What would perfect war matching making look like ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnnyfsullivan

I feel like I'm playing a different game than you and the poster i responded to. i don't see "tons of clans / bases" with defense ahead of offense. Maybe it's the way we are defining it. If you're talking about rushed bases (TH10 with crystal walls, 1-2 infernos, a mix of TH7/8/9 defenses and teen heroes) then yes, there are many of those. But to me, that's not defense ahead of offense...it's a rushed base. And I have never seen an entire clan with TH9/10 defense with TH7/8 offense (putting defense ahead of offense), nor have I ever come across a base that is like that. That's rarefied.

---

On my TH10 and TH in G3/C1, I see garbage bases with low heroes, IT / EA and low-level walls but since I don't go back and check their offense, I don't know for sure but I suspect that it is lagging their defense...

Now to me that is a rushed base but one that is rushed without forethought unlike the strategically rushed bases from our dear friend SoD...

I am not not trying to be pedantic but aren't most poorly rushed bases indicative of defense > offense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denton

On my TH10 and TH in G3/C1, I see garbage bases with low heroes, IT / EA and low-level walls but since I don't go back and check their offense, I don't know for sure but I suspect that it is lagging their defense...

Now to me that is a rushed base but one that is rushed without forethought unlike the strategically rushed bases from our dear friend SoD...

I am not not trying to be pedantic but aren't most poorly rushed bases indicative of defense > offense?

---

I disagree. The bases / clans I come across in MM and in wars have gotten the queen (for TH9) the extra spell (for TH9/10), the extra troop space (TH9/10) and a few select troops. I have not seen a base in which the offense is TH8 (no queen, no extra troops, no extra spells, no select upgrades like Valks, Hogs, or Dragons) but the defense is max TH9 or TH10. To me, the latter is defense over offense. The former is a mixed bag, hence poor upgrade choice(s) or rushed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnnyfsullivan

I disagree. The bases / clans I come across in MM and in wars have gotten the queen (for TH9) the extra spell (for TH9/10), the extra troop space (TH9/10) and a few select troops. I have not seen a base in which the offense is TH8 (no queen, no extra troops, no extra spells, no select upgrades like Valks, Hogs, or Dragons) but the defense is max TH9 or TH10. To me, the latter is defense over offense. The former is a mixed bag, hence poor upgrade choice(s) or rushed.

---

Ok I see your point and completely agree!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnnyfsullivan

I disagree. The bases / clans I come across in MM and in wars have gotten the queen (for TH9) the extra spell (for TH9/10), the extra troop space (TH9/10) and a few select troops. I have not seen a base in which the offense is TH8 (no queen, no extra troops, no extra spells, no select upgrades like Valks, Hogs, or Dragons) but the defense is max TH9 or TH10. To me, the latter is defense over offense. The former is a mixed bag, hence poor upgrade choice(s) or rushed.

---

I haven't seen any bases with "defense over offense" as you define it either, but I think you're changing the terminology on the fly. No one--at least no one who sticks with CoC--wants to play a pure tower defense game and upgrade only defenses without troops.

In fact, if you were a completely passive player and just sat behind your defenses relying on collector income, your offense would soon outstrip your defense. There are far fewer lab upgrades than defensive upgrades.

What you are calling rushed *is* "defense over offense". Your defense is stronger than your offense, ie. you can't three star your own base.

This is if anything the "natural" way to play the game, as TankSinatra has pointed out. As a casual player or farmer, why wouldn't you drop a tower the instant you had the gold and the builder? Helps protect your resources. That's why these rushed bases are the most common type out there. The hero slog is difficult and tedious; walls don't return much bang for the buck compared to even the most expensive towers. That's why max or near-max bases are rare; it's why, at least IMO, matching them to a lower-mid base at the next level is reasonable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by posthoc

I haven't seen any bases with "defense over offense" as you define it either, but I think you're changing the terminology on the fly. No one--at least no one who sticks with CoC--wants to play a pure tower defense game and upgrade only defenses without troops.

In fact, if you were a completely passive player and just sat behind your defenses relying on collector income, your offense would soon outstrip your defense. There are far fewer lab upgrades than defensive upgrades.

What you are calling rushed *is* "defense over offense". Your defense is stronger than your offense, ie. you can't three star your own base.

