SuperCell - FIX THIS ALREADY

Yes, I am actually yelling.

I tried the "be patient" way.
I tried the "let's give suggestions" way.
I tried the "open letter" way.

At this point I don't care anymore. Fix this. I don't care how. I don't care what our weights are. I don't care what our enemies weights are. I don't care who is engineering or who isn't. I don't care about anything at this point.

In fact, in the spirit of the new Clash of Clans UI, I will use the fonts I know you can actually read:


FIX THIS ALREADY.

http://i.imgur.com/CRHLwza.jpg

Or, alternatively you can nerf the clock tower from 8 to 4 minutes and from 8x speedup to 4x speedup, I am sure the playerbase really wants that.


Thanks in forward,
Dorsan the enraged

Is their number 1 max or near max with an EA?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denton

Is their number 1 max or near max with an EA?

---

He's at around max th10 weight. Got the new defenses and the warden but no EA.

Sadly, I don't think you'll get your wish. I used to be angry about this issue too. When I eventually had enough, feeling like sandbagging would not be fixed, I quit warring. Now, this is somebody else's problem.

The downside it that my two balanced bases are no longer in the war queue. Oh and I stopped buy gems ages ago.

This was my reaction to what I perceive to be SuperCell's inaction about this issue. Additionally, I won't support any future SuperCell games because I think they've really dropped the ball.

Realistically, I doubt they care about what I'm doing. But the feeling is now mutual.

Ouch, that's a painful one dorsan.

My clan got a match that was notable for being the one so many want but so few get - almost perfect lane by lane th level and progression level matching, same size bases looking at each other across the map, and all the appropriate eagles and infernos where they should be... rare as hen's teeth, but such a shame it is that way. I was beginning to think th10 only came in three types: th9 with extra camp and spell space and whopping big troops, everything max and whopping troops but no infernos, or everything max including max infernos. Then this came along to reward my faith that it can't be all that's out there.

I know how frustrating those matches can be but I dont expect a fix to be in our future, atleast not without SC killing peoples ability to build as they wish. I know people say its being worked on but I highly doubt its possible without severly nerfing engineering (doubt this) or forcing a upgrade path. If its really getting you this upset I recommend walking away from wars for a bit. I did and am enjoying clash a bit more as a casual farmer.

Ouch! Man that sucks. Especially if they all have the Warden. Every now and then, you face an engineered clan who look super tough on paper but they attack like noobs. Maybe you will get lucky and it will be this type of clan? My advice is don't give up before it's over. Good luck!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdome757

Ouch! Man that sucks. Especially if they all have the Warden. Every now and then, you face an engineered clan who look super tough on paper but they attack like noobs. Maybe you will get lucky and it will be this type of clan? My advice is don't give up before it's over. Good luck!

---

They actually have 7 wardens... They got some more th11s down below too...

But they have a bunch of low bases at the bottom you can beat easy so it isn't a problem. And, with good attacking and planning you can beat all of those top bases too! So, again, no problem. (Sarcasm font.)

Yep. That's pretty much par for the course these days. We just matched a clan with 6 TH11. We of course have none. Happily only 2 have the EA, and we are nearly balanced for inferno bases. They have only a 2 base TH10 advantage, plus the 6 base TH11 attack advantage. All have wardens of course. So as far as recent matches for us, pretty average. This makes perfect sense since we have 3 max or nearly max TH10 and several max TH9. No 0.5 for us, no TH8 bases. They balance the inferno advantage, 12 warden attack advantage with 2 TH8 at the bottom.

The only matches we get that are balanced are league arranged wars. Pretty sad that in order to get balanced wars and avoid this ridiculous engineering tumor is to take matters into our own hands and do friendly wars. And being at such a disadvantage our best hope for a win is that our opponents are hopelessly bad attackers.

We post and post here, complaints about the issues with the war MM fill forum threads here and on other sites. What do we get from SC for our efforts?

Silence.

Sad the game we love and have invested so much into has degraded into this mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

But they have a bunch of low bases at the bottom you can beat easy so it isn't a problem. And, with good attacking and planning you can beat all of those top bases too! So, again, no problem. (Sarcasm font.)

---

LOL.


@ Dorsan: I'm not running a line up like yours, so I don't know the frequency of encountering clans like this one. I hope it's not a growing trend, but in my experience (what appears to be) significant mismatches do not occur that often. Slight ones (i.e. 1-2 extra high level attacks) occur more frequently depending on the line up your bring.

The one you are facing infuriates me when it happens--hopefully it will balance out (no pun intended)--in your future wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JFSoul

@ Dorsan: I'm not running a line up like yours, so I don't know the frequency of encountering clans like this one. I hope it's not a growing trend, but in my experience (what appears to be) significant mismatches do not occur that often. Slight ones (i.e. 1-2 extra high level attacks) occur more frequently depending on the line up your bring.

---

All the time. We just decided to fill up our roster with rushed th11s too because there is no other option anymore. Last war they had 2 wardens vs our 0, the war before that they had 3 wardens vs our 0, this war it's 7... I don't remember the wars before that and the logs are gone, but it's pretty consistent that the enemy teams have at least a few wardens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardF

Yep. That's pretty much par for the course these days. We just matched a clan with 6 TH11. We of course have none. Happily only 2 have the EA, and we are nearly balanced for inferno bases. They have only a 2 base TH10 advantage, plus the 6 base TH11 attack advantage. All have wardens of course. So as far as recent matches for us, pretty average. This makes perfect sense since we have 3 max or nearly max TH10 and several max TH9. No 0.5 for us, no TH8 bases. They balance the inferno advantage, 12 warden attack advantage with 2 TH8 at the bottom.

The only matches we get that are balanced are league arranged wars. Pretty sad that in order to get balanced wars and avoid this ridiculous engineering tumor is to take matters into our own hands and do friendly wars. And being at such a disadvantage our best hope for a win is that our opponents are hopelessly bad attackers.

We post and post here, complaints about the issues with the war MM fill forum threads here and on other sites. What do we get from SC for our efforts?

Silence.

Sad the game we love and have invested so much into has degraded into this mess.

---

Is it possible that SC is trying to tell your clan something through the MM (time to progress your bases and hopefully spend some gems). Are your bases actually balanced? What is balanced? How do you know they are balanced? Does having all the defenses for your th level make you balanced? Is a only th10 and th9 war roster a balanced roster? How important is balanced bases in a balanced roster and how do we know when we have achieved this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

All the time. We just decided to fill up our roster with rushed th11s too because there is no other option anymore. Last war they had 2 wardens vs our 0, the war before that they had 3 wardens vs our 0, this war it's 7... I don't remember the wars before that and the logs are gone, but it's pretty consistent that the enemy teams have at least a few wardens.

---

You guys keep drawing th11s but don't run th11s in your line up, why? Are you against th11s? Do you just not want to try to bring in any th11s into your clan? Do your match ups get worse with th11s?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WookieFloyd

You guys keep drawing th11s but don't run th11s in your line up, why? Are you against th11s? Do you just not want to try to bring in any th11s into your clan? Do your match ups get worse with th11s?

---

So you think SC should just delete the matchmaker and simply match clans randomly. Then everyone will have to gem to th11. Brilliant idea. Let's do that next to the clock tower nerf that I proposed in the OP. And while we're at it, we could increase the UI icons on Android a bit more, I don't think they are gigantic enough yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Yes, I am actually yelling.

I tried the "be patient" way.
I tried the "let's give suggestions" way.
I tried the "open letter" way.

At this point I don't care anymore. Fix this. I don't care how. I don't care what our weights are. I don't care what our enemies weights are. I don't care who is engineering or who isn't. I don't care about anything at this point.

In fact, in the spirit of the new Clash of Clans UI, I will use the fonts I know you can actually read:


FIX THIS ALREADY.

http://i.imgur.com/CRHLwza.jpg

Or, alternatively you can nerf the clock tower from 8 to 4 minutes and from 8x speedup to 4x speedup, I am sure the playerbase really wants that.


Thanks in forward,
Dorsan the enraged

---

Have you tried balanced bases and a balanced roster?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

Have you tried balanced bases and a balanced roster?

---

Yup. Ran only that for around 2 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Yup. Ran only that for around 2 years.

---

Was tongue in cheek. Sorry about your waste of 2 days. would recommend getting a league at this point, every day we dont push the button but have an AW the game is a little better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

So you think SC should just delete the matchmaker and simply match clans randomly. Then everyone will have to gem to th11. Brilliant idea. Let's do that next to the clock tower nerf that I proposed in the OP. And while we're at it, we could increase the UI icons on Android a bit more, I don't think they are gigantic enough yet.

