[ASK] What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts)

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts)
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3-star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10?
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defenseless th11 to attack th10s when in fact, building a maxed th10 is pointless?
4. Why is it wrong if a defenseless th11 3-starred a maxed th10? Ins't attacking with ease a clever way of fighting as per advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

I'll just say one thing, it's not wrong. It's your base, your choice whatever you wanna do with it.

The main problem is more and more people are adapting to the meta (that is making their base engineered as well, me included btw), and this in turn is increasing the amount of engineered bases in the game.

The way it is going right now, I don't think the 'problem' of engineered bases will never be solved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? Nothing. Adapt or get rolled over
For example:
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3 star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10? There is no reason to stay unless you are a career th10 that has a secure spot in your war roster
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defless 11 to attack th10s since building a maxed th10 is still pointless? Many consider it bullying
4. Why is it wrong if a defless 11 3 starred a maxed def th10? Its not wrong. I'm assuming the defenseless th11 has max troops/spells etc.. The th11 chances aproach 100% the closer he gets to max offense.

“What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.” -- Sun Tzu

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

Answers In bold. Other answers from posters will vary..

The battle continues

Perhaps you could ask Galadon to post a YouTube video on this Adapting idea, I heard the last one he posted went down really well.

1) Nothing, but if you don't want to why should you have to.
2) Harder to loot as a rushed th 11 than as a maxed th 10. Pre-clan war we had 2 years of anti-rush sentiment, and still lot of people that rush to get the new toys and end up with badly built bases. Again, why could you is not the right question, the question is should the game force you too or have to accept being at a disadvantage every war.]
3) People should be allowed to make what they want, it is supposed to be fun. The question is why should a max th 10 be a big disadvantage in war.
4) Nothing, it is expected a max th11 can 3 star a max th10, in my opinion the balance is about right for that, maybe a little too easy but not automatic. What is unfair is the defenseless base gives that side 2 extra maxed attacks and the war comes down to how those top attacks go most of the time.

I have a low lvl defenseless 11 and it is a good advantage in war. A maced 11 is a huge advantage,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laneofmagic

I'll just say one thing, it's not wrong.

The way it is going right now, I don't think the 'problem' of engineered bases will never be solved.

---

I agree, never be solved. Scrape the current war dynamic and/or come up with a different approach.

I don't know, how about those villages that want war jump into a pool, let SC war maker select from that pool to make an equitable war.
Those that want to stick with current war dynamic have that choice also

1) Nothing
2) No real reason
3) Dips usually win wars, but I see both sides of the coin
4) Nothing per se, TH11 should besmirch a TH10. People simply don't like the idea of defenceless bases in war.

Let me say that my clan is a pretty casual war clan. We let anyone who is in the clan, and wants to war, into war. We only recently, past 6~8 months +/-, started 'engineering' our clan (.5 bases since guys were way past the point of being able to build defenceless from scratch). We did it not to necessarily win wars, but to stay competitive with the clans we kept getting matched with. So far, its working out pretty good for us. Pre 'engineering' we were probably winning 50% of our wars. Now we win 60~65%. We don't have any long win streaks, but we never lose more than 2 in a row, and most notably, we don't get stomped by the engineered clans we face any more, often only losing by 1~2 stars, or on %

All that being said, I get the hate for engineering, or as I like to call it mini maxing. I've played many games over my life time. From semi competitive online FPS, to table top miniatures games in high level environments. Some people are casual gamers. Most casual gamers like to win, but don't care if they lose, as long as they are competitive. Then there is the uber competitive crowd. The 'win at all cost, and I don't care how I do it or who I crush to achieve my goals' guys. Of course there are those between the extremes all throughout the spectrum.

In the world of miniatures gaming, its pretty easy to cater to both. Casual gamers can simply play at home with friends, or go to Tournaments specifically tailored to see their needs. The Ubers can go to high level tournaments to test their mettle against the best of the best. Everyone wins.

Online gaming, not so much. Unfortunately the casuals get lumped in with the Ubers, and when the two meet, it's never a fun time for the casuals. The Ubers will say its fun, because their primary goal is winning. To them, thats the end game. Anything less is unacceptable. The casuals just want to have a good time, and have a chance at winning, which they feel is diminished by the Ubers inability to do anything less than give 100% all the time.

In the end, its really a no win situation. Casuals will never convince the Ubers to play their way, and Ubers will never really see the merits of the way the casuals want to play. Is there a balance somewhere in between? I'm not sure tbh. One solution I could offer up, and I'm no programmer, so I'm not sure how this would work, would be to have tiers with-in the MM algorithm. And leagues (for lack of a better term) set up with-in the game itself. That way the Ubers could put themselves into the higher competitive leagues to test themselves against better competition, and the casuals could stay in the lower leagues to play for fun and still feel like they are being challenged.

Anyway, I'm probably rambling a this point. It's late and I'm tired. If you managed to muddle your way through this, and its made any sense to you, thanks for that.

Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MouthofSauron

1) Nothing
2) No real reason
3) Dips usually win wars, but I see both sides of the coin
4) Nothing per se, TH11 should besmirch a TH10. People simply don't like the idea of defenceless bases in war.

Let me say that my clan is a pretty casual war clan. We let anyone who is in the clan, and wants to war, into war. We only recently, past 6~8 months +/-, started 'engineering' our clan (.5 bases since guys were way past the point of being able to build defenceless from scratch). We did it not to necessarily win wars, but to stay competitive with the clans we kept getting matched with. So far, its working out pretty good for us. Pre 'engineering' we were probably winning 50% of our wars. Now we win 60~65%. We don't have any long win streaks, but we never lose more than 2 in a row, and most notably, we don't get stomped by the engineered clans we face any more, often only losing by 1~2 stars, or on %

All that being said, I get the hate for engineering, or as I like to call it mini maxing. I've played many games over my life time. From semi competitive online FPS, to table top miniatures games in high level environments. Some people are casual gamers. Most casual gamers like to win, but don't care if they lose, as long as they are competitive. Then there is the uber competitive crowd. The 'win at all cost, and I don't care how I do it or who I crush to achieve my goals' guys. Of course there are those between the extremes all throughout the spectrum.

In the world of miniatures gaming, its pretty easy to cater to both. Casual gamers can simply play at home with friends, or go to Tournaments specifically tailored to see their needs. The Ubers can go to high level tournaments to test their mettle against the best of the best. Everyone wins.

Online gaming, not so much. Unfortunately the casuals get lumped in with the Ubers, and when the two meet, it's never a fun time for the casuals. The Ubers will say its fun, because their primary goal is winning. To them, thats the end game. Anything less is unacceptable. The casuals just want to have a good time, and have a chance at winning, which they feel is diminished by the Ubers inability to do anything less than give 100% all the time.

In the end, its really a no win situation. Casuals will never convince the Ubers to play their way, and Ubers will never really see the merits of the way the casuals want to play. Is there a balance somewhere in between? I'm not sure tbh. One solution I could offer up, and I'm no programmer, so I'm not sure how this would work, would be to have tiers with-in the MM algorithm. And leagues (for lack of a better term) set up with-in the game itself. That way the Ubers could put themselves into the higher competitive leagues to test themselves against better competition, and the casuals could stay in the lower leagues to play for fun and still feel like they are being challenged.

Anyway, I'm probably rambling a this point. It's late and I'm tired. If you managed to muddle your way through this, and its made any sense to you, thanks for that.

Cheers.

---

Only problem with how this applies to CoC, is that calling all engineers "Ubers" is not accurate at all.

The only people I'd actually call "Ubers" are those who play in higher levels of competition, like CWL.

Engineering is not "Uber".

I have faced so many engineered clans that are terrible attackers and only win because 95% of their attacks are dips and when they finally have to clear the top, they have so many TH11 attacks left that they can fail 10 times and still get away with it. In a lot of cases, it's more of a crutch than anything else.

That's not to say that there aren't engineered clans out there with great attackers/builders, but there is no correlation with engineering itself.

I generally don't feel too bad about losing to any clan (engineered or not) if they are actually better attackers, but it is rarely the case in my experience.

What I will agree on is that there there is probably no middle ground.

Engineers don't want to play against each other. They want to play against non-engineers.

Any solution that would allow non-engineers to avoid engineers would be the end of engineering, as it would become pointless.

Would be hilarious if SC did this though. :)

Play however you like until supercell decides they don't want you to play that way.

accdg to anti-engineering bible, all engineers must be crucified.

nothing is wrong, if you see it from SC's perspective

it is only wrong if you see it from anti-engineer's perspective.

I'm at 2340 trophies and now all I see are TH9s with a missing Wizard Tower, XBOW, Teslas, and point defenses. Easy 3 stars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nullandvoid

Engineers don't want to play against each other. They want to play against non-engineers.

---

This isnt true. For engineered clans with competent attackers, they feel pity and sorrow when their clan is faced to a defensively rushed roster. On the other hand, they feel more excited when they get a tough match specially against heavily engineered clans with much more warden attacks than theirs and have more eagles than theirs at the same time. Once an engineered clan is placed in the high win rate bracket, they have no other choice but to fight whatever tough match the MM gave to them trying to reset their streak back to zero. It's always an honor to fight very strong clans whatever their make up is, and it's always a pity and sadness when engines are matched against casual clans.

Nothing is wrong with dipping or having a deffensless base. Nothing is wrong with playing inside the rules. I always look at engineering as a sign of weakness. These are people that want to feel good on beating up a lesser opponent. They don't care about there base being 3 stared in war because they don't care about there outer appearance. these are people that will do anything in the game to make themselves feel better. Real people want a challenge they want to hit a base at there level or higher to see how good they are. But like I said there is Nothing wrong with any style of game play that are inside the rules even for the ones that like to beat on a weaker opponent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

This is only true for casual engineering clans. For engineered clans with competent attackers, they feel pity and sorrow when their clan is faced to a defensively rushed roster. But they feel more excited when they get a tough match specially against heavily engineered clans with much more warden attacks than theirs and have more eagles than theirs at the same time.

