And Finally I saw the MM fix . Our Current War : Engineers vs Engineers

So , finally after the win streak of 36 , we matched with engineers .
It would be a draw or lose for us .
Pics:


http://i63.tinypic.com/dhfptj.jpg
http://i66.tinypic.com/jtugs9.png
http://i65.tinypic.com/opr038.jpghttp://i68.tinypic.com/zn66gk.png


EDIT :
WAR RESULT
http://i66.tinypic.com/2m3lkdl.png

Why can't you win?

Are you roster engineering?

That bonus seems questionable....

"Fair Play" .. is that what I see in your description there?!?

You are jumping through a lot of hoops to engineer and stack the cards in your favor and you write "Fair Play" ?

Okay .. okay .. really?

Well, best of luck to you guys .. a perfect draw war would be quite an achievement :-)

/Affront

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KoningHan

Why can't you win?

---

because they almost 3 starred us .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Affront

"Fair Play" .. is that what I see in your description there?!?

You are jumping through a lot of hoops to engineer and stack the cards in your favor and you write "Fair Play" ?

Okay .. okay .. really?


Well, best of luck to you guys .. a perfect draw war would be quite an achievement :-)

---

actually we are not highly engineered .
Sometimes we have a maxed th11 in our clan and some .5s .
And another reason , we don't cheat in war

So one of the win streaks will end, or both if you tie! Let us know the end result.

Also how is your clan engineered and how is the enemy?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BbaBaba123

Are you roster engineering?

That bonus seems questionable....

---

no, not rosters , just a few 10s and 2-3 11s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expand

So one of the win streaks will end, or both if you tie! Let us know the end result.

Also how is your clan engineered and how is the enemy?

---

we got th10.5 , 9.5s in war , and they got 10s , 9.75s and some 8.75s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Affront

"Fair Play" .. is that what I see in your description there?!?

You are jumping through a lot of hoops to engineer and stack the cards in your favor and you write "Fair Play" ?

Okay .. okay .. really?

Well, best of luck to you guys .. a perfect draw war would be quite an achievement :-)

/Affront

---

Yes I see both clans feel the need to reassure the world they are fair play, with one even being 110% fair play!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadPoool

actually we are not highly engineered .
Sometimes we have a maxed th11 in our clan and some .5s .
And another reason , we don't cheat in war

---

Ok, fair enough.

I just thought, that "Fair Play" was implicit these days, but I guess that SuperCell is still catching people that are blatantly using 3rd party software to cheat in wars.

Keep us posted about the result :-)

/Affront

In the last 36 wars, You didn't match with any engineers? Or Engineer vs Enginner is defined as Fixed MM? Just curious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwagDaz

Yes I see both clans feel the need to reassure the world they are fair play, with one even being 110% fair play!

---

Haaa, haha, yeah, that's really rich, isn't it :-)

/Affront

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Affront

"Fair Play" .. is that what I see in your description there?!?

You are jumping through a lot of hoops to engineer and stack the cards in your favor and you write "Fair Play" ?

Okay .. okay .. really?

Well, best of luck to you guys .. a perfect draw war would be quite an achievement :-)

/Affront

---

We see a lot of clans with " no rushed bases". In their description. Just above where you scroll down and see all the defenseless bases at the bottom of the map

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SwagDaz

Yes I see both clans feel the need to reassure the world they are fair play, with one even being 110% fair play!

---

not going for long arguement , but i can say ,by fairplay , our clan means that we dont use any mods or bots in wars .
neither we cheat ,
moreover we sometimes have maxed th11 and 2 or 3 engineers in wars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rakanishu

We see a lot of clans with " no rushed bases". In their description. Just above where you scroll down and see all the defenseless bases at the bottom of the map

---

Defenseless is not rushed .. everybody knows that :-)

Is it Fair Play? .. well, technically it is still a good strategy...

/Affront

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Affront

Keep us posted about the result :-)

---

sure ! i.ll edit tommoraw morning

Are enemy th11s super 9.5s or just 10.5s? Considering their def weight is less than the th10.

Are your top 3-4 bases th11s? Do they have eagles or are they 10.5s? If your 11s have eagles, I'd say you got beat by an awesome attacker, not by engineering...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arachnid3

In the last 36 wars, You didn't match with any engineers? Or Engineer vs Enginner is defined as Fixed MM? Just curious.

---

idk about last 36 wars , i can say we didn't matched with engineer from last 20 wars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rakanishu

We see a lot of clans with " no rushed bases". In their description. Just above where you scroll down and see all the defenseless bases at the bottom of the map

---

most are engineered ones at down ( enemies got the most )

So then what exactly is fairplay? Everyone maxed and perma based?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Affront

Defenseless is not rushed .. everybody knows that :-)

Is it Fair Play? .. well, technically it is still a good strategy...

/Affront

---

yeah , old and working technique!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cnaf

So then what exactly is fairplay? Everyone maxed and perma based?

---

i think , fair play is when do wars without any cheating and some say's fair play wars with no troll bases

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arachnid3

Then You aren't sure about this. We do have bunch of engineers and we do get matched against engineers from the last two months. We even lost the streak though. And so this isn't called the FIX.

---

this is a fix. Then what should be done to fix ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadPoool

this is a fix. Then what should be done to fix ?

---

I mean that if this is the Fix, Then this is done Long Back.

Imo, if Engineer vs Engineer is called as Fix, then every engineered clan has to face engineered in every war, not as such after 2-3 wars or long.

Engineered clan losing to an engineered clan. Karma... I hate clans like both in these images

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadPoool

we got th10.5 , 9.5s in war , and they got 10s , 9.75s and some 8.75s

---

are both clans sandbagging? or do they have defenceless accounts with high level heroes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cnaf

So then what exactly is fairplay? Everyone maxed and perma based?

