Lopsided bases

Hey Chiefs, just got our third Lopsided war in a row which is a big deal to us since we don't engineer.

I've been seeing it more and more and I am REALLY unhappy about it because my love for the game is in wars.

Two wars ago it was 3x th10 offense, 1x th10 defense, compared to our 1x th10 defense/offense. Then it was 2x th10 offense, 2x th11 offense, 1x th10 defense against our 1x off/Def. Now it's 1x th10, 1x th11 against our 1x th10.

It isn't all that fulfilling this way and I have seen plenty of good suggestions to fix this, but since then haven't seen real effect on MM. With that in mind I even understand the rise in Lopsiders, but it is not the system that I fell in love with.

Is anyone else experiencing a rise in Lopsiders?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Hey Chiefs, just got our third Lopsided war in a row which is a big deal to us since we don't engineer.

I've been seeing it more and more and I am REALLY unhappy about it because my love for the game is in wars.

Two wars ago it was 3x th10 offense, 1x th10 defense, compared to our 1x th10 defense/offense. Then it was 2x th10 offense, 2x th11 offense, 1x th10 defense against our 1x off/Def. Now it's 1x th10, 1x th11 against our 1x th10.

It isn't all that fulfilling this way and I have seen plenty of good suggestions to fix this, but since then haven't seen real effect on MM. With that in mind I even understand the rise in Lopsiders, but it is not the system that I fell in love with.

Is anyone else experiencing a rise in Lopsiders?

---

if you REALLY love the war you should adapt there war mechanic, if you dont have anyn engineer then you will got beaten by those who REALLY REALLY love the war 😀😀😀

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hyta666

if you REALLY love the war you should adapt there war mechanic, if you dont have anyn engineer then you will got beaten by those who REALLY REALLY love the war 

---

I imagine it's because he really really loves wars that he doesn't want easy wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Hey Chiefs, just got our third Lopsided war in a row which is a big deal to us since we don't engineer.

I've been seeing it more and more and I am REALLY unhappy about it because my love for the game is in wars.

Two wars ago it was 3x th10 offense, 1x th10 defense, compared to our 1x th10 defense/offense. Then it was 2x th10 offense, 2x th11 offense, 1x th10 defense against our 1x off/Def. Now it's 1x th10, 1x th11 against our 1x th10.

It isn't all that fulfilling this way and I have seen plenty of good suggestions to fix this, but since then haven't seen real effect on MM. With that in mind I even understand the rise in Lopsiders, but it is not the system that I fell in love with.

Is anyone else experiencing a rise in Lopsiders?

---

Do you run .5s?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Is anyone else experiencing a rise in Lopsiders?

---

If you look under "Clan Wars," where this will probably end up, you will find a multitude already discussing your situation from a variety of perspectives.

Stick to your guns, op. Don't give in and start sandbagging. Sc says they're working on it. Hopefully they bring us fair play in cw soon.

Be strong buddy!

Don't handicap yourself OP. Lopsided bases are strategy in a strategy game and are not against any rules. Keep artificial limits on your war abilities and you will lose more wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rbredt

Don't handicap yourself OP. Lopsided bases are strategy in a strategy game and are not against any rules. Keep artificial limits on your war abilities and you will lose more wars.

---

Listen to him. I have a maxed base but I decided to make have my second account go 10.5.

If you have no .5s in your war roster, then your clan should definitely reconsider having some. There's no rule saying you have to drop your infernos immediately after getting to TH10 (or EA after reaching TH11).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Hey Chiefs, just got our third Lopsided war in a row which is a big deal to us since we don't engineer.

I've been seeing it more and more and I am REALLY unhappy about it because my love for the game is in wars.

Two wars ago it was 3x th10 offense, 1x th10 defense, compared to our 1x th10 defense/offense. Then it was 2x th10 offense, 2x th11 offense, 1x th10 defense against our 1x off/Def. Now it's 1x th10, 1x th11 against our 1x th10.

It isn't all that fulfilling this way and I have seen plenty of good suggestions to fix this, but since then haven't seen real effect on MM. With that in mind I even understand the rise in Lopsiders, but it is not the system that I fell in love with.

Is anyone else experiencing a rise in Lopsiders?

---

i have actually seen a decrease in their number since last MM change.
Previously everytime we achieved 10 win-streak or something close to it, next thing was a guaranteed engineered clan and am talking fully engineered, kinda like US:10,10,9,9,9,9,9,9,8,8 vs THEM:11, 10, 11, 9, 10, 9, 9, 10, 9, 11.
Not anymore though. We do c an occasional engineered player in every other clan but not whole engineered clan. Coz of this we r now able to stretch our streak beyond that cursed number 10. 14 and counting atm

This is also 3rd war in a row where we have faced engineers at the bottom.
TH9 with 1 cannon, etc. Not a problem for now but when they get to TH11 and increase the offence it becomes the same problem everyone else is facing.

I don't accept to "do the same"......it's becoming/become a real issue in wars. I don't accept to lower the spread of town halls either. We range from TH10 to th5 and this is how the wars were designed as they are called "clan wars" not "TH9, TH10 and TH11 wars".

Edit: we are on a 7 win streak so we saw the first engineer when hitting a streak of 5.

Our top base runs more than a 9.5. It has the 3rd xbow at lvl 2, the extra archer tower and extra cannon - all upgraded to TH9 max lvl. THe only things it does not have are the IT's and 2nd bomb tower. Its paired TH10 with infernos L1 mostly but occasionally paired with a max TH9.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blissbomb

I imagine it's because he really really loves wars that he doesn't want easy wars.

---

Exactly, I want a fair fight in order to have true fulfillment. Running a no-brainer isn't satisfying at all to me, hence my apathy towards engineering/defenseless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoumilDude

Do you run .5s?

---

In the early stage of transition, absolutely, like I said: I wan't a fair fight. But .5 should end, in my opinion, when you should be able to par your current TH-level. If you stick longer to it, it would be engineering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wysiwyg

Stick to your guns, op. Don't give in and start sandbagging. Sc says they're working on it. Hopefully they bring us fair play in cw soon.

Be strong buddy!

---

Thanks buddy, no way I'm going for the easy way out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rbredt

Don't handicap yourself OP. Lopsided bases are strategy in a strategy game and are not against any rules. Keep artificial limits on your war abilities and you will lose more wars.

---

Sure thing Chief, 'war abilities'....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MonkeyDLuffySH

i have actually seen a decrease in their number since last MM change.
Previously everytime we achieved 10 win-streak or something close to it, next thing was a guaranteed engineered clan and am talking fully engineered, kinda like US:10,10,9,9,9,9,9,9,8,8 vs THEM:11, 10, 11, 9, 10, 9, 9, 10, 9, 11.
Not anymore though. We do c an occasional engineered player in every other clan but not whole engineered clan. Coz of this we r now able to stretch our streak beyond that cursed number 10. 14 and counting atm

---

Ok, that is what I was hoping. Guess we'll have to push through this one and hope for a true opponent next time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboticboy

This is also 3rd war in a row where we have faced engineers at the bottom.
TH9 with 1 cannon, etc. Not a problem for now but when they get to TH11 and increase the offence it becomes the same problem everyone else is facing.

I don't accept to "do the same"......it's becoming/become a real issue in wars. I don't accept to lower the spread of town halls either. We range from TH10 to th5 and this is how the wars were designed as they are called "clan wars" not "TH9, TH10 and TH11 wars".