So good engines dont fear fellow engines. Once Engines are placed in the high win rate bracket, they have no other choice but to fight whatever tough match the MM gave to them trying to reset their streak back to zero. It's always an honor to fight strong clans whatever their make up is, and always sadness when against casual clans.

---

I am not buying this at all. You engineer to get an advantage over the other clan. The only ones happy they get an even match are the ones engineering to compete against their less then honorable opponents. I fall into the second category. I made two slimey villages to even the field. Since the new game was introduced I idled them and stopped warring in my main. I am tired of it and if SC is taking the game in a new direction without fixing this I will be done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martvol

I am not buying this at all. You engineer to get an advantage over the other clan. The only ones happy they get an even match are the ones engineering to compete against their less then honorable opponents. I fall into the second category. I made two slimey villages to even the field. Since the new game was introduced I idled them and stopped warring in my main. I am tired of it and if SC is taking the game in a new direction without fixing this I will be done.

---

Perhaps it's pride that stops you to join the meta. Just guessing though.

One thing's i'm sure btw, engineering will only be slightly fixed. 2 reasons:
1. when sc designed this time-consumming base building game in a play and progress however you like manner, then right from the start, they already knew that defenseless bases would exist.
2. Darian[SC] posted this: "What do you think is the cure for engineered bases ... while still allowing players a degree of freedom in how they play?"

edit: It's apparently how the game is meant to be played right from the start, else, this game wouldnt be loved by hundreds of millions due to rediculous upgrade wait time.

There is nothing wrong with engineering, but if you choose to engineer you should be matched with someone of similar strentgh, both offence and defence considered.

A th11 with a warden, max hounds and loons and mid 20+ king/queen should not be matched with a th9....no, that isnt a made up example, I have seen this happen many times...

It's not wrong that people do this. In fact, it makes perfect sense.

What is wrong is the fact that the game allows people to be put into a position where they feel this is the only way to be competitive.

It much depends on why you are warring.

a) Do you simply wanna level up the clan as much as quickly as possible?

b) Or do you want to compete against fellow clashers in a contest of skill and strtategy ( and a bit of luck)?

If the answer is a then , sure whatevs..,just get the task done. Engineer away.

If the the answer is b and you still think of engineering then you have to have a serious word with yourself.

Engineers gain an advantage by engineering not by being more skilful. There is no such thing as a 'skilful engineer'... if the clasher were skilful he/she wouldn't needn't to hide behind an engineered base for lighter matchmaking. Simples.

It's not wrong to engineer but it shows shows a lack of willingness to enter a fair contest of strength. It automatically disqualifies you as a 'warrior' as such. The more you tinker with the weight the less meaning you give to your actual war activities.

I say if you can't beat them then join them. But before you join them you need to ask yourself if your the kind of person that needs an advantage to win an app game. If your the kind of person that cant beat a person at the same level as you. If your the kind of person that needs to take advantage of others to make yourself feel good. If your that kind of person than you need to make an engineered base and have some fun.

People make engineered accounts because they aren't skilled enough to win even match ups. Fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fette

It much depends on why you are warring.

a) Do you simply wanna level up the clan as much as quickly as possible?

b) Or do you want to compete against fellow clashers in a contest of skill and strtategy ( and a bit of luck)?

If the answer is a then , sure whatevs..,just get the task done. Engineer away.

If the the answer is b and you still think of engineering then you have to have a serious word with yourself.

Engineers gain an advantage by engineering not by being more skilful. There is no such thing as a 'skilful engineer'... if the clasher were skilful he/she wouldn't needn't to hide behind an engineered base for lighter matchmaking. Simples.

It's not wrong to engineer but it shows shows a lack of willingness to enter a fair contest of strength. It automatically disqualifies you as a 'warrior' as such. The more you tinker with the weight the less meaning you give to your actual war activities.

---

many errors in this post.

1 you get many skillful engineers, they simply want to win more, so they combine skill and engineering to put together large win streaks
2 even if you goal is b, no one will defensively rush, as one would when farming. All decent war player make upgrade decisions cognizant of matchmaker (eg don't drop xbows and and max them as your first upgrade as a fresh th9), and that is engineering.
3 since we all have freedom to create whatever bases we want, the contest is fair, however the contests are certainly not always even. Not by a long shot.
4 what kind of warrior builds a base intentionally weaker than they could? I would question who should be disqualified as a warrior.

having said all of that I hope supercell adjust the matchmaker to make wars more even.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mat5592

People make engineered accounts because they aren't skilled enough to win even match ups. Fact.

---

This is certainly true for some, but not true for all. And one could argue it's a good thing, as it gives the less skilled an incentive to war if true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by windyciti

I say if you can't beat them then join them. But before you join them you need to ask yourself if your the kind of person that needs an advantage to win an app game. If your the kind of person that cant beat a person at the same level as you. If your the kind of person that needs to take advantage of others to make yourself feel good. If your that kind of person than you need to make an engineered base and have some fun.

---

This is a strategy game where you build your base and take it to war. Ferrari and Mercedes build their f1 cars and then race them, result depends on car built and the driver skill. You seam to have the need to pull others down to feel good, so I would be careful throwing shade at engineers, lest you get lost in your own shadow.

1/ Nothing.
2/ Why indeed?
3/ It's not wrong, but a maxed 10 is only pointless if that's not what you're playing the game for. Personally I value achievements like that, but I'm not a maxer in terms of how I play the game.
4/ Not wrong either.

All these things are legit according to the rules, but the big question for me is, do they bring something positive to the game for the wider community? I think it's starting to leave a sour taste in the mouths of many, so it's probably time to do something from SCs end.

But as you say, even if they do, you just adapt to the new meta huh :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

many errors in this post.

1 you get many skillful engineers, they simply want to win more, so they combine skill and engineering to put together large win streaks
2 even if you goal is b, no one will defensively rush, as one would when farming. All decent war player make upgrade decisions cognizant of matchmaker (eg don't drop xbows and and max them as your first upgrade as a fresh th9), and that is engineering.
3 since we all have freedom to create whatever bases we want, the contest is fair, however the contests are certainly not always even. Not by a long shot.
4 what kind of warrior builds a base intentionally weaker than they could? I would question who should be disqualified as a warrior.

having said all of that I hope supercell adjust the matchmaker to make wars more even.

---

Lol sure, seeing your signature I'm not surprised that's your opinion. ;)

You're wrong tho. You should check my signature too sometimes :smirk:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts)
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3-star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10?
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defenseless th11 to attack th10s when in fact, building a maxed th10 is pointless?
4. Why is it wrong if a defenseless th11 3-starred a maxed th10? Ins't attacking with ease a clever way of fighting as per advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

I rather suspect you already know the answers from your considerable familiarity with the clan wars subforum, where this post probably belongs. But anyway, my answer are:

1. Nothing is wrong from the point of view of the individual player, but from the point of view of overall gameplay it has a widespread bad effect on war matching and war gameplay experience for the broad Clash community. And as it gets more widespread, it becomes a greater problem both from the point of view of fun war experience for all, and from the point of the devs trying to address the problem without hurting casual non-engineered rushed bases.
2. Stay at 10 or rush to 11, up to the individual player. In either case check first that one isn't caught in the "3 star mentality" that doesn't recognise that at different th levels it is relatively easier or harder to 3 star a max base of the same th level.
3. It isn't wrong, but see the answer to 1. In fact this has a worse effect still, as not only do nonengineered clans find themselves outgunned, they need to attack what they perceive as "joke bases" further undermining their fun.
4. It isn't wrong, any rather good max offence th11 ought be able to 3 star very many 10s. "Attacking with ease" is however, to some, also called "attacking in easy mode", and so to them doing so (or any dip attacking never mind engineered dips) is not really an actual demonstration of any attack skill, as opposed to skill in working to the flaws of the current matchmaker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mat5592

People make engineered accounts because they aren't skilled enough to win even match ups. Fact.

---

Well, people will go a long way to pick on somebody weaker to ensure the win.

People will spy, cheat, report opponent obscene bases, names, messages .. and other things that I don't even have the imagination for ..

Some Engineers will insist, that they can attack "their mirror" and do a good job .. yay, your maxed TH10 troops beat up a TH7, good job you. .. but all in all, giving up 3 stars as a offense engineered base to be able to gain 5-6 stars is good strategy and herein lies the problem with engineering. If defenses counted as much as attacks, we wouldn't have engineering .. as it is, engineering is the sensibel strategy.

Disclaimer: I'm a one-account maxing player.
(I understand the Engineering strategy, even though I don't practice it myself .. also, I don't participate in Clan Wars, because of blatant cheating)

/Affront

If you want to engineer you can, done properly you can reach huge winstreaks without being a good attacker, many clans have used this to reach 100+ winstreaks some even going past the 200 win mark, so if you are a bad attackers engineer your lineup properly a 20 win streak would still be easily possible even if your clan sucks at attacking.

I made on (in 2015) because we faced a clan with one and I thought it was a cool idea, wanted to try it. I kept developing it because as the having it as the lowest base in the clan helped emphasis that most members should be dipping and getting a sure 3 star to start with. It has also always helped with match making, at the time we had a few rushed 10s and would often draw a maxed 10 or 2 that we could not deal with, lowering our weight was a big help in this.

Even now, it is and th 11 with th 9 heros and th 10 troops. It mosty goes after 9.5s or lower 10s and isn't really swinging any wars with its attacks, main purpose is to give a easier match ups and it works except most opponents are just as engineered as we are or more. Most wars come down to how are 11s do against other nearly maxed 11s, some times we get an advantage of more eagles than our opponent, sometime we don't. To overcome a disadvantage in # of ealges takes some luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salkin101

If you want to engineer you can, done properly you can reach huge winstreaks without being a good attacker, many clans have used this to reach 100+ winstreaks some even going past the 200 win mark, so if you are a bad attackers engineer your lineup properly a 20 win streak would still be easily possible even if your clan sucks at attacking.

