Will the outcry on the forums be more or less than the insanity that followed the perma-ban octopus episode?
Printable View
Will the outcry on the forums be more or less than the insanity that followed the perma-ban octopus episode?
Certainly less
My money is on more. Much more.Quote:
Originally Posted by GodlyMortal
its going to be impossible to nerf engineering. Unless they force you upgade like in the BH< If anything, they will match people with other engineer clans, but I do not believe they have the technology to do this and give everyone the perfect match up
Even if they THINK they did, they could be wrong and it could be worse, It is not a easy fix as Darian has pointed out in other threads, I don't see them nerfing or getting rid of it
less, I would sayQuote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
although a lot of people engineer, I think that part of them just do it because they have no other option (if you can't beat them, join them), but they actually want to see it purged from the game
What sheedy said. Darien said they don't want to force a particular style of play. Besides, that didn't work out so well in bh. It forced most to rush to bh6. It sounds to me like some attempt to pair similar clans. Not a huge nerf hammer like make engineering a huge liability. Even if they did, it's a whole lot easier to build up a defenseless base than it is to unbuild a maxed one. :p
I don't mean make engineered bases useless, I mean remove the advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by sheedy17
I guess we will see if it happens. I just see a ton of passion on the pro-engineering side so I am curious what the backlash will be like if they remove any advantages gained by engineering.
can you please explain the perma-ban octopus episodeQuote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
I don't understand.Quote:
Originally Posted by sheedy17
If, for example, they just weight taxed certain developed TH, how exactly is that impossible?
If SC removed the advantage, it still allows people to upgrade how they want, but I bet you more nonsense stopping...
It's far more complex than just weighing troops and buildings. But... I don't at all believe that they can not solve this problem. It doesn't take 2 years of R&D to solve this problem. Supercell has an ace development staff. The only reason engineering still maintains an advantage is due to money. Once the money changes the advantage will be removed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunaticfringe
I wouldn't be so sure of that, I mean, considering all those mistakes they made in the past and stuff, you knowQuote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
The competition doesn't even compare to them. It's no easy feat building something used by literally hundreds of millions of people.Quote:
Originally Posted by strandwolfza
Games with a user base of a few hundred thousand collapse much quicker and contain so many more flaws.
If your expectation is perfection, well, that just doesn't exist. Of course there will be exploits and problems. You have millions of people looking to break and exploit this game. It would be impossible to stop all of them.
I would think that there will be a breaking point where it will make more money to nerf the engis and have them spend gems fully developing their bases.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
I agree, and I think we have just about reached that point.Quote:
Originally Posted by SomePeopleCallMeMaurice
Note that I didn't say that, but I'm curious what else there is....Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
If they did some engineers would simply adapt to the new system. Most engineers would wait to see what the advantages are created by the few adapting. Some would quit and there will follow some other system.
Those complaining about engineering currently will rejoice for a few days then start complaining about some other reason why the game is unfair and why they can't win. The cycle will continue on and on. However if people actually took personal responsibility for the choices they make and realize the main reason they lost was themselves not the mm this silliness would all end.
Lets say that in the most extreme situation you have build a TH11 with all troops maxed and all hero's maxed with only a single lvl 1 canon. Such a base cost a lot of time, devotion and often real money to develop. Would it be fair to make such a base compleet useless for war? It would take years to make such a base balanced, so if SC decides that balanced bases have some kind of advantage then I can imagine that owners of engineerd basis will be upset. It would be same anger that top Formula 1 teams would have if they decide that all cars should be identical. Then these top teams would have wasted a lot of time energy and money in building a car that is faster then the competition.
I agree 100%, can't wait to hear the excuses.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
But this already has happened, several times. You think the current flavor of engineering has always been what was best in wars? You think the people that spent 3-4 years working on a base that is basically a liability or less than optimal in war aren't upset?Quote:
Originally Posted by RazorBlade72nd
But no one is saying make the engineered bases uselss. Just fair. Just fair.