Edit: we are on a 7 win streak so we saw the first engineer when hitting a streak of 5.

Our top base runs more than a 9.5. It has the 3rd xbow at lvl 2, the extra archer tower and extra cannon - all upgraded to TH9 max lvl. THe only things it does not have are the IT's and 2nd bomb tower. Its paired TH10 with infernos L1 mostly but occasionally paired with a max TH9.

---

Our streak was ended after 4 due to a engineered clan. Bummer, pick up, move on.Then we got matched with an engineered clan again, so it became annoying. We just barely lost, but hey, next one will be better. Now, third time in a row, we have another unfair match-up against engineered clan.

If we would only encounter them one out of ten times, I'll be OK, but now...geez

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Thanks buddy, no way I'm going for the easy way out.

---

Taking non-optimized bases against optimized bases is definitely an effective way to keep war challenging. Sounds like you are on the path you want to be on.

about 16 months ago when Engineering was gaining traction I decided a plan for my main base, and also created a defenseless mini.


It is not the general populace's fault that you failed to adapt to the changing game.

Op, I suggest you check your roster again, so that it doesn't fall into the roster engineering category.

OP, send a complaint to Support. I've been doing that for months and the last time I got a very encouraging response. They commended me for not Engineering and called that tactic cowardly and an exploitation of the system. Most positive response I've seen from a SS employee yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboticboy

This is also 3rd war in a row where we have faced engineers at the bottom.
TH9 with 1 cannon, etc. Not a problem for now but when they get to TH11 and increase the offence it becomes the same problem everyone else is facing.

I don't accept to "do the same"......it's becoming/become a real issue in wars. I don't accept to lower the spread of town halls either. We range from TH10 to th5 and this is how the wars were designed as they are called "clan wars" not "TH9, TH10 and TH11 wars".

Edit: we are on a 7 win streak so we saw the first engineer when hitting a streak of 5.

Our top base runs more than a 9.5. It has the 3rd xbow at lvl 2, the extra archer tower and extra cannon - all upgraded to TH9 max lvl. THe only things it does not have are the IT's and 2nd bomb tower. Its paired TH10 with infernos L1 mostly but occasionally paired with a max TH9.

---

Going into war with th10s all the way down to th5s definitely results in matching engineering clans more now. The low bottom matches you with someone else with a low bottom, often that is defenseless or close to it.

9.5s more often match against 10s now than they used to.

These two changes have been noted frequently in the war forum since the October update.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littledoctor

Taking non-optimized bases against optimized bases is definitely an effective way to keep war challenging. Sounds like you are on the path you want to be on.

---

This has always been my thought whenever I see threads like these

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pluribus

OP, send a complaint to Support. I've been doing that for months and the last time I got a very encouraging response. They commended me for not Engineering and called that tactic cowardly and an exploitation of the system. Most positive response I've seen from a SS employee yet.

---

That's oddly direct for sc. do you have a screenshot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

It isn't all that fulfilling this way and I have seen plenty of good suggestions to fix this, but since then haven't seen real effect on MM. With that in mind I even understand the rise in Lopsiders, but it is not the system that I fell in love with.

---

the system you fell in love with has been favoring lopsided bases for years now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SinOfDusk

This has always been my thought whenever I see threads like these

---

I respect everyone's path, but they do not necessarily have to cross each other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wysiwyg

That's oddly direct for sc. do you have a screenshot?

---

I don't think I'm allowed to do that am I?

I am not sure our clan is seeing any more or less of these "engineered" clans lately but we are seeing more that do a horrible job at trying to be an engineered clan. We have been matched with three recently and crushed all three. Our last finished war was very entertaining for our clan watching them try and use all dragon attacks for every map. We saw in the first ten minutes of the prep day they were set up for only dragon attacks which made it easy for map choices and CC composition. The best battle was watching their number 2 TH10 fail an attack on our 17 who is a TH8(max).

OP, just take a little extra time during the prep day to study your opponent and tailor your defense/attacks to take advantage of their weaknesses.

It's strange, we have not faced a lot of engineering, until recently. 3 of last 4 were engineeded and going into these wars we knew we had slim chances. Kind of takes the fun out of it. I hope SC is still working on it. For all the adopt or be beat croud, cool your gaming the system and are smart to get in early on it, but I'm not going there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pluribus

I don't think I'm allowed to do that am I?

---

You're not, rule 19 applies.

I have seen a screenshot posted of such a response before, I said then that I would expect that particular Support operative to be re-trained when SC become aware of what they are sending. Looks like SC haven't become aware yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Hey Chiefs, just got our third Lopsided war in a row which is a big deal to us since we don't engineer.

I've been seeing it more and more and I am REALLY unhappy about it because my love for the game is in wars.

Two wars ago it was 3x th10 offense, 1x th10 defense, compared to our 1x th10 defense/offense. Then it was 2x th10 offense, 2x th11 offense, 1x th10 defense against our 1x off/Def. Now it's 1x th10, 1x th11 against our 1x th10.

It isn't all that fulfilling this way and I have seen plenty of good suggestions to fix this, but since then haven't seen real effect on MM. With that in mind I even understand the rise in Lopsiders, but it is not the system that I fell in love with.

Is anyone else experiencing a rise in Lopsiders?

---

Cry me a river, if you fail at war stop blaming the game. If it's in the game and its been there since day one, then the game is meant to be played this way. Coc will die if it just tailers to a certain group, if it keeps changing to how each side think of as fair play.. the beauty of it is that it has this not so linear path.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Happyharpy

Cry me a river, if you fail at war stop blaming the game. If it's in the game and its been there since day one, then the game is meant to be played this way. Coc will die if it just tailers to a certain group, if it keeps changing to how each side think of as fair play.. the beauty of it is that it has this not so linear path.

---

Again, to each their own, but the paths don't have to cross.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hyta666

if you REALLY love the war you should adapt there war mechanic, if you dont have anyn engineer then you will got beaten by those who REALLY REALLY love the war 

---

Many of us still love to war, but not want to play with system to get easy matches.

Its like: i want to win 100 meter sprint, who run fastest, wins. Fair match, i like.
Engineerer style: break every opponent leg, then walk over goal line. Unfair match, someone might like. But don't come to tell me, this is how it should be done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littledoctor

Taking non-optimized bases against optimized bases is definitely an effective way to keep war challenging. Sounds like you are on the path you want to be on.

---

best reply ever

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

You're not, rule 19 applies.

I have seen a screenshot posted of such a response before, I said then that I would expect that particular Support operative to be re-trained when SC become aware of what they are sending. Looks like SC haven't become aware yet.

---

I rule 19 and it seems to only apply to disciplinary action discussed in private messages or emails. My interaction was simply a question about engineering that support answered. Seems like that is public information that would not fall under rule 19?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pluribus

I rule 19 and it seems to only apply to disciplinary action discussed in private messages or emails. My interaction was simply a question about engineering that support answered. Seems like that is public information that would not fall under rule 19?

---

Perhaps re-read it? It's explicit enough. The brackets around "disciplinary" indicate supplementary information, not the only thing that may not be discussed. I've bolded the section that directly applies below:

You may not discuss publicly any (disciplinary) actions taken by staff, moderators or support such as banning, closing forum threads, deleting forum posts / threads etc. This also includes posting publicly any private messages / emails you have received from either staff, moderators or support.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevs926

best reply ever

---

Really? You're that easily impressed?