---

I guess it is possible that you could do it without any good attackers but I think it is harder than you make it out and suspect the clans with these huge streaks had plenty of good attackers, they just also got a matchup advantage because of engineering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fette

It much depends on why you are warring.

a) Do you simply wanna level up the clan as much as quickly as possible?


Joining one of the farm war leagues is a much quicker way to level up. Engineered clans, depending on how lopsided their offence to defence ratio is tends to gain less xp due to lower TH opponents.


b) Or do you want to compete against fellow clashers in a contest of skill and strtategy ( and a bit of luck)?

If the answer is a then , sure whatevs..,just get the task done. Engineer away.

If the the answer is b and you still think of engineering then you have to have a serious word with yourself.

Engineers gain an advantage by engineering not by being more skilful. There is no such thing as a 'skilful engineer'... if the clasher were skilful he/she wouldn't needn't to hide behind an engineered base for lighter matchmaking. Simples.

It's not wrong to engineer but it shows shows a lack of willingness to enter a fair contest of strength. It automatically disqualifies you as a 'warrior' as such. The more you tinker with the weight the less meaning you give to your actual war activities.

---

Your answer to A is definitely incorrect. Not even going to touch b.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

1 answer to cover all points. Lets say everyone jumped on the bandwagon (unlikely but more people are doing it) You could possibly end up with the scenario of 100% wars each and every time due to the amount of engineered bases. How boring is that?

Wars are fun, the variety of attacks vs different bases make it interesting. Not defensless th11 mindlessly drag spamming a th9 from way down the bottom of the map.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sbauer9

...having it as the lowest base in the clan helped emphasis that most members should be dipping and getting a sure 3 star to start with... isn't really swinging any wars with its attacks, main purpose is to give a easier match ups and it works except most opponents are just as engineered as we are or more...

---

I think you may be missing the contradiction or tension in what you say.. it is swinging wars, not so much with its attacks perhaps, but definitely in pulling an easier clan of opponents more often, and so helping create the situation where others in the lineup can mainly dip 3 star while its attacks (great or mediocre) can be added to the star pile in a way unlike that, say of having an actual th8 on bottom who does not attack while everyone above them dips. But then in an environment where engineering is endemic, you match other engineers who may win for engineering harder or smarter, as opposed to being more skilled.

Any, shall we say "base weight management" technique that aims to draw an easier opponent and succeeds is in fact a way of handing the enemy clan a disadvantage in having a harder matchup than they would otherwise have gotten.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

Advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

The ancient times also had something called honour in winning against a worthy opponent. There are thousands of laws in many countries that may be wrong but that doesn't mean their exploitation is correct, does it?

I know I stretched the metaphor a bit too far but hope you get my point

1. Nothing
2. No point in staying unless you are a farmer or in a FWA clan.
3. Its not wrong because its using a tactic to gain an advantage.
4. Its not wrong because you are playing the way you want to play.

The problem is the meta.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheConfuzed1

It's not wrong that people do this. In fact, it makes perfect sense.

What is wrong is the fact that the game allows people to be put into a position where they feel this is the only way to be competitive.

---

This guy hit the nail on the head. Supercell has made a game where this is the meta. Don't blame the players for utilizing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mat5592

People make engineered accounts because they aren't skilled enough to win even match ups. Fact.

---

No, no and no.

Last war 10 vs 10:

Our offense (defense)
- 44-43-20 (Eagle)
- 35-35-10 (no eagle TH10.5)
- 45-45-20 (no eagle no infernos)
- Plus 2 almost max TH10 + 3 TH9 + 2 TH8

Their offense
- 43-43-15 (Eagle)
- 40-40-15 (Eagle)
- 40-40-15 (Eagle)
- Plus 2 almost max TH10 + 3 TH9 + 2 TH8

They had better defense than us. Almost the same offense. We won because we got 3 star in 2 of their TH11-s with their max infernos and eagle.

They could'nt 3 start any of our 5 top bases.

You need skill (and luck) if you want to win. Engineering is not autowin.

OP has been around a while and knows the answers to the questions posed based on the OP's responses in other threads on this subject--this seems to be an attempt to flame up the forum.

These links provide excellent commentary (IMO) on the impact of engineering:

Billius discussion on the impact of Engineered clans and bases to the game
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...-and-Farm-Wars

ChiefTuk view on Engineering
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...Clash-of-Clans

Major Tom's view on Engineering
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...7#post10119837

Onyx view on Engineering
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...84#post9272584

Seachicken view on Engineering
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...53#post9304253

Sumosloth on Engineering
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...ut-Engineering

Nerf's comments on fairness as it pertains to war
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...3#post10369773

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts)
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3-star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10?
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defenseless th11 to attack th10s when in fact, building a maxed th10 is pointless?
4. Why is it wrong if a defenseless th11 3-starred a maxed th10? Ins't attacking with ease a clever way of fighting as per advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

1.) The problem is you cant unbuild deff you already have. So if you enjoy pushing as well or did a regular main with eagle because you did not know about matchmaking at the time, you can now start all over again. Yes I have my war optimized minis as well, but cleaning up everything above th9 requires a lot of farming that I dont want to do on a mini. My main does not have an eagle or bomb towers and my th9 mini has 20+ heroes with still entry level th9 defenses to compensate for other accounts having more deff than heroes, but personally I dont want to do much more because it would be a pain and at the time I have a second 40+ heroes th11 engineering might be fixed. Honestly I think we already are at that point or close to it.

2.) In my opinion th10s should not have infernos and th11s should not have eagles in war, but the problem is if we fill the clan with th10s that dont have infernos and get matched with players that do have them we are at a real disadvantage. For the eagle it is less of a pain because it is massively overrated in matchmaking and we are currently at a state where a max 10.75 still does not get 3 stared, but a th11 would so it is essentially more a base optimization thing that I cant burn so many enemy attack trying to 2 star me and it will end in a higher percentage.

3.) In my opinion even now it is not effective to build defenseless accounts. We have beaten many clans that did this and have been matched with 1 th11/10.75 more on our side so all we had to do is make sure our th11s did not get 3 stared and carry home the win.
What is effective is doing a bit more offense than defense like a 10.75 or a 9.5 (if you have more th11s than th10s) or doing selective defense upgrading. We had a th11 a few wars ago with no eagle and infernos, but everything else pretty max. War weigth was mid th10, but even one of our high th11 barely got him down after a failed 9.5 (max offense) and new 10.75 trying it.

4.) Well it is not really wrong. The problem is that it is not fun if you are a clan with many th10s (not max offense yet) and few th11s and have to opt many players out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts)
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3-star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10?
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defenseless th11 to attack th10s when in fact, building a maxed th10 is pointless?
4. Why is it wrong if a defenseless th11 3-starred a maxed th10? Ins't attacking with ease a clever way of fighting as per advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

I'll sum it all up in one word... Time.

The one that spent the most time in game developing their base should be the one rewarded, if any rewards were given out, aka advantages. Current meta gives the advantage to half cooked bases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts)
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3-star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10?
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defenseless th11 to attack th10s when in fact, building a maxed th10 is pointless?
4. Why is it wrong if a defenseless th11 3-starred a maxed th10? Ins't attacking with ease a clever way of fighting as per advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

Nothing wrong with any of these :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

This isnt true. For engineered clans with competent attackers, they feel pity and sorrow when their clan is faced to a defensively rushed roster. On the other hand, they feel more excited when they get a tough match specially against heavily engineered clans with much more warden attacks than theirs and have more eagles than theirs at the same time. Once an engineered clan is placed in the high win rate bracket, they have no other choice but to fight whatever tough match the MM gave to them trying to reset their streak back to zero. It's always an honor to fight very strong clans whatever their make up is, and it's always a pity and sadness when engines are matched against casual clans.

---

Yeah, I don't buy this at all, either.

Are you really suggesting that people start engineering with the objective of eventually, hopefully, possibly facing other engineers after going on long win streaks against non-engineered casuals?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

On the other hand, they feel more excited when they get a tough match specially against heavily engineered clans with much more warden attacks than theirs and have more eagles than theirs at the same time.

---

If you really want this challenge, you can just not engineer and you'll be facing these odds right away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

Perhaps it's pride that stops you to join the meta. Just guessing though.

One thing's i'm sure btw, engineering will only be slightly fixed. 2 reasons:
1. when sc designed this time-consumming base building game in a play and progress however you like manner, then right from the start, they already knew that defenseless bases would exist.
2. Darian[SC] posted this: "What do you think is the cure for engineered bases ... while still allowing players a degree of freedom in how they play?"

edit: It's apparently how the game is meant to be played right from the start, else, this game wouldnt be loved by hundreds of millions due to rediculous upgrade wait time.

---

The game was loved by millions long before the introduction of clan wars.

Before that, defenseless bases offered zero advantage, except getting to play with higher troops faster.

There is no reason to assume that SC knew from the beginning that the matchmaker they would eventually implement would have had limitations to be taken advantage of in this way.

Just like they probably did not anticipate TH sniping or how popular it became.

A part of development is acknowledging that you cannot predict everything your users will do. That's why user testing and collecting/monitoring data is so important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

This isnt true. For engineered clans with competent attackers, they feel pity and sorrow when their clan is faced to a defensively rushed roster. On the other hand, they feel more excited when they get a tough match specially against heavily engineered clans with much more warden attacks than theirs and have more eagles than theirs at the same time. Once an engineered clan is placed in the high win rate bracket, they have no other choice but to fight whatever tough match the MM gave to them trying to reset their streak back to zero. It's always an honor to fight very strong clans whatever their make up is, and it's always a pity and sadness when engines are matched against casual clans.

---

I disagree. Before I started implementing lopsided bases into my line up, I enjoyed even matches as part of the thrill of competition. Engineering ruined that experience. Now I engineer just to counter the growing trend of lopsided bases in war, and I do it knowing it is to gain an advantage at the expense of casual clans, or those who don't engineer. There is no honor in that, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martvol

I am not buying this at all. You engineer to get an advantage over the other clan. The only ones happy they get an even match are the ones engineering to compete against their less then honorable opponents. I fall into the second category. I made two slimey villages to even the field. Since the new game was introduced I idled them and stopped warring in my main. I am tired of it and if SC is taking the game in a new direction without fixing this I will be done.