---

Fair play is what my clan uses when we win

Not fair play is when the other clan wins.

I find that to be the most used definition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rakanishu

Fair play is what my clan uses when we win

Not fair play is when the other clan wins.

I find that to be the most used definition.

---

haha this make senses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arachnid3

I mean that if this is the Fix, Then this is done Long Back.

Imo, if Engineer vs Engineer is called as Fix, then every engineered clan has to face engineered in every war, not as such after 2-3 wars or long.

---

yeah , you are right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adz93

Engineered clan losing to an engineered clan. Karma... I hate clans like both in these images

---

lol , and you can't losing , there is very high chance of draw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expand

are both clans sandbagging? or do they have defenceless accounts with high level heroes?

---

no, there are 4-5 defenceless

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rakanishu

Fair play is what my clan uses when we win

Not fair play is when the other clan wins.

I find that to be the most used definition.

---

damn , the simple definitions i know for fair play is when we war without using any bots/mods or cheats

For what little it's worth, we warred with same enemy clan a couple of months back.

We lost, but it was our fault. We made lots of mistakes in attacking.

I wish you better luck.

Add a max th11 and you never ever get perfect.
Currently none can 3* a max def th11 with proper design.
We always add one max th11 at top and we never get full star (only 1 time in last 2 years by modders)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milomilomilo

For what little it's worth, we warred with same enemy clan a couple of months back.

We lost, but it was our fault. We made lots of mistakes in attacking.

I wish you better luck.

---

dang , it's too late , we made some mistakes but still chance for a draw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadPoool

damn , the simple definitions i know for fair play is when we war without using any bots/mods or cheats

---

Forum hint: to the right if the "reply with quote" button is another button that lets you quote multiple posts in your reply post. Using this will help to avoid the impression that you may be over posting in deliberately repeatedly replying to your own thread over and over to drive your post count (which is against forum rules). Great button to use in situations like this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sandbuzz

Add a max th11 and you never ever get perfect.
Currently none can 3* a max def th11 with proper design.
We always add one max th11 at top and we never get full star (only 1 time in last 2 years by modders)

---

same with us , we don't promote heavy engineers but few .5s to balance the war attacks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

Forum hint: to the right if the "reply with quote" button is another button that lets you quote multiple posts in your reply post. Using this will help to avoid the impression that you may be over posting deliberately repeatedly replying to your own thread over and over to drive your post count (which is against forum rules). Great button to use in situations like this.

---

oops , i didn't know this ,
anyways thanks for telling :) , will try next time

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Expand

So one of the win streaks will end, or both if you tie! Let us know the end result.

Also how is your clan engineered and how is the enemy?

---

i.ll Edit the thread after war end

What is with the 16,000 war bonus?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anarchos

What is with the 16,000 war bonus?

---

my defenceless mini is in that clan , and my mirror was defenceless but a troll one , a th10 with teslas and traps , very much away from my offence

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadPoool

my defenceless mini is in that clan , and my mirror was defenceless but a troll one , a th10 with teslas and traps , very much away from my offence

---

Fair enough. Best of luck to your clan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Affront

"Fair Play" .. is that what I see in your description there?!?

You are jumping through a lot of hoops to engineer and stack the cards in your favor and you write "Fair Play" ?

Okay .. okay .. really?

Well, best of luck to you guys .. a perfect draw war would be quite an achievement :-)

/Affront

---

That would be perfect actually! Don't let them beat you OP! Get the draw :thumbsup:

Seeing a sandbagging clan match their kin is nice.

Of course, it doesn't help us fair play clans who catch them when our war win streak is high enough. Grumble grumble

Sandbagging isn't fair play
#WeWantFairPlay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anarchos

Fair enough. Best of luck to your clan.

---

thanks:)
/deadpool

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saleh47

That would be perfect actually! Don't let them beat you OP! Get the draw :thumbsup:

---

yeah, only we need is to 3 star their top 3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wysiwyg

Seeing a sandbagging clan match their kin is nice.

Of course, it doesn't help us fair play clans who catch them when our war win streak is high enough. Grumble grumble

Sandbagging isn't fair play
#WeWantFairPlay

---

that was first one i saw , it's the beginning of MM fix

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

Forum hint: to the right if the "reply with quote" button is another button that lets you quote multiple posts in your reply post. Using this will help to avoid the impression that you may be over posting in deliberately repeatedly replying to your own thread over and over to drive your post count (which is against forum rules). Great button to use in situations like this.

---

Great suggestion. I wondered how to do this! And a cat reference too!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milomilomilo

Great suggestion. I wondered how to do this! And a cat reference too!

---

Me too !/!/!

Fairplay has always meant no mods. Entirely fair for engineers to keep using the term, lets not go redefining terms that have been in use for years just to suit someone's feelings about upgrade paths.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

Fairplay has always meant no mods. Entirely fair for engineers to keep using the term, lets not go redefining terms that have been in use for years just to suit someone's feelings about upgrade paths.

---

This 100%! Fairplay is exclusively about not cheating in game, ie modding or botting! At no point has it ever reflected a chosen progression path.


#We want Fairplay!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

Fairplay has always meant no mods. Entirely fair for engineers to keep using the term, lets not go redefining terms that have been in use for years just to suit someone's feelings about upgrade paths.

---

yeah , that's what i had been telling

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadPoool

yeah , that's what i had been telling

---

\/ \/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

This 100%! Fairplay is exclusively about not cheating in game, ie modding or botting! At no point has it ever reflected a chosen progression path.


#We want Fairplay!

---

Posted the war result

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

Fairplay has always meant no mods. Entirely fair for engineers to keep using the term, lets not go redefining terms that have been in use for years just to suit someone's feelings about upgrade paths.