---

I never said delete the MM? I simply asked if you keep drawing th11s when you don't have them in your roster why not try to bring some th11s to war to see if it helps alleviate the situation? I realize you're frustrated but I am not trying to minimize your situation in any way. I am just trying to think about what could help prevent these terrible match ups from being so frequent for you. From what i recall of reading your posts you are an engineered clan correct? Our clan engineers and we rarely see such bad match ups. Even the match ups that heavily favor one side are not usually this lopsided even. However our clan bring 2 or 3 max th11s, a th10.5 and 2 th9.11s to our lineup usually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WookieFloyd

I never said delete the MM? I simply asked if you keep drawing th11s when you don't have them in your roster why not try to bring some th11s to war to see if it helps alleviate the situation? I realize you're frustrated but I am not trying to minimize your situation in any way. I am just trying to think about what could help prevent these terrible match ups from being so frequent for you. From what i recall of reading your posts you are an engineered clan correct? Our clan engineers and we rarely see such bad match ups. Even the match ups that heavily favor one side are not usually this lopsided even. However our clan bring 2 or 3 max th11s, a th10.5 and 2 th9.11s to our lineup usually.

---

Well yeah, our plan is exactly to move some 9.5s to th11 offense. But it doesn't change the fact that the matchmaker is utterly horrible. I can do exactly the same thing our enemies are doing, that is not the issue here. The issue here is the inaction from SC.

The funny thing is that a clan could increase to th11, but that just means that instead of 0 vs 7 you will get 7 vs 14.

It is truly a MMA issue. They need to match O to O and D to D (with a slight window of error). If your clan doesn't find a match, try bring your roster into a better balance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

The funny thing is that a clan could increase to th11, but that just means that instead of 0 vs 7 you will get 7 vs 14.

It is truly a MMA issue. They need to match O to O and D to D (with a slight window of error). If your clan doesn't find a match, try bring your roster into a better balance.

---

I get a little frustrated when I hear people suggest perhaps the MM is trying to tell us to upgrade. That's baloney. We all run multiple accounts most of which are max. We have actually been at this game a while, and the reason we DONT run our max TH11 is exactly what SS103 points out. Instead of the TH11 our 10s consistently draw, we would be pulling down even more unbalanced topheavy matches since the MM seems to treat our TH10 bases as if they are TH11. Our max TH11 bases would bring greater lopsided matches under the current rules. The weightless warden is killing any hope of balance at TH10-11.

As Wook said, we have engineered accounts in our clan but we also have max accounts that anchor the top and we rarely see crazy mismatches. The one that was very lopsided in the GW department I made a post here about and we ended up winning the war anyways. As long as you have some heavy TH11s to anchor the top of your clan then it seems like the better attackers usually prevail.

Most clans we go up against have 2-3 TH11s that are engineered to some extent which is how we run our wars as well.

We also have some TH10s that are not engineered and some that are TH9.5s.

Overall I think you should take a look at your war composition and have a good mix of bases that are maxed out (or heavy weights) and several that are engineered to alleviate issues that all clans are inevitably facing with heavily engineered clans these days.

You have 2 options really -

1. Max your bases and continue to complain about mismatches.
2. Take necessary steps to bring your clan in line with the clans you are matching so wars are more even.

We all know that Supercell "says" they are making adjustments but those adjustments are moving at a snails pace. My advice is to adjust a bit if you enjoy war and carry on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardF

I get a little frustrated when I hear people suggest perhaps the MM is trying to tell us to upgrade. That's baloney. We all run multiple accounts most of which are max. We have actually been at this game a while, and the reason we DONT run our max TH11 is exactly what SS103 points out. Instead of the TH11 our 10s consistently draw, we would be pulling down even more unbalanced topheavy matches since the MM seems to treat our TH10 bases as if they are TH11. Our max TH11 bases would bring greater lopsided matches under the current rules. The weightless warden is killing any hope of balance at TH10-11.

---

This isn't our experience at all in MM. We run 2-4 max TH11 bases each war as well as 2-3 engineered (to some extent) TH11s as well as several heavy, near max TH10s and some 9.5s.

Regardless, if you are leaving out TH11s in fear of pulling more Th11s you are really hurting yourself more than helping yourself. You need those anchor bases at the top to prevent the enemy from 3-starring every base. When you have hard bases up top there is a better chance to win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

As Wook said, we have engineered accounts in our clan but we also have max accounts that anchor the top and we rarely see crazy mismatches. The one that was very lopsided in the GW department I made a post here about and we ended up winning the war anyways. As long as you have some heavy TH11s to anchor the top of your clan then it seems like the better attackers usually prevail.

Most clans we go up against have 2-3 TH11s that are engineered to some extent which is how we run our wars as well.

We also have some TH10s that are not engineered and some that are TH9.5s.

Overall I think you should take a look at your war composition and have a good mix of bases that are maxed out (or heavy weights) and several that are engineered to alleviate issues that all clans are inevitably facing with heavily engineered clans these days.

You have 2 options really -

1. Max your bases and continue to complain about mismatches.
2. Take necessary steps to bring your clan in line with the clans you are matching so wars are more even.

We all know that Supercell "says" they are making adjustments but those adjustments are moving at a snails pace. My advice is to adjust a bit if you enjoy war and carry on.

---

The reason you feel like running max 11 anchors is not a problem is your inclusion of presumably engineered TH10 and 11 lower in your roster, and I am guessing those TH11 accounts have wardens too, so it's not a big deal to face highly engineered opponents. We don't care to include engineered bases in our clan choosing instead to encourage our members to focus on solid attack planning and execution instead of gaining advantage by having TH9-10-11 troops attacking lower bases to secure victory.

The reason I complain about the lopsided matches is that it is affecting many seasoned players adversely, it doesn't have to be this way, and for whatever reason fixing this elephant in the room does not seem to be a priority for SC. So by your logic I must change the way I play because the program is to lazy to fix such a glaring issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

Regardless, if you are leaving out TH11s in fear of pulling more Th11s you are really hurting yourself more than helping yourself. You need those anchor bases at the top to prevent the enemy from 3-starring every base. When you have hard bases up top there is a better chance to win.

---

Our clan's 400+ war wins disagree with this statement. I've never once warred with a th11 in our roster, not once. You do need a strong anchor, but doesn't have to be an 11.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardF

The reason you feel like running max 11 anchors is not a problem is your inclusion of presumably engineered TH10 and 11 lower in your roster, and I am guessing those TH11 accounts have wardens too, so it's not a big deal to face highly engineered opponents. We don't care to include engineered bases in our clan choosing instead to encourage our members to focus on solid attack planning and execution instead of gaining advantage by having TH9-10-11 troops attacking lower bases to secure victory.

The reason I complain about the lopsided matches is that it is affecting many seasoned players adversely, it doesn't have to be this way, and for whatever reason fixing this elephant in the room does not seem to be a priority for SC. So by your logic I must change the way I play because the program is to lazy to fix such a glaring issue.

---

all of that appears to be true, but..
that is exactly what SC seems to be saying.
there are tons of examples of this.

notice what they did to android tablet owners with 16:10 ratio?
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...-so-big/page46

guess we all are supposed to go get different tablets or...
"change the way I play because the program is to lazy to fix such a glaring issue"

sometimes it sucks to hear the potential truth. SC gives 0 "cares" it seems about much of anything anyone wants...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardF

The reason you feel like running max 11 anchors is not a problem is your inclusion of presumably engineered TH10 and 11 lower in your roster, and I am guessing those TH11 accounts have wardens too, so it's not a big deal to face highly engineered opponents. We don't care to include engineered bases in our clan choosing instead to encourage our members to focus on solid attack planning and execution instead of gaining advantage by having TH9-10-11 troops attacking lower bases to secure victory.

The reason I complain about the lopsided matches is that it is affecting many seasoned players adversely, it doesn't have to be this way, and for whatever reason fixing this elephant in the room does not seem to be a priority for SC. So by your logic I must change the way I play because the program is to lazy to fix such a glaring issue.

---

Let me get one thing straight - I would much rather have a matchmaking system that matches fairly and is able to match engineered clans against clans that are like-minded. But as we all know - SC has been FAR too slow to fix the issue.

Yes, our TH11s that are engineered certainly have Wardens. That doesn't mean we don't have well planned attacks 11v11 and 10v10 because we definitely do. We have plenty of chatter about planning for bases and take pride in a lot of our attacks vs high end max bases.

My "logic", as you phrase it, isn't necessarily telling you to change how you play but it is explaining how we have overcome getting matched in wars that are lopsided like the OP's.

But in all honesty, as long as we know SC is not changing its WMM algorithm fast enough to combat this type of abuse, then yes, you are putting yourself at a disadvantage by not at least holding back some select defenses on at least a couple bases you war with while your offense has a chance to get to a decent level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xXXCHRISXXx

Our clan's 400+ war wins disagree with this statement. I've never once warred with a th11 in our roster, not once. You do need a strong anchor, but doesn't have to be an 11.