Well what makes a base engineered?It's low defense .So the person attacking a engineered base has the firepower to 3☆ it cause he is attacking same defensive war weight base. But if he can't do that his attacking strategy has some lacking or his offense is far behind his defense. So thats a mistake. Instead of removing those mistake complaining about matchup is not appreciated by me. Yeah I agree an engineered player can 3☆ a base easily cause he finds the strategy that suits him. Why doesn't a non engineered player who see this as unfair find a good attacking strategy and layout for himself?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nahid314

Well what makes a base engineered?It's low defense .So the person attacking a engineered base has the firepower to 3☆ it cause he is attacking same defensive war weight base. But if he can't do that his attacking strategy has some lacking or his offense is far behind his defense. So thats a mistake. Instead of removing those mistake complaining about matchup is not appreciated by me. Yeah I agree an engineered player can 3☆ a base easily cause he finds the strategy that suits him. Why doesn't a non engineered player who see this as unfair find a good attacking strategy and layout for himself?

---

What you are not including is that fact that the engineered base has 2 attacks. So yes while he may give up 3 easy stars, he has the ability to get 6 easy stars. That is the whole problem with engineering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nahid314

Well what makes a base engineered?It's low defense

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pluribus

What you are not including is that fact that the engineered base has 2 attacks. So yes while he may give up 3 easy stars, he has the ability to get 6 easy stars. That is the whole problem with engineering.

---

Not all engineered bases are low defence. Many of the best are actually restricted defence (for example zero mortars but high level Archer Towers perhaps) or restricted offence (for example only key war troops such as Dragons upgraded, but level 1 barbs, and perhaps no dark barracks).

However, the 2 attacks (6 stars possible) v 1 defence ( 3 stars only) is indeed an important point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nahid314

Well what makes a base engineered?It's low defense .So the person attacking a engineered base has the firepower to 3☆ it cause he is attacking same defensive war weight base. But if he can't do that his attacking strategy has some lacking or his offense is far behind his defense. So thats a mistake. Instead of removing those mistake complaining about matchup is not appreciated by me. Yeah I agree an engineered player can 3☆ a base easily cause he finds the strategy that suits him. Why doesn't a non engineered player who see this as unfair find a good attacking strategy and layout for himself?

---

That in general is a good thought, but what happens when the #19 player in a 20v20 war has max heroes? They can easily face-roll anyone on the board low and/or take shots at the top bases.

I'm a little salty atm because we just got destroyed by an engineered clan. These guys were great attackers, but because of their engineering, even when they failed on a base they had multiple attempts to get it right.

Our lineup TH11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 10, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 8, 8, 10 - 18 infernos 5 eagles 8 TH11


Their lineup TH11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 10, 11, 11, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 9 - 14 infernos 3 eagles 16 TH11

So yes we had the slight defensive advantage. However, that doesn't matter when the other team can use 11, yes 11, attacks on 2 of our bases. They fell one star shy of a perfect war. I'm not trying to take anything away from them, they probably would have beat us in a straight fair match, but we had no chance in this format.

If you really love war you will adapt to whatever the current matchmaking. If SC changes it you simply adapt.
Now if you only want challenging wars the then congrats that is exactly what you should be getting by tying one hand behind your back and going against someone who isn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScorpioGhost

That in general is a good thought, but what happens when the #19 player in a 20v20 war has max heroes? They can easily face-roll anyone on the board low and/or take shots at the top bases.

I'm a little salty atm because we just got destroyed by an engineered clan. These guys were great attackers, but because of their engineering, even when they failed on a base they had multiple attempts to get it right.

Our lineup TH11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 10, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 8, 8, 10 - 18 infernos 5 eagles 8 TH11


Their lineup TH11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 10, 11, 11, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 9 - 14 infernos 3 eagles 16 TH11

So yes we had the slight defensive advantage. However, that doesn't matter when the other team can use 11, yes 11, attacks on 2 of our bases. They fell one star shy of a perfect war. I'm not trying to take anything away from them, they probably would have beat us in a straight fair match, but we had no chance in this format.

---

Given that you too had lopsided bases i don't think your saltiness is warranted. They did to you what you do to other clans. Turnabout is fair play.

We also just finished our 3rd war in a row where engineering netted our opponents a massive advantage.

Last war was awesome though. We decided not to attack their TH11 with a TH10 because it was completely maxed. When all was said and done, we were tied 55-55 and they had a 0.4% lead in total damage.

One of our TH8 had a remaining attack so he brewed up some mass drags level 3 and did just enough damage to the TH11 base (31% I think) to tip the scales in our favor. I'd have loved to have been a fly on the wall in their chat.

That aside though, the recent flood of engineered matchups are getting exhausting. Every time we hit the search button everyone holds their breath to see if we are going to get another bad match. It's just not fun.

This weekend we are doing our first 40v40 in ages. I'm quite concerned about what we will be matched up against.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

Given that you too had lopsided bases i don't think your saltiness is warranted. They did to you what you do to other clans. Turnabout is fair play.

---

Well then you sir are blinded by your opinion. Having a few .5's is not the same as an entire clan of engineers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScorpioGhost

Well then you sir are blinded by your opinion. Having a few .5's is not the same as an entire clan of engineers.

---

A TH11 without infernos does not a .5 make. A TH10 that weighs less than a TH8 is nothing but engineered (unless it also has sub-TH8 offence, which I seriously doubt). You got out engineered.

What is the opinion that has blinded me, BTW?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScorpioGhost

That in general is a good thought, but what happens when the #19 player in a 20v20 war has max heroes? They can easily face-roll anyone on the board low and/or take shots at the top bases.

I'm a little salty atm because we just got destroyed by an engineered clan. These guys were great attackers, but because of their engineering, even when they failed on a base they had multiple attempts to get it right.

Our lineup TH11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 10, 10, 10, 11, 11, 10, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 8, 8, 10 - 18 infernos 5 eagles 8 TH11

Their lineup TH11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 11, 10, 11, 11, 10, 10, 11, 11, 11, 11, 9 - 14 infernos 3 eagles 16 TH11

So yes we had the slight defensive advantage. However, that doesn't matter when the other team can use 11, yes 11, attacks on 2 of our bases. They fell one star shy of a perfect war. I'm not trying to take anything away from them, they probably would have beat us in a straight fair match, but we had no chance in this format.

---

I think the problem is you had four TH bases with eagles, and three TH11 bases without eagles, all get three starred

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScorpioGhost

Well then you sir are blinded by your opinion. Having a few .5's is not the same as an entire clan of engineers.

---

20 bases and a total difference of 4 infernos. Yawn.

I agree you do need to adapt but that doesn't mean you need to start running engineered bases in your linup. Nothing is better than beating an engineered clan.

We used to get matched with them a lot until we had all of our 8.5s drop bows, lost the dead weight at the bottom of our roster and filled it with more 8s and above.

Now we rarely get matched with them but when we do we win MOST of the time. Nothing tastes better than beating a clan that tries so hard to win by seeking an "unfair advantage".

I don't like when we get paired with heavily engineered clans on a long win streak from advantageous pairings. It means we have to wait for the war to end and rinse and repeat, a wasted war. However, it is rare to find extreme engineering. With that said, we have not seen any less engineering since the MM changes took place. In fact, we have seen more. I just think there are more and more if you can beat em join em people out there by the day. I also understand that everyone plays the game differently so I am torn as to whether there should be a fix anyway - this coming from someone in a purely non-engineered clan. I just don't feel right about forcing an intended playing style (SC seems to flip flop on this depending on circumstance).