---

The one who is hero of one side is terrorist of other side. The one who is fairplay for one clan is cheating for others.
A defined term should have same meaning for everyone. Which is not true in case of engineering.

I thought matching engineered vs engineered is a thing for a long time now.

We are currently on 0 win streak with 7 perfect war streak at the moment with 2 draws out of last 4 games. We used to face engineered clans 25% of the time before but then started engineering ourselves and now we're facing engineered clans 50% of the time. I assumed it either means the number of engineered clans has increased or that the matchmaker is in fact matching engineered vs engineered.

If anything, OPs clan was extremely lucky not to match any strong engineered clans for 36 wars in a row.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

I thought matching engineered vs engineered is a thing for a long time now.

We are currently on 0 win streak with 7 perfect war streak at the moment with 2 draws out of last 4 games. We used to face engineered clans 25% of the time before but then started engineering ourselves and now we're facing engineered clans 50% of the time. I assumed it either means the number of engineered clans has increased or that the matchmaker is in fact matching engineered vs engineered.

If anything, OPs clan was extremely lucky not to match any strong engineered clans for 36 wars in a row.

---

hold up, were you not the same person presching how engineers and their clans were sellfish immoral war manipulators, taking a look at your clan your gone al #6ay Martians on us. Your account been hacked?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Farooqhome08

The one who is hero of one side is terrorist of other side. The one who is fairplay for one clan is cheating for others.
A defined term should have same meaning for everyone. Which is not true in case of engineering.

---

it depends on how people understand it , like they won against engineers then it would be fair for them and vice versa

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

I thought matching engineered vs engineered is a thing for a long time now.

We are currently on 0 win streak with 7 perfect war streak at the moment with 2 draws out of last 4 games. We used to face engineered clans 25% of the time before but then started engineering ourselves and now we're facing engineered clans 50% of the time. I assumed it either means the number of engineered clans has increased or that the matchmaker is in fact matching engineered vs engineered.

If anything, OPs clan was extremely lucky not to match any strong engineered clans for 36 wars in a row.

---

i saw engineers vs engineers from a few days , As my title said , MM fix !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

hold up, were you not the same person presching how engineers and their clans were sellfish immoral war manipulators, taking a look at your clan your gone al #6ay Martians on us. Your account been hacked?

---

what? who is he

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadPoool

Posted the war result

---

Yay! Well .. That was probably the most expected result .. two clans, both toning down their defense to pump up their offence.

I hope you had a good time :-)

/Affront

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Affront

Yay! Well .. That was probably the most expected result .. two clans, both toning down their defense to pump up their offence.

I hope you had a good time :-)

/Affront

---

ah yeah , we can conclude draws from engineers VS engineers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeadPoool

what? who is he

---

The original anti-engineer, kinda like daddylindo without the temper, and with much more complex, but usually intelecrually dishonest, arguments for why engineers are the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥s of the earth.

now hes gone full circle and is engineering to the highest level, bemusing. He started a while back with rostar engineering, but I thought it was tongue in check to draw supercells attention to the problem.

it seams the power of the dark side corrupted young Dorsan, and perhaps if bringing balance to the force, will bring balance to his arguments.

I wonder if he even has any docates left?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

The original anti-engineer, kinda like daddylindo without the temper, and with much more complex, but usually intelecrually dishonest, arguments for why engineers are the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥s of the earth.

now hes gone full circle and is engineering to the highest level, bemusing. He started a while back with rostar engineering, but I thought it was tongue in check to draw supercells attention to the problem.

it seams the power of the dark side corrupted young Dorsan, and perhaps if bringing balance to the force, will bring balance to his arguments.

I wonder if he even has any docates left?

---

oh .
maybe not

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Farooqhome08

The one who is hero of one side is terrorist of other side. The one who is fairplay for one clan is cheating for others.
A defined term should have same meaning for everyone. Which is not true in case of engineering.

---

Engineering is setting your upgrade path to optimize for war based on your knowledge of weights and the matchmaker. So, 'not engineering' is just dropping things as allowed by loot/free builders, or optimizing for raid attack & defense, or maxing because you think that's 'playing as intended'. This makes maxing engineering if the goal is optimizing for war, though. This also makes .5s in all variations engineering too.
Not everyone likes my definition but it seems to be the only one out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

Engineering is setting your upgrade path to optimize for war based on your knowledge of weights and the matchmaker. So, 'not engineering' is just dropping things as allowed by loot/free builders, or optimizing for raid attack & defense, or maxing because you think that's 'playing as intended'. This makes maxing engineering if the goal is optimizing for war, though. This also makes .5s in all variations engineering too.
Not everyone likes my definition but it seems to be the only one out there.

---

Your definition for engineering is true. But i was talking about the term fairplay and its definition acceptable for all players

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

Engineering is setting your upgrade path to optimize for war based on your knowledge of weights and the matchmaker. So, 'not engineering' is just dropping things as allowed by loot/free builders, or optimizing for raid attack & defense, or maxing because you think that's 'playing as intended'. This makes maxing engineering if the goal is optimizing for war, though. This also makes .5s in all variations engineering too.
Not everyone likes my definition but it seems to be the only one out there.

---

Pretty spot on imo theere Tankie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Farooqhome08

Your definition for engineering is true. But i was talking about the term fairplay and its definition acceptable for all players

---

Fairplay defined : https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...n-clan-wars%29

That's from 2014. Fairplay as a clash term means no ghosting (remember that?), sandboxing, modding. No reference to acceptable upgrade paths. Ignore anyone that wants to take a three year old term and redefine it to include their pet peeve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

hold up, were you not the same person presching how engineers and their clans were sellfish immoral war manipulators, taking a look at your clan your gone al #6ay Martians on us. Your account been hacked?

