What would perfect war matching making look like ?

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.

---

I see these bases in war and it is one of the main reasons why we win +90% of our wars - we have high heroes and few IT/EA which is what OnyxDS termed "heroes v infernos". Just finished a 50v engineered war and for the first time that I can recall, we had the advantage in both...

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.

---

Thanks as always JFS for being a true gentleman! Regarding rushed bases and matchmaking, this one of the issues with changing the MMA to penalize engineers - if not done correctly, it will negatively impact rushers who IME comprise the greatest percentage of the player population. This is why I support Nerfedname's tax proposal or something similar - and objective - that penalizes the disparity between offense and defense...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Humbob

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

---

Got the Powerball numbers? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denton

Thanks as always JFS for being a true gentleman! Regarding rushed bases and matchmaking, this one of the issues with changing the MMA to penalize engineers - if not done correctly, it will negatively impact rushers who IME comprise the greatest percentage of the player population. This is why I support Nerfedname's tax proposal or something similar - and objective - that penalizes the disparity between offense and defense...

---

Thank you, Denton. And I agree--it's not easy to do, and I really like the small, incremental changes SC has taken. It will never be perfect, but it's pretty darn good. And if I were to guess, it seems like they may have implemented something that is approach Nerf's suggestion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Johnnyfsullivan

Thank you, Denton. And I agree--it's not easy to do, and I really like the small, incremental changes SC has taken. It will never be perfect, but it's pretty darn good. And if I were to guess, it seems like they may have implemented something that is approach Nerf's suggestion.

---

Amen. As an active war clan we would love to see even matches. Both ways! I think most of us would agree that we don't like big imbalances, in either direction. Not much fun.

And the small incremental changes that SuperCell has taken have worked somewhat, IMO... and cf. my previous post are perhaps as much as they are prepared to do, or are willing to do given their larger data set and greater resources compared to forum jocks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by posthoc

Amen. As an active war clan we would love to see even matches. Both ways! I think most of us would agree that we don't like big imbalances, in either direction. And the small incremental changes that SuperCell has taken have worked somewhat, IMO... and cf. my previous post are perhaps as much as they are prepared to do, or are willing to do given their larger data set and greater resources compared to forum jocks.

---

i agree the changes have been good, moving away from unbalanced wars to wars each side can win, without destroying the game for the many rushed bases.

supercell has really gone hard at modders, and have done a great job bringing clanwars into balance.

outrageous that there are not more thank you threads, so much outrage, so little gratitude.

thank you supercell for diminishing modders and making clanwars more competitive and balanced, great job, keep it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starcast99

To be honest there can be only one answer to this question. Perfect war match making would mean everyone would win 1/2 of their wars and lose 1/2.

We all know this is impossible but that would be perfect. Bottom line if you win more then you lose don't complain.

---

This does not make sense. It does not account for us being humans who make mistakes, forget to attack, some who care, some who don't...

A quick question to you guys..

What would you consider more fair?

A th9 with 30/30 max defense matching a th9 with sub 20/20 max defense

or a th9 with 30/30 max defense matching a defensively equal 9.5 with 15/15 and max troops for th10

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathandrake2017

A quick question to you guys..

What would you consider more fair?

A th9 with 30/30 max defense matching a th9 with sub 20/20 max defense

or a th9 with 30/30 max defense matching a defensively equal 9.5 with 15/15 and max troops for th10

---

Hypothetical are a waste of time . The 9.5 would have the traps and max tesla usually.
Prob 50 magmas or more

The 15 15 with max laloon can 3* 100% of the time without deploying heros , so heros don't matter

The margin for the 9 is much thinner

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nathandrake2017

A quick question to you guys..

What would you consider more fair?

A th9 with 30/30 max defense matching a th9 with sub 20/20 max defense

or a th9 with 30/30 max defense matching a defensively equal 9.5 with 15/15 and max troops for th10

---

Even if the 9.5 didn't add or upgrade a single trap or defense to his base he still has the advantage.

My mini moved to TH10 with 12/12 heroes. At that time my main was a TH9 with 30/28 heroes. Once I got max camps, extra spell and level 5 valks it was easier to 3 star max TH9s with my "mini th10".

I think heroes are currently overvalued by the MM. IMO the extra spell, camp space and one major war troop are worth about 40 combined hero levels. Therefore TH9 with 30/30 might compare to a TH9.5 with 10/10 with only level 5 valks. Give that 9.5 15/15 heroes and all maxed troops and it's not even close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azrial

Even if the 9.5 didn't add or upgrade a single trap or defense to his base he still has the advantage.

My mini moved to TH10 with 12/12 heroes. At that time my main was a TH9 with 30/28 heroes. Once I got max camps, extra spell and level 5 valks it was easier to 3 star max TH9s with my "mini th10".

I think heroes are currently overvalued by the MM. IMO the extra spell, camp space and one major war troop are worth about 40 combined hero levels. Therefore TH9 with 30/30 might compare to a TH9.5 with 10/10 with only level 5 valks. Give that 9.5 15/15 heroes and all maxed troops and it's not even close.

---

Hm i see

Consider two matches we have seen

5 max th9s with 20/20 + (THEM) vs 2 max th9s defensively, 1 th9.5, 2 th8ish defenses engineered th10s (US)

5 max th9s with 20/20+ (THEM) vs 1 th9 20/20, 4 th9s with max defenses and heroes below 15/15 (high defense low offense bases)

Which would you consider more fair?

Personally I would consider the first one more fair as the max th9s (opponents) will triple our th9s/engienered bases with relative ease (as while we have more offense we compensate with weaker defenses on the last 3) and we will as well

The second one has been a common occurence as to what ive seen. Lots of defensively rushed bases facing maxed near max bases and standing little to no chance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azrial

Even if the 9.5 didn't add or upgrade a single trap or defense to his base he still has the advantage.

My mini moved to TH10 with 12/12 heroes. At that time my main was a TH9 with 30/28 heroes. Once I got max camps, extra spell and level 5 valks it was easier to 3 star max TH9s with my "mini th10".

I think heroes are currently overvalued by the MM. IMO the extra spell, camp space and one major war troop are worth about 40 combined hero levels. Therefore TH9 with 30/30 might compare to a TH9.5 with 10/10 with only level 5 valks. Give that 9.5 15/15 heroes and all maxed troops and it's not even close.

---

And that's why I keep saying again and again. Heroes aren't just overvalued by the MM, they are also massively overrated by the players

Last war top 5:
Us:
TH11 - 20/20/5
TH10 - 20/25
TH10 - 10/10
TH10 - 5/5
TH10 -5/5

Them:
TH10 - 36/40
TH9.5 - 30/37
TH9 - 30/30
TH9 - 30/30
TH9 - 29/28

One clan perfected the other clan in a 20v20 in 22 attacks, guess which one? The losing clan didn't even manage to get 55/60 stars