Anyway, to OP, I would say we have experienced a very similar pattern and all I can say is wars are usually won at the top and the top tends to be even. After that it's about cleanup so hopefully you can win in most cases even against an engineered clan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fieldofdreams

I don't like when we get paired with heavily engineered clans on a long win streak from advantageous pairings. It means we have to wait for the war to end and rinse and repeat, a wasted war. However, it is rare to find extreme engineering. With that said, we have not seen any less engineering since the MM changes took place. In fact, we have seen more. I just think there are more and more if you can beat em join em people out there by the day. I also understand that everyone plays the game differently so I am torn as to whether there should be a fix anyway - this coming from someone in a purely non-engineered clan. I just don't feel right about forcing an intended playing style (SC seems to flip flop on this depending on circumstance).

Anyway, to OP, I would say we have experienced a very similar pattern and all I can say is wars are usually won at the top and the top tends to be even. After that it's about cleanup so hopefully you can win in most cases even against an engineered clan.

---

Agree, they are decided at the top. But having your #2 max anti 3 th9 being face rolled by 12 lvl6 dragons coming from the #19 is just awful!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScorpioGhost

Well then you sir are blinded by your opinion. Having a few .5's is not the same as an entire clan of engineers.

---

You don't need an entire clan of engineers to get matched to another engineered clan. Most engineered clans only have a few engineered bases. 2 or 3 in your lineup usually gets the job done (for the matchmaker to identify you as engineered and match you to one). Don't ask me how the matchmaker knows but from personal experience, (I am in a slightly engineered clan (1 minimal defense Th8 and a couple of 0.5s)) I get matched to a similar clan 90% of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rbredt

Don't handicap yourself OP. Lopsided bases are strategy in a strategy game and are not against any rules. Keep artificial limits on your war abilities and you will lose more wars.

---

This^

But if you MUST be "honorable"...

There are guides on how to avoid engineers somewhere in cw section. Don't know if they actually work, but worth a shot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboticboy

I don't accept to lower the spread of town halls either. We range from TH10 to th5 and this is how the wars were designed as they are called "clan wars" not "TH9, TH10 and TH11 wars".

---

Worth noting that they are also not called "bring any ridiculous collection and expect to win wars"

one of the gripes often made (not unreasonably) about clans with a lot of lopsided bases is that the war is no fun for the people who get lined up against pushover bases at the bottom. Seems to me that a clan taking a roster spread from 10 down to 5 is also guilty of the same lack of concern that the opponent will have a challenging war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wysiwyg

That's oddly direct for sc. do you have a screenshot?

---

Maybe it was one of the outsourced reps ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Agree, they are decided at the top. But having your #2 max anti 3 th9 being face rolled by 12 lvl6 dragons coming from the #19 is just awful!

---

Why does it matter which base they came from? If the opponent attacking you was #19 of 20, that just means that was the 19th strongest base, measured on defensive strength at the time the war was declared. Doesn't say anything about their offense. No one ever seems to make a big deal about it when they get attacked by a offensively weak #1 that has max defenses and level 1 golems. Your defensive strength is irrelevant when you are attacking, just like your offensive strength is irrelevant when you are defending.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboticboy

I don't accept to lower the spread of town halls either. We range from TH10 to th5 and this is how the wars were designed as they are called "clan wars" not "TH9, TH10 and TH11 wars".

---

You can continue to not accept things...and then deal with unfavorable results that come from being too prideful or stubborn to change.

The MM doesn't care about what you find acceptable or not. There was a time when our clan was loaded with .5s. Last year's MM tweak rolls out, and we find ourselves outgunned with eagle ratios of 1-7, 2-9 every war. Outgunned inferno ratios. All the while, seeing hero levels fairly equal on both sides of the pairing.

I suppose we could have kept running into a brick wall, and continued to war with a bunch of .5 in an offensive heavy clan. The alternative was to understand and adjust to what the MM was presenting us in wars. We chose the latter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotTheRealPaul

This^

But if you MUST be "honorable"...

There are guides on how to avoid engineers somewhere in cw section. Don't know if they actually work, but worth a shot.

---

Sorry, but many believe that strategy should not be upgrading to get free wins. Many believe, inc FPC, that war should be won on battle day, and not in the war matchmaking.

I see far more defense heavy bases with low offense or heroes as oppose to engineering or lopsided bases during war. Or better yet a clan will complain about engineering but will then have .5 bases or several TH5 bases to try to take advantage of war weight.

What’s next and you can’t dip attack in war?

Fact is MM is fine and if you don’t enjoy a challenge of beating different types of clans then go play multiplayer or trophy push. The great thing about COC is the freedom of how to build your base and if Super Cell ever change this feature then you might as well just kill the game off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lostinsnow

I see far more defense heavy bases with low offense or heroes as oppose to engineering or lopsided bases during war. Or better yet a clan will complain about engineering but will then have .5 bases or several TH5 bases to try to take advantage of war weight.

What’s next and you can’t dip attack in war?

Fact is MM is fine and if you don’t enjoy a challenge of beating different types of clans then go play multiplayer or trophy push. The great thing about COC is the freedom of how to build your base and if Super Cell ever change this feature then you might as well just kill the game off.

---

We're fine with people upgrading how they want, just not with that deciding the war by giving them free wins. Everyone should be allowed to war, and stand a chance of winning based on skill. NOT based on their upgrade choices. War is the best part of the game, and if we like war more, we shouldn't have to go and push or just farm, just coz we get unfair matches in war. MM needs additions. Personally I believe in an offense:defense ratio, that on top of war weight, clans get matched by this going down the roster in 5s or 10s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whp4

Why does it matter which base they came from? If the opponent attacking you was #19 of 20, that just means that was the 19th strongest base, measured on defensive strength at the time the war was declared. Doesn't say anything about their offense. No one ever seems to make a big deal about it when they get attacked by a offensively weak #1 that has max defenses and level 1 golems. Your defensive strength is irrelevant when you are attacking, just like your offensive strength is irrelevant when you are defending.

---

This type of base does not exist in competitive war clans for the obvious reason that they wouldn't be able to attack a th 9 let alone a maxed th 10.

Sorry, I am cutting and pasting/editing some of the posts in the thread to save room (but not altering any meanings/intent).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Hey Chiefs, just got our third Lopsided war in a row ... [The second one] We just barely lost
Our streak was ended after 4 due to a engineered clan ...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roboticboy

This is also 3rd war in a row where we have faced engineers at the bottom.
... we are on a 7 win streak so we saw the first engineer when hitting a streak of 5.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krudler02

We also just finished our 3rd war in a row where engineering netted our opponents a massive advantage.
Last war was awesome though. ... When all was said and done, we ... did just enough damage to ... to tip the scales in our favor.

---

I see so many of these posts: Unfair! We won xxx in a row, and then we got a hugely unfair match against an engineered clan. It ended up with us/them winning by 1 star. We just want a challenging war, not these unfair matchups!

What makes your clan so special that when you win 4 in a row, you don't think you were the beneficiaries of unfair matchups? Do you really want challenging wars, or do you just want to win? I never see: "Matchmaking is broken -- we win 80% of our wars, when in a fair world we should only be winning half of them!"

What were the scores of the 4 wins in your streak and the scores of the you vs. the engineers?