---

Well stated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

I rather suspect you already know the answers from your considerable familiarity with the clan wars subforum, where this post probably belongs. But anyway, my answer are:

1. Nothing is wrong from the point of view of the individual player, but from the point of view of overall gameplay it has a widespread bad effect on war matching and war gameplay experience for the broad Clash community. And as it gets more widespread, it becomes a greater problem both from the point of view of fun war experience for all, and from the point of the devs trying to address the problem without hurting casual non-engineered rushed bases.
2. Stay at 10 or rush to 11, up to the individual player. In either case check first that one isn't caught in the "3 star mentality" that doesn't recognise that at different th levels it is relatively easier or harder to 3 star a max base of the same th level.
3. It isn't wrong, but see the answer to 1. In fact this has a worse effect still, as not only do nonengineered clans find themselves outgunned, they need to attack what they perceive as "joke bases" further undermining their fun.
4. It isn't wrong, any rather good max offence th11 ought be able to 3 star very many 10s. "Attacking with ease" is however, to some, also called "attacking in easy mode", and so to them doing so (or any dip attacking never mind engineered dips) is not really an actual demonstration of any attack skill, as opposed to skill in working to the flaws of the current matchmaker.

---

Extremely well put, as always. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Too many people assume that those who want an improved matchmaker to result in more even matches are against the engineers themselves. Considering I have several engineered accounts, yet want the matchmaker to be improved, that wouldn't apply to me. Most posters here want the matchmaker to create even matches, yet don't blame people for upgrading their base in a way the matchmaker currently encourages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Too many people assume that those who want an improved matchmaker to result in more even matches are against the engineers themselves. Considering I have several engineered accounts, yet want the matchmaker to be improved, that wouldn't apply to me. Most posters here want the matchmaker to create even matches, yet don't blame people for upgrading their base in a way the matchmaker currently encourages.

---

I am in your boat.

This exactly ^

The meta once favored defense, then favored maxing, now favors offense!

I myself have 6 accounts which are consistently adapting to the new meta...in which some where completely maxed TH's and are now a little engineered because times have changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Unlisted

This exactly ^

The meta once favored defense, then favored maxing, now favors offense!

I myself have 6 accounts which are consistently adapting to the new meta...in which some where completely maxed TH's and are now a little engineered because times have changed.

---

Sounds reasonable to me and I do the same with everything other than my max th11. I would like it even better, though, if the matchmaker worked so well that there wouldn't be a disadvantage or advantage based on how I upgrade. Maxer? Rusher? Strategic rusher? All fine, no advantage, all properly accounted for. I realize we will never get perfection, but we are so far from it we shouldn't use that unreasonable goal as a roadblock to improvement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Sounds reasonable to me and I do the same with everything other than my max th11. I would like it even better, though, if the matchmaker worked so well that there wouldn't be a disadvantage or advantage based on how I upgrade. Maxer? Rusher? Strategic rusher? All fine, no advantage, all properly accounted for. I realize we will never get perfection, but we are so far from it we shouldn't use that unreasonable goal as a roadblock to improvement.

---

Very well stated per the usual 2222. This is exactly how I feel. We've joined the "if you can't beat em, join em" mentality. However, how I build my base or how the next guy builds his should have no bearing on the matchmaker. Everyone should have the right to build their base however they want. But they should not be at a disadvantage in any way, shape, or form. Every base accounted for. No advantages given to either clan who decide to spin a random war. The difficulty of this is extremely high and I understand that. But it also has A LOT of room for improvements

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Sounds reasonable to me and I do the same with everything other than my max th11. I would like it even better, though, if the matchmaker worked so well that there wouldn't be a disadvantage or advantage based on how I upgrade. Maxer? Rusher? Strategic rusher? All fine, no advantage, all properly accounted for. I realize we will never get perfection, but we are so far from it we shouldn't use that unreasonable goal as a roadblock to improvement.

---

The perfect MM, one that would find good matches no matter how a base is built, is impossible. Or at least, impossible to implement as if would be too complicated and finding the perfect match would take days. You are looking at a binary equation. Defense Vs Offense. That's it. That is all that MM looks at when matching clans. It does not look at individual bases, it looks at the cumulative clan weight.

As such, it will ALWAYS favor those who put some thought and planning (engineered) into the clan. All bases in the clan matter. If one or two are off, it will have an adverse effect. A maxed base, is the worst thing you can do in war. If you have maxed bases anywhere below the top spots, you will not win wars. Not against a clan that was set up with war in mind.

Wars, that aspect of this game, is why many play it. it's competitive, it requires you to customize bases for it. If you just toss in a bunch of bases, and hope to be successful, you will fail.

That is part of any endeavor in life. If you don't work for it, plan for it... you will not be as successful as those who do.

MM is not the problem. Lack of understand of how MM works, is the problem. Many of the complaints a see here come from people who think they can have any type of base in war, without planning for it, and find good matches.

Some are under the illusion that those who max should have the right to fair wars. A maxed base can't 3 star the same level maxed base, very rarely can it be done. As it should be, if you have a maxed base, it should defend itself against same level base. So if you need to consistently 3 star a base (and in war it's an absolute must), it better have better fire power.

This is simple arithmetic.

Edit to add: The defenseless base, the number of defenseless bases being seen in war, is what many are upset by. They are annoying, but certainly not as effective as many think they are. My clan has never ever lost a war due to that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

The perfect MM, one that would find good matches no matter how a base is built, is impossible. Or at least, impossible to implement as if would be too complicated and finding the perfect match would take days. You are looking at a binary equation. Defense Vs Offense. That's it. That is all that MM looks at when matching clans. It does not look at individual bases, it looks at the cumulative clan weight.

As such, it will ALWAYS favor those who put some thought and planning (engineered) into the clan. All bases in the clan matter. If one or two are off, it will have an adverse effect. A maxed base, is the worst thing you can do in war. If you have maxed bases anywhere below the top spots, you will not win wars. Not against a clan that was set up with war in mind.

Wars, that aspect of this game, is why many play it. it's competitive, it requires you to customize bases for it. If you just toss in a bunch of bases, and hope to be successful, you will fail.

That is part of any endeavor in life. If you don't work for it, plan for it... you will not be as successful as those who do.

MM is not the problem. Lack of understand of how MM works, is the problem. Many of the complaints a see here come from people who think they can have any type of base in war, without planning for it, and find good matches.

Some are under the illusion that those who max should have the right to fair wars. A maxed base can't 3 star the same level maxed base, very rarely can it be done. As it should be, if you have a maxed base, it should defend itself against same level base. So if you need to consistently 3 star a base (and in war it's an absolute must), it better have better fire power.

This is simple arithmetic.

Edit to add: The defenseless base, the number of defenseless bases being seen in war, is what many are upset by. They are annoying, but certainly not as effective as many think they are. My clan has never ever lost a war due to that.

---

Again, don't let the impossibility of reaching perfection be a roadblock to improvement. The matchmaker results in a lot of uneven matches and so over values some items it causes people to not build them at all. There is a lot of room for improvement. SC could make a big improvement instantly by just looking at some of the big (100-200) win streak clans and see what they figured out shouldn't be built at all and drop the weight on those items. That isn't what I suggest as a final fix, but it would be an instant improvement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Again, don't let the impossibility of reaching perfection be a roadblock to improvement. The matchmaker results in a lot of uneven matches and so over values some items it causes people to not build them at all. There is a lot of room for improvement. SC could make a big improvement instantly by just looking at some of the big (100-200) win streak clans and see what they figured out shouldn't be built at all and drop the weight on those items. That isn't what I suggest as a final fix, but it would be an instant improvement.

---

One of the small frustrations for me here, is that people disregard anything that doesn't completely fix the issue. Saying it will just make issues elsewhere. Anything we can do to step in the right direction towards balance is better then letting things continue to spiral out of control. Even if it is temporary while they figure out a more permanent solution.

What could possibly go wrong with a +/- 1 warden variance check box to make a match? Long search times for clans with multiple low level th11 accounts with wardens? What's wrong with them waiting longer then other clans for a similar match of low level warden accounts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Again, don't let the impossibility of reaching perfection be a roadblock to improvement. The matchmaker results in a lot of uneven matches and so over values some items it causes people to not build them at all. There is a lot of room for improvement. SC could make a big improvement instantly by just looking at some of the big (100-200) win streak clans and see what they figured out shouldn't be built at all and drop the weight on those items. That isn't what I suggest as a final fix, but it would be an instant improvement.

---

The majority of the complaints about uneven matches, aren't being created by MM. Do you not see that? We could go on until eternity improving MM all for not. That is not the problem. I don't know how else I can explain. A clan with a bunch of bases, all without thought on how they affect war, is the cause of bad matches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kotepikabea

No, no and no.

Last war 10 vs 10:

Our offense (defense)
- 44-43-20 (Eagle)
- 35-35-10 (no eagle TH10.5)
- 45-45-20 (no eagle no infernos)
- Plus 2 almost max TH10 + 3 TH9 + 2 TH8

Their offense
- 43-43-15 (Eagle)
- 40-40-15 (Eagle)
- 40-40-15 (Eagle)
- Plus 2 almost max TH10 + 3 TH9 + 2 TH8

They had better defense than us. Almost the same offense. We won because we got 3 star in 2 of their TH11-s with their max infernos and eagle.

They could'nt 3 start any of our 5 top bases.

You need skill (and luck) if you want to win. Engineering is not autowin.

---

Cool story, except that it didn't dispute anything I said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

The majority of the complaints about uneven matches, aren't being created by MM. Do you not see that? We could go on until eternity improving MM all for not. That is not the problem. I don't know how else I can explain. A clan with a bunch of bases, all without thought on how they affect war, is the cause of bad matches.