---

Agreed - but if they are pulling TH11s with eagles then yes, they need a base that is higher than a TH10 in war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardF

Yep. That's pretty much par for the course these days. We just matched a clan with 6 TH11. We of course have none. Happily only 2 have the EA, and we are nearly balanced for inferno bases. They have only a 2 base TH10 advantage, plus the 6 base TH11 attack advantage. All have wardens of course. So as far as recent matches for us, pretty average. This makes perfect sense since we have 3 max or nearly max TH10 and several max TH9. No 0.5 for us, no TH8 bases. They balance the inferno advantage, 12 warden attack advantage with 2 TH8 at the bottom.

The only matches we get that are balanced are league arranged wars. Pretty sad that in order to get balanced wars and avoid this ridiculous engineering tumor is to take matters into our own hands and do friendly wars. And being at such a disadvantage our best hope for a win is that our opponents are hopelessly bad attackers.

We post and post here, complaints about the issues with the war MM fill forum threads here and on other sites. What do we get from SC for our efforts?

Silence.

Sad the game we love and have invested so much into has degraded into this mess.

---

I couldn't agree with this more. As leader of a war clan with 320+ wins (43 losses) we just had enough. Most of the time with planning and solid attackers you can overcome the MM, but occasionally you get unwinnable wars, all because they just have more high level attacks (TH 11's with GW's) than you do, and know how to attack. We were fed up enough to close the clan and join a clan that was involved in league play (MLCW). I gotta say it looks odd seeing FAIR and EVEN matchups. We enjoyed what we built, but it was move or stop playing, so we moved. Now we're just one less clan in the MM pool that's just looking for a competitive and exciting war, not one that's decided on prep day, as almost everything is a FW for us now.

[QUOTE=But in all honesty, as long as we know SC is not changing its WMM algorithm fast enough to combat this type of abuse, then yes, you are putting yourself at a disadvantage by not at least holding back some select defenses on at least a couple bases you war with while your offense has a chance to get to a decent level.[/QUOTE]

Our anchors are max TH10. Actual max bases, same for our many TH9 bases. My TH11 is (well was, going to be again soon) max as well. None of our members have any defenses to hold back. Our few TH10 that "recently" upgraded from 9 waited to drop infernos for a bit but in truth that put us at a greater disadvantage. Same for the few last TH8 that went to TH9. Not having xbows skewed the matches far more than them dropping to upgraded defenses early rather than waiting. If you want to see what a mature clan looks like, swing by and check our war roster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

Agreed - but if they are pulling TH11s with eagles then yes, they need a base that is higher than a TH10 in war.

---

Seriously. If our top TH10 consistently draw TH11 with near max wardens and L2 EA how do you honestly think adding our max TH 11 bases to the roster is going to help?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardF

Seriously. If our top TH10 consistently draw TH11 with near max wardens and L2 EA how do you honestly think adding our max TH 11 bases to the roster is going to help?

---

It won't. All it will do is give the opposing clan even more war weight to potentially manipulate in a bad way unbalancing the match to an even greater extreme. You cannot remove the randomness if the MM from the equation unless you are a clan of 100% Full th11's. It is pure luck on who happens to be in the pool when you start a search and receive your match.

Just because the picture shows a TH11, doesn't mean they are a TH11, yes they have the toys, but you should be able to hold your own against a TH10 defense.

The match up isn't as off as you would think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xXXCHRISXXx

Our clan's 400+ war wins disagree with this statement. I've never once warred with a th11 in our roster, not once. You do need a strong anchor, but doesn't have to be an 11.

---

It does for engineered clans that war above max TH9 because they will inevitably face multiple low-weight TH11's with at least one max attack and a L20 GW...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sheedy17

Just because the picture shows a TH11, doesn't mean they are a TH11, yes they have the toys, but you should be able to hold your own against a TH10 defense.

The match up isn't as off as you would think.

---

Yeah put a roster together like his and see what shows up more often than not. if the opponent has a 7-0 GW advantage they will have to be horrible attackers (not uncommon in engineered clans) to not be perfect and Dorsan provided the enemy number 1 here:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

He's at around max th10 weight. Got the new defenses and the warden but no EA.

---

Again, unless the base design is ♥♥♥♥ or Dorsan is a very good TH10 attacker, the odds are not in his favor to get anything but a draw...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denton

Again, unless the base design is ♥♥♥♥ or Dorsan is a very good TH10 attacker, the odds are not in his favor to get anything but a draw...

---

I am not sure how bad the layout should be and how good of an attacker I should be to deal with 1 additional x-bow, archer tower and canon on top of all th10 defenses... Getting 3 stars on th10s with infernos as a th10 is hard already. Yet getting the same 3 stars with maxed miners and a warden (what our enemy #9 has for example) is slightly less difficult. I checked their accounts, and 5 of them do have 1 army comp that is maxed for th11, and they don't all have the same army comp either, so if one doesn't work, they can try different stuff. While we're stuck with th10, th9 and th8 attacks.

Basically you need TH11s in your war line up if you are facing TH11s without them.

Regardless of what you are thinking if you are pulling TH11s with your TH10s then it's time to either push 1-2 of your TH10s up or add TH11s you have in your clan already. In order to stay competitive at the top end of these wars you need to have a base with GW that can get 2-3 stars on their top bases.

As long as you have as many attacks with your GW as they have TH11 bases that are above TH10 in war weight you have a shot at winning. We have had plenty of wars where we have less GW than the opponent but play better up top.

You can go ahead and keep playing the same exact way you have been getting the same results and matchups but then it's only your fault for not changing to stay competitive.

To quote The late Albert Einstein:

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"

Seems like the shoe fits in a lot of the instances in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

It won't. All it will do is give the opposing clan even more war weight to potentially manipulate in a bad way unbalancing the match to an even greater extreme. You cannot remove the randomness if the MM from the equation unless you are a clan of 100% Full th11's. It is pure luck on who happens to be in the pool when you start a search and receive your match.

---

Maybe just changing the pool your in would help. So if you search at night try the morning or change the days you normally roll wars on. I am not trying to sit here and say I got any of the right answers but if what you're doing isn't working then why keep doing it? I mean should you have to change the way you're playing just because SC is dragging their feet on this? No, but unfortunately it is the reality of the situation, and unfortunately there is really nothing we can do about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

You can go ahead and keep playing the same exact way you have been getting the same results and matchups but then it's only your fault for not changing to stay competitive.

To quote The late Albert Einstein:

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"

Seems like the shoe fits in a lot of the instances in this thread.

---

Ok. Se let's flow with your quote right here.

We started as a maxer clan of th7-th8 players. We kept getting engineered th10s as enemies. So we got some engineered th10s too. The result? We started getting th11 enemies. So, we were in one situation, started doing what our enemies were doing and then we got into a worse situation. Now here you come and suggest that we keep copy what our current enemies are doing - so basically to do what we did before - and to expect different results?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

Basically you need TH11s in your war line up if you are facing TH11s without them.

Regardless of what you are thinking if you are pulling TH11s with your TH10s then it's time to either push 1-2 of your TH10s up or add TH11s you have in your clan already. In order to stay competitive at the top end of these wars you need to have a base with GW that can get 2-3 stars on their top bases.

As long as you have as many attacks with your GW as they have TH11 bases that are above TH10 in war weight you have a shot at winning. We have had plenty of wars where we have less GW than the opponent but play better up top.

You can go ahead and keep playing the same exact way you have been getting the same results and matchups but then it's only your fault for not changing to stay competitive.

To quote The late Albert Einstein:

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"

Seems like the shoe fits in a lot of the instances in this thread.

---

Except the MMA is not consistent. You don't always get bad matches. You CAN do the same thing and EXPECT different results. The MMA is a much better definition of Insanity. That's the silly part.....This is the first in awhile since I put an alt in Dorsan's clan. If you are constantly adjusting your roster guessing what the MMA will deem appropriate as a match, your just chasing your tail.

I honestly think they tried to tweak the MMA to go along with the Clan War event. It had the opposite effect. Bad matches are on the uptick, if the recent forum complaints are related to it. I noticed a thread surge during the event of bad matches.

To quote myself:

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing and getting wildly different results out of the SC MMA"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardF

to encourage our members to focus on solid attack planning and execution instead of gaining advantage by having TH9-10-11 troops attacking lower bases to secure victory.

---

The people in my clan who have always wanted the better troops were the 10s. There was the short summer if bowler healer, but besides that, they got frustrated & either quit or went .5.
MM always favored 10.5, although I think it may be slightly nerfed now.
What we are left with are a bunch of 9.5ers who don't want infernos because they don't want the pain. 10.5ers , many of them max or near max 10s, who did it to 3 10s. And then a bunch of ppl who looked around & said, why even .5 if engineering is better rewarded? Not caring about gear ups on those accounts is a plus too.

Still waiting on how these miner, hogs, max heal all end up working out. It could be that 9.5s end up being such an easy 3 that ppl drop infernos sooner & 9.5 won't be as attractive.