You say, "I respect everyone's path, but they do not necessarily have to cross each other." Well most of the th9s in my clan use valks in war. Should we have to face clans that have the massive unfair advantage of using laloon or hghb?

I stipulate that in general defensive engineering helps matchmaking. I also stipulate that in general height helps you in basketball. But that doesn't mean that basketball teams that are taller shouldn't get matched against shorter teams.

I know I've touched on a few things here - sorry for the lack of a clear thesis :) I think SC has a tough job trying to incorporate a huge number of tangible and intangible variables into matchmaking, and I think they are doing a good job with it and are getting better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Going into war with th10s all the way down to th5s definitely results in matching engineering clans more now. The low bottom matches you with someone else with a low bottom, often that is defenseless or close to it.

9.5s more often match against 10s now than they used to.

These two changes have been noted frequently in the war forum since the October update.

---

Running that wide of a TH spread is a recipe for mismatches with the current MM. I don't think it's a good long term answer for the friends & family type clans out there, who just want a fair war for all their members. I'm fine with engineering as an option, but MM needs work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tremblor

Sorry, I am cutting and pasting/editing some of the posts in the thread to save room (but not altering any meanings/intent).







I see so many of these posts: Unfair! We won xxx in a row, and then we got a hugely unfair match against an engineered clan. It ended up with us/them winning by 1 star. We just want a challenging war, not these unfair matchups!

What makes your clan so special that when you win 4 in a row, you don't think you were the beneficiaries of unfair matchups? Do you really want challenging wars, or do you just want to win? I never see: "Matchmaking is broken -- we win 80% of our wars, when in a fair world we should only be winning half of them!"

What were the scores of the 4 wins in your streak and the scores of the you vs. the engineers?

You say, "I respect everyone's path, but they do not necessarily have to cross each other." Well most of the th9s in my clan use valks in war. Should we have to face clans that have the massive unfair advantage of using laloon or hghb?

I stipulate that in general defensive engineering helps matchmaking. I also stipulate that in general height helps you in basketball. But that doesn't mean that basketball teams that are taller shouldn't get matched against shorter teams.

I know I've touched on a few things here - sorry for the lack of a clear thesis :) I think SC has a tough job trying to incorporate a huge number of tangible and intangible variables into matchmaking, and I think they are doing a good job with it and are getting better.

---

Fair point about the win streak breakage, but you won't have me on the forum complaining when I have a 50/50 win ratio because the odds are even for both parties. That was the whole moral of the story, remember?

Your comparison of valks vs LaLoon doesn't make any sense nor is it relevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tremblor

I stipulate that in general defensive engineering helps matchmaking. I also stipulate that in general height helps you in basketball. But that doesn't mean that basketball teams that are taller shouldn't get matched against shorter teams.

I know I've touched on a few things here - sorry for the lack of a clear thesis :) I think SC has a tough job trying to incorporate a huge number of tangible and intangible variables into matchmaking, and I think they are doing a good job with it and are getting better.

---

Height is only one variable in basketball, & the move towards 'small ball' lineups says it's a lot more complex than just getting the tallest players on your team to win. Under the old MM, it was almost that simple. Build strong offense, with little defense & you'd get mismatch after mismatch. I think we're seeing the ongoing round of posts about unfair matchups that turn out to be a win simply because far more people are aware of engineering. In most cases, when the lineups of both clans are given in full, it becomes clear that it wasn't such a bad matchup after all.

MM does still throw enough horrible matchups out there, that I think it's fair to call for more improvements. I'd like to think they learned their lesson from last year's poorly thought out March update & are now making changes in smaller increments that don't cause sudden upheaval.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kevs926

the system you fell in love with has been favoring lopsided bases for years now.

---

More correctly, bases that keep offense ahead of defense have always had some advantage. There weren't a whole lot of people doing anything more aggressive than .5 before last year, when SC pretty much removed offense from the MM algorithm. A few early adopters understood the implications & had strong TH9+ offense on bases with little defense. The trend picked up steam & was in danger of completely undermining clan wars last fall. The October & December patches improved the situation a lot, but it's not there, yet.

No one here would approve of a MM system that pretty much ignores defenses. We'd have tons of bases with max defense & as little offense as they could get by with. The system shouldn't be something that can easily be gamed for easy wins for anyone...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaagelus

Many of us still love to war, but not want to play with system to get easy matches.

Its like: i want to win 100 meter sprint, who run fastest, wins. Fair match, i like.
Engineerer style: break every opponent leg, then walk over goal line. Unfair match, someone might like. But don't come to tell me, this is how it should be done.

---

The engineer is not harming anyone's ability to compete. He just brings a faster runner to the sprint, and doesn't care that he is not competitive in the pole vault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pluribus

This type of base does not exist in competitive war clans for the obvious reason that they wouldn't be able to attack a th 9 let alone a maxed th 10.

---

Ah, so this stuff only matters for self-anointed "competitive war clans"? Those casual clans don't matter?

We see plenty of people with bases like I characterized on the forums complaining about unfair matchups. I think if SC is going to fix something, they ought to pay attention to the effects on all of the players, not just those who feel they are more important than the rest.

I lead an engineered clan and rarely do we get cakewalk wars. We optimize offense to increase our chance of winning and plan attacks based on our opponent. It's amazing how many want to delete the strategy from a strategic game. Some of you must get a lot of exercise getting on those high horses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SplashBuzz

I lead an engineered clan and rarely do we get cakewalk wars. We optimize offense to increase our chance of winning and plan attacks based on our opponent. It's amazing how many want to delete the strategy from a strategic game. Some of you must get a lot of exercise getting on those high horses.

---

Bolded line is sig worthy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NGS8Blood

We're fine with people upgrading how they want, just not with that deciding the war by giving them free wins. Everyone should be allowed to war, and stand a chance of winning based on skill. NOT based on their upgrade choices. War is the best part of the game, and if we like war more, we shouldn't have to go and push or just farm, just coz we get unfair matches in war. MM needs additions. Personally I believe in an offense:defense ratio, that on top of war weight, clans get matched by this going down the roster in 5s or 10s.

---

Actually you are not fine with the way people upgrade otherwise you and other people wouldn't be on the forums complaining about how other people play the game.

Regardless, you have it wrong… This game is a not about skill but a strategy game. Take the CWL finals for example and where were all those skill attacks? Last I checked it was mostly TH11 doing dip attacks and the lack variety in attacks outside of spamming BWitch... War is more about communicating with your clan members, coordinating your attacks, and executing a war strategy than worrying about 2, 3, 6 or whatever engineer bases per war.

With that said if you, your clanmates, or anyone else truly wants to flex their sills in war and want a even playing field I have a simple solution for you. Run max 11v11 only wars and you won’t ever have to complain about anyone is trying to get some sort of an advantage in a strategy game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NGS8Blood

Sorry, but many believe that strategy should not be upgrading to get free wins. Many believe, inc FPC, that war should be won on battle day, and not in the war matchmaking.

---

I agree that wars should not be "decided" by beating the matchmaker - the current system needs improvement.

However, is this not a strategy game? I think that base progression is part of the strategy, and I think it should continue to be. It would be detrimental to the game to limit the various styles of base progression for war just to favor a perceived "normal" progression path only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NGS8Blood

We're fine with people upgrading how they want, just not with that deciding the war by giving them free wins. Everyone should be allowed to war, and stand a chance of winning based on skill. NOT based on their upgrade choices. War is the best part of the game, and if we like war more, we shouldn't have to go and push or just farm, just coz we get unfair matches in war. MM needs additions. Personally I believe in an offense:defense ratio, that on top of war weight, clans get matched by this going down the roster in 5s or 10s.