---

And what we're saying is how I build my base should NOT have a bearing on the matchmaker. That's where my beef is. I said this in another thread and I'll see it here as well. Why should I be punished for building my base like how I want? Is not everyone else doing the same thing? Not every clan is that hardcore war clan that wins at all costs. There are many out there that are casual and want to simply have fun and enjoy the game. Win or lose, they want to have fun, but more importantly, have an equal opportunity at winning any particular war. The fact that you can decide to not build certain defenses to give you an advantage makes for a flawed system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBlaze

And what we're saying is how I build my base should NOT have a bearing on the matchmaker. That's where my beef is. I said this in another thread and I'll see it here as well. Why should I be punished for building my base like how I want? Is not everyone else doing the same thing? Not every clan is that hardcore war clan that wins at all costs. There are many out there that are casual and want to simply have fun and enjoy the game. Win or lose, they want to have fun, but more importantly, have an equal opportunity at winning any particular war. The fact that you can decide to not build certain defenses to give you an advantage makes for a flawed system.

---

If you are just playing for fun, and don't care about win/loss why care about engineering advantage? Just figure it's no different than losing to a hardcore, top attacking war clan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ripple1972

If you are just playing for fun, and don't care about win/loss why care about engineering advantage? Just figure it's no different than losing to a hardcore, top attacking war clan.

---

I never said that we didn't care about winning or losing. I said there are clans out there that want to have fun. We win majority of our wars. But I enjoy an even match up a lot more than facing a clan that has twice as many th11s. Had that in the previous war and still won because we're solid attackers. But wanting even match ups shouldn't be too much to ask for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts)
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3-star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10?
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defenseless th11 to attack th10s when in fact, building a maxed th10 is pointless?
4. Why is it wrong if a defenseless th11 3-starred a maxed th10? Ins't attacking with ease a clever way of fighting as per advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

1. Nothing wrong since we're allowed the freedom to build/upgrade our bases in any way we see fit.
2. 10v10 3* is not common, thus, it is more prudent to move to 11 if the aim is to 3* 10's with 11's. But, I feel it is a waste for a higher TH to 3 a lower TH if it can be avoided.
3. Answer is entirely dependent on your roster. If you already have a max 10, a defenseless 11 is an asset, if not, it is a liability.
4. Nothing wrong until the time when warden is weighed higher and/or the eagle is weighed less (if it ever happens). If this happens, extra 11's will pop up on the opponent roster which may require 11's to attack.

The unfortunate result of hitting a lower TH is the general skill of the player base.
If and when SC really balances offense and defense, those accustomed to hitter lower will most likely be screwed.

Its all about playing to win. Winners adapt and know "fair" is not determined by the players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ripple1972

If you are just playing for fun, and don't care about win/loss why care about engineering advantage? Just figure it's no different than losing to a hardcore, top attacking war clan.

---

Exactly, some people claim they play for fun, but complain when they lose. A player who plays to win does not complain because they understand what it takes to win; a player who plays for fun does not complain about they are just having fun, not particularly interested about winning. The people in between? Their mentality is shackled and they do not win

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SinOfDusk

Exactly, some people claim they play for fun, but complain when they lose. A player who plays to win does not complain because they understand what it takes to win; a player who plays for fun does not complain about they are just having fun, not particularly interested about winning. The people in between? Their mentality is shackled and they do not win

---

LOL...thank you for this. Made my morning start off right with a good laugh!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SinOfDusk

Exactly, some people claim they play for fun, but complain when they lose. A player who plays to win does not complain because they understand what it takes to win; a player who plays for fun does not complain about they are just having fun, not particularly interested about winning. The people in between? Their mentality is shackled and they do not win

---

Everyone plays to win. Some just care about winning more than others. No matter how much you care about winning, should not the meta be about having a fair, even match up? The beauty of this game is that you are free to build your base however you want. But you shouldn't forced to build your base a certain way in order to stay competitive. That takes away the fun that this game was originally made in the first place. Not sure how many of you follow basketball. But most of us true fans, that I've personally spoken with, were really disappointed in this season. Why? Because there was no competition. It was already a foregone conclusion that one team in particular, was going to win. And that's exactly what happened. "Super team" as some have so affectionately called it. A competition is about winning as much as you can. But it's even more about giving each side given an even, fair chance at winning and sportsmanship. Which where in lies the issues of the matchmaker. It obviously under values or over values certain aspects where it shouldn't, thus where my issues lie. When you take away certain freedoms that everyone enjoys in order to stay competitive but still get told to have fun with it, the long-term ramifications of that are cloudy at best. You will lose A LOT of those casual players because they are no longer having fun. Nobody wants to be told what they should and shouldn't be doing, esp if they are forced into a bubble in order to have a chance at winning.

this may be what you and alot of folks want the game to be.. but perhaps it really is not..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBlaze

Everyone plays to win. Some just care about winning more than others. No matter how much you care about winning, should not the meta be about having a fair, even match up? The beauty of this game is that you are free to build your base however you want. But you shouldn't forced to build your base a certain way in order to stay competitive. That takes away the fun that this game was originally made in the first place.

perhaps the meta is whatever SC says it is at the moment. either intentionally or unintentionally. you put your faith in them or yourself to adapt?

perhaps war and trophies/farming are two separate goals in the game.

perhaps you DO have to build your base a certain way to be competitive in war, and a different way to be successful in trophies/farming. (think of all those troops/spells/units you never use in war, and those buildings that are of a limited effect in war. do you think those should be free/no weight? if i dont build them and you do... guess what happens... i bring more "war" stuff and you bring more "other" stuff.

Not sure how many of you follow basketball. But most of us true fans, that I've personally spoken with, were really disappointed in this season. Why? Because there was no competition. It was already a foregone conclusion that one team in particular, was going to win. And that's exactly what happened. "Super team" as some have so affectionately called it. A competition is about winning as much as you can. But it's even more about giving each side given an even, fair chance at winning and sportsmanship.

unfortunately SC's version of basketball rules continuously change. (still putting your faith in SC?)
this season, SC says "each point scored by a guard counts as double". "each point scored by a forward counts as half."
in this case, the winning team put in 5 guards on their roster. the losing team put in 2/2/1 ("balanced").
guess what is going to happen..

Which where in lies the issues of the matchmaker. It obviously under values or over values certain aspects where it shouldn't, thus where my issues lie.

true. but...
now that you know this, and recognize this... what do you do about it?
sure you can post here and make suggestions. thats what its for.
you can hope SC changes the rules to make the game how you like it (wouldn't count on that personally)
or you can adapt to the new seasons rules.
i'd suggest stop building/upgrading the stuff with no/marginal war use as a start.
then move on to making a plan for those under/over values that you recognized above.



oh and then the fun part. next season SC changes the rules again!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts)
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3-star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10?
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defenseless th11 to attack th10s when in fact, building a maxed th10 is pointless?
4. Why is it wrong if a defenseless th11 3-starred a maxed th10? Ins't attacking with ease a clever way of fighting as per advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

1. I already have 2 th11 ground defenseless bases, one started from a th6, the other is completely defenseless and both are around 8 months old
2. I went to th11 on my main and now have max heroes and troops, although for defenses I stopped for a long time while I worked on heroes and walls, now focusing on point.
3. It's not wrong, this is war strategy
4. If you truly want to win, win by the highest margin possible but claiming you fight with honor because you cannot compete is a cop out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBlaze

Everyone plays to win. Some just care about winning more than others. No matter how much you care about winning, should not the meta be about having a fair, even match up? The beauty of this game is that you are free to build your base however you want. But you shouldn't forced to build your base a certain way in order to stay competitive. That takes away the fun that this game was originally made in the first place. Not sure how many of you follow basketball. But most of us true fans, that I've personally spoken with, were really disappointed in this season. Why? Because there was no competition. It was already a foregone conclusion that one team in particular, was going to win. And that's exactly what happened. "Super team" as some have so affectionately called it. A competition is about winning as much as you can. But it's even more about giving each side given an even, fair chance at winning and sportsmanship. Which where in lies the issues of the matchmaker. It obviously under values or over values certain aspects where it shouldn't, thus where my issues lie. When you take away certain freedoms that everyone enjoys in order to stay competitive but still get told to have fun with it, the long-term ramifications of that are cloudy at best. You will lose A LOT of those casual players because they are no longer having fun. Nobody wants to be told what they should and shouldn't be doing, esp if they are forced into a bubble in order to have a chance at winning.

---

There has always been enough information available to those who want to be competitive, why should I have sympathy for people who literally have had YEARS to research weights but blatantly ignored best practices and now come complaining about it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

There has always been enough information available to those who want to be competitive, why should I have sympathy for people who literally have had YEARS to research weights but blatantly ignored best practices and now come complaining about it?

Let's just get rid of the casual players

---

So you would just get rid of the majority of the players? Then who would your clan pray upon for wins? May want to rethink that beauty of a idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

You are looking at a binary equation. Defense Vs Offense. That's it. That is all that MM looks at when matching clans. It does not look at individual bases, it looks at the cumulative clan weight.

---

Wrong.

This is one of my objections to engineering. People with almost no understanding of the MM, or weights can make accounts that can successfully stomp many enemies. A bit like dear Blombardo's clans - almost everything he said about the MM and weights on here was heavily disputed by everyone else. And yet, even though his builds were based on almost entirely wrong information, his clans could still get a perfect war every time and substantial win streaks. As long as it was lopsided enough it worked at that time. Likewise you see people using weights they found on the internet (so basically the laughable spAnser numbers), and they still win.

It's like when a troop just wipes out the enemy with no skill needed. Remember TH7 dragons before the third AD? I remember people dropping all their spells on the grass, AND doing no funneling and getting 3*. There's not much point playing that game really.

I did make an engineered account back in those days of 2AD TH7s. But I largely abandoned in as soon as the March 2016 update dropped - there's just no point really. The account sits in another clan as a way of keeping contact with them and builds a bit from collectors. But since that update there's never been any time when engineering got interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

A bit like dear Blombardo's clans - almost everything he said about the MM and weights on here was heavily disputed by everyone else..