A solid attack plan hasn't been good enough at Th10 for a long time now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

You can go ahead and keep playing the same exact way you have been getting the same results and matchups but then it's only your fault for not changing to stay competitive.

To quote The late Albert Einstein:

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"

Seems like the shoe fits in a lot of the instances in this thread.

---

It's not just about competitive, it's about interesting wars. We're still north of 90% wins in our current log, so it's not like we're getting beaten up all the time. Watching TH11s spam a single troop attack at every target is BORING. (OK, when they fail on TH9s, that's kind of funny, but it's still not really what war is about). Attacking defenceless bases is BORING.

But all our losses were wars where we were basically spectators - the enemy could spam a score that it was physically impossible for us to match. We've had other wars like that we won, because it turned out the enemy couldn't in fact tie their own shoe laces. And too many of the wins we are just smashing the enemy. We recently had a run of 9 out of 10 wars with a winning margin of well over 20* - in every case the enemy just gave up.

The choice isn't between losing with our current line up (because we're not) and winning with an alternate line-up. The choice is between SC providing a game that's fun, or quitting the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

It's not just about competitive, it's about interesting wars. We're still north of 90% wins in our current log, so it's not like we're getting beaten up all the time. Watching TH11s spam a single troop attack at every target is BORING. (OK, when they fail on TH9s, that's kind of funny, but it's still not really what war is about). Attacking defenceless bases is BORING.

But all our losses were wars where we were basically spectators - the enemy could spam a score that it was physically impossible for us to match. We've had other wars like that we won, because it turned out the enemy couldn't in fact tie their own shoe laces. And too many of the wins we are just smashing the enemy. We recently had a run of 9 out of 10 wars with a winning margin of well over 20* - in every case the enemy just gave up.

The choice isn't between losing with our current line up (because we're not) and winning with an alternate line-up. The choice is between SC providing a game that's fun, or quitting the game.

---

Our clan has been saying this for a while now. Nice post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardF

Seriously. If our top TH10 consistently draw TH11 with near max wardens and L2 EA how do you honestly think adding our max TH 11 bases to the roster is going to help?

---

I think he does; the question is, why do you think it wouldn't help?

If your top TH10 consistently draw TH11, you need TH11 for two reasons: first, to prevent the other side from getting a perfect score on you, and second, to hit those enemy TH11 much harder than your TH10 are able to.

Dorsan, I know an easy way to war with max and .5 bases and avoid what you are experiencing. Feel free to PM me or visit my clan to get an idea of what I mean.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

It's not just about competitive, it's about interesting wars. We're still north of 90% wins in our current log, so it's not like we're getting beaten up all the time. Watching TH11s spam a single troop attack at every target is BORING. (OK, when they fail on TH9s, that's kind of funny, but it's still not really what war is about). Attacking defenceless bases is BORING.

But all our losses were wars where we were basically spectators - the enemy could spam a score that it was physically impossible for us to match. We've had other wars like that we won, because it turned out the enemy couldn't in fact tie their own shoe laces. And too many of the wins we are just smashing the enemy. We recently had a run of 9 out of 10 wars with a winning margin of well over 20* - in every case the enemy just gave up.

The choice isn't between losing with our current line up (because we're not) and winning with an alternate line-up. The choice is between SC providing a game that's fun, or quitting the game.

---

Exactly.... It's not about wins and losses... we also have a pretty darn good war log... it's about a fun war experience... and sorry, but watching TH+1 and +2 attacks is stupid and does not do anything to inspire creativity. Spamming Max drags or Max LaLoon vs a TH9 is a weak and shameful way to win a war and it makes me wonder why I play and what happened to the game I got addicted to over two years ago.

Sorry... but if TH Sniping was "not the way the game was meant to be played"... please explain how this is?

War and my clan are the ONLY reasons I play this game. And now the war experience is dead. Now I am hanging on by a thread... and it's only my loyalty to my clan that keeps me going... and I am not sure how much longer that will last without a MEANINGFUL AND SIGNIFICANT change to the MMA... these Nonexistent 'tweaks' that they claim to be making isn't even close to enough. It needs a complete overhaul.

It seems like such a simple fix to me. Match GW to GW... it would kill TH11 eng bases almost immediately. They would be forced to start upgrading.... and if new Th11's decided not to drop the GW... fine... at least it would be a weaker offensive attack.

So... We are in battle day...

So far they failed with a maxed miner attack on our #2 (th9.5 with no infernos) and then with a maxed laloon attack. They did take out our #3 with the mass maxed miners. So that's 2 fails, 1 success, 11 th11 attacks left for them.

We failed on their #1 with our #2 attack and got 71% 1 star, but we did take out 2-4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

So... We are in battle day...

So far they failed with a maxed miner attack on our #2 (th9.5 with no infernos) and then with a maxed laloon attack. They did take out our #3 with the mass maxed miners. So that's 2 fails, 1 success, 11 th11 attacks left for them.

We failed on their #1 with our #2 attack and got 71% 1 star, but we did take out 2-4.

---

Good luck in your war.

When I encounter a mismatch due to engineering, it's especially frustrating to me when I see less skilled attackers benefitting from using higher level troops to hit down. Some engineering clans are also superb attackers, and would've won regardless of the mismatch. Hats off to them. It's the former example that burns deep.

Update: They managed to take out our #2 with another th11 laloon attack. At this point they got our 2-3 down and 10 th11 attacks left.

Update 2: Our #1 is now down to 69% 2 stars, we need to do higher than that on their #1 now. They also took out our #4 with a th11 attack. They are using th10 attacks on our 8.5s and it seems that they are planning to take out all th9+ with th11 attacks.

Update 3: Yes, they are consistently 3 staring our 8s and 8.5s with th10 miners and keep going for th9+ with th11 laloon attacks.

Update 4: Looks like they are using the weaker th11 attacks where the GW doesn't have it's ability as th10 attacks for the th8-th8.5 bases. Which means they will have to at least 3 star 3 th9/th9.5 bases with th10 attacks instead of th11. It also means that they won't be trying to go for 3 stars or higher % on our #1, so all we need now is to get 70% 2 stars on their #1 to win...

edited to add: I will keep the th11 attack list here
1) mass miners -> #2 (th9.5), fail
2) mass miners -> #3 (th9.5), success
3) laloon -> #2 (th9.5), fail
4) laloon -> #2 (th9.5), success
5) laloon -> #1 (th10), 69%, 2 stars
6) laloon -> #1 (th10), 66%, 2 stars
7) laloon -> #4 (th9), success
8) laloon -> #5 (th9), success
9) mass miners -> (th8.5), success
10) mass miners -> (th8.10), success

th11 attacks left: 4

th9/th9.5 targets left: 5
our only real th10: at 69% 2 stars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Update: They managed to take out our #2 with another th11 laloon attack. At this point they got our 2-3 down and 10 th11 attacks left.

Update 2: Our #1 is now down to 69% 2 stars, we need to do higher than that on their #1 now. They also took out our #4 with a th11 attack. They are using th10 attacks on our 8.5s and it seems that they are planning to take out all th9+ with th11 attacks.

edited to add: I will keep the th11 attack list here
1) mass miners -> #2 (th9.5), fail
2) mass miners -> #3 (th9.5), success
3) laloon -> #2 (th9.5), fail
4) laloon -> #2 (th9.5), success
5) laloon -> #1 (th10), 69%, 2 stars
6) laloon -> #1 (th10), 66%, 2 stars
7) laloon -> #4 (th9), success

th11 attacks left: 7

th9/th9.5 targets left: 6
our only real th10: at 69% 2 stars

---

Good Luck my friend, the free world is rooting for you.....and me.

Update...

They are still going all in, we are waiting for our #1 to show up (he was on when the war started but he's been MIA since then).

This is the current situation:
enemy attacks left:
th11 - 4
th10 - 3
th9 - 15
th7 - 2
th3 - 1
------------
25 total

targets left:
#1 (th10) - 69% 2 stars
#6 (th9.5) - 0%
#7 (th9) - 85% 2 stars
#8 (th9.5) - 0%
#9 (th9) - 0%
#10 (th9) - 68% 2 stars
#21 (th8) - 90% 2 stars
#22 (th8.9) - 0%
#23 (th8) - 0%
-------------------------
9 total

So far they were only using either mass miners or laloon. We haven't seen any other th9+ attack. If they are using all their th10/th11 attacks for th9+ cleanup, it means they have 7 of those attacks against 5 remaining th9/th9.5 targets. If they fail 3 out of those attacks and all of their th9 attacks, we can win this without getting any extra stars or % due to our 73% 1 star on their top 1. If not, then we will have to get it down to 70% 2 stars somehow. Will keep updating as the events roll in.

Update, as their th3 and th7 attacks are useless at this point, they will need to use 3 th9 attacks to cleanup our th8s. Which means they have 12 th9 attacks left.