---

Base progression (i.e. lopsidedness) does not correlate to skill and an automatic win. It just certainly helps ;).

The matchmaker does not look at skill - it looks at fixed attributes for bases in war (war weight) and tries to match one clan as closely as possible to another. It just might do it better for some clans than others based on the war composition, size, etc.

I honestly do not think it would be feasible to make a matchmaker that truly factors in "skill." Not only would this require a more extensive algorithm and probably predictive analytics, but "skill" is mostly a "subjective" term. A program is not subjective - it looks at inputs and produces outputs. For the program, it is never wrong. For the end users (war participants), there are different degrees of "correctness". But if you could ask the program, it would tell you it is correct within XX%.

To factor in skill, the program would need to do something along these line:
Store an individual's war attacks, reference the offensive war weight during given wars, reference the defensive war weight of the bases hit in the given wars, consider offensive troop selection compared to defensive set-up, pull the results, use an algorithm to determine "skill", factor this as some value/multiplier in the matchmaker, do this for EACH individual and the clan as whole, then try to match.
Not only would this take forever to match, but would require a larger and more complicated code, and still cannot guarantee fairness (I am sure people could still trick the matchmaker).

Do not get me wrong, I think that the war matchmaker needs improvement. But, I do not think it will ever be what people on the forums expect it to be.
/rant over

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NGS8Blood

We're fine with people upgrading how they want, just not with that deciding the war by giving them free wins. Everyone should be allowed to war, and stand a chance of winning based on skill. NOT based on their upgrade choices. War is the best part of the game, and if we like war more, we shouldn't have to go and push or just farm, just coz we get unfair matches in war. MM needs additions. Personally I believe in an offense:defense ratio, that on top of war weight, clans get matched by this going down the roster in 5s or 10s.

---

To paraphrase what another poster said in one of the clan wars subforum threads: If you truly desire a match which is won based on skill then pressing the "start war" button will seldom do it for you. In addition to facing engineers you are also going to be facing clans who don't fill their CC, clans who don't attack, clans full of kids and folks randomly gathered from global who use 2 year old internet bases and mass dragons up and down their lineup.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

"... but you won't have me on the forum complaining when I have a 50/50 win ratio because the odds are even for both parties. That was the whole moral of the story, remember?

---

So ... in your last 7 wars you are 4-3 (assuming you will lose/have lost the third Lopsider match). Are you saying you need to lose one more before you will be content -- hitting the "fair" 50/50 ratio?

If people want fair/challenging matchups, when they start winning, they should be demanding tougher and tougher matchups instead of complaining about them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Your comparison of valks vs LaLoon doesn't make any sense nor is it relevant.

---

Your comment, "I respect everyone's path, but they do not necessarily have to cross each other." pertained to the engineered path vs. the non-engineered path. My point was that there are lots of "paths" you can choose in CoC. Your "I don't want to cross paths with engineers" is as valid to me as a valk-using clan saying "I don't want to cross paths with laloon users".

Sorry if that wasn't/isn't clear or if I've come across as accusatory/snarky/toxic in any way. I do greatly appreciate your taking the time to post your thoughts on the forum and respond to me and others. And I do understand the frustration of being in a war you know you have no chance of winning from the get-go. I am just trying to (probably poorly) make a case for the relativity of "Fair". Cheers to you, and I hope you pull out a win and get your streak back on track.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stealthmtn

The matchmaker does not look at skill - it looks at fixed attributes for bases in war (war weight) and tries to match one clan as closely as possible to another. It just might do it better for some clans than others based on the war composition, size, etc.

---

Actually, I think the addition of the MM looking at "recent war record" does to some extent factor in skill. If they are "adding weight" to successful clans and "reducing weight" of unsuccessful ones, it does accomplish that.

MM: Your clan has an overall combined weight of 100 units, but you have won 6 in a row -- let's bump that weight up to 110 and see how you do. Oh, and there's a clan that has a total weight of 120, but they have lost 5 of their last 7, let's lower that weight down to 110 and see if they can do any better. Presto: a war that appears to be a mismatch (100 vs. 120 on paper), but could come down to the wire.

I think this is why I so often see clans riding win streaks complain about getting unfair matches (many of which turn out to be "well, we ended up beating them on % or vice versa).

Let's hear from SC.... crickets

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bouges

Let's hear from SC.... crickets

---

We did.

10 there's none so deaf as those who will not listens

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

We did.

10 there's none so deaf as those who will not listens

---

If you think SC is good at communicating that is great. I think they could make more of an effort especially given that they said they would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RoCoStr

Hey Chiefs, just got our third Lopsided war in a row which is a big deal to us since we don't engineer.

I've been seeing it more and more and I am REALLY unhappy about it because my love for the game is in wars.

Two wars ago it was 3x th10 offense, 1x th10 defense, compared to our 1x th10 defense/offense. Then it was 2x th10 offense, 2x th11 offense, 1x th10 defense against our 1x off/Def. Now it's 1x th10, 1x th11 against our 1x th10.

It isn't all that fulfilling this way and I have seen plenty of good suggestions to fix this, but since then haven't seen real effect on MM. With that in mind I even understand the rise in Lopsiders, but it is not the system that I fell in love with.

Is anyone else experiencing a rise in Lopsiders?

---

As someone else mentioned, 9.5s tend to be drawing 10s more often than before. My 9.25 (TH9 defences maxed but no xbows) is drawing a TH10 in wars.

As for matchmaking over the last few months, I'd say our wars have been pretty fair with the odd exception when we are the stronger opponent or when we our outmatched as we were in our last war.

Our 15V15 wars usually include 4 TH10 (of which I am one which no TH10 defences other then traps and the new walls), 7 TH9s, 3 TH8s, and 1 TH7. One of the TH9s is my baby account with TH7 defences (the only TH9 offence is dragons).

Usually we draw 4 TH10s with that setup, a load of TH9s, and the rest TH8s. Fair wars except when our opponents heroes are very low (how can you be a TH10 when heroes less then level 10?). Occasionally, matchmaking throws us a curveball (our last war had 4TH10s and 3 TH11s). It happens and we deal with it ... time to try some attacks we would not normally use with no worries.

All I can say is stay with it. Level up your offence and heroes and work on 3 star strategies. Remember to have fun ... even when you get a bad matchup ... make it a troll war ... come up with some wacky attacks ... have a good laugh. (come to think of it, I'll suggest this to my clan mates the next time we get a bad match).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bouges

If you think SC is good at communicating that is great. I think they could make more of an effort especially given that they said they would.

---

Their team is divided on it, however, they did say they wanted to improve war MM.

I don't see a problem with .5 bases, I believe dropping your infernos the moment your TH finishes is the worst decision ever. But the defenseless bases create a problem. I'm pro engineering btw, I feel like those who spend the time or gems to build a defenseless base deserve it. At the same time, it's so tough to win those wars unless they absolutely suck at attacking.

[QUOTE=mmmk604;9752865]Their team is divided on it, however, they did say they wanted to improve war MM.