---

not sure what you are getting at. Blombardos problem was all his bases were so low he was getting perfect'd himself, so he quit. Lacked the anchor bases up top bc he wasnt going to gem/raid max bases. ( I still do not see how or why people are horsing around with sub TH9 bases )

I dont really remember anyone disputing his method.

End of the day - the MM sucks, it sucks bad. Engineering is the result, not the symptom.

Find a league, where the matches are fair. or a clan in a league, many are filling rosters.

Just did my first NDL practice match, was great.

we just spun a random.. they have 3 eas, we have 2. ( they have 9 bases with infernos, we have 6 total ) they have an addition 10.5 also. but, they have th8 at the bottom, 3 of them. Engineered? not really. all bases are in TH order. MM sucks, their low weight th8 gave them extra beef up top. They will probably dip 10-15 bases out of 20. We will probably be dipping 4. ( their heros are good so might be less, we shall see )

Very top heavy for them, offensively and defensively. interesting match, but not surprising.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

There has always been enough information available to those who want to be competitive, why should I have sympathy for people who literally have had YEARS to research weights but blatantly ignored best practices and now come complaining about it?

Let's just get rid of the casual players

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jobob145

this may be what you and alot of folks want the game to be.. but perhaps it really is not..

---

If you get rid of the casual players, good luck on trying to bring in new players and building the game as well lol there is no way you could convince a brand new player to keep playing and enjoy it but also forcing him to play "a certain way" or build your base a "particular way" in order to be competitive when the whole premise of the game is free play for everyone. This game will crash and burn if it continues down this path

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts)
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3-star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10?
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defenseless th11 to attack th10s when in fact, building a maxed th10 is pointless?
4. Why is it wrong if a defenseless th11 3-starred a maxed th10? Ins't attacking with ease a clever way of fighting as per advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”
Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

1. There is noting wrong with adapting to the current meta. I would question if engineered aka defenseless is meta or just better than maxers aka fair play.
2. There would be no reason to stay at th10 unless that was your goal. I would say a th10 with maxed defenses but no bomb tower, xbows, or IT would be balanced and bring about a significant lower war weight. It would only be worth is with 1 or 2 war strategies like dragonloon and/or giwiva to balance out the offense weight too.
3. Again there is nothing wrong with defenseless th11. Just don't want too many in the clan to throw off the balance. I would say a th11 with max defenses (including xbows) but no bomb tower, IT's or EA while taking longer might be a more effective strategy than an engineered th11 aka defenseless.
4. There is nothing wrong with dip attacking. Many do it while raiding using the next button.
Your questions while interesting are asking the same questions that have the same arguments all over the forum. The short answer is there is nothing wrong to your questions. I would assume you like my signature suggests you use the most effective strategies available to effect your outcome and win. While many other put self imposed limits to see how tough they are then complain when someone tougher beats them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

not sure what you are getting at. Blombardos problem was all his bases were so low he was getting perfect'd himself, so he quit. Lacked the anchor bases up top bc he wasnt going to gem/raid max bases. ( I still do not see how or why people are horsing around with sub TH9 bases )

I dont really remember anyone disputing his method.

---

Pretty much everything Blombardo "knew" about matchmaking was flat out wrong, and yet his clan was remarkably effective simply because the matchmaker was so flawed that it could be gamed by just building no defenses, at all. A monkey could do it, and it's one of the reasons the leader of #6M flamed the forum in a tizzy and got himself banned.

He thought ALL war weight, including offense, was included in the gold storage numbers which is spectacularly incorrect. He claimed unlocking bowlers and upgrading them to lvl3 added no offensive weight, which is spectacularly incorrect (he made this incorrect assumption because of his incorrect assumption about what's displayed in gold storages). He frequently quoted wall weights that when summed up gave total weights greater than the current maximum 110k. Etc., etc.

In short, he essentially knew nothing about war weights and how matchmaking worked and was STILL able to string together 90+ perfect wars. A world in which engineering to remarkable effectiveness is that easy makes for a TERRIBLE game and war scene. Thankfully the Oct. 2016 update squashed some of that easiness, but still left gaping holes (for example, the weight of the warden)...

Blombardo is back and going strong. I actually learned a lot from him and while we don't always see eye to eye I can respect his organization and study. When the game changed in his favor he went strong when it changed back it took him a bit to adapt but now he is there, still a little weak up top imo but should be good.
My guess is he will put together another big run of perfect wars although not always wins.
People will adapt and I think people will move away from engineering aka defenseless as soon maxers move from maxing to balanced.
stretegic rusher(balanced)>engineered (defenseless)>Maxer in terms of strategy for war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

In short, he essentially knew nothing about war weights and how matchmaking worked and was STILL able to string together 90+ perfect wars. A world in which engineering to remarkable effectiveness is that easy makes for a TERRIBLE game and war scene. Thankfully the Oct. 2016 update squashed some of that easiness, but still left gaping holes (for example, the weight of the warden)...

---

mhmm. funny reading that in this sub.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit

3. Again there is nothing wrong with defenseless th11. Just don't want too many in the clan to throw off the balance. I would say a th11 with max defenses (including xbows) but no bomb tower, IT's or EA while taking longer might be a more effective strategy than an engineered th11 aka defenseless.

---

I agree that defenseless is not the best option.

It is doing better against their defense than they do against your defense that wins wars. Defenseless is mostly ignoring half of that.

If a clan can fully clear your opponents with attacks remaining, then they should build more defenses (or rebuild their bases to have less offense). It will make the matches harder, but they have the offensive headroom.

Even if they don't have that many spare attacks, if they could fully clear an enemy with more defenses, they should also build more defenses (or rebuild with less offense). They still have extra offensive headroom.

I'd even go further. Unless they are failing to clear (but barely) most of the time, they still have too much offense. It is better to only occasionally fully clear than to plan on doing so as that way all the attacks are useful even when they get better than typical results. Fully clearing as a baseline means when they do well they have too much offense/wasted attacks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

This is one of my objections to engineering. People with almost no understanding of the MM, or weights can make accounts that can successfully stomp many enemies. A bit like dear Blombardo's clans - almost everything he said about the MM and weights on here was heavily disputed by everyone else. And yet, even though his builds were based on almost entirely wrong information, his clans could still get a perfect war every time and substantial win streaks. As long as it was lopsided enough it worked at that time. Likewise you see people using weights they found on the internet (so basically the laughable spAnser numbers), and they still win.

---

As long as you are a sufficiently good attacker, you'll do well. Some people compensate partially with troop levels and the impact of that choice is not as heavy as some would like*.

The best engineered clans however are made up of great attackers with hand crafted designer bases (balanced in offense/defense). Some of them (not all) also play in the kiddie pool of war weight, so they match much less experienced players more often than not.


* If offense is matched with offense, adding more offense generally adds more offense to the opponents, If offense is matched with defense, then the additional offense generally adds more defense. The forum lopsided/engineered complaint is that the degree of penalty is not sufficient.


Edit: I also agree that Blombardo's numbers were off, but even Moskri got those numbers to mostly match war weights for most bases....

Do you not see you are trying to play with words here? You say the problem is people not putting thought into how they upgrade their bases. That is just another way of saying not putting thought into how to take advantage of the flaws of the matchmaker. If it is your opinion that knowledge of how to take advantage of the match maker is something that should be a big factor in war success, that is totally fine. That is your turn opinion and you are entitled to it. There are others who agree. They really enjoy figuring out the flaws of the matchmaker, things that are overvalued or undervalued and not yet corrected by SC, and then using that to their advantage to get uneven wars. That is not what I enjoy. I prefer to have the war determined as much as possible by the attacking and base designing skill of the players in the war, rather than determined by one side or the other getting a huge power advantage.

So, yes, you are correct that there are ways to take advantage of the matchmaker flaws and ways to try to limit the amount of uneven matches. That doesn't mean there aren't flaws in the matchmaker and it doesn't invalidate my opinion that the matchmaker should be improved to create more even matches so that the outcomes of wars are determined as much as possible by the attacking and base designing skill of the players.

Edit, sorry that was in reply to iBork, must not have gotten the quote in there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

Wrong.

This is one of my objections to engineering. People with almost no understanding of the MM, or weights can make accounts that can successfully stomp many enemies. A bit like dear Blombardo's clans - almost everything he said about the MM and weights on here was heavily disputed by everyone else. And yet, even though his builds were based on almost entirely wrong information, his clans could still get a perfect war every time and substantial win streaks. As long as it was lopsided enough it worked at that time. Likewise you see people using weights they found on the internet (so basically the laughable spAnser numbers), and they still win.

It's like when a troop just wipes out the enemy with no skill needed. Remember TH7 dragons before the third AD? I remember people dropping all their spells on the grass, AND doing no funneling and getting 3*. There's not much point playing that game really.

I did make an engineered account back in those days of 2AD TH7s. But I largely abandoned in as soon as the March 2016 update dropped - there's just no point really. The account sits in another clan as a way of keeping contact with them and builds a bit from collectors. But since that update there's never been any time when engineering got interesting.

---

So you object to engineering because anyone with no understanding of the MM can make successful accounts to stomp many enemies. That makes no sense, If that is the case, why don't you do it?

I don't know who Blombardo is. But I'm not surprised his claims were heavily disputed by everyone. Based upon the majority of what I read here, the MM is the most misunderstand animal of the game.

People talk about weight as if it's the God of everything. By the way, this weight thing is calculated upon assumptions. Many use the weight of a base to calculate their base for war. Do you know that MM does not calculate matches just based on weight? The level of a defense plays a huge role in it.

