full th11 offensive advantage they had in their 2 and 3 to win.

Why do I say this? Well... after a scout attack from their bottom guy their 1 hit their 1 and 2 for 99% and 100% respectively. After that, their 2 practiced on DL's 1 and 2 and their 3 did not attack at all. The rest of the bases were cleared with even hits and were evenly matched.

Another thing i'd like to add, their 1-3 had great anti 3 star bases, while DL's 1 had a standard ring base which is tricky for inexperienced players and average guys but not for good players like the enemy's number 1. If DL's 1 had a stronger base layout , they could have turned the tide.

Now, another thing... DL's 1 has bad offense defense ratio. He has a L2 eagle, mostly th10 defense but not great heroes for his ratio. In short, hes the kind of base engineered clans see if they have a th11...

However, he still has the capability to have tripled their 2 and DL's clan failed to 3 star a th11 without infernos.

So, now lets get hypothetical. Replace the enemy's 2 and 3 with similiar weighted th10s and the enemy clan would still have won because they had superior bases and attacks.


So in conclusion, while the enemy clan had an advantage, they did not even need it to win agaisnt DL and were thus the superior clan .

To DL...

Are you able to accept that they were a better clan or will you just blame the matchmaker for giving you a tough match that forced you guys to bring your best?

---

Whether or not they needed the advantage is moot. Point is they HAD an advantage no? That's where the unfairness comes into play. Its not whether or not if opposition needs advantage, its more they have the advantage if need b hence y they win most wars bc they manipulate war mm to their favor to get easier matchups. Am I wrong in my logic? Its common sense to know y people engineer in first place no? Y else would they do it? If its not to get easier wars n takes "skill" y not build def in first place? For all those who r pro engineers n think they dont get easier wars n that it takes skill, y do yall engineer than?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Upgrayyyyyyyyd

While I see your point, Supreme, you must also consider that with an offensive disadvantage, DL's clan is forced to change their attack styles. For instance, with fewer offensive attacks, the top bases may be forced use a safe 2 star strategy, rather than a solid full attack, while their opponent may have 4 chances to triple an opponent before they even consider going the safe method.

The MM certainly does play a role in Outcome.

That said, it sounds like this clan didn't need their extra attacks, and has some better attackers.

---

yup thats what i was saying. i think the enemy clan was better overall in attacks adn bases and didnt even need their advantage. the outcome would have been the same had those 2 and 3 been replaced with regular th10s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kimchilove

Whether or not they needed the advantage is moot. Point is they HAD an advantage no? That's where the unfairness comes into play. Its not whether or not if opposition needs advantage, its more they have the advantage if need b hence y they win most wars bc they manipulate war mm to their favor to get easier matchups. Am I wrong in my logic? Its common sense to know y people engineer in first place no? Y else would they do it? If its not to get easier wars n takes "skill" y not build def in first place? For all those who r pro engineers n think they dont get easier wars n that it takes skill, y do yall engineer than?

---

i saw some of their matches and they indeed do have the advantage, however they didnt need it, which is kind of strange. imo, they should just build infernos/eagle on their th11s, they are pretty solid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SupremeCleave

i saw some of their matches and they indeed do have the advantage, however they didnt need it, which is kind of strange. imo, they should just build infernos/eagle on their th11s, they are pretty solid.

---

Exactly they should but they dont bc they want easier wars. C my point? This is y people gripe about em bc it is unfair but they r simply playing by the boundaries set forth to us by sc so its fine. What irks me tho r those who r pro engineers n say ridiculous things like matches r fair, they get "tuff" wars, it takes "skill" (maybe minimal skill but hardly high skills imo). Just my opinion tho. I dont wanna make def weak accts but I am just to reaffirm my opinions so I dont talk smoke (although my opinions I think r valid but going to make sure)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kimchilove

Exactly they should but they dont bc they want easier wars. C my point? This is y people gripe about em bc it is unfair but they r simply playing by the boundaries set forth to us by sc so its fine. What irks me tho r those who r pro engineers n say ridiculous things like matches r fair, they get "tuff" wars, it takes "skill" (maybe minimal skill but hardly high skills imo). Just my opinion tho. I dont wanna make def weak accts but I am just to reaffirm my opinions so I dont talk smoke (although my opinions I think r valid but going to make sure)

---

they match well at the top usually against max th11s. the war against dl and their last war they didnt need their 2 and 3. im guessing its just there for insurance incase of fails.

I finally got to visit DL's clan (had a very tense war in my own clan yesterday).

I think much of what SC is right, but it does also understate the match and DL's point about the match. The matchup was effectively unwinnable (unless the enemy had been morons, when any match might be winnable). The best DL's clan could realistically have done with genius attacks and bases is to lose on percentage at 74-74.

DL's #1 is a low-mid TH11. #2 is a mid-strong TH10. #3 and 4 are very fresh TH10s, and #5 down are regular TH9s.
Enemy #1 has kept his xbows at lvl 4, but is otherwise totally maxed out - it looked like all 50 icing sugar walls, and all the new hero levels. His base looks like a variant of very common TH11 multi-ring pushing base. Enemy #2 had slightly in excess of max TH10 defence; #3 and #4 were engineered - inferno-less, but #3 in particular is a very hard target for a TH10. They had good bases. The enemy actually had very slightly lower total defence scores on the top 5, but because they had been selective on what to build, especially on their outright engineered defence #3, their defence was actually stronger - and was outright stronger - decisively so - on 1 and 2. Enemies #2-#4 had good anti-3 bases.