---

Nope. I still stand by everything I said.

I just got tired of facing engineered clans without any chance to fight back. But if they ever fix the matchmaker I will rejoice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

He started a while back with rostar engineering, but I thought it was tongue in check to draw supercells attention to the problem.

---

Nope, when I made that guide thread, I didn't do any roster engineering. I just made the guide to make fun of engineers and also to make all the info available to everyone.

I believe the only way to force SC hand on this issue is to make engineering so frequent that they simply can't ignore it anymore. Which is why I made sure to explain how to do it to as many people as I could both in the forums and in game on global.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

Fairplay defined : https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...n-clan-wars%29

That's from 2014. Fairplay as a clash term means no ghosting (remember that?), sandboxing, modding. No reference to acceptable upgrade paths. Ignore anyone that wants to take a three year old term and redefine it to include their pet peeve.

---

Fairplay with matchmaking system. Which was intended by sc to do fair matching. But now being dodged to get weaker opponent. Which is a clear cheating but as everyone started doing this. So sc might have accepted this as game standards. Who knows. Also when ppls of one side are dominant. They can call A wrong thing a right. Because they r more in number. And increasing in numbers. So majority of other also joining their paths for their survival. Who will not like a shortcut?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Farooqhome08

Fairplay with matchmaking system. Which was intended by sc to do fair matching. But now being dodged to get weaker opponent. Which is a clear cheating but as everyone started doing this. So sc might have accepted this as game standards. Who knows. Also when ppls of one side are dominant. They can call A wrong thing a right. Because they r more in number. And increasing in numbers. So majority of other also joining their paths for their survival. Who will not like a shortcut?

---

If you want to talk about something else, you should pick a different term. Fairplay has been a heavily used term for years now, it means no modding.

As to the rest, disapprove of engineering, hope for a MM change to nerf it, whatever you like. But don't call it cheating, that's factually wrong and needlessly inflamatory. No game rules are broken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

If you want to talk about something else, you should pick a different term. Fairplay has been a heavily used term for years now, it means no modding.

As to the rest, disapprove of engineering, hope for a MM change to nerf it, whatever you like. But don't call it cheating, that's factually wrong and needlessly inflamatory. No game rules are broken.

---

Ok u r right. I take back the word cheating. And appologise for it.
But i must say thats not fairplay. Because main purpose of matcbmaking died by this. And now some ppls laughing on others. And some crying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

If you want to talk about something else, you should pick a different term. Fairplay has been a heavily used term for years now, it means no modding.

As to the rest, disapprove of engineering, hope for a MM change to nerf it, whatever you like. But don't call it cheating, that's factually wrong and needlessly inflamatory. No game rules are broken.

---

Wrong.

The definition of the word 'cheating' is:
"act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination."

Engineering is the act of hiding your actual strength from the matchmaker - therefore you are acting dishonestly.
The goal of engineering is to gain an advantage.
This is happening within a game.

Therefore engineering is in fact cheating.

I am sorry if it hurts anyone's feelings, but it is factually correct to call engineering cheating.


edited to add:
Engineering is also meta gaming because instead of playing the game, you are analyzing the program behind the game and abusing it's flaws. Meta gaming is also a form of cheating, therefore engineering is cheating by this logic as well...

I can go on, but I think I made my point clearly.


Here is a picture of a rabbit that is a real rabbit and not a dog trying to fool the matchmaker:
http://ww3.hdnux.com/photos/04/34/32.../1024x1024.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Wrong.

The definition of the word 'cheating' is:
"act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination."

Engineering is the act of hiding your actual strength from the matchmaker - therefore you are acting dishonestly.
The goal of engineering is to gain an advantage.
This is happening within a game.

Therefore engineering is in fact cheating.

I am sorry if it hurts anyone's feelings, but it is factually correct to call engineering cheating.


edited to add:
Engineering is also meta gaming because instead of playing the game, you are analyzing the program behind the game and abusing it's flaws. Meta gaming is also a form of cheating, therefore engineering is cheating by this logic as well...

I can go on, but I think I made my point clearly.


Here is a picture of a rabbit that is a real rabbit and not at all trying to fool the matchmaker:
http://ww3.hdnux.com/photos/04/34/32.../1024x1024.jpg

---

I see you point but disagree. SC refuses to release details on the MM, so your comments are a little disingenuous. Noone know what the actual weights are, or how the algorithm functions. How can you hide something if you dont know how it is considered? I dont have pekkas leveled, is this now cheating? no way

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

I see you point but disagree. SC refuses to release details on the MM, so your comments are a little disingenuous. Noone know what the actual weights are, or how the algorithm functions. How can you hide something if you dont know how it is considered? I dont have pekkas leveled, is this now cheating? no way

---

You just confirmed my point.

SC is hiding the details on the MM because they don't want you to play against the MM, they want you to play against other players. All the information about the MM is obtained by reverse-engineering the game. Which is... can you guess? ... Yup, cheating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

You just confirmed my point.

SC is hiding the details on the MM because they don't want you to play against the MM, they want you to play against other players. All the information about the MM is obtained by reverse-engineering the game. Which is... can you guess? ... Yup, cheating.

---

How does that confirm your point? I think they are hiding the details, because if released they would be shown to have poor mathematical basis and you would have high schoolers submitting better formulas. They just dont feel like investing on something... at this point war is old and tired... not going to see them investing much here since they invested in friendly war, which allows you to not have unfair matches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

How does that confirm your point? I think they are hiding the details, because if released they would be shown to have poor mathematical basis and you would have high schoolers submitting better formulas. They just dont feel like investing on something... at this point war is old and tired... not going to see them investing much here since they invested in friendly war, which allows you to not have unfair matches.

