SC - Please Break Your Silence On Engineered Bases

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

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. :)

---

Good call. I should have qualified my statement with it with the phrase "whining". :)

At any rate, in my clan war experience, if you look at a lot of the war matchups where clans draw "engineered" clans (it's certainly true for ours) if you look at the bottom of the roster of the complaining clan............. you'll see a couple th3 halls or a defenseless base or two. Which skews their war weight downward to match the weight of the engineered clan.

So, often, the clan that is whining about "engineering" simply got "out-engineered" and is taking issue with it. Best way to avoid engineered clans (of course nothing is absolute) is to add all legitimate bases to your war roster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MossackFonseca

I got a big kick out of Blombardo's complaint post-patch that it took him FOUR DAYS to find a war match... :)

---

Yes, and dont forget Blombardo probably spent 100$ in gems to try to win or tie that war because his clan was so mismatched.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevs926

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.

---

Aha. Now we're getting somewhere, albeit with a slight omission which I'll come to shortly.

The MM does seem to be leaning far more on this direction now. Big advantages in offence do seem to be regularly pit against clear advantages in defence.
Not just through lopsided bases, even when 2 clans full of balanced bases meet and there's a significant hero advantage for one, expect an eagle/inferno advantage to the other.

Which, really, sounds fair enough, it's the old perfect draw scenario.
But why isn't that the result more often?

Well, it is indeed partly due to attacking ability, and base design quality. A very well designed 9.5 is just as difficult to 3* for the vast majority, as a poorly designed full 10.

However. That omission I talked about earlier.
Those clans with higher defs and weaker heroes, very generally speaking, tend to be less experienced, less talented attackers, with weaker base designs.

Which turns that non-existent to small advantage to the engineers, into a seemingly insurmountable one.

So while I agree with the principle of the 'perfect draw' argument, or that engineering is actually a disadvantage to the eyes of some.....the chances of matching the types of clans and players with that view, are pretty slight.

Fair assessment?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HappyDragon

The longer they wait, the more engineered bases pop up... and the more heartbreak there will be if they suddenly announce policy changes.

FYI... I don't have an engineered base, but since we're encountering so many, folks in my clan are starting to engineer, or under-upgrade high-weight defenses when going to the next townhall level...

---

nah, the more engineered bases out there, the easier is to beat those engineered clans...and that is according the current match making algorithm. So funny to read all those people thinking dipping into engineering when they have no idea what they are getting into. Your post and the folks in your clan confirm exactly that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Superfinch30

Aha. Now we're getting somewhere, albeit with a slight omission which I'll come to shortly.

The MM does seem to be leaning far more on this direction now. Big advantages in offence do seem to be regularly pit against clear advantages in defence.
Not just through lopsided bases, even when 2 clans full of balanced bases meet and there's a significant hero advantage for one, expect an eagle/inferno advantage to the other.

Which, really, sounds fair enough, it's the old perfect draw scenario.
But why isn't that the result more often?

Well, it is indeed partly due to attacking ability, and base design quality. A very well designed 9.5 is just as difficult to 3* for the vast majority, as a poorly designed full 10.

However. That omission I talked about earlier.
Those clans with higher defs and weaker heroes, very generally speaking, tend to be less experienced, less talented attackers, with weaker base designs.

Which turns that non-existent to small advantage to the engineers, into a seemingly insurmountable one.

So while I agree with the principle of the 'perfect draw' argument, or that engineering is actually a disadvantage to the eyes of some.....the chances of matching the types of clans and players with that view, are pretty slight.

Fair assessment?

---

They should gem them. Help pay for this great game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

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.

---

Loophole is in the eye of the beholder. Some clans value offense, and therefore would advocate for a MM system that favors offense. Some clans value defense and therefore would advocate for a MM system that favors that. Of course everyone would like a "fair" matchup but the devil is in the details.

I bet you if a deity came down today from on high and bestowed SC with a "perfect" matchmaking algorithm for matchmaking, it wouldn't be a week before someone would be up here complaining that their war streak was snapped because they got hosed on a war matchup.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Superfinch30

Aha. Now we're getting somewhere, albeit with a slight omission which I'll come to shortly.

The MM does seem to be leaning far more on this direction now. Big advantages in offence do seem to be regularly pit against clear advantages in defence.
Not just through lopsided bases, even when 2 clans full of balanced bases meet and there's a significant hero advantage for one, expect an eagle/inferno advantage to the other.

Which, really, sounds fair enough, it's the old perfect draw scenario.
But why isn't that the result more often?

Well, it is indeed partly due to attacking ability, and base design quality. A very well designed 9.5 is just as difficult to 3* for the vast majority, as a poorly designed full 10.

However. That omission I talked about earlier.
Those clans with higher defs and weaker heroes, very generally speaking, tend to be less experienced, less talented attackers, with weaker base designs.

Which turns that non-existent to small advantage to the engineers, into a seemingly insurmountable one.

So while I agree with the principle of the 'perfect draw' argument, or that engineering is actually a disadvantage to the eyes of some.....the chances of matching the types of clans and players with that view, are pretty slight.

Fair assessment?

---

There it is. Very solid take.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevs926

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.

---

Don't bet on many people agreeing with you on that because so many people already drank the kool-aid: ''engineers manipulated the mm and got huge mismatch advantage in wars''. And this is not just now, it is been going on for a couple of years now (since Nov 2014 update i think). Engineer was a liability before March 2016 update as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gw2kpro

There it is. Very solid take.

---

Yes. SuperFinch has it. Where's Pedro? Haven't seen him around for awhile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

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.

---

Really? what loophole? please state just one! Sight...another GASP with little (perhaps outdated) understanding about the mm. SC did an amazing job closing those ''loopholes'' already back in the October update, and further tweaked it in the December update.