Also I really really do hope this thread doesn't digress into another pro/anti engineering argument thread. There are plenty of those around.
So, basically, you are saying that only biased people complain about the MM.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
Oh really?
Is that your theory?
do you have any idea how fast it is to upgrade defenses? Why do you think there are so many maxers on the wall hero grind. Once a few levels are upgraded defense strength goes way up. A month, 2 months max with all 5 builders upgrading defenses in a stretegic pattern and the engineered th11 will be able to start competing.Quote:
Originally Posted by RazorBlade72nd
come on man....Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
because of engineering, we lose wars before they even start and you're saying this isn't the MM/supercell/engineers's fault? no one likes losing, but for me and my clan a good competion is what really matters, as long as it's fair. of course we'll do our best to win, but, in a fair match, we wouldn't blame anyone else if we lost
the engineers on the other hand, will do anything to win, except, apparently, practice to have the skill to not need to rely on tactics such as engineering to have an advantage over the adversary
you say we complain now, but if supercell actually removes engineering from the game, we'll see who'll complain about not being able to win in a fair playfield
Yes and they made poor choices, those entitled spoiled brats actually thought leveling up buildings in a base builder game was a something they should be allowed to do. Those pathetic mindless losers failed to care about the consequences of their actions and behaved recklessly. Luckly they have MrJackRabbit to set them straight in the world lol..Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunaticfringe
generally speaking, yes. I do try to refrain from using the word only since I have enough common sense to not believe all. However if you find an exception is only supports the general theory since exceptions do occur.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunaticfringe
Oh, I see.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
And how do you determine if you are exchanging with someone who might be an exception, yet complains about the MM, vs. someone who doesn't take responsibility for being a poor attacker?
And what about the players that reek at attacking, yet engineer?
What about these golly good players?
Why shouldn't they take, "personal responsibility for the choices they make" and actually learn how to attack?
Here's a group of people that might need to take more responsibility for the choices they make..Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
I, for one, wouldn't want people that fickle in my clan anyways, but, perhaps, that's just me
ever see how much easier it is to recruit when on a winning streak vs losing streak? Or how many more leave after a loss vs win? However in my experience over the past 3 years very I've seen very few wars that were won before the war starts. I've see a large number of wars where one side claim as over before it starts and they end up winning or at least coming very, very close.Quote:
Originally Posted by strandwolfza
How do I take personal responsibility for dropping my defences before clanwars even existed. I know alot of other players in the same boat. Apologies for not being a clairvoyant, I accept responsibility. Will be taking classes with miss cleo asap. Just to be clear im one of a few who have been in winning clans yet can still see faults in MM, I even know a few engineers who see it. Starting to look like you just wanna call people whinners because mabey you dont like what the advocate for, on a public forum to boot.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
just trying to eliminate common objections. As far as engineers that are poor attackers yes they do need to. I would note that in my experience a lot of people claim the other side is engineered when they are really just rushed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunaticfringe
it's simple at every th with the exception of th11 it's about being smart with what you have. I would 1. Upgrade offense/elixer stuff 1st dumping all gold into walls. 2. Upgrade hidden stuff 3. Focus on point defenses vs splash. 4. On offense only upgrade 1 war army. Engineered isn't just defenseless. If you are mostly maxed every clan needs an anchor up top so be the anchor and work as a team.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark11308
I don't think the mm is perfect but I don't think it's that bad either. I see a lot of people think the whole thing needs to be redone from scratch. Having played for so long I have always just adapted to the game vs demand the game cater to me.
