Why engineering is good for the game

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

February 10th, 2017
ForgiveMeNot

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForgiveMeNot

That s what ppl r facing everyday in multiplayer. In war, can't u 3 stars an underdeveloped base with ur maxed troops?

Ppl lost a war, don't want to admit they r not as good and blame on others that is the only reason. If both clan r good attacker, i don't see why "maxers clan" would lose :confused:. Au contraire, their top maxed bases are hard for enginnered clan to 3 stars.

tbh, ask yourself, if ur clan is not engineering why would a maxed of all same th level clan face one????
MM is fair, only ppl don't admit their defeat complain.

only thing not fair in this game is ppl get match with opponents better attackers than them!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erl86

me as a th10(just example) with level 25 heroes can 3 star him and even a th9 can 3 star him but the problem isn't 3 starring him but 3 starring the top enemy guy max th10 defense and since it's not so easy to 3 star a max th10 with my level 25 heroes in most cases i can take high % 2 star and even if the enemy th10 fails to 3 star me they have that engineer dude positioning last in their map with max th11 heroes and troops that can faceroll me.Is it so much difficult to understand????don't tell me that me as a th10 with level 25 heroes should 3 star other max th10 all the day.
i

As I said, if your clan is not engineering why would your opponents have a maxed TH10 on top and low weight base at bottom??
February 10th, 2017
Redviper42

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForgiveMeNot

As I said, if your clan is not engineering why would your opponents have a maxed TH10 on top and low weight base at bottom??

Please...so your saying if you have a good spread of townhalls, high weight and low weight, your automatically engineering? Your deflecting, as you KNOW the answer and you KNOW he is right.
February 10th, 2017
HairPartyLlama

I find it hilarious that most people are upset with the people engineering their bases. Those "engineers" have used anecdotal evidence from past war matchmaking results and have used that data to try and improve their war outcome. That's called "playing the game".

By the rationale being employed by most of these bashers, then I should be criticized because I study the current meta at th11 and then decide to use air troops in a fashion demonstrated by some of the best attackers because I am exploiting the game. The game is currently favoring air, but I should not "exploit" this advantage because it's NOT FAIR to everyone. Some people may not know about this advantage.

Here's the deal -- as long as there are war advantages to be gained by engineering, smart people will engineer bases. I have 2 TH11 accounts. One is fully maxed defensively. One has TH9 level defenses, but max heroes and max offense. I can attack the same bases with either account, so it's flexible, and I will leave it like that as long as there is an advantage to do so. I make no apologies to anyone for playing the game the way it is currently designed.

Supercell is going to do what they feel is best for the game, and when they make changes, I'm not going to cry about it, I'm going to adjust accordingly.
February 10th, 2017
Rakanishu

I didn't read through the entire thread so if this point has been made my apologies for repeating it.

Engineering is not good for the game not because of the advantage it brings, but because of the absolute waste of time it forces the other clan to deal with when they get matched to engineers in war.

2 of our last 3 wars were against engineered clans. (we're examining our line up to try and figure out why. I suspect it has to do with our wide town hall spread of TH5s - TH10) The first one ended in a tie. Our Current one, I doubt they have the skill or the power to beat us. They at best will tie with us, and i doubt they manage that since they are clearly using engineering to overcome a talent deficit based on their attacks so far.

Here's the problem for our clan.

Attacking defenseless bases: not fun
Attacking rushed/underdeveloped bases: not fun
Attacking mini-max bases: not fun
Making dip attacks: not fun

Having the war end in a tie because the other clan basically makes all dip attacks to steam roll your clan: Not fun (I'm not sure how its fun for the other team but apparently it is since they are the ones doing it)

The only thing that is fun here is watching their TH9s fail on TH7s. But that gets old pretty quickly.

The war is a complete waste of time for us. Thats the problem with engineering and why it needs to stop.
February 10th, 2017
ProfChaos

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warios

I have no issue with engineering, play how you want of the multitudes of development paths available. SC just needs to figure out a way to properly weight these bases for war matching, and all these threads will vanish.

I have slight issue with it, but I agree if reasonable changes to mm continue everyone will move in to the next exploit and the rants that go with them.

And as others posted, but not quoted here, there is a bit of blame on the "anti" side if you find you are continually matching these kinds of bases/ clans and you should be looking at adjusting your roster, which is likely engineered. :eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SinOfDusk

If they do not want to put up with this system, then they should get to maxed TH11 asap, because that's the way I'm doing for my maxed account. Maxed TH11 in a full maxed TH11 roster vs enemies who are maxed TH11s as well. No way the enemy can outmatch us and any engineers would be easily crushed.

Not everyone wants to or is capable of playing that way, nor does SC think they should as they said indirectly in the comments about GW to TH10, nor is everyone capable of only running that kind of a roster. The suggestion and overall implications if everyone operated that way are pretty dumbfounding from someone claiming to know the game so well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SinOfDusk

Advanced mechanics, you've said it yourself. Shouldn't players who know advanced mechanics be at an advantage? Shouldn't players who know that advantage late put in the extra mile and extra effort to win? As far as I know, you don't need to engineer to get 80% win rate, just be an organised clan. The players who truly put in the extra effort can go up to 95%, shouldn't it be that way?