So we need them to fail 3 th10/th11 attacks against th9 targets AND 12 th9 attacks against th9 targets to win this. (That or to get 70% 2 stars on their #1).

Sounds like you are doing alright so far. Keep it up!

Maybe it's not as mismatched as originally thought?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

Sounds like you are doing alright so far. Keep it up!

Maybe it's not as mismatched as originally thought?

---

Which is why I also think it's hard for SC to resolve this issue. I've stated this before--I believe Dorsan's matchup is unfavorable, however if Dorsan's clan wins, and SC reviews the data, will they see this as a mismatch? Just another item to consider.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

So we need them to fail 3 th10/th11 attacks against th9 targets AND 12 th9 attacks against th9 targets to win this. (That or to get 70% 2 stars on their #1).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

Sounds like you are doing alright so far. Keep it up!

Maybe it's not as mismatched as originally thought?

---

How did you came to that conclusion? What do you thing the odds are of them actually failing 15 attacks or us getting 70% 2 stars on a th10 defense base with an added x-bow and grand warden?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

How did you came to that conclusion? What do you thing the odds are of them actually failing 15 attacks or us getting 70% 2 stars on a th10 defense base with an added x-bow and grand warden?

---

As long as that TH11 doesn't have the eagle it shouldn't be difficult for the 70% 2 star as a TH10.

Can you post their #1? Curious about the base design.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

I am not sure how bad the layout should be and how good of an attacker I should be to deal with 1 additional x-bow, archer tower and canon on top of all th10 defenses... Getting 3 stars on th10s with infernos as a th10 is hard already. Yet getting the same 3 stars with maxed miners and a warden (what our enemy #9 has for example) is slightly less difficult. I checked their accounts, and 5 of them do have 1 army comp that is maxed for th11, and ​they don't all have the same army comp either, so if one doesn't work, they can try different stuff. While we're stuck with th10, th9 and th8 attacks.

---

Sounds like a clan that has worked together as a team to become strong in war instead of a clan that doesn't want to adapt to the way things are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JFSoul

Which is why I also think it's hard for SC to resolve this issue. I've stated this before--I believe Dorsan's matchup is unfavorable, however if Dorsan's clan wins, and SC reviews the data, will they see this as a mismatch? Just another item to consider.

---

If they do this, they're including relative skill in their matchmaking. Yes in the long run it should balance out, but I can think of cases that would get the wrong answer and distort things.

For instance, maxed based tend to be inhabited by players with above average skill. If that skill is included in the calibration, maxed bases will look better than they actually are due to the types of players usually handling the accounts.

The fact that every single engineering thread is "(1) they had a base advantage, (2) they sucked at attacking, (3a) we won because 2 > 1 or (3b) they won because they had too much an advantage in the bases (1 > 2)" suggests that SC may be using skill somehow in matchmaking.

Please point me to the engineering match complaint thread where someone says "(1) they had a major base advantage and (2) they were awesome at attacking". In the absence of such threads, I'm leaning towards skill mattering and that being the reason that good clans eventually lose to bad clans with a base advantage.

Edit: There are reasons such threads would be rare. There's less to complain about if they were also better attackers. In addition if you have a major base advantage, why try hard, so attacks would likely appear less skilled than the attacker actually is if they were trying harder in a tighter war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

If they do this, they're including relative skill in their matchmaking. Yes in the long run it should balance out, but I can think of cases that would get the wrong answer and distort things.

For instance, maxed based tend to be inhabited by players with above average skill. If that skill is included in the calibration, maxed bases will look better than they actually are due to the types of players usually handling the accounts.

The fact that every single engineering thread is "(1) they had a base advantage, (2) they sucked at attacking, (3a) we won because 2 > 1 or (3b) they won because they had too much an advantage in the bases (1 > 2)" suggests that SC may be using skill somehow in matchmaking.

Please point me to the engineering match complaint thread where someone says "(1) they had a major base advantage and (2) they were awesome at attacking". In the absence of such threads, I'm leaning towards skill mattering and that being the reason that good clans eventually lose to bad clans with a base advantage.

Edit: There are reasons such threads would be rare. There's less to complain about if they were also better attackers. In addition if you have a major base advantage, why try hard, so attacks would likely appear less skilled than the attacker actually is if they were trying harder in a tighter war.

---

As you stated those threads will be a little self selecting, its hard to be really bitter if an engineered 11 3 stars you Max 11 with goboho, and people who hate engineeres want likely admit great skill if witnessed. I think you may have a point that supercell is creating invisible leagues using weight less and less as win streak builds. They have admitted already to controling for skill by taking into account recept war record, but I think you medan they are controlin for skill with further steps?

but heres the thing, as true as all your saying be, What really going on is this, and we kinda all know it:

step 1 - underweight warden and dont set limits so warden is a massive war advantage
step 2 - we all rush 11 and gem warden
step 3 - profit

and looking into my crystal ball

step 4 - "Hey clashers!!! We have heared your feedback and have added substantial weight to the warden, as well as making sure you Will nerver face more that 1.5 Times' your number of wardens"
step 5 - those of Us with accounts with teen royals and level 2 witch realise we at a disadvantage suddenly
step 6 - we gem Queen and lev 3 witch
step 7 - profit
step 8 - Huge nerf to witches (mortar damage x 4 or whatever) and bowlers and overpowered new troop "the Dorsan" who critises your village till it surrenders (unkess the village is supercell, so far at least)
step 9 - we all gems Max level Dorsan
step 10 - profit

Update: Enemy used 4 th9 attacks. 3 of them failed to get the 3 stars and the 4th was used to cleanup a th8. On the other side our #1 had his queen walk the healers into the ADs and failed to get the 2 stars.

This is the current situation:
enemy attacks left:
th11 - 4
th10 - 3
th9 - 11
th7 - 2
th3 - 1
------------
21 total

targets left:
#1 (th10) - 69% 2 stars
#6 (th9.5) - 60% 1 star
#7 (th9) - 85% 2 stars
#8 (th9.5) - 0%
#9 (th9) - 0%
#10 (th9) - 68% 2 stars
#21 (th8) - 90% 2 stars
#23 (th8) - 0%
-------------------------
8 total

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

but heres the thing, as true as all your saying be, What really going on is this, and we kinda all know it:

---

I think their incentive on gemming upgrades is two fold

1) Trophy pushers. More maxed is better, they gem all defense and any offense that they'd use.

2) War Clans. Waking Heros, quick armies, donate now, etc. These are all facilitated by wars being close. The closer a war is, the more value the gems theoretically provide. This does hedge towards including win streaks/skill/etc somehow

I don't think the following occurs much (which is what you're suggesting)
3) Players decide they want multiple upgrades for war and gem them all instead of slowly getting there. They are much more likely to gem a small amount each war, which is already facilitated by case 2.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Update: Enemy used 4 th9 attacks. 3 of them failed to get the 3 stars and the 4th was used to cleanup a th8. On the other side our #1 had his queen walk the healers into the ADs and failed to get the 2 stars.

This is the current situation:
enemy attacks left:
th11 - 4
th10 - 3
th9 - 11
th7 - 2
th3 - 1
------------
21 total

targets left:
#1 (th10) - 69% 2 stars
#6 (th9.5) - 60% 1 star
#7 (th9) - 85% 2 stars
#8 (th9.5) - 0%
#9 (th9) - 0%
#10 (th9) - 68% 2 stars
#21 (th8) - 90% 2 stars
#23 (th8) - 0%
-------------------------
8 total

---

Can we see the base of their #1? Seems like a rookie move to walk healers into air d...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

Can we see the base of their #1? Seems like a rookie move to walk healers into air d...

---

http://i.imgur.com/3c3aYhC.jpg

edit: Btw any suggestions on how to get to 70% 2 stars on this are welcome too...

The attacks we can try:
1) most th10 troops and spells (lvl 1 freeze), 20/20 royals
2) most th10 troops and spells (lvl 1 freeze), 11/11 royals
3) th10 dragons, th10 loons, maxed lightning, rage eq and poison, 9/9 royals

So if anyone has a clue on how to get to 70% 2 stars with that, I would really appreciate it.

My take, with single target infernos, a heal spell would work for valks. Raged valks would vaporize that core. 1 jump rage heal for valks a rage for AQ/Healers and then either another jump or heal. Looks like a lot of value out of walks, nicely spaced defenses and infernos are out of range.

6 heal
6 wb
3 wiz
2 hogs (cc pull after queen clears trigger protection towers)
12 valks
4 Bowlers
2 Archers
CC = bowlers and a miner

http://i.imgur.com/cVKf5QK.jpg?1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

http://i.imgur.com/3c3aYhC.jpg

edit: Btw any suggestions on how to get to 70% 2 stars on this are welcome too...