So your advice is engineer. Im well aware of how to trim weight. Ill stick with advocating for those who may want to use all the toys in the game, learn how to attack them and try to do it better than the enemy. Not sure why you find people who like this idea so offensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
well I wouldn't want to stay in a clan who sucks at attacking neither, but to leave a clan just because they lost some wars, even though they fought bravely but, unfortunately, the opponent managed to be better? I'd never do that. but if a clan is good at attacking/defending, they're bound to win more than they lose, so this isn't actually a problem, I thinkQuote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
I agree that it's a lot more easy to recruit when we're winning wars though
even if they end up winning, they kinda relied on the incompetence of the opponent, who, even though they had a big advantage, manage to lose. so they didn't win, the opponent lost. but my point here is that this is not fun. fun is starting a fair war, where we can win or lose, depending on our abilities. this is how wars was originally intended to be playedQuote:
However in my experience over the past 3 years very I've seen very few wars that were won before the war starts. I've see a large number of wars where one side claim as over before it starts and they end up winning or at least coming very, very close.
#unfairnerfed
{Insert *.jpg of Supercell staff sacrificing a goat here}
I don't find maxing offensive. Just not my style of play. I would say since so many who play that way complain of losing wars it might not be the best strategy out there. I fact for cw I'd say it's worse that a rusher since they are often lumped in with engineers. I see clan war like the crossfire games. It's a battle of modalities and may the best one win. My current thought is stretegic rusher>engineer>rusher>maxer when it comes to clan wars at this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark11308
As far as what I find offensive it has more to do with people making the choice to play a certain way knowing they are putting themselves at a disagvantage then complaining about it. Like saying I'm going to fight this guy with 1 hand tied behind my back then complain about losing.
as my signature says I play to win not to see how tough I am. When you say win or lose depending on our abilities I would claim knowledge of what works and doesn't work in war is included not just attack skill and base design?Quote:
Originally Posted by strandwolfza
I agree that some might misinterpret rushed vs. engineered. I also agree that people need to be responsible for their own actions. It's a joke that it's always someone else's fault seemingly far more often than not in today's world (enter rant that goes on for 10 minutes here...)Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
But the complaint side most certainly does have some merit & one great place to start is those players that engineer because they stink at attacking.
Off the top of my head, out of the last ~65 wars, my clan faced about 5 clans that we would say were legitimate/great attackers. Want to know how many were engineered?
Exactly zero...
I find that interesting, even if it is just a meaningless data point.
On the other hand, however, my clan's experience has been that engineers are about as bad as it possibly gets when it comes to attacking, the exact people that you claim (which I 100% agree) need to take responsibility for their own actions.
So, it seems strange to me that you'd seemingly chastise posts where people complain about engineering, yet, in fact, they may be complaining about those players that engineer because they stink at attacking, that they themselves need to take responsibility for their actions
Further, I'd also exercise caution in believing that people who complain about engineering must also stink at attacking. At times, I can guarantee you that some players might actually be pretty damn good at the game, yet remain overwhelmingly unbiased in their assessment of engineering & what is for the long-term benefit of the game
I see your point, but you can't deny that analysing the matchmacker to see what to build/upgrade (or not) to have an advantage over the opponent was not how supercell intended wars to be played. playing like I said, though, was the correct way envisioned by supercellQuote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
I mean, seeing like this you at least can't be angry if supercell decides to enforce the way they intended wars to be played on us, can you?
its funny.. In raiding MM especially in the lower leagues I've seen lopsided bases all over the place, but in war we rarely pull them. Once in a blue moon, and I'd say 90-99% of the time when we do pull hardcore engineers we crush them. Usally is dead even. Whatever I have extra in offence, my mirror has in defence, and vice-versa. So I've no idea what's so magical about our line up. But going by what I see in the reg MM. I'd guess the forums will go about the same stage of crazy as when the octopus debuted. But it won't last as long and it will start much slower.
the idea is that everyone needs to take resonsibility. While may look like I'm on the side of the engineer I'm more of a balanced player seeking the right level of defense to match my war attack army and then work as a team. Engineered maybe but not defenseless engineered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunaticfringe
I think the engineer who gets out engineered needs to stop complaining about the loss and own up to it just as must as a maxer needs to stop for complaining for losing. As I said in a previous post it's a battle of modalities just like crossfit is a battle of exercise systems to determine the winner.