---

Now you are dishonest.

What is the purpose of the matchmaker?
- The purpose of the matchmaker is to find clans that are as close in strength as possible in order to have fair wars.

Do you honestly think they want you to analyze the matchmaker and find flaws within it to get easier wars?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Now you are dishonest.

What is the purpose of the matchmaker?
- The purpose of the matchmaker is to find clans that are as close in strength as possible in order to have fair wars.

Do you honestly think they want you to analyze the matchmaker and find flaws within it to get easier wars?

---

It goes both ways. Plenty of people would use to find even match ups.

Like i said before you started insulting... they throw a bone with friendly war. Dont expect them to put effort into fixing the MM.

And as is often the case. My clan sees bad , terrible matches - and neither side has a .5 or an engineer. If they cant fix it with "balanced" rosters and accounts, how does anyone expect it to be fixed with lopsided bases?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

Like i said before you started insulting...

---

I am sorry if you feel insulted, but I went through all my posts in this thread and I couldn't find any post that was trying to insult anyone. I am truly sorry if you feel insulted, it was not my intention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

Dont expect them to put effort into fixing the MM.

---

I do expect them to put effort into fixing the MM because they do try to fix it update after update. If they will ever actually succeed is another question. Giving them feedback is surely a good thing though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

And as is often the case. My clan sees bad , terrible matches - and neither side has a .5 or an engineer. If they cant fix it with "balanced" rosters and accounts, how does anyone expect it to be fixed with lopsided bases?

---

It is doable. I have personally given up waiting for them though, which is why I engineered my clan fully. It will in fact stay that way until they fix the matchmaker or the whole clan becomes maxed th11 - where engineering is mute.

All that being said, I stand by every single word I ever wrote against engineering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

It is doable. I have personally given up waiting for them though, which is why I engineered my clan fully. It will in fact stay that way until they fix the matchmaker or the whole clan becomes maxed th11 - where engineering is mute.

---

I have a gut feeling that your clan is doing well because you are good attackers -- not because of your engineering. I think currently the best form of engineering is being balanced with a slight bias towards a better offense.

They have already posted, twice, they feel like dip specialists are being fairly matched and it isnt a problem. So you keep waiting for that fix to come in:facepalm:

I dont think you have to max your whole roster, but the bottom weight probably needs to top out around 90 to avoid engineering. Any other method to avoid engineering seems unlikely.

It is possible 10v and 15v have tighter contraints, or less engineers running those size wars. no data to support any real thesis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azrial

I have a gut feeling that your clan is doing well because you are good attackers -- not because of your engineering. I think currently the best form of engineering is being balanced with a slight bias towards a better offense.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

It is doable. I have personally given up waiting for them though, which is why I engineered my clan fully. It will in fact stay that way until they fix the matchmaker or the whole clan becomes maxed th11 - where engineering is mute.

---

:facepalm:x10.

skilled attackers arent trying to set up wars with 27 out of 30 attacks being dips.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

It is possible 10v and 15v have tighter contraints, or less engineers running those size wars. no data to support any real thesis.

---

We are running 10v10 and 15v15 wars and we are getting engineered opponents 50% of the time. I know this is a small sample to make any conclusion, but some data is better than no data.

As for my clans skills, it doesn't even matter at this point. We are doing perfect wars where we usually have 1 th10 with infernos to clear the rest is 72 weight and below. Last war we had 4 th10 attacks, rest th9 in a 10vs10. Used 2 th10 attacks to 3 star the guy with the infernos (1st attack failed at 98%) and 1 th10 attack to take out the strongest th9 enemy, the 4th th10 attack went for loot because we were already on perfect. However when we are facing a non-engineered clan, the offensive advantage is so huge for us that we could win blindfolded during an earthquake.

My foolish pride forces me to say this though: we got to our highest win streak before we started engineering. So there's that. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

skilled attackers arent trying to set up wars with 27 out of 30 attacks being dips.

---

If you consider a 9.25 with baby heroes hitting a max TH9 a dip then I guess you're right. However I highlighted the important part of your reply. Skilled attackers are what wins wars. If you want the MM to punish skill that's a different argument that could actually have some merit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azrial

If you consider a 9.25 with baby heroes hitting a max TH9 a dip then I guess you're right. However I highlighted the important part of your reply. Skilled attackers are what wins wars. If you want the MM to punish skill that's a different argument that could actually have some merit.

---

It's actually extremely easy to hit th9s with baby heroes and th10 troops. (Talking from experience here.) If you really want to gain advantages via engineering that is the way to go. If you go 9.5 with maxed heroes, you will face th10s most likely. What you want is baby heroes and maxed troops. Those get matched against mid th9s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azrial

If you consider a 9.25 with baby heroes hitting a max TH9 a dip then I guess you're right. However I highlighted the important part of your reply. Skilled attackers are what wins wars. If you want the MM to punish skill that's a different argument that could actually have some merit.

---

Yea, i have a TH10 with 14/13 max lavaloon and camps. its a joke hitting 9s. My butt can deploy it and win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Wrong.

The definition of the word 'cheating' is:
"act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination."

Engineering is the act of hiding your actual strength from the matchmaker - therefore you are acting dishonestly.
The goal of engineering is to gain an advantage.
This is happening within a game.

Therefore engineering is in fact cheating.

---

As the matchmaker can see exactly what each and every base included in war search has unlocked/upgraded, your contention that engineers hide their strength is patently false. Your argument falls down at that point.

Studying a base so as to devise an attack that would take advantage of its weaknesses is an integral part of the game, which shows that looking for advantage is not cheating. That drives a pickup truck over your argument's supine body.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Wrong.

The definition of the word 'cheating' is:
"act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination."