The attacks we can try:
1) most th10 troops and spells (lvl 1 freeze), 20/20 royals
2) most th10 troops and spells (lvl 1 freeze), 11/11 royals
3) th10 dragons, th10 loons, maxed lightning, rage eq and poison, 9/9 royals

So if anyone has a clue on how to get to 70% 2 stars with that, I would really appreciate it.

---

I would suggest a golem, bk, aq kill squad with the needed funneling troops (2 baby or wiz or combo) from the west corner to take out 1 air d, cc and aq; then bring in laloon with 3 hounds from south or north depending on which direction your kill squad heads. I like to bring a rage and poison for kill squad, then mostly haste with 1 rage for laloon.

Or an aq charge breaking into the south corner and then meeting charge up with wibo to circle the base and then delayed valks with a jump and rage to take out the core. May even skip the valks and just bring more wibo. Not sure if you are familiar with this attack? It's a little more complicated to describe in text. Basically break aq into first wall and rage walk as needed. once she picks a direction drop your golem or giants on the far corner that she is headed towards, use a baby to set the edge funnel and drop witches, then bk, then bowler and rage the hoard as they circle then once they push past the th you drop jump into core and valks at the hoard entry point to go into core and rage to get th. I do it at th11 frequently and works very well on ring bases. typical army comp is 8 wb, 4 healer, 2 baby, 2 minion, 6 valk, 3 witch, 10 bowlers, 4 rage, 1 jump, 1 poison, cc is golem and rage but at th10 just get an extra poison in cc or bring a haste or eq to soften core for valks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

edit: Btw any suggestions on how to get to 70% 2 stars on this are welcome too...

The attacks we can try:
1) most th10 troops and spells (lvl 1 freeze), 20/20 royals
2) most th10 troops and spells (lvl 1 freeze), 11/11 royals
3) th10 dragons, th10 loons, maxed lightning, rage eq and poison, 9/9 royals

So if anyone has a clue on how to get to 70% 2 stars with that, I would really appreciate it.

---

isnt bowler/witch spam an option? 2 golem, 17/18 bowler, 8/9 witch, 2 jump, 2 rage, 1 heal, 2 poison?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

I think their incentive on gemming upgrades is two fold

1) Trophy pushers. More maxed is better, they gem all defense and any offense that they'd use.

2) War Clans. Waking Heros, quick armies, donate now, etc. These are all facilitated by wars being close. The closer a war is, the more value the gems theoretically provide. This does hedge towards including win streaks/skill/etc somehow

I don't think the following occurs much (which is what you're suggesting)
3) Players decide they want multiple upgrades for war and gem them all instead of slowly getting there. They are much more likely to gem a small amount each war, which is already facilitated by case 2.

---

are you saying that people dont rush from townhall 9 or early 10 and use a fair bit of gems to get warden to lev 5 or 10 asap? i think this generates a ton of revenue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

are you saying that people dont rush from townhall 9 or early 10 and use a fair bit of gems to get warden to lev 5 or 10 asap? i think this generates a ton of revenue.

---

I think that same player who prefers to spend gems rather than spend time farming would spend gems if their goal was a maxed account too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

My take, with single target infernos, a heal spell would work for valks. Raged valks would vaporize that core. 1 jump rage heal for valks a rage for AQ/Healers and then either another jump or heal. Looks like a lot of value out of walks, nicely spaced defenses and infernos are out of range.

6 heal
6 wb
3 wiz
2 hogs (cc pull after queen clears trigger protection towers)
12 valks
4 Bowlers
2 Archers
CC = bowlers and a miner

http://i.imgur.com/cVKf5QK.jpg?1

---

It's plausible, but tbh I think that green line heading into the center is optimistic and begs the question. The valks are much more likely to swing sideways, unless your timing and spacing for killing the side buildings is supernatural. Which it might well be! I'd expect myself or a clanmate to brick that attack at least 9 times out of 10, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by posthoc

It's plausible, but tbh I think that green line heading into the center is optimistic and begs the question. The valks are much more likely to swing sideways, unless your timing and spacing for killing the side buildings is supernatural.

---

If two stars is the goal, time is not an issue. Let the QW and BW do some work. Delay the valks until the path is defined. The one "If" is if valks choose elixir storage over core. But if the bowlers go into first ring, it should not be an issue.

I didn't blur the player info yet so ill just post the link, but this base is similar and gives an idea of timing.

https://youtu.be/hURWm7zmatE

My growing experience with valks it that you have to patient and wait for the path to form.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

If two stars is the goal, time is not an issue. Let the QW and BW do some work. Delay the valks until the path is defined. The one "If" is if valks choose elixir storage over core. But if the bowlers go into first ring, it should not be an issue.

I didn't blur the player info yet so ill just post the link, but this base is similar and gives an idea of timing.

https://youtu.be/hURWm7zmatE

My growing experience with valks it that you have to patient and wait for the path to form.

---

Thanks for the link. Adding witches is an interesting variant on the funnel, and it looks to have worked just as intended in terms of buying time with bodies. "Naked" funnels seem to require the more exacting timing, and as you mention the question was how to 2-star, even if your video shows a triple.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by posthoc

It's plausible, but tbh I think that green line heading into the center is optimistic and begs the question. The valks are much more likely to swing sideways, unless your timing and spacing for killing the side buildings is supernatural. Which it might well be! I'd expect myself or a clanmate to brick that attack at least 9 times out of 10, though.

---

I got the valks to go in during my first attack, but it was a mess because I was going for 3 stars and had quite a few hogs, so the valks didn't manage to take out the core. The thing is, valks love the buildings that are close together. In my attack, they went for the x-bow/AD combo and then I had a jump there and they went straight to the core because of how close the buildings are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

I think that same player who prefers to spend gems rather than spend time farming would spend gems if their goal was a maxed account too.

---

not really, a maxed 10 will do nothing in war except draw a 10.25 with lev 10 warden and maxed bowlers to 3 star it. Theres just no incentice to rush. To uppgrade townhall and gem a lev 5 or even 10 warden on the other hand significatly impacts the next war immdietly helping your clan. The incentive to gem warden for instant war reward is strong, which is why I think the matchamker looks like it does. Like sserves mentioned you get the whales who If trophy pushen gem maxed 11, and if war mongers gem maxed offence 11 with defence from defencless to th10, after that though I think the semi heavy gemmers with most income for supercell per player are people like me who will rush a few th9 or th10 to 11, gem a lev 5/10 warden and Max bowler or witch. A maxer can wait, they dont have the instant gratification that someone gemming a warden for war gets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

are you saying that people dont rush from townhall 9 or early 10 and use a fair bit of gems to get warden to lev 5 or 10 asap? i think this generates a ton of revenue.

---

I'm saying that level 5 warden is only 5 builder days. Level 10 is only 22.5. If that's the only piece missing, then maybe. But if they want Hound 4, Loon 7, that's 28 days of lab (after a 7 day upgrade).

The Warden is one of the faster things to achieve at TH11 and not what I'd gem first (that would be the lab). He's also elixir, so keeping him upgrading without pause is fairly trivial.

Edit: I don't disagree. People who gem everything gem everything, but I'd make a bet that SC gets more money out of small time gemmers around war than any the whales who want to be instantly worthy of the next TH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by posthoc

Thanks for the link. Adding witches is an interesting variant on the funnel, and it looks to have worked just as intended in terms of buying time with bodies. "Naked" funnels seem to require the more exacting timing, and as you mention the question was how to 2-star, even if your video shows a triple.

---

Yes, I realize it was a 3 star but the purpose of the video was to portray the timing and general attack plan. if two stars is the goal, the attacker can wait forever for the flanking armies to work.

** WAR UPDATE **

Both clans have currently at 29 attacks done, and this is the situation on the field:

War score: 64 - 60 for us.

all attacks left (red enemy, green us):
th11 - 4 - 0
th10 - 3 - 7
th9 - 11 - 13
th8 - 0 - 1
th7 - 2 - 0
th3 - 1 - 0
------------
21 total

targets left for enemy team:
#1 (th10) - 69% 2 stars
#6 (th9.5) - 60% 1 star
#7 (th9) - 85% 2 stars
#8 (th9.5) - 0%
#9 (th9) - 0%
#10 (th9) - 68% 2 stars
#21 (th8) - 90% 2 stars
#23 (th8) - 0%
-------------------------
8 total

targets left for our team:
1. th10.5 - 73% 1 star
5. th9.5 - 96% 2 stars
9. th9.11 - 92% 2 stars
10. th9 - 0%
12. th9 - 0%
14. th9.11 - 84% 2 stars
-------------------------
6 total

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

I'm saying that level 5 warden is only 5 builder days. Level 10 is only 22.5. If that's the only piece missing, then maybe. But if they want Hound 4, Loon 7, that's 28 days of lab (after a 7 day upgrade).

The Warden is one of the faster things to achieve at TH11 and not what I'd gem first (that would be the lab). He's also elixir, so keeping him upgrading without pause is fairly trivial.