SC can't always make fair matches. Even if they nerf engineers, you will still get uneven matches, people will still choose upgrade paths that maximise the likelihood of getting easier war match ups, and people will still be complaining.
Why does engineering work? In my opinion its mainly because it gives you room for error. e.g. Let's say one clan has 5 max th11 and 5 th7, and the other has 5 max th11 and 5 engineered th11 with weak defences. The first clan gets 10 th11 attacks while the second gets 20. If they were both matched 'unfairly' against a team with 7 max th11 and 3 th3, the first clan can only fail 3 raids, while the second team can fail far more. It is not the skill or base strength of engineers that gives the advantage - its the clan balance.
maybe your clan can't maintain a high win streak? because based on my clan's experience, you tend to attract more and more engineers as your win streak increasesQuote:
Originally Posted by MrMechEngin
Bingo. That is the issue. In a 10v10 for instance, if ClanMaxer has 1 TH11 offense and ClanLoppy has 3 TH11 offenses then the rest of the bases don't even matter. ClanLoppy can demolish 60% of the map leaving 14 attacks to clear out the bottom 4 bases.Quote:
Originally Posted by SirMick
ClanMaxer will struggle to 2 star most of the top bases while ClanLoppy will have dip attacks on almost the entire map. And like you said, not just one dip attack, but multiple.
Yes, ClanMaxer can match ClanLoppy if they play their absolute best, but ClanLoppy has so much more room for error.
That may be however do you know who Tim Ferris is the author of the 4 hour work week. He won a national title in a type of kick boxing. He did it by dehydrating before the weighin, rehydration after and the using his extra weight to throw the opponent off the mat for the win. All within the rules. He was looked down on for wining that way. Today everyone fights that way in that style wit much bether co petition than when Tim won. The sport evolved just like cw has evoloved. The way the game was ment to be played has evoloved into something more and the competition will get better.Quote:
Originally Posted by strandwolfza
My thoughts are that engineers will evoloved to a more specialized play like football. With lineman aka anchors, running back aka ground attackers, and receivers aka air attackers. The specialized clan will have an advantage over the jack of all trades clan
If they nerfed engineering there will be an outpouring of tears on one side and rapturous applause on the other.
nope, the engineers will adapt like they usually do so few tears. The other side will applause till they realize they still can't win and find something new to complain about.Quote:
Originally Posted by StrategicFail
I can't see myself ever engineering, but you do have a very good point in my opinionQuote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
supercell can't please both crowds however, so they'll have to choose what path they'll take. or maybe they'll amaze us with a solution that works for everybody? I doubt it, but it can happen. we'll see in the next days
What if clans enter a matchmaking where you can next your oponent, and both clans have to agree in order to start a war.
No war would ever be agreed on.Quote:
Originally Posted by scysk
Sure, but that isn't the same as:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
to say nothing about the fact that the above reply doesn't address the poor players who engineer that also need to take personal responsibilityQuote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
While you've sketched some broad strokes, I don't think these are the clans that most have issues with.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
Not really.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
All that really means to me is, "You need to upgrade/build a war roster this way if you want to win at war," not upgrade/build a roster and have a reasonable match-upQuote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
Then you will end up searching for days.. as every clan prefers to NOT TO LOSE....Quote:
Originally Posted by scysk
Exactly. And its not just room for error either. Its room for people to not turn up if they are too busy irl, room for disconnects, room for an aq to have fun shooting some random wall etc. So many things can and do go wrong even with good clans.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
If you are going to get long win streaks you are going to have to win matches where you are up against tough clans. And in those tough matches have a few engineered th11 gives you those extra attacks you need.
Yes it's generalized since the engineer, maxer, rusher, stretegic rusher are all general catagories.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunaticfringe
"Not really" goes into no explication so no counter point needed.