But on the offence side there was no comparison. The enemy had 3 max troop TH11 attacks all with better than 40/40/20 heroes. No matter what bases DL's #2-#4 had, they were going to be flattened: non-max TH10s aren't going to survive multiple max TH11 hits. Whereas DL's clan had respectable, but normal heroes. The enemy had 155 extra hero levels across the top 4 bases.

The enemy had so much excess offence their lowest realistic score was 74. Some of DL's TH10 bases aren't great, but it would have made no difference in this case. There's no way DL's new-ish TH11 could triple the maxed enemy TH11, so they had a maximum possible score of 74 - and probably a lower percentage on #1.

Reasons for the disparity? Mostly the enemy had 5 no defence bases (mostly TH3s) at the bottom out of 25 total. They had also been selective about what they built, which was giving their defence a bit of a boost. And they had set up the line-up well, with a maxed out #1, then effectively a reasonably steep drop, which is likely to match up to TH11, but non-max, #1s on the enemy side. They didn't have a mass of defenceless bases, and weren't crazy lopsided - mostly just their #2 and #3 giving them a knock-out blow at the top. So they'd focused their lopsidedness where it mattered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

I finally got to visit DL's clan (had a very tense war in my own clan yesterday).

I think much of what SC is right, but it does also understate the match and DL's point about the match. The matchup was effectively unwinnable (unless the enemy had been morons, when any match might be winnable). The best DL's clan could realistically have done with genius attacks and bases is to lose on percentage at 74-74.

DL's #1 is a low-mid TH11. #2 is a mid-strong TH10. #3 and 4 are very fresh TH10s, and #5 down are regular TH9s.
Enemy #1 has kept his xbows at lvl 4, but is otherwise totally maxed out - it looked like all 50 icing sugar walls, and all the new hero levels. His base looks like a variant of very common TH11 multi-ring pushing base. Enemy #2 had slightly in excess of max TH10 defence; #3 and #4 were engineered - inferno-less, but #3 in particular is a very hard target for a TH10. They had good bases. The enemy actually had very slightly lower total defence scores on the top 5, but because they had been selective on what to build, especially on their outright engineered defence #3, their defence was actually stronger - and was outright stronger - decisively so - on 1 and 2. Enemies #2-#4 had good anti-3 bases.

But on the offence side there was no comparison. The enemy had 3 max troop TH11 attacks all with better than 40/40/20 heroes. No matter what bases DL's #2-#4 had, they were going to be flattened: non-max TH10s aren't going to survive multiple max TH11 hits. Whereas DL's clan had respectable, but normal heroes. The enemy had 155 extra hero levels across the top 4 bases.

The enemy had so much excess offence their lowest realistic score was 74. Some of DL's TH10 bases aren't great, but it would have made no difference in this case. There's no way DL's new-ish TH11 could triple the maxed enemy TH11, so they had a maximum possible score of 74 - and probably a lower percentage on #1.

Reasons for the disparity? Mostly the enemy had 5 no defence bases (mostly TH3s) at the bottom out of 25 total. They had also been selective about what they built, which was giving their defence a bit of a boost. And they had set up the line-up well, with a maxed out #1, then effectively a reasonably steep drop, which is likely to match up to TH11, but non-max, #1s on the enemy side. They didn't have a mass of defenceless bases, and weren't crazy lopsided - mostly just their #2 and #3 giving them a knock-out blow at the top. So they'd focused their lopsidedness where it mattered.

---

N this is where the disagreement lies. Engineers wars r on roster management whereas most peoples wars r on the battlefield. With that said, how can u hate on engineers for wanting to play that way? It is afterall legal n a strategy (not fair tho n competitive imo) there r many aspects to war n preparation is a skill. Some people prepare by practicing how to three max bases n others prepare by making accts n tinkering with rosters to get easier wars. One strategy is not better than the other. They r both strategies n their choice of playstyle. The only reason y im against engineering is bc I think it is not competitive(although I personally dont mind matching against them but do understand y people r frsutrated at meeting em) n pro engineers who make silly excuses. Engineers r not to blame. It is sc even tho we can all acknowledge it is super hard to make a fair system for all (overall I think sc did good job with war mm)

i am not disagreing with the war being unfair... it was unwinnable


but... im jus tpointing out the opponent would have won even if the war was evenly matched and they did not even need their 2 and 3.

lets replace the enemy's 2 and 3 with th10s. Dls clan may have scraped up a star or two, but their 1 secured the win and their base designs were better. effectively, they did not even need the advantage to win. all im saying

i am not denying the war was unwinnable but i think you guys should not deny that even if the war was fair, the enemy would still win (assuming same attacks/defenses)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SupremeCleave

i am not disagreing with the war being unfair... it was unwinnable


but... im jus tpointing out the opponent would have won even if the war was evenly matched and they did not even need their 2 and 3.

lets replace the enemy's 2 and 3 with th10s. Dls clan may have scraped up a star or two, but their 1 secured the win and their base designs were better. effectively, they did not even need the advantage to win. all im saying

---

THAT, is a bold statement to make

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daddylindo

THAT, is a bold statement to make

---

is it? their 1 secured the win for them with a 99% and a 3 star.

The most you guys could have mustered up would be 74 stars and would lose on percentage. really not bold at all, it is factual.


Tell me, if they needed their 2 and 3 to win, why did they not attack?