I always get a chuckle when i see people saying they have a .5. Yet, all their defense units are maxed to TH level. Ohhh, but they left X-Bows out.... Sorry bud, your TH8.5, even with no x-bows, is a TH9 in MM and you will bring TH9's below you to war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Do you not see you are trying to play with words here? You say the problem is people not putting thought into how they upgrade their bases. That is just another way of saying not putting thought into how to take advantage of the flaws of the matchmaker. If it is your opinion that knowledge of how to take advantage of the match maker is something that should be a big factor in war success, that is totally fine. That is your turn opinion and you are entitled to it. There are others who agree. They really enjoy figuring out the flaws of the matchmaker, things that are overvalued or undervalued and not yet corrected by SC, and then using that to their advantage to get uneven wars. That is not what I enjoy. I prefer to have the war determined as much as possible by the attacking and base designing skill of the players in the war, rather than determined by one side or the other getting a huge power advantage.

So, yes, you are correct that there are ways to take advantage of the matchmaker flaws and ways to try to limit the amount of uneven matches. That doesn't mean there aren't flaws in the matchmaker and it doesn't invalidate my opinion that the matchmaker should be improved to create more even matches so that the outcomes of wars are determined as much as possible by the attacking and base designing skill of the players.

Edit, sorry that was in reply to iBork, must not have gotten the quote in there.

---

Because when you know how something works, you can always control it. Go ahead, perfect the MM all you want. It does not matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

So you object to engineering because anyone with no understanding of the MM can make successful accounts to stomp many enemies. That makes no sense, If that is the case, why don't you do it?

I don't know who Blombardo is. But I'm not surprised his claims were heavily disputed by everyone. Based upon the majority of what I read here, the MM is the most misunderstand animal of the game.

People talk about weight as if it's the God of everything. By the way, this weight thing is calculated upon assumptions. Many use the weight of a base to calculate their base for war. Do you know that MM does not calculate matches just based on weight? The level of a defense plays a huge role in it.

I always get a chuckle when i see people saying they have a .5. Yet, all their defense units are maxed to TH level. Ohhh, but they left X-Bows out.... Sorry bud, your TH8.5, even with no x-bows, is a TH9 in MM and you will bring TH9's below you to war.

---

This post doesnt make any sense at all. Its just ramblings that in no way dispute the post you quoted. Ill just go off the 1st paragraph for a example. Yes anyone can whip up a engineered acct. It takes no special knowledge to not build defences. You can argue all you want that you wont be successful just bringing defenceless but it does work with quality anchors. Add to that dropping troops you dont use to drop offensive weight and you have a winning machine that requires little knowledge to form. Look at the thread major johnson made for proof. I dont engineer but its not to hard to figure out how to do it rite and win. Its not like you have to crack the enigma machine to build a winning clan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clark11308

This post doesnt make any sense at all. Its just ramblings that in no way dispute the post you quoted. Ill just go off the 1st paragraph for a example. Yes anyone can whip up a engineered acct. It takes no special knowledge to not build defences. You can argue all you want that you wont be successful just bringing defenceless but it does work with quality anchors. Add to that dropping troops you dont use to drop offensive weight and you have a winning machine that requires little knowledge to form. Look at the thread major johnson made for proof. I dont engineer but its not to hard to figure out how to do it rite and win. Its not like you have to crack the enigma machine to build a winning clan.

---

yup you just have to be willing/able to put the time in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

Because when you know how something works, you can always control it. Go ahead, perfect the MM all you want. It does not matter.

---

It matters to me. The more even the matches are the better in my opinion. I think it is better for the game long term too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

It matters to me. The more even the matches are the better in my opinion. I think it is better for the game long term too.

---

Agree. Good exchange with iBork.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clark11308

This post doesnt make any sense at all. Its just ramblings that in no way dispute the post you quoted. Ill just go off the 1st paragraph for a example. Yes anyone can whip up a engineered acct. It takes no special knowledge to not build defences. You can argue all you want that you wont be successful just bringing defenceless but it does work with quality anchors. Add to that dropping troops you dont use to drop offensive weight and you have a winning machine that requires little knowledge to form. Look at the thread major johnson made for proof. I dont engineer but its not to hard to figure out how to do it rite and win. Its not like you have to crack the enigma machine to build a winning clan.

---

I love that I'm becoming a bit famous around these parts.

It does require knowledge, time and effort in order to form a winning combination, those that lead are the anchors and lead by example. For us, our anchors are also a big part of the defenseless. We work together as a team in order to efficiently build our bases and manage our roster, we have a great team of solid attackers and supportive people.

You can build defenseless bases and it can help, but you need everyone to be on the same page in order to get the results you want.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

So you object to engineering because anyone with no understanding of the MM can make successful accounts to stomp many enemies. That makes no sense, If that is the case, why don't you do it?

---

For the same reason I don't war at TH7. My main is TH10 and getting 3* in war is hard. I struggle against good bases. Of course, I could easily get 3* every time if I just switched to a TH7 mini - it would take hardly any time to get one ready.

Quote:

---

People talk about weight as if it's the God of everything. By the way, this weight thing is calculated upon assumptions. Many use the weight of a base to calculate their base for war. Do you know that MM does not calculate matches just based on weight? The level of a defense plays a huge role in it.

---

You may not have noticed, but the level of a defence determines it's weight. All that's needed to match a clan are the 2 weights for each base and the clan's "recent war performance"

Quote:

---

I always get a chuckle when i see people saying they have a .5. Yet, all their defense units are maxed to TH level. Ohhh, but they left X-Bows out.... Sorry bud, your TH8.5, even with no x-bows, is a TH9 in MM and you will bring TH9's below you to war.

---

Again you don't seem to understand why people build them. An strong xbow-less TH9 will match TH9, and our strong inferno-less TH10s will match TH10s. People aren't necessarily trying to match the base below. At TH10, in particular, they're a good way of matching non-max TH10s - which makes for more interesting wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

Again you don't seem to understand why people build them. An strong xbow-less TH9 will match TH9, and our strong inferno-less TH10s will match TH10s. People aren't necessarily trying to match the base below. At TH10, in particular, they're a good way of matching non-max TH10s - which makes for more interesting wars.

---

Great post. Adding on.

Also, Max for any given TH will occasionally match with a more developed base. Unless you're TH11 max (where it's impossible), having a max THX at the top of your map will occasionally give you a matchup where they have more than max THX at the top. If they're equally skilled this often results in a loss of the difference is significant enough (and it will be occasionally)

It makes a lot of sense to have your top base be either (a) max TH11 or (b) nonmax TH something else as both of these insulate your from occasional bad matches at #1.

Answers in bold. In general, I don't think it's wrong to develop a base how you see fit, but the matchmaking needs to more accurately account for offensive potential in a war. Otherwise simply acknowledge matchmaking is exploitable and doesn't yield fair matchups.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

1. What's wrong with adapting on the meta? (to make engi alts) People don't have the time, money, or desire to make more accounts specifically built to give the gamebreaking advantage needed to have a chance to win the truly competitive wars. Competitive wars are those matchups you come across after a 5-10 war win streak where your mostly balanced clan is matched up against an opponent with many more, higher TH max offenses (namely TH11s with TH9/10 level defenses). At the top of the war lineup, it is easy to accept defeat when your base is poorly developed defensively, when your base is poorly developed offensively, or when you simply didn't execute a great attack; however, losing because your opponent has the means to relatively easily or very likely eventually triple your top bases due to a matchmaking exploit is a tough pill to swallow. Keep in mind offense has two attacks for a potential six stars while only being a three star liability. Anyone with half a brain can see the game breaking advantage this brings regarding getting difficult stars against top TH10 bases. If everyone adapts to this meta, simply more revenue for ♥♥♥. That is the simple reason this topic gets ignored. (All of the existing engineered bases had no problems getting to their current status; they can simply fully develop the bases over time and catch up if a matchmaking change was implemented that reduced or took away their advantage.)
2. If a maxed troop th10 cant 3-star a maxed def th10, then why stay at th10? Good point. What about those wanting to learn all of the different attack strategies and apply them in the moment of war? We are already told we should have the freedom to develop our base how we want, but if we desire to win and are a TH10, should we all be forced to rush to TH11 and dip to TH10s in war? Is this how the game is meant to be played? Then there are completionists like me that want to fully develop their TH at their current level before leveling up their TH. Why is it after all the time and money I've put into my account that it feels like a liability as a near max TH10 in war? It only feels that way when lopsided opposing TH11s in skilled hands successfully execute an attack that triples me? Yes I usually triple them right back; however, I cannot triple any of the mature TH11 max defenses on their side. Their TH11 that attacked me, however, has the potential to triple or at least earn higher percentage two star against our TH11s. Again, fundamental gamebreaking advantage with matchmaking given to those who've poured more time and money into the game to capitalize off of a current exploit.
3. Why is it wrong to many people to make a defenseless th11 to attack th10s when in fact, building a maxed th10 is pointless? Again, exploitation, but at an extreme level. Matchmaking should make a war competitive on paper, but it's not competitive when one side has far greater number of high level attacks than the other.
4. Why is it wrong if a defenseless th11 3-starred a maxed th10? Ins't attacking with ease a clever way of fighting as per advised by Sun Tzu? “What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.” Same answer as #3.

Four questions, four answers. Thanks.

---

I get that hyper competitive people are going to do whatever it takes to win and the "losers" are going to make excuses. I believe the gamebreaking advantage engineered bases give with the current matchmaker are legitimate complaints. With all the care put into balance and fair play, that same consistency does not translate to the war matchmaker.

War is the reason many of us play this game and to see it fundamentally broken (and about to get more exploited) is very depressing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jrod55426

War is the reason many of us play this game and to see it fundamentally broken (and about to get more exploited) is very depressing.

---

Every day unchanged is a day progress for engineers. Many players are fed up and have been with the current state of match making. Several of us were saying a year or more ago that engineering would become rampant. It's only a matter of time until one of two things will break this game imo. Either it'll be turned into an engineered wasteland due to lack of response from Supercell or Supercell will mess it up for everyone trying to fix the problem indirectly. I'm hoping they find some kind of compromise but I don't see it happening.

I've put much thought into it. We are going to take a loss somewhere. Either on your maxed mains or your created engineered monsters. Someone is getting the short end. Guess we should all be gemming up one of those near free warden accounts if you haven't already and cherishing the time you have left on your main accounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

Because when you know how something works, you can always control it. Go ahead, perfect the MM all you want. It does not matter.