This is if anything the "natural" way to play the game, as TankSinatra has pointed out. As a casual player or farmer, why wouldn't you drop a tower the instant you had the gold and the builder? Helps protect your resources. That's why these rushed bases are the most common type out there. The hero slog is difficult and tedious; walls don't return much bang for the buck compared to even the most expensive towers. That's why max or near-max bases are rare; it's why, at least IMO, matching them to a lower-mid base at the next level is reasonable.

---

Got it....thanks for the clarification. I've never heard it stated that way. I've always referred to them as rushed, and I'm not changing the definition on the fly. Appreciate you taking the time to respond.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnnyfsullivan

Got it....thanks for the clarification. I've never heard it stated that way. I've always referred to them as rushed, and I'm not changing the definition on the fly. Appreciate you taking the time to respond.

---

Does your definition of offense include heroes? This game is awash with defensively max Th9s with 10/10 heroes and mid Th10s with 15/15 heroes. They may have their offensive troops upgraded but with those low heroes the chances they can get a 3 star against a base similar to themselves is really low. I consider heroes a integral part of offense thus I would say the vast majority of players at Th9 and 10 have themselves lopsided bases with defense > offense. Disclaimer, I don't have a TH11 so I don't know what its like up there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chang405

Does your definition of offense include heroes? This game is awash with defensively max Th9s with 10/10 heroes and mid Th10s with 15/15 heroes. They may have their offensive troops upgraded but with those low heroes the chances they can get a 3 star against a base similar to themselves is really low. I consider heroes a integral part of offense thus I would say the vast majority of players at Th9 and 10 have themselves lopsided bases with defense > offense. Disclaimer, I don't have a TH11 so I don't know what its like up there.

---

Yes it does, but I think we are straying too far from the OP, and I apologize if I derailed this thread over semantics. What a few of the posters called "a ton of bases out there which upgrade defense over offense" I call "rushed." Some further defined that as poorly rushed or strategically rushed...and I really think all of us are in agreement in a broad sense.

So trying to get back into the main point which is about the matchmaker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnnyfsullivan

Yes it does, but I think we are straying too far from the OP, and I apologize if I derailed this thread over semantics. What a few of the posters called "a ton of bases out there which upgrade defense over offense" I call "rushed." Some further defined that as poorly rushed or strategically rushed...and I really think all of us are in agreement in a broad sense.

So trying to get back into the main point which is about the matchmaker.

---

There was a main point?

:confused:

Thanks for the clarification about rushed bases. I agree that we all are discussing the same thing, and are substantially in agreement--including, back to the main point, that good matchmaking would yield wars where either side has a chance to win, and the clan with better attacks and base designs prevails. I find that to be the case in most of our wars.

But invariably there are going to be mismatches. I've been on both sides of uneven matches, and neither way is much fun.

So, how bad is a mismatch before it becomes "intolerable"? (Which is more a question about one's personal pain threshold than about matchmaking, imo.) And what can be done to minimize mismatches? I'll apply an adulterated-almost-beyond-recognition version of the anthropic principle, and suggest that any fixes which can be applied easily and uncontroversially have already happened. Whatever remains is either difficult to achieve technically, or lacks consensus (cf. this forum!), or is judged to have significant unintended or imbalancing consequences worse than the problem being addressed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by posthoc

There was a main point?

:confused:

Thanks for the clarification about rushed bases. I agree that we all are discussing the same thing, and are substantially in agreement--including, back to the main point, that good matchmaking would yield wars where either side has a chance to win, and the clan with better attacks and base designs prevails. I find that to be the case in most of our wars.

But invariably there are going to be mismatches. I've been on both sides of uneven matches, and neither way is much fun.

So, how bad is a mismatch before it becomes "intolerable"? (Which is more a question about one's personal pain threshold than about matchmaking, imo.) And what can be done to minimize mismatches? I'll apply an adulterated-almost-beyond-recognition version of the anthropic principle, and suggest that any fixes which can be applied easily and uncontroversially have already happened. Whatever remains is either difficult to achieve technically, or lacks consensus (cf. this forum!), or is judged to have significant unintended or imbalancing consequences worse than the problem being addressed.

---

Well stated...agree.

No such thing. A couple or more years ago i opined that cw matching would end the game, eventually, it will