I don't see a problem with .5 bases, I believe dropping your infernos the moment your TH finishes is the worst decision ever. But the defenseless bases create a problem. I'm pro engineering btw, I feel like those who spend the time or gems to build a defenseless base deserve it. At the same time, it's so tough to win those wars unless they absolutely suck at attacking.[quote]

I dislike engineering whole heartedly... they create bases that allow them to attack lower level defenses with high level offense. Do that in match making, but war, no. War should be about testing limits not manipulating flaws in the system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bouges

If you think SC is good at communicating that is great. I think they could make more of an effort especially given that they said they would.

---

We have heard from them on this issue. How many times do you want them to repeat themselves?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

We have heard from them on this issue. How many times do you want them to repeat themselves?

---

I for one, am shocked that SuperCell employees aren't demanding they be able to come on the forums & argue with everyone who has a bone to pick with how the game works. Shocked, I say!

Yeah, that was sarcasm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit

If you really love war you will adapt to whatever the current matchmaking. If SC changes it you simply adapt.
Now if you only want challenging wars the then congrats that is exactly what you should be getting by tying one hand behind your back and going against someone who isn't.

---

Fully agreed on this. If someone isn't bothered to play in an optimal way, they really shouldn't complain when others are doing so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pluribus

This type of base does not exist in competitive war clans for the obvious reason that they wouldn't be able to attack a th 9 let alone a maxed th 10.

---

Good, prematurely assuming an engineer has no skill. If an engineer does not have good skill, they wouldn't be better than a non-engineering clan in the first place

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tremblor

Sorry, I am cutting and pasting/editing some of the posts in the thread to save room (but not altering any meanings/intent).


I see so many of these posts: Unfair! We won xxx in a row, and then we got a hugely unfair match against an engineered clan. It ended up with us/them winning by 1 star. We just want a challenging war, not these unfair matchups!

What makes your clan so special that when you win 4 in a row, you don't think you were the beneficiaries of unfair matchups? Do you really want challenging wars, or do you just want to win? I never see: "Matchmaking is broken -- we win 80% of our wars, when in a fair world we should only be winning half of them!"

What were the scores of the 4 wins in your streak and the scores of the you vs. the engineers?

You say, "I respect everyone's path, but they do not necessarily have to cross each other." Well most of the th9s in my clan use valks in war. Should we have to face clans that have the massive unfair advantage of using laloon or hghb?

I stipulate that in general defensive engineering helps matchmaking. I also stipulate that in general height helps you in basketball. But that doesn't mean that basketball teams that are taller shouldn't get matched against shorter teams.

I know I've touched on a few things here - sorry for the lack of a clear thesis :) I think SC has a tough job trying to incorporate a huge number of tangible and intangible variables into matchmaking, and I think they are doing a good job with it and are getting better.

---

Agreed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lostinsnow

Actually you are not fine with the way people upgrade otherwise you and other people wouldn't be on the forums complaining about how other people play the game.

Regardless, you have it wrong… This game is a not about skill but a strategy game. Take the CWL finals for example and where were all those skill attacks? Last I checked it was mostly TH11 doing dip attacks and the lack variety in attacks outside of spamming BWitch... War is more about communicating with your clan members, coordinating your attacks, and executing a war strategy than worrying about 2, 3, 6 or whatever engineer bases per war.

With that said if you, your clanmates, or anyone else truly wants to flex their sills in war and want a even playing field I have a simple solution for you. Run max 11v11 only wars and you won’t ever have to complain about anyone is trying to get some sort of an advantage in a strategy game.

---

So is building your base not a strategy? Why do you pay so much attention to your order of upgrades rather than upgrading randomly and haphazardly? If you do not build infernos on the first day of TH10, isn't that as much strategy as engineering is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chang405

To paraphrase what another poster said in one of the clan wars subforum threads: If you truly desire a match which is won based on skill then pressing the "start war" button will seldom do it for you. In addition to facing engineers you are also going to be facing clans who don't fill their CC, clans who don't attack, clans full of kids and folks randomly gathered from global who use 2 year old internet bases and mass dragons up and down their lineup.

---

Yup, somehow when they are disadvantaged, it is the death of wars because they want challenge in war. But when they face disoragnised clans, it is alright

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChiefTuk

I for one, am shocked that SuperCell employees aren't demanding they be able to come on the forums & argue with everyone who has a bone to pick with how the game works. Shocked, I say!

Yeah, that was sarcasm.

---

You're right, people like you can act like their mouth pieces.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mmmk604

Their team is divided on it, however, they did say they wanted to improve war MM.

I don't see a problem with .5 bases, I believe dropping your infernos the moment your TH finishes is the worst decision ever. But the defenseless bases create a problem. I'm pro engineering btw, I feel like those who spend the time or gems to build a defenseless base deserve it. At the same time, it's so tough to win those wars unless they absolutely suck at attacking.

---

Interesting, maybe they should really revamp their MM, punish a player if they do not build xbows/infernos/eagle immediately

This is because they have gem packs which provide these buildings already completed on the first day, they should heavily incentivise this

I must say I have also noticed this.

In our last 50 wars, our enemies were facing a lopsided clan in every single war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mmmk604

Their team is divided on it, however, they did say they wanted to improve war MM.

---

Lol. If they wanted to improve it, they would publish it. ( like scientists do with peer review, to like, further the science ) Think they want to not spend money on something they think is good enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

Lol. If they wanted to improve it, they would publish it. ( like scientists do with peer review, to like, further the science ) Think they want to not spend money on something they think is good enough.

---

This makes absolutely no sense. If SC wants to prevent engineering, then why would they publish in depth details of the matchmaker to help people engineer?

Also, a piece of commercial software has nothing in common with a scientific paper. Asking for the MM details to be published is like asking a bank to publish how exactly their security software work. Arguing that they are not going to improve it because they won't publish is exactly the same as saying "xyz bank will never improve their security, because they didn't publish how it works".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

This makes absolutely no sense. If SC wants to prevent engineering, then why would they publish in depth details of the matchmaker to help people engineer?

Also, a piece of commercial software has nothing in common with a scientific paper. Asking for the MM details to be published is like asking a bank to publish how exactly their security software work. Arguing that they are not going to improve it because they won't publish is exactly the same as saying "xyz bank will never improve their security, because they didn't publish how it works".

---

I'm not aware of any major game company that publishes their code for peer review for what seem like obvious reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bouges

You're right, people like you can act like their mouth pieces.

---

If you paid attention to what I've said on the forums, I have been very critical of SuperCell when I feel like it's warranted. I'm probably pretty close to you on my opinion about the current MM, but I don't expect SC chime in on repetitive threads about problems in MM. The fact that some posters are quick to descend to pretty toxic behavior isn't going to encourage them to commit resources to engaging this community, imo.

I'm so tired of hearing engineers try to defend themselves. Yeah, yeah, you're so smart that you figured out a way to exploit the matchmaking algorithm. First of all, you didnt figure it out...someone else did and you copied them. If you guys are so smart, why cant you plan an execute a good attack? Why do you need to manipulate your base to have an advantage?

Lets be clear, there is only 1 reason to engineer...theyre bad attackers who NEED an advantage in war. Im not talking about .5 bases, I'm talking full on hardcore engineered for war bases. What other reason could there possibly be to manipulate your base like that? Theyre masochists who enjoy seeing their base destroyed everytime they go on defence?(unless theyre hiding down in bronze, lol) They have to much money and enjoy buying gems? Their addicted to the praise they get from their fake warlogs from the noobs in global? Theyre the only ones you're impressing by the way. 'Real' clashers know you guys are jokes who couldnt attack your way out of a wet paper bag.