Effort = rewards, its that simple really.

You missed the point entirely.

Put it this way instead... For SC gave full disclosure/ rules of the game then those who opted not to take advantage of any advantage would only have themselves to blame, however this is not the case and by the time you are aware enough of the mechanics you've already missed the oppertunity to take advangate of it thus requiring additional accounts be made that then compete against those without the smell level of understanding.

And it's certainly not "effort = reward" it's exploit = reward.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azrial

This is wrong and it should be highlighted.

The pro golfer would be considered a "scratch" golfer and therefore would have a zero handicap. If he averages 4 under par per 18 these are 4 free strokes that he has when competing against someone who does have a handicap. In addition the player who averages 80 isn't an 8 handicap. His handicap would most likely be 4 or 5 at worst -- you don't get 100% of your handicap and outlying bad scores are tossed out.

Therefore a fair match-up in golf including handicap would be...

Player A (Pro golfer who averages -4 per round)

versus

Player B (Highschool player with a 5 handicap)

Player B would get 5 strokes (NOT 12) on the toughest holes.

If I were a betting man I'd put my money on the pro 6 days of the week and twice on Sundays.

Edit: In addition how would it be "fair" to give the high school player 12 strokes? Let's say the high schooler has a great round and shoots a 74. The pro would then have to shoot a 62 just to tie?

Morale of the story. The pro does and should have the advantage. In golf the USGA has a fair handicap system to ensure the match isn't won before it is played. 5 strokes is what they deem fair. Arguing for 12 strokes is simply unreasonable.

Bowling handicap is also similar in that the player with the better average will when more often than a player with a lower average.

Regardless of who is correct in the golf scenario, isn't this just the reason why professional golfers don't play high school students competitively? Sounds to me like the same applies to engineers in CoC. :smirk:
February 10th, 2017
ForgiveMeNot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Redviper42

Please...so your saying if you have a good spread of townhalls, high weight and low weight, your automatically engineering? Your deflecting, as you KNOW the answer and you KNOW he is right.

Roster engineering is still engineering.
I know lot of ppl just playing innocent because roster can be done effortlessly and they can do it.. but against engineered base because they don't want to invest time to do it.
February 10th, 2017
Redviper42

Quote:

Originally Posted by HairPartyLlama

I find it hilarious that most people are upset with the people engineering their bases. Those "engineers" have used anecdotal evidence from past war matchmaking results and have used that data to try and improve their war outcome. That's called "playing the game".

By the rationale being employed by most of these bashers, then I should be criticized because I study the current meta at th11 and then decide to use air troops in a fashion demonstrated by some of the best attackers because I am exploiting the game. The game is currently favoring air, but I should not "exploit" this advantage because it's NOT FAIR to everyone. Some people may not know about this advantage.

Here's the deal -- as long as there are war advantages to be gained by engineering, smart people will engineer bases. I have 2 TH11 accounts. One is fully maxed defensively. One has TH9 level defenses, but max heroes and max offense. I can attack the same bases with either account, so it's flexible, and I will leave it like that as long as there is an advantage to do so. I make no apologies to anyone for playing the game the way it is currently designed.

Supercell is going to do what they feel is best for the game, and when they make changes, I'm not going to cry about it, I'm going to adjust accordingly.

I respect what you are saying and im fine with that, fairness is a tough concept. BUT extreme engineering is deteimental to the game. It gives one side an advantage so blatantly, its often over before the war even starts. HOW IS THAT FUN? If the majority adapted it would become a easy bully 3 star festival.
February 10th, 2017
Mustworkout

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForgiveMeNot

As I said, if your clan is not engineering why would your opponents have a maxed TH10 on top and low weight base at bottom??

WRONG, im #1, aq 20 bk 15 warden 5...max th10 fail on me every war. Im a 9.5.5, because im so great at attacking. Sorry you spent hours upon hours of the same old weak loot strat, to push everything. All i have to say is.

All is fair in love and war!

Rules dont apply to everything, which makes the game great. Just a simple findamenral rules of balance and structure. Which in SC defense. Is brilliant!

#getyourgameup
February 10th, 2017
Mustworkout

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustworkout

WRONG, im #1, aq 20 bk 15 warden 5...max th10 fail on me every war. Im a 9.5.5, because im so great at attacking. Sorry you spent hours upon hours of the same old weak loot strat, to push everything. All i have to say is.

All is fair in love and war!

Rules dont apply to everything, which makes the game great. Just a simple findamenral rules of balance and structure. Which in SC defense. Is brilliant!

#getyourgameup

Every base is engineered, ever war group is engineered. The game is engineering, sc does a great job balancing.

Im confused on the argument really altogeher.
February 10th, 2017
JFSoul

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mustworkout

Every base is engineered, ever war group is engineered. The game is engineering, sc does a great job balancing.

Im confused on the argument really altogeher.

This happens on occasion, when some focus on the semantics and the word engineering. For the purposes of this discussion, an engineered base refers to a lopsided base.

Since you responded to your own comment, I'm not sure if you are saying you are confused about your comment, or about another post.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page