SC - Please Break Your Silence On Engineered Bases

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xXXCHRISXXx

In your world it isn't. As I stated, bring a maxed 9 or you're wasting both mine and your time. Of course you'd like to bring a th11 offense to bully my 9. What exactly are you trying to prove? That you can bully lower townhalls?

Talentless? You know all this from the very few engagements we've had here on this thread? Let me sum this up for you. I run a successful clan, we're nearing our 400th war win, just a bunch ' talentless maxers' handing out fair losses. Take that how you'd like...don't waste my time.

---

Super Finch told me to start being nice to you. Sigh.

400 is a big deal. Nice work!

Keep personal attacks or even the slightest insults to a minimum or this thread will fall into the hand of the mods where they will have no choice but to close it because of the actions being presented.

Seen it before, seems like this thread might follow suit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BbaBaba123

Keep personal attacks or even the slightest insults to a minimum or this thread will fall into the hand of the mods where they will have no choice but to close it because of the actions being presented.

Seen it before, seems like this thread might follow suit.

---

An intelligent point of view. I am thoroughly enjoying being on the same forum as you, and look forward to further opinions you may share.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Upgrayyyyyyyyd

For the love of God...

These aren't engineers. They're try-hards.

Engineers are max hero, max walls, TH1-9 defenses, who win against top tier clans by playing the weights effectively.

Think GG, 6ayMartians, WreckingCrew, TRL.

---

It's all engineering, and falls under a mod's description, "An engineered base refers to a player who selectively builds and upgrades defenses to produce a base that is as strong as possible with a minimum war weight."

IMAO, I think these are the type of lopsided bases that the majority of users (casual players) encounter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Wrong. We don't want to play a PvM (player vs matchmaker) game. We want to play a PvP game instead. The matchmaker is a machine logic system that is easy to anticipate and play against. That is not a game we'd like to play.

---

easy to anticipate, yet alot of clans failed to do so. Oh the irony. The results of war isnt fully dependent on it anyway. layout, plans, and execution still matters. So you still play a PVP game, but you have to mind the matchmaker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Wrong again. What we need is a game that will match similar clans to similar clans. Which is in fact the purpose of the matchmaker. If you don't want to be matched against similar clans then why not just ditch the matchmaker and get a random clan when the game starts? SC clearly wanted wars where both clans have a similar strength and just because they failed at it doesn't mean you should be abusing the system and force the rest of us to do the same. On top of that if anything is forcing everyone to have the same bases and same clan compositions is engineering. Most players that want to war go offense heavy even now. That wasn't their choice, it is forced on them. If forcing everyone to build offense heavy bases only isn't limited and boring then I don't know what is. Our idea is to build bases as you wish and upgrade what you wish and face clans that are similar. Your idea is to force one single upgrade path down everyone's throats.

---

there is no difference with "similar" and "same offense /defense". The moment a piece was different, the imbalance starts. The more different the pieces, the higher the imbalance. By your idea, the wars will be determined by three factors only, base layout, attack planning, and attack execution. You want all kinds of base to get the same kind of war potential. So if any kind of base have the same war potential, the players will only have to consider multiplayer advantage. Basically everyone will gear towards a maxer base because there is no purpose for the lopsided base. With engineering around, there are 2 paths to take, the one geared towards war, and one that is geared towards multiplayer and reaches end game faster. End game base being advantageous for both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Nope. Again. When you start the game there is no hint that says "Don't build that X-Bow because it will ruin your wars.", in fact there is a hint saying "Upgrading defenses is just as important as building a strong army.". SC never intended lopsided bases or roster engineering. Their matchmaker is flawed and people are abusing that flaw. We are using a piece of software made by SC that isn't working as intended. Therefore we complain. If we'd get a car that doesn't work as it should, we go and get it fixed. If we get a software that doesn't work as it should, we try to do the same by informing the developers of the problems.

---

That's how you see it. The way i see it, they made those statements to help you in multiplayer. They give no pointers when it comes to war. You are on your own to find what upgrades help you in war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Nope, that is not what we wish for. We wish for rushers being matched vs rushers, maxers vs maxers, etc. We wish for a system that is fair to all, not just maxers. You are the one that wishes everyone to make lopsided bases or lose. You are advocating a system that has only 1 viable path, we are advocating a system that has variety.