Edit: I don't disagree. People who gem everything gem everything, but I'd make a bet that SC gets more money out of small time gemmers around war than any the whales who want to be instantly worthy of the next TH.

---

not if you rush the account, theres a ton of elixir upgrades you need, camps, gold storages for cc, spell levels. The warden is easyish to upgrade which is exactly why hes tempting to gem. The costs to gem a lev 45 archer Queen are insane, but a level 10 warden is while costly, a very good spend in terms of effect to cost, with a cost that want end in divorce.

as you hop up to 11, you get a warden pack, which is a no brainer, then you can quite reasonebly ger hin to level 5, at which point your account is instantly significantly more powerful, and then you can grind the other Items.

I think they do make more from small tine gemming, but per custoner I think warden rushens makes then a very handy sum. For them Its this revenue versus the invisible theoretical revenue loss from customers quitting war. This may be a negativa for then, but it may be a case of a bird in the hand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

I got the valks to go in during my first attack, but it was a mess because I was going for 3 stars and had quite a few hogs, so the valks didn't manage to take out the core. The thing is, valks love the buildings that are close together. In my attack, they went for the x-bow/AD combo and then I had a jump there and they went straight to the core because of how close the buildings are.

---

QW into Wibo with delayed valks should do it. You just need a wide funnel.

I would start QW right adjacent to any of the air d (doesn't really matter which one) then once she decides a direction break in with a corner. Create a funnel with a baby drag or a giant and a couple wiz and let cc golem, 3 witches, 9 bowlers and bk out to enter base with queen and healers. rage when needed, get a big funnel and either take 2 jumps to get valks in or bring extra wb and a jump.

Save a rage for valks in core and should do it.

This base doesn't even have max TH10 defenses so a queen walk executed correctly should be very strong.

I've been following your thread. I haven't seen your actual lineup but I gather that your lineup has .5 bases. All that tells me is that certain bases don't have key defenses. To me it sounds like you got out engineered. Now I don't agree with the GW mismatch and this should be addressed. But I think if your .5s have a good amount of lab work done then your clan, with this lineup, will continue to find these matches. If your lab is ahead of your defenses then I'd recommend that your clan turn the lab lights off and focus on defenses until you guys find a better balance.

This single thread has become three or four, somehow...

I can't even figure out the hypothetical gemming/revenue thread and therefore won't address it. :)

The tactical one is the most interesting to me because we face similar situations as OP with regularity. I appreciate Storm's video because it showed me a new wrinkle on funneling that I hadn't previously considered and will have to try. Dingo, considering the stated problem of two-starring with fairly small heroes, I'm not sure your experience with queen walk is going to be the same as OP's given your max heroes. My clan has a wide range of hero levels, and we use queen walks heavily, so we are constantly trying to calibrate and target appropriately.

I'm curious as to how much recent war performance factors into these kind of matchups. The OP's enemy is 79-103-0 with mixed performance war log but with high damage percentage. Dorsan clan is obviously highly skilled with a 336-78-20 and solid performance with lots of 98-100% wins.
Is the matchmaker punishing good performance and rewarding those who don't do well? Matchups like these should never happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by posthoc

This single thread has become three or four, somehow...

I can't even figure out the hypothetical gemming/revenue thread and therefore won't address it. :)

The tactical one is the most interesting to me because we face similar situations as OP with regularity. I appreciate Storm's video because it showed me a new wrinkle on funneling that I hadn't previously considered and will have to try. Dingo, considering the stated problem of two-starring with fairly small heroes, I'm not sure your experience with queen walk is going to be the same as OP's given your max heroes. My clan has a wide range of hero levels, and we use queen walks heavily, so we are constantly trying to calibrate and target appropriately.

---

People are postulating quite rightly why on earth this continues. Some mentioned supercell controlling for skill, I mentioned that the most probably reason was to encourage warden gemming. This was a key point of Dorsans open letter half of us think supercell are borderline incoptent to deal with matchmaking, and the other halv though supercell were deliberatly creating those wars to faciltate gemming. Thats where it came in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiEngineer002

I'm curious as to how much recent war performance factors into these kind of matchups. The OP's enemy is 79-103-0 with mixed performance war log but with high damage percentage. Dorsan clan is obviously highly skilled with a 336-78-20 and solid performance with lots of 98-100% wins.
Is the matchmaker punishing good performance and rewarding those who don't do well? Matchups like these should never happen.

---

supercell have said they recent war record factors in, others have postulated it factors in directly beyond simply indirectly through the recent war record.

you make a great point, the mma may be looking at dorsans clan, and assuming high skill baser on some metrics, and the other clan low skill, and that may be an underlying cause. Wether or not this is a good Idea is another debate entirely. IF they were to do it it should be iether in leagues or with an explicit skill rating or a war difficulty rating, not silently like this (IF thats even whats happened).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

you make a great point, the mma may be looking at dorsans clan, and assuming high skill baser on some metrics, and the other clan low skill, and that may be an underlying cause. Wether or not this is a good Idea is another debate entirely. IF they were to do it it should be iether in leagues or with an explicit skill rating or a war difficulty rating, not silently like this (IF thats even whats happened).

---

If they are only looking at recent matches and they aren't giving any negative points for draws, then we are in a difficult situation indeed. We only have 2 red lines in our current war logs, and the last loss we had was more than 2 months ago...

edited to add: This one seems to be going on a good way to become a red line tho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

People are postulating quite rightly why on earth this continues. Some mentioned supercell controlling for skill, I mentioned that the most probably reason was to encourage warden gemming. This was a key point of Dorsans open letter half of us think supercell are borderline incoptent to deal with matchmaking, and the other halv though supercell were deliberatly creating those wars to faciltate gemming. Thats where it came in.

---

I've mentioned multiple times that if skill was a factor in matchmaking, we'd see results just like Dorsan's current war. It's going to be close, but only because the skill disparity is roughly inverse of the base disparity.

This would be vary bad if SC actually does this. It's one thing to put better clans with similar development together (win streak's intent), it's another to use the skill difference as a weight adjustment. Both equalize win percentage closer to 50%, but the one feels much better than the other.

Countering this possibility, #6M is still winning. So there are limits to how much a penalty applies if there's one at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

I am not sure how bad the layout should be and how good of an attacker I should be to deal with 1 additional x-bow, archer tower and canon on top of all th10 defenses... Getting 3 stars on th10s with infernos as a th10 is hard already. Yet getting the same 3 stars with maxed miners and a warden (what our enemy #9 has for example) is slightly less difficult. I checked their accounts, and 5 of them do have 1 army comp that is maxed for th11, and they don't all have the same army comp either, so if one doesn't work, they can try different stuff. While we're stuck with th10, th9 and th8 attacks.

---

That was my point; the TH10 game is hard enough but against a 10.XX base, it is a real challenge as you saw...

From what I have read in your attack recaps, they are a typical engineered clan that is compensating for attacking skill with TH11 troops and GW's against 9.XX bases...:facepalm:

Dorsan - what levels are their GWs? I see the #1 guy is only level 8.... IMO he really isn't too great until level 10 and the 2nd ability level. Plus that base isn't even max TH10 defense so it's actually pretty weak. A qw into wibo with delayed valks would likely be an easy 2 star with good %.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

I've mentioned multiple times that if skill was a factor in matchmaking, we'd see results just like Dorsan's current war. It's going to be close, but only because the skill disparity is roughly inverse of the base disparity.

Countering this possibility, #6M is still winning. So there are limits to how much a penalty applies if there's one at all.

---

Isn't the WWS supposed to be the "skill" component of MM? Not sure how you would address skill otherwise...

Regarding GM, have you looked closely at their bases / profiles? Sick devotion to engineering which is the main reason for their continued streak but I wouldn't sell them short on base design or attacking...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

Dorsan - what levels are their GWs? I see the #1 guy is only level 8.... IMO he really isn't too great until level 10 and the 2nd ability level. Plus that base isn't even max TH10 defense so it's actually pretty weak. A qw into wibo with delayed valks would likely be an easy 2 star with good %.

---

What does it matter what level the GW are when they are using them against th9 defenses? We only have 1 base with infernos. Most of their attacks were dips or double dips. THh11 -> th9 and th9.5 or Th10 -> th8.5 or Th9 -> th8. They didn't have a single th9 vs th9 attack that was a 3 star so far.

I just checked, and the TH11s that can sill attack have level 2 and level 5 GWs. So it is unlikely they will get more % on our #1. But it is also unlikely we will get the 70% on their #1. We did manage to 2 star it, but only with 63%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThePeskyDingo

Dorsan - what levels are their GWs? I see the #1 guy is only level 8.... IMO he really isn't too great until level 10 and the 2nd ability level. Plus that base isn't even max TH10 defense so it's actually pretty weak. A qw into wibo with delayed valks would likely be an easy 2 star with good %.