Engineering is the act of hiding your actual strength from the matchmaker - therefore you are acting dishonestly.
The goal of engineering is to gain an advantage.
This is happening within a game.

Therefore engineering is in fact cheating.

I am sorry if it hurts anyone's feelings, but it is factually correct to call engineering cheating.


edited to add:
Engineering is also meta gaming because instead of playing the game, you are analyzing the program behind the game and abusing it's flaws. Meta gaming is also a form of cheating, therefore engineering is cheating by this logic as well...

I can go on, but I think I made my point clearly.

---

No, you've just gone in circles, cheating is unfair because its unfair to cheat. Your definition is bad because it just shifts the argument to what's unfair, and what's dishonest. In any game, cheating refers to breaking the rules, no exceptions I can think of. We have clearly defined rules for the game, both hard-coded and in the TOS, none are broken by engineers. You don't like engineering, think its bad for the game, that's fine but to call it cheating is to do damage to the English language.

And a lot of handwaving goes into calling it dishonest. All info is open to SC, every building and troop weighed. It's impossible to be dishonest in this context. You're just not happy with how SC does the weighing.
Its not unfair either, as anyone can do it. You know this well. And if you truly thought it was unfair you wouldn't be doing it yourself.

As for metagaming being cheating? They say there's nothing new under the sun, but I think this qualifies. Hey everybody, stop thinking about the game or you're cheating!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

As the matchmaker can see exactly what each and every base included in war search has unlocked/upgraded, your contention that engineers hide their strength is patently false. Your argument falls down at that point.

Studying a base so as to devise an attack that would take advantage of its weaknesses is an integral part of the game, which shows that looking for advantage is not cheating. That drives a pickup truck over your argument's supine body.

---

aspex is so abrasive, when he falls of his bike at High speed the road needs to be resurfaced.

allthough your argument is correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

It's actually extremely easy to hit th9s with baby heroes and th10 troops. (Talking from experience here.) If you really want to gain advantages via engineering that is the way to go. If you go 9.5 with maxed heroes, you will face th10s most likely. What you want is baby heroes and maxed troops. Those get matched against mid th9s.

---

I still see a ton of failed TH10 dips with teenage heroes.

It's also extremely easy to triple a TH9 as a TH9 if you have 30/30 heroes.

My point is that it's not so much the engineering it's the skill of the player behind the account.

I will concede that heroes are slightly over weighted at the moment. However the MM has never been more fair.






.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

As the matchmaker can see exactly what each and every base included in war search has unlocked/upgraded, your contention that engineers hide their strength is patently false. Your argument falls down at that point.

---

The matchmaker is trying to find 2 clans that are close in strength. However it is faulty. By knowing exactly where the errors in the software is, you can abuse it to get a match that is easy. Therefore you are abusing errors in the matchmaker. The moment when your defenseless th11 is matched against a clan that has no such base is the moment where the matchmaker didn't notice the real strength of that account - because you managed to hide it from the matchmaker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

Studying a base so as to devise an attack that would take advantage of its weaknesses is an integral part of the game, which shows that looking for advantage is not cheating. That drives a pickup truck over your argument's supine body.

---

Nope. Studying a base is actually taking advantage of the weaknesses of the enemy players design. Not the piece of the code. Now if there was a point where you can drop the troops that would make them invulnerable due to a bug, and then studying the base to find the spot where the bug occurs on that specific layout would be cheating.

To simplify: if you are playing against another player, it is fair. If you're trying to fool a piece of code, it is cheating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

No, you've just gone in circles, cheating is unfair because its unfair to cheat.

---

Perhaps you should read again what I wrote because there isn't any circular argument in there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

Your definition is bad because it just shifts the argument to what's unfair, and what's dishonest.

---

It is not my definition, it is the dictionary definition of the word "cheating".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

In any game, cheating refers to breaking the rules, no exceptions I can think of. We have clearly defined rules for the game, both hard-coded and in the TOS, none are broken by engineers.

---

The game rules can't predict every single situation. Unplugging the wifi connection of an enemy player (if they happen to live nearby) isn't against TOS, nor does the CoC code prevent doing it - yet we can all agree it is cheating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

You don't like engineering, think its bad for the game, that's fine but to call it cheating is to do damage to the English language.

---

I have quoted the direct dictionary definition of the word "cheating" and then demonstrated why it applies to engineering. If anyone is doing damage to the English language is you - because it is you who require a new definition for the word "cheating" - not me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

And a lot of handwaving goes into calling it dishonest. All info is open to SC, every building and troop weighed. It's impossible to be dishonest in this context. You're just not happy with how SC does the weighing.

---

For that argument to work, SC would have to manually find matches for every singe war. But they don't. The matchmaker does. And we are all quite capable of hiding our actual strength from it. Therefore we deceive the matchmaker in order to gain an advantage in a game... Do I need to quote the dictionary definition again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

Its not unfair either, as anyone can do it.

---

Anyone can pee on their neighbors fence as well, it wouldn't make it okay though. Just because everyone can do something, doesn't make it right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

And if you truly thought it was unfair you wouldn't be doing it yourself.

---

You clearly don't know me. If pushed enough, I can be very unfair.



edit: sorry somehow I missed this part:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

As for metagaming being cheating? They say there's nothing new under the sun, but I think this qualifies. Hey everybody, stop thinking about the game or you're cheating!

---

You clearly don't know what meta gaming is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Now you are dishonest.

What is the purpose of the matchmaker?
- The purpose of the matchmaker is to find clans that are as close in strength as possible in order to have fair wars.

Do you honestly think they want you to analyze the matchmaker and find flaws within it to get easier wars?