---

Just a few words for you: electrocution, cancer, supernova, asphyxiation, death... not to get depressing there, but the idea you can control anything you understand is a pretty shallow illusion.

Engineers understand how to undermine the intended function of the present matchmaker algorithm, which may be subject to changes in ways not so easily controllable for understanding. "We will just adapt to whatever comes, and do that better than anyone else" is pretty hollow, unless in the game context it means you'd also give up any hope of manipulating matchmaking's limitations and then just war better against all comers by making the very best team of top war performers who can stack up long win streaks without having any advantage beyond their raw attack skill, base design skill and team coordination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

Just a few words for you: electrocution, cancer, supernova, asphyxiation, death... not to get depressing there, but the idea you can control anything you understand is a pretty shallow illusion.

Engineers understand how to undermine the intended function of the present matchmaker algorithm, which may be subject to changes in ways not so easily controllable for understanding. "We will just adapt to whatever comes, and do that better than anyone else" is pretty hollow, unless in the game context it means you'd also give up any hope of manipulating matchmaking's limitations and then just war better against all comers by making the very best team of top war performers who can stack up long win streaks without having any advantage beyond their raw attack skill, base design skill and team coordination.

---

How do you know what the intended function of the MM is?

I would argue, TH sniping was not intended, so they removed it. ( botting compounded it )

One can only assume at this point , the MM is functioning as intended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

Just a few words for you: electrocution, cancer, supernova, asphyxiation, death... not to get depressing there, but the idea you can control anything you understand is a pretty shallow illusion.

Engineers understand how to undermine the intended function of the present matchmaker algorithm, which may be subject to changes in ways not so easily controllable for understanding. "We will just adapt to whatever comes, and do that better than anyone else" is pretty hollow, unless in the game context it means you'd also give up any hope of manipulating matchmaking's limitations and then just war better against all comers by making the very best team of top war performers who can stack up long win streaks without having any advantage beyond their raw attack skill, base design skill and team coordination.

---

I'm going to rephrase to be less pejorative.

Engineers/people who play to win, not to play a certain way have noticed things that they think are wrong with matchmaking and war attacks/defense. They have decided to build bases that take advantage of those perceived discrepancies. The question as to if those tweaks are against the intended function can only be answered by SuperCell. As is, the structure of wars work a certain way.

If they are against the intended function, then their existence points directly to what needs to be adjusted insofar as they are against the intended function (which only SC can answer).

All changes need to be simple revisions accurate to the reality of what really matters in war.

For instance, a change like "match by TH only" fails to account to for how people upgrade their TH and that newly upgraded TH are much weaker in the new TH than they were in the old TH, regardless of what upgrade plan the account is on. It adds a form of clumping where bases that are significantly different are grouped together. It doesn't solve the problem that bases of different capabilities are grouped together in ways that advantage some players and disadvantage others. It even disadvantages maxers when they're a newly upgraded TH and advantages one particular group (perma max bases that never upgrade) which, when I inject my own value judgement, is also probably not how the game is intended to be played. I could be wrong, and maybe SC wants people to perma max bases at lower TH's like TH9.

Personally, I'd start with defensive war weights on Splash damage and XBows and making sure that army camp size is just as important as troop levels. I'm on the fence about Infernos and Eagles. I'd follow it up by making sure that offense is matched with offense and defense with defense, both compared in order of strength regardless of order in the war map.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

How do you know what the intended function of the MM is?

I would argue, TH sniping was not intended, so they removed it. ( botting compounded it )

One can only assume at this point , the MM is functioning as intended.

---

Sorry but I'm not convinced that the system is working as intended. When you can game said system into making it think that 5 th11s vs 10 th11s is an even match, it's definitely not working as it should be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JackAyos

“What the ancients called a clever fighter is one who not only wins, but excels in winning with ease.”

---

I like this quote. Very well placed given the context.

The issue here, however, is the context... What is the ancient fighter (rhetorical)? and how does it relate to competitive (e-) sports and our global philosophies to date.

Well, look at the Patriots in the NFL for instance. They fit the mold of Tzu's quote yet are chastised for rumors of cheating and sustained success over a long period. In short, today we value parity and competition in sports and hobbies as a society (this is certainly not true for actual war where your ancient fighter is concerned).

There is nothing wrong with points 1, 2, 4. Regarding point 3, TH10 play is extremely valuable and rewarding for those who commitment themselves to the subtle aspects of the game. There are many bully dip champs who are rewarded only sometimes for their upgrade path and relatively loose play.

If the community wants to abolish engineering we must do so one clan and one account at a time by structuring upgrades a certain way and only accepting accounts with balanced upgrade path. Our clan is one such clan and new MM has rewarded us more than before for being such. Let's hope this trend continues and soon enough the community will be looking to clans with success and a roster similar to ours for how to properly upgrade and build a roster. All league play only helps to structure upgrades and roster construction for competitive clans. :)

SC has stated numerous times they are against the advantage lopsided bases gain in wars and intend to address it (they've been working on it for well over a year now). But their actions speak louder than words. I think it's much harder than they anticipated and it is not a priority. In my view, Engineering--and the advantage they have in wars--is here to stay.

Introduce th12 and include some powerful new offense, but require all th11 defenses to be built and maxed in order to get it. While I would instead prefer a matchmaker that allows for any type of base buiding (no advantage or disadvantage), I could see SC going this direction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Introduce th12 and include some powerful new offense, but require all th11 defenses to be built and maxed in order to get it. While I would instead prefer a matchmaker that allows for any type of base buiding (no advantage or disadvantage), I could see SC going this direction.

---

certainly an idea.. i wonder how their gem sales would like that though..

imagine the guy that wants that cool new toy, and would gem it complete when available. lets say $20 under the current "upgrade your th anytime you want" system.

but.. he gets a big fat error message. "you must upgrade these 1 billion worth of gold/elixer walls first, that'll be $300"
hmmm.. maybe not is what i'd be thinking.

thats probably the only type of conversation in SC land that would occur. not any sense of fairness / advantage / disadvantage to war play.

of course im old and cynical. SC would never ever think like that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jobob145

certainly an idea.. i wonder how their gem sales would like that though..

imagine the guy that wants that cool new toy, and would gem it complete when available. lets say $20 under the current "upgrade your th anytime you want" system.

but.. he gets a big fat error message. "you must upgrade these 1 billion worth of gold/elixer walls first, that'll be $300"
hmmm.. maybe not is what i'd be thinking.

thats probably the only type of conversation in SC land that would occur. not any sense of fairness / advantage / disadvantage to war play.

of course im old and cynical. SC would never ever think like that

---

No reason for engy to upgrade th then. Bad for SC
th9 and below becomes even less relevant. Bad for SC
discourages newer players as now it becomes a 4-5 year trek to end game. Bad for SC

makes non engy' happy. Good for them. Effect on SC unknown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ripple1972

No reason for engy to upgrade th then. Bad for SC
th9 and below becomes even less relevant. Bad for SC
discourages newer players as now it becomes a 4-5 year trek to end game. Bad for SC

makes non engy' happy. Good for them. Effect on SC unknown.

---

First, again, I don't favor a hammer like approach like this, but I could see SC doing something like it (perhaps only requiring level 1 of each defense, not max, like on the builder hall). That said, there would still be a reason for people to upgrade their townhall to 12 because there are plenty who have all those defenses and are not engineered. As for the engineered players, correct, if they are an engineered th11 then they won't likely go to th12 right away as they would be encouraged to instead build and upgrade defenses. Every lower hall becomes less relevant when a new one comes out, I agree with that, but it is worth it to get new hall levels. A 4-5 year path to the end game is fine if you enjoy playing the game, although as usual SC will probably reduce some time and cost of lower stuff when th12 comes out or soon after. I'm not saying it is going to happen, just that it could. It wouldn't surprise me, although it probably would only be a requirement to build level 1 of everything, not max.

The intend is to get players to progress in the game. We know the MM is currently mostly affecting clans with TH9 and TH10 with little or no TH11, and clans with mostly TH11 are not being affected too much. Some players think TH9 is competitive but it's not that competitive. Maybe it is competitive a year ago but it's a lot easier now. Maybe it's competitive if it's your first TH9 is it still competitive after staying at TH9 over a year?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JFSoul

SC has stated numerous times they are against the advantage lopsided bases gain in wars and intend to address it (they've been working on it for well over a year now). But their actions speak louder than words. I think it's much harder than they anticipated and it is not a priority.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBlaze

Sorry but I'm not convinced that the system is working as intended. When you can game said system into making it think that 5 th11s vs 10 th11s is an even match, it's definitely not working as it should be.

---

System is to make money. SC is pro income, first and foremost.

It ( the degenerate MM ) worked to generate a ton of revenue.

Seeing the new content-night base, brawl stars, whatever they are dropping for TH11.. all intended to be blips in the income.

Game is not a subscription model, like wow.

Game is a p2w, f2p, whatever you want to call it.

Sniping was abusive to the bottom line, as botters were abusing it to level their base with no efforts. ( also regular players )

A dysfunctional MM is inconsequential, until the revenue dips and this is the perceived cause. they tried a couple times to fix it, obviously made it worse by lack of understanding of the game, so it has been put back where it was... but the demographics have shifted underneath them.

FW was the solution. CWL was promoted, possibly other leagues in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JFSoul

In my view, Engineering--and the advantage they have in wars--is here to stay.

---

You nailed it here, for the reasons I listed. Likely there is no correlation to the MM being good and revenue, but a negative one where engineers are suddenly not gemming offense. Plus, you want a fair war? use FW.

They already got their money from defensive rushers, and those players quit long ago or dont care. (casuals)

I have said it once, will say it again.. Cannot believe there is not some Cash royale style gem to enter tournament/ladder deal ( with canned "fair" rosters ) .. would rejuvenate the game and make wars relevant if done properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

FW was the solution. CWL was promoted, possibly other leagues in the future.

---

People are forgetting why they added FW.