---

this is fair for all, but no one will actually rush/engineer a base when it has no advantage on any part of game whatsoever. There are 2 viable paths, the maxer path still being the preferred one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Since I've just defeated every single argument you posted, we can conclude that your conclusion - which is based on good logic but flawed premises - is defeated as well. Keeping engineering is just wrong. People are exploiting a faulty piece of software and playing a PvM game instead of a PvP one. While doing so they are also forcing the rest of us to take one single upgrade path or have no chance to win wars. We want freedom to build as we wish, we want a malfunctioning software to be fixed and we want wars that are not decided before the battle day starts. You want easy wins and/or everyone to have the exact same clan. You are wrong, we are right.

---

If you really think engineering is faulty, there is no need to remove it. You can ask for it to be fixed, and maybe the day comes where a normal clan faces an engineered one and the players can view it as fair matchup. Right now, some people already view it as such. There are maxer clans that views engineering as a disadvantage. These clans can defeat engineering and think of them as easy win. The matchmaker just needs to be adjusted, such that a defenseless base on the bottom will be compensated somewhere else on the top. SC has been working on it and the players feel the change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WarBeetle

There are clans out there that have plenty of bases with TH7 or 8 defenses but their town hall is 9/10 with maxed troops for that level. So they match up against far weaker clans and clean with ease.

What is the point of engineering bases for Th10/11 clan wars, they wouldn't be matched anyway surely?

I don't see the point in it unless you are engineering to face lower TH's and win with ease. Am I missing the point here?

P.S Our clan is TH10's and 9s, no 11's. We have only faced one clan who had an engineered TH11 base but his base got cleared with ease and he could only 2 star out top TH10, so no real advantage was gained.

---

so how are enemy engineers at the bottom making you LOSE wars?
the enemy doesnt have a th11 with max xbows fernos n an EA as their #1, it is still a th10.
in this case, if you lose it comes down to poorer attacking skills/planning from u than the other clan, the loss is not affected by the engineered bases the enemy has at the bottom.
at most it SHOULD come down to 1-2 stars and possibly % if your clan are decent attackers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

So if we all did it, it would make engineering less effective... and bore us all brainless with having to build our bases in only that war weight paranoid way and having to attack joke one cannon bases in war regularly.

---

Which is exactly what maxers advocate. Playing one way and building one way. I have even seen a few people posting that SC should designate the order in which upgrades are made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gw2kpro

Which is exactly what maxers advocate. Playing one way and building one way..

---

I'm a maxer, and I don't advocate this. As a regular forum member, I can also confirm that this opinion is rare. A few people do not justify an incorrect generalisation. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gw2kpro

Which is exactly what maxers advocate. Playing one way and building one way. I have even seen a few people posting that SC should designate the order in which upgrades are made.

---

I suggest you read a bit more widely then, as you'll find plenty of anti-engineering folk saying clearly that they have no wish to move to a system where all must build the same way, but rather they simply want the matchmaker to not have a loophole that engineers attempt to exploit before the war begins. You'll find that multiple times in this thread, for a start. And there are a good many anti-engineers who wouldn't describe themselves as maxers, btw, just regular casual players doing their thing who are sick of the effect engineering can have on their enjoyment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCharlie

No one cares if you have a lvl1 cannon only defense and lvl6 drags, were just asking supercell to match you in war with another lvl1 cannon lvl6 drag base instead of a th5. That way you get to play the game with like minded individuals who enjoy the challenge of going defenseless and only having one good troop.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MossackFonseca

Awesome reply CosmicCharlie. SC is willing to tolerate engineering within a certain range b/c that makes people feel like they can "upgrade like they want". The issue, as always, is that there are always some people who push the boundaries too far and take away the fun from others. If that happens once in a blue moon, say like modding is today, then there isn't much complaint b/c it's way better than it used to be and hardly ever happens, anyway. However, when it starts to happen often to many clans then it can become a threat to the long-term viability of the war scene, which then becomes a threat to long-term viability of the game. Which gets us to where we are today with the devs working diligently to improve matchmaker and generally making it harder to engineer than it used to be.

fyi, for those who don't want to match engineers, don't "engineer" yourself and you won't match them. Don't permabase at .5. Don't dump th3's on bottom of your war roster. Keep a reasonably-close spread of th's in your war roster. Oh, and recognize that if you win a very high % of your wars then you're going to get some serious mismatches.

---

Mossack: I expect you should know better: there is no such thing as a TH11 with lev 6 drag being ever matched with a TH5. Comparing mirror bases is such noobs thing to do.