---

Dorsan you also gamed and game the matchmaker, you didnt let defence rushers into your clan, you insisted on maxing because you thought it gave advantage, you made sure troops stayed at same pace as defence at least, you sat people out of war if they didnt have heroes up, you didnt take weak th10 with infeno in clans all to affect the matchmaker, to get more favourable wars. Now if course you full on engineering admittedly.

cheating is break the rules, optimising your base and clan to be strong at war, instead of deliberatly making weaker bases than you could, is not only not breaking the rules, its the rational way to play a war game. You can focus on the matchmaker, but to call engineers cheats is namecalling, nothing more, and is totally subjective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Now you are dishonest.

What is the purpose of the matchmaker?
- The purpose of the matchmaker is to find clans that are as close in strength as possible in order to have fair wars.

Do you honestly think they want you to analyze the matchmaker and find flaws within it to get easier wars?

---

The matchmaker gives close wars while giving certain things a lean, to encourage gemming and raiding. Used to be heroes and walls, then it was offence rushed, now its manicured and slighty offence ahead. The matchmaker has a nerf buff cycle thats part of supercells business model.

if nothing has a matchmaker lean, no more gems or farming. Its not about looking for flawa, its about listening to its voice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

Dorsan you also gamed and game the matchmaker, you didnt let defence rushers into your clan, you insisted on maxing because you thought it gave advantage, you made sure troops stayed at same pace as defence at least, you sat people out of war if they didnt have heroes up, you didnt take weak th10 with infeno in clans all to affect the matchmaker, to get more favourable wars.

---

I did that because I was trying to get good players to the clan. I wasn't obsessed about the matchmaker. You really need to take this argument to rest because it has nothing to do with engineering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

Now if course you full on engineering admittedly.

---

Yup. If everyone else is going to cheat, so can I.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

cheating is break the rules, optimising your base and clan to be strong at war, instead of deliberatly making weaker bases than you could, is not only not breaking the rules, its the rational way to play a war game. You can focus on the matchmaker, but to call engineers cheats is namecalling, nothing more, and is totally subjective.

---

It isn't subjective. I have provided the exact logic behind that statement. You can refute it via logical arguments, but just giving a blanket statement of "it's namecalling" won't do.

For the "breaking the rules" part of your argument, refer to my previous post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

The matchmaker is trying to find 2 clans that are close in strength. However it is faulty. By knowing exactly where the errors in the software is, you can abuse it to get a match that is easy. Therefore you are abusing errors in the matchmaker. The moment when your defenseless th11 is matched against a clan that has no such base is the moment where the matchmaker didn't notice the real strength of that account - because you managed to hide it from the matchmaker.

---

The MM noticed the strength of the account. It, as per SC, took the strength of that account into account when making the match.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Nope. Studying a base is actually taking advantage of the weaknesses of the enemy players design. Not the piece of the code. Now if there was a point where you can drop the troops that would make them invulnerable due to a bug, and then studying the base to find the spot where the bug occurs on that specific layout would be cheating.

To simplify: if you are playing against another player, it is fair. If you're trying to fool a piece of code, it is cheating.

---

Now you're shifting the goalposts. You originally said:

"The goal of engineering is to gain an advantage.
This is happening within a game.

Therefore engineering is in fact cheating."

Your argument was that seeking to gain an advantage is, in and of itself, cheating. No mention of a distinction of against a player or the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Perhaps you should read again what I wrote because there isn't any circular argument in there.


It is not my definition, it is the dictionary definition of the word "cheating".

---

The dictionary definition of cheating has been shown not to apply to engineering so many times, see those threads for rebuttals.

Further, SC representatives, who would have taken instruction from SC before making such statements, have categorically stated that engineering is not cheating.


Finally, as you are engineering yourself does that mean that you classify yourself as a cheat?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

The game rules can't predict every single situation. Unplugging the wifi connection of an enemy player (if they happen to live nearby) isn't against TOS, nor does the CoC code prevent doing it - yet we can all agree it is cheating.

<snip the rest>

---

WRT unplugging someone's router not being against the ToS I give you this excerpt from the "thou shalt not" section of the ToS:

"Institute, assist, or become involved in any type of attack, including without limitation distribution of a virus, denial of service attacks upon the Service, or other attempts to disrupt the Service or any other person’s use or enjoyment of the Service."

As you can see, disrupting any other person's use or enjoyment of the service is strictly verboten.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

The matchmaker is trying to find 2 clans that are close in strength. However it is faulty. By knowing exactly where the errors in the software is, you can abuse it to get a match that is easy. Therefore you are abusing errors in the matchmaker. The moment when your defenseless th11 is matched against a clan that has no such base is the moment where the matchmaker didn't notice the real strength of that account - because you managed to hide it from the matchmaker
Its goal is in fact to match 2 clans closely while offering a slight advantage to things that are challnging to raid to encourage farming and or gemming. Further you cant see the offensive weight on the war map.

Nope. Studying a base is actually taking advantage of the weaknesses of the enemy players design. Not the piece of the code. Now if there was a point where you can drop the troops that would make them invulnerable due to a bug, and then studying the base to find the spot where the bug occurs on that specific layout would be cheating.
its not clear if this would be against terms of service or not, but it is clear that this is unintentional, so at most this would be an exploit.

To simplify: if you are playing against another player, it is fair. If you're trying to fool a piece of code, it is cheating.

Asserting its fooling code, circular reasoning, assuming your right so your right.

Perhaps you should read again what I wrote because there isn't any circular argument in there.

Its only circular
It is not my definition, it is the dictionary definition of the word "cheating".

Yours deliberatly interpreting word meaning and defintions, and further making assumptions to fit engineering to cheating.
The game rules can't predict every single situation. Unplugging the wifi connection of an enemy player (if they happen to live nearby) isn't against TOS, nor does the CoC code prevent doing it - yet we can all agree it is cheating.