I ask engineers all the time in global why they engineer and Ive never gotten a real answer. Its ok to admit that youre not very good at clash and need the advantage, theres no shame in that. Its these guys that try to pass it off like theyre doing something super smart by 'optimizing' their bases that makes me laugh. Theyre just looking for the easy way, and theyve found it....for the time being.

You engineers realize though that its only a matter of time...maybe not in the comming update, maybe the next...until SuperCell fixes this. I cannot wait to see all your red warlogs, all your sad posts crying about how SuperCell is making you play fair now, all your 'I'm quitting' posts, its gonna be better than when SuperCell finally got rid of your distant cousins...the fluffy bunnies.

So enjoy your advantage while you still have it engineers, I'll be waiting for you with my maxxed clan who knows how to attack AND defend, lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

This makes absolutely no sense. If SC wants to prevent engineering, then why would they publish in depth details of the matchmaker to help people engineer?

Also, a piece of commercial software has nothing in common with a scientific paper. Asking for the MM details to be published is like asking a bank to publish how exactly their security software work. Arguing that they are not going to improve it because they won't publish is exactly the same as saying "xyz bank will never improve their security, because they didn't publish how it works".

---

the algorithm != the code. Most popular e sports games pit the players on a level playing field. Pay to win obviously a different paradigm. depends which direction they want to go... actions speak louder then words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

the algorithm != the code. Most popular e sports games pit the players on a level playing field. Pay to win obviously a different paradigm. depends which direction they want to go... actions speak louder then words.

---

Your not really responding to the content of his post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whp4

Why does it matter which base they came from? If the opponent attacking you was #19 of 20, that just means that was the 19th strongest base, measured on defensive strength at the time the war was declared. Doesn't say anything about their offense. No one ever seems to make a big deal about it when they get attacked by a offensively weak #1 that has max defenses and level 1 golems. Your defensive strength is irrelevant when you are attacking, just like your offensive strength is irrelevant when you are defending.

---

Are you even serious with this?
Why does it matter that #19 can smash the opponent #2? :facepalm:
Then coming to this forum and call it skill :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarcelLohfink

Are you even serious with this?
Why does it matter that #19 can smash the opponent #2? :facepalm:
Then coming to this forum and call it skill :D

---

Would it make "you" feel better if I engineer a #3base to become a lopsided Th11 and smash the opponents #1and2 in a Th10/9 clan war? When a base is that lopsided, does it really matter if its number 19 or number 3?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chang405

Would it make "you" feel better if I engineer a #3base to become a lopsided Th11 and smash the opponents #1and2 in a Th10/9 clan war? When a base is that lopsided, does it really matter if its number 19 or number 3?

---

Not at all, both ways are very poor so please dont make it sound normal that a #19 is able to smash a #2 in a cw with different th lvls..thx :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarcelLohfink

Not at all, both ways are very poor so please dont make it sound normal that a #19 is able to smash a #2 in a cw with different th lvls..thx :)

---

It is normal and it isn't the problem. As long as both clans have the same amount of same level attacks it doesn't matter from which defensive position the attacks come from. The problem appears when one clan has significantly more high level attacks compared to another.

Thus this isn't a problem:
clan 1:
1. th9 defense / th9 attack
2. th8 defense / th9 attack
3. th8 defense / th8 attack
4. th7 defense / th8 attack
5. th7 defense / th7 attack

clan 2:
1. th9 defense / th9 attack
2. th8 defense / th8 attack
3. th8 defense / th8 attack
4. th7 defense / th7 attack
5. th7 defense / th9 attack

Even though the 5. from clan 2 will be able to attack 1. from clan 1, these clans are a perfect match.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

It is normal and it isn't the problem. As long as both clans have the same amount of same level attacks it doesn't matter from which defensive position the attacks come from. The problem appears when one clan has significantly more high level attacks compared to another.

Thus this isn't a problem:
clan 1:
1. th9 defense / th9 attack
2. th8 defense / th9 attack
3. th8 defense / th8 attack
4. th7 defense / th8 attack
5. th7 defense / th7 attack

clan 2:
1. th9 defense / th9 attack
2. th8 defense / th8 attack
3. th8 defense / th8 attack
4. th7 defense / th7 attack
5. th7 defense / th9 attack

Even though the 5. from clan 2 will be able to attack 1. from clan 1, these clans are a perfect match.

---

Yea... but... who draws wars like that ? not my clans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

This makes absolutely no sense. If SC wants to prevent engineering, then why would they publish in depth details of the matchmaker to help people engineer?

---

If they wanted to "prevent" engineering in clan war, they would fix the MM. In turn, they would probably communicate that they were changing it. It is trivial to fix it... Thing is, they have already said they dont see it as a problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

If they wanted to "prevent" engineering in clan war, they would fix the MM. In turn, they would probably communicate that they were changing it. It is trivial to fix it... Thing is, they have already said they dont see it as a problem.

---

Disagreed, they are in the process of changing things so you can not say they aren't trying to prevent it. Why would they publish/communicate the things they are changing? Hey chiefs, this is what we plan to do, change your bases accordingly... yeah, no, not good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

Yea... but... who draws wars like that ? not my clans.

---

I didn't say the matchmaker works well. All I am saying is, stop focusing on things that doesn't matter and focus on things that do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

If they wanted to "prevent" engineering in clan war, they would fix the MM. In turn, they would probably communicate that they were changing it. It is trivial to fix it... Thing is, they have already said they dont see it as a problem.

---

your spreading missinformation, they have changed the matchmaker, and they have communicated they are changing it.

its starting to seam like you are trolling, if you not, you need to get informed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

If they wanted to "prevent" engineering in clan war, they would fix the MM. In turn, they would probably communicate that they were changing it. It is trivial to fix it... Thing is, they have already said they dont see it as a problem.

---

They don't want to prevent engineering in wars. They want to prevent engineering from gaining undue unfair advantages. Now, no one knows for sure what sort of advantage is acceptable for them. Many people were predicting that they would do something about the defenseless bases first but they chose to swing the axe at the 0.5s in October.

They continuously communicate that they are always balancing the matchmaker and players have seen that the matchmaker has indeed changed over time. So your entire statement is false.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaagelus

Many of us still love to war, but not want to play with system to get easy matches.

Its like: i want to win 100 meter sprint, who run fastest, wins. Fair match, i like.
Engineerer style: break every opponent leg, then walk over goal line. Unfair match, someone might like. But don't come to tell me, this is how it should be done.

---

That's a great analogy. Perfect. Made my day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chang405

They don't want to prevent engineering in wars. They want to prevent engineering from gaining undue unfair advantages. Now, no one knows for sure what sort of advantage is acceptable for them. Many people were predicting that they would do something about the defenseless bases first but they chose to swing the axe at the 0.5s in October.

They continuously communicate that they are always balancing the matchmaker and players have seen that the matchmaker has indeed changed over time. So your entire statement is false.

---

It's a bit early to tell but I think they did something more in the balancing update a week or so ago. We drew 3 consecutive heavily engineered clans after that update with extremely impressive records but they were all cupcake matches for us. 97% on one and 100% on the other 2. The best any of them got on us was 87%.

I think these clans were used to drawing TH8 heavy lineups and didn't know what to do against a strong TH9 lineup with 2 max 10s on top. All that any of them had for strong troops were dragons.

The last one, which ended yesterday, that clan had a 147-22 record. After losing to us they are now on a 3 war losing streak.

To quote Bob Dylan...

"Cuz the times they are a-changing"