---

level 8 is plenty with bowler witch, can spam 3 star any of dorsans bases, especially with Max bowler or witch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denton

Isn't the WWS supposed to be the "skill" component of MM? Not sure how you would address skill otherwise...

---

One of the main complaints against a clan trophy system is that it would negate skill differences. It would give "fair" matchups in the sense that both clans had a roughly equal chance to win, but ignore that the clans might have different development and skill.

Any balancing of results only results in negating skill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

What does it matter what level the GW are when they are using them against th9 defenses? We only have 1 base with infernos.

---

Hmm ok. I guess I just feel like people on the forums jump to conclusions when they see TH11s on the war map. It seems to me that these TH11s all have low level GW which doesn't give much of an advantage up top where it actually matters.

You should be able to 3 star 2 down in the war from what I am gathering. So getting that 2 star on the #1 is where the war will be won.

Looking at that base he isn't very strong. He has mid level TH10 defenses.

An AQ walk bringing in bowler/witch midway through and busting in and using delayed valks raged in core will get that 2 star.

If you have time left feel free to stop by my clan and we can go over the strategy with you before you hit (if you are the one hitting the #1).

#9UGPPUPC is our clan tag. 1 spot is open for you.

Interesting enough, I have had those thoughts. When we have won a war by a large amount, or several in a row, we often get blown out of the water by the next clan. To the point I've almost considered sand bagging wins to only win by 1 star. I wouldn't put it past the MMA to assume that clan A with good attackers can handle Clan B with tougher bases and clan B as worse attackers will be challenged by clan A's weaker defenses. Sometimes it's predictions are far from reality and we get these horrible matches that you see here with huge warden count differences among other seemly unbalanced matches.

Concerning the 6M, I've always assumed they were beyond hyper engineered so much that the it is not within the MMA ability to give them a challenging war. They have beat the MMA so bad that the 120% allowable skew/handicap in matching is not enough to stop them. (just threw out a %). Their true power of their accounts must be vastly undervalued by the MMA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

One of the main complaints against a clan trophy system is that it would negate skill differences. It would give "fair" matchups in the sense that both clans had a roughly equal chance to win, but ignore that the clans might have different development and skill.

Any balancing of results only results in negating skill.

---

I may have misunderstood dentons question, but he is noting that a recent clan record skill is currently being controlled for, and is wondering What other mechanism could be used to control for skill, that were different in effect as well as essence.

I guess that because thats What i wondered when reading your post. I can see a lot of ways to do it and an not convinced that assining a weight to skill is any worse than using recent war record or win streak to to match clans of similar record, as both punish skill, and it would shrink search pool leading to mismatches, albeit less severe than IF skill was weighted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

If they are only looking at recent matches and they aren't giving any negative points for draws, then we are in a difficult situation indeed. We only have 2 red lines in our current war logs, and the last loss we had was more than 2 months ago...

edited to add: This one seems to be going on a good way to become a red line tho.

---

Dorsan, I respect a lot of your posts, but this threw me back. Mm has been working for you so well that you have 2 red lines and you started this thread?!. It shows your skills at your clan composition and I'm sure you have a skilled team. We get bad war match ups far more often & just take them with a grain of salt. After 4 wins, we wait for the bad match - although, lately it hasn't been as bad as every 5th war. This war is 14 (them) wardens to 7, 4 EAs to 4 EAs. They have 3 more sets of infernos. I'm not sure how it will end, it depends on how good attackers they are, so far they have hit down & 3d everything.
Maybe you're taking this so hard because you work a lot harder than we do at clan composition. Maybe that means you have to figure out the latest mm change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

One of the main complaints against a clan trophy system is that it would negate skill differences. It would give "fair" matchups in the sense that both clans had a roughly equal chance to win, but ignore that the clans might have different development and skill.

Any balancing of results only results in negating skill.

---

Well any system is bound to alienate a segment of the population but it is clear that their approach is not working so you would think that they would try something new...

In the end, they have the data so sure they must know the real impact of the current WW / MMA - right? /s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freyja1

Dorsan, I respect a lot of your posts, but this threw me back. Mm has been working for you so well that you have 2 red lines and you started this thread?!. It shows your skills at your clan composition and I'm sure you have a skilled team. We get bad war match ups far more often & just take them with a grain of salt. After 4 wins, we wait for the bad match - although, lately it hasn't been as bad as every 5th war. This war is 14 (them) wardens to 7, 4 EAs to 4 EAs. They have 3 more sets of infernos. I'm not sure how it will end, it depends on how good attackers they are, so far they have hit down & 3d everything.
Maybe you're taking this so hard because you work a lot harder than we do at clan composition. Maybe that means you have to figure out the latest mm change.

---

No man. We might win this war, but it won't make it a good match. We had enemy th11s in the last 2 wars too and we didn't even have a single base with infernos in those. We get sometimes enemies with huge defensive advantage, but in that cases I can see where our adantage is. However in the last 3 wars the enemy teams always had both the defensive and offensive advantage.

Here is the current war in defensive terms:
88-88 (but their base is with 4 x-bows and the GW health buff, ours with 3 x-bows)
71-75 (but their base is with 3 x-bows and the GW health buff, ours with 2 x-bows)
70-71 (but their base is with 3 x-bows and the GW health buff, ours with 2 x-bows)
69-70 (but their base is with 3 x-bows and the GW health buff, outs is a regular th9)
68-70 (but their base is with 3 x-bows, ours is a regular th9)

Matchups like these are the norm for us. And if the offense is at least similar, I don't complain. But when they have the edge both in defense and in offense - which is certainly the case here - then I do complain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

I may have misunderstood dentons question, but he is noting that a recent clan record skill is currently being controlled for, and is wondering What other mechanism could be used to control for skill, that were different in effect as well as essence.

I guess that because thats What i wondered when reading your post. I can see a lot of ways to do it and an not convinced that assining a weight to skill is any worse than using recent war record or win streak to to match clans of similar record, as both punish skill, and it would shrink search pool leading to mismatches, albeit less severe than IF skill was weighted.

---

The problem is one of PR. If clan wars were promoted as a trophy system, it would be a known fact that great TH9s would have to do better on bad TH10's than those bad TH10's did on them, etc. Matches would get progressively worse until they were at 50%, much like builder base trophy pushing where activity does not help the same way it does on the other ladder

Clan wars are marketed as finding a clan like yours in development. If Clan wars were intended as a trophy system there would be bells and whistles and rewards attached to better performance.

I agree that there's nothing inherently wrong with a game where skill is included in matchmaking (see builder base trophy pushing). However, that game is not clan wars (to date at least).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freyja1

Dorsan, I respect a lot of your posts, but this threw me back. Mm has been working for you so well that you have 2 red lines and you started this thread?!. It shows your skills at your clan composition and I'm sure you have a skilled team. We get bad war match ups far more often & just take them with a grain of salt. After 4 wins, we wait for the bad match - although, lately it hasn't been as bad as every 5th war. This war is 14 (them) wardens to 7, 4 EAs to 4 EAs. They have 3 more sets of infernos. I'm not sure how it will end, it depends on how good attackers they are, so far they have hit down & 3d everything.
Maybe you're taking this so hard because you work a lot harder than we do at clan composition. Maybe that means you have to figure out the latest mm change.

---

you missing dorsans view point, he hates the matchmaker because it gives him easy wins, and because it gives mismatches like this. He used to be a balansed maxed clan hating engineering, when he realised supercell wasnt going to fix things he began to engineer but doesnt think Its good for the game. He doesnt like that he can set up easy win, and that others can set up easy wins, and that others get terrible matchens because they defence rushed.

he doesnt want a race to the bottom where we all have to gem wardens, he wants a parits matchmaker delivering even wars, so each war is close IF the skill is close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denton

Well any system is bound to alienate a segment of the population but it is clear that their approach is not working so you would think that they would try something new...

In the end, they have the data so sure they must know the real impact of the current WW / MMA - right? /s

---

If they shifted to skill adjusted matchmaking I would expect them to
(a) mention it to curtail people going "wth is this match"
(b) add rewards for ladder pushing

Edit: They might not realize they've included skill or might consider it a minor impact or decided not to mention it or be underperforming my expectations on communications.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

The problem is one of PR. If clan wars were promoted as a trophy system, it would be a known fact that great TH9s would have to do better on bad TH10's than those bad TH10's did on them, etc. Matches would get progressively worse until they were at 50%, much like builder base trophy pushing where activity does not help the same way it does on the other ladder

Clan wars are marketed as finding a clan like yours in development. If Clan wars were intended as a trophy system there would be bells and whistles and rewards attached to better performance.

I agree that there's nothing inherently wrong with a game where skill is included in matchmaking (see builder base trophy pushing). However, that game is not clan wars (to date at least).

---

I agree we would iether need a league based system, or trophy based system, or the system we have now with a war difficulty metric instead of war win streak with the goal to achieve a great log with the vighets war difficulty. And yes it would be a massive change.