Yes, but but there is no connection between that act, and engineering. And in fact your example may be against terms of service.

I have quoted the direct dictionary definition of the word "cheating" and then demonstrated why it applies to engineering. If anyone is doing damage to the English language is you - because it is you who require a new definition for the word "cheating" - not me

the dictionary defined a turkey as a large semi flightless bird eaten at christmas, you are a large semi flightless bird, and i assume you get eaten at christmas, therefor you are a turkey.

For that argument to work, SC would have to manually find matches for every singe war. But they don't. The matchmaker does. And we are all quite capable of hiding our actual strength from it. Therefore we deceive the matchmaker in order to gain an advantage in a game... Do I need to quote the dictionary definition again?

We listen to it.
Anyone can pee on their neighbors fence as well, it wouldn't make it okay though. Just because everyone can do something, doesn't make it right.

agree we shouldnt, fristly is not part of the clash game, and may get us in trouble, but if it was a tactic that was part of clash, and the neighbour was cool with it, then if you chose not to do it it doesnt mean its cheating if i do.

You clearly don't know me. If pushed enough, I can be very unfair.

I agree here, but i dont think it takes much pushing.

edit: sorry somehow I missed this part:

You clearly don't know what meta gaming is.

---

Im pretty sure he dose, meta has 4 defintions, you may be using different ones. Your arguments often shift 1 to 4 levels of meta outside of the actual argument. You must have had 2 full seasons as tennis club chairman now, whats next for Dorsan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

I did that because I was trying to get good players to the clan. I wasn't obsessed about the matchmaker. You really need to take this argument to rest because it has nothing to do with engineering.

.

---

you cant win an argument by asserting something has nothing to do with engineering, wether you engineer on a base or clan level is irrelevant, what you do is make sure you clan goes into a war with defence to offence ratio X. % progression to max Y, and to draw favorable wars by understanding what the matchmaker wants (it used to punish rushed bases), and you listened to the matchmaker to be sure not to take bases that would match up to much more developed bases, which is exactly what engineers do.

this argument will never rest, because it is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

The MM noticed the strength of the account. It, as per SC, took the strength of that account into account when making the match.

---

Unless the purpose of the matchmaker is to find a war where one clan will defeat the other clan because of offensive advantage, it didn't notice the strength of the account. Please, try to be honest here. Do you really honestly think that a defenseless th11 and a th3 are the same thing? If no, then the defenseless th11 did in fact hid it's strength from the matchmaker - and we both know this is true, yet you somehow insist it isn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

Now you're shifting the goalposts. You originally said:

"The goal of engineering is to gain an advantage.
This is happening within a game.

Therefore engineering is in fact cheating."

---

I didn't move to goalpost, you have quoted me out of context.

Let me put it back into context and even further elaborate why my argument is logical.

We start from the dictionary definition of cheating:
act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination.

Now, let's see how "or" works in logic: If you have statement 1 or statement 2, it means that if any of those 2 statements are true, the result is true as well. Therefore we can ignore statement 1 if statement 2 is true and vice versa.

In the beginning of that sentence it states:
act dishonestly or unfairly

I did not go into the "unfairly" part, instead I went for the "dishonestly" part. If the action is proven dishonest, it doesn't need to be proven unfair as well, due to the "or" in the sentence.

Therefore the definition for this specific case can be shortened to:
act dishonestly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game or examination.

You will notice there is a second "or" in the sentence at the part that says "in a game or examination". Since we can demonstrate that engineering takes place in a game, we can ignore the "examination" part, therefore coming to the definition that we are going to work with, which is:
act dishonestly in order to gain an advantage, especially in a game.

For this to work, we need to demonstrate the following 3 as facts:
1) the player is acting dishonestly
2) the player is gaining an advantage
3) it is happening in a game

All 3 of those statements must be true in order for the action to qualify as cheating. I have demonstrated why engineering is dishonest, and we do know its purpose is to gain an advantage and it is happening within a game. Therefore finding something else that is also happening in the game and gives advantage, but isn't dishonest - does not fall under the same category. Which is why your argument is mute.

If you want to defeat my argument, you must show that engineering isn't dishonest - which you did try several times, but have failed so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

Your argument was that seeking to gain an advantage is, in and of itself, cheating. No mention of a distinction of against a player or the game.

---

No, as I just demonstrated that was not what my argument was. That was only a part of my argument taken out of context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

The dictionary definition of cheating has been shown not to apply to engineering so many times, see those threads for rebuttals.

---

If it was, it shouldn't be hard for you to quote a post that does show it because I haven't seen any.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

Further, SC representatives, who would have taken instruction from SC before making such statements, have categorically stated that engineering is not cheating.

---

They have also stated that Town Hall sniping wasn't a cheating, yet they fixed that exploit as well. As it was demonstrated many times in the past SC is not a divine entity incapable of making assessments that are later disproved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

Finally, as you are engineering yourself does that mean that you classify yourself as a cheat?

---

Guilty as charged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

WRT unplugging someone's router not being against the ToS I give you this excerpt from the "thou shalt not" section of the ToS:

"Institute, assist, or become involved in any type of attack, including without limitation distribution of a virus, denial of service attacks upon the Service, or other attempts to disrupt the Service or any other person’s use or enjoyment of the Service."

As you can see, disrupting any other person's use or enjoyment of the service is strictly verboten.

---

So is reverse engineering the matchmaker to figure out war weights:

You agree that you will not, under any circumstances: [--cut--]

Reverse engineer [--cut--] any underlying software or other intellectual property used to provide the Service or any Supercell game, or to obtain any information from the Service or any Supercell game using any method not expressly permitted by Supercell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

....

---

Sorry mate, but everything you wrote in that post was already said and answered.