Final you only need to upgrade/adjust this way if you feel your style of play isn't getting the results you want. Again personal responsibility.
If SC can avoid matching engineered clans vs non-engineered clans, I think that there will be less outcry from either side with regards to unfair matches.
Now that does not mean that people will stop complaining about other things.
I can't speak for other engineers but I look forward to the match adjustments. Not because I think maxing is the only pure way to play the game. Rather, what I find fun is adjusting (engineering) my roster and bases as the MM evolves. The current MM has been with us (more or less) for over a year already, and I want to face a new challenge.
It'll definitely be more. These days, people always find something to complain about.
But it isn't about personal responsbility. You are saying people should throw away a base they have been working on for years because the game makers decided to make changes that bore extreme loopholes.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
In your Tim Ferris example, or just about any other professional sports analogy you can draw, the difference is there is almost ZERO barrier to entry to adapt.
In this case you have to go against the fundamentals of the game, go against what makes it fun and throw away your built up base and start over with a selectively built base.
That goes against everything that makes the game fun for the majority of the people. It also detachs them from their base, a concept that keeps people playing and keeps the game alive.
If, however, Supercell allowed deletion of buildings, then the tables turn, the barrier to entry is ZERO and everyone can adapt without disrupting the very core of the game and why people play it.
If people could delete buildings this entire match making debate would die quickly.
Another thing, this arrogance that so many engineers have is laughable.
You didn't invent a play style, you aren't some mad genius, you aren't being clever. You are literally following someone else's blue print, piggybacking off their hard work and there is almost no thought or effort that went into it. Stop acting like you came up with some genius strategic move, you are simply copying what someone much smarter than yourself discovered.
Engineers won't "adapt" they will simply wait for the next easy mode game play to be spoon fed to them. No adapting there, just sheepishly following suit.
I've built a TH11 engineered base, it's not hard, it took no skill or brain power. Stop acting like this is some evolved, more intelligent style of game play.
You're just willing to toss your base aside for the flavor of the month while others are more attached to theirs, as they should be, it's what keeps people playing.
If buildings could be deleted the playing field would be even and the arrogance could cease. Which won't happen, but would be nice to see.
People shouldn't have to throw their base away to continue enjoyjng the game when they haven't even maxed all their buildings.
And maxing one's base is pure genius or something? I have a maxed base and engineered bases that are not defenseless. It takes more thought balancing a engineered base than the max base.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
The vast majority of the player base, regardless of playstyle, is copying what someone much smarter than themselves discovered.
And don't tell me non engineers don't watch youtube to learn attack strategies.....strategies developed by other people.
Less. There was a 1800+ page thread on here filled with complaints. There were lawyers called. There were lawsuits threatened. There was threats of attacks on SC offices. There was a white house petition begging Obama to look into it. Some guy on here called the police.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
There is absolutely no way they will top the butt hurt caused by the octopus.
Honestly there will be a week of rejoicing by the anti engineer crowd followed by things returning to normal for a few months. Soon after the complainers with find some new reason why's they lose wars. First it was all the modders fault. Now it's those evil engineering people.
If you are talking engineered as defenseless then you are right there is little you can do, however I've been saying it's about balanced bases. So it isn't about going back it is about going froward. Upgrade with a plan. A very basic and no not the only one is to rush up the th to the next level, focus on getting your once offense attack for war, have a plan with defenses like upgrading hidden 1st then point, the splash then new and don't put down the heavy stuff till the new defenses are up to the previous th level. This is a type of strategic rushing and is far superior a strategy in cw than engineered. No it isn't new, but neither is maxing and arrogance falls on both sides of the issue. An online mentor from these forums once said if you can 3* your base wo heroes you are and asset to your clan. Simply upgrade your th and offense till you can 3* your own base.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
Even if you have put all defenses down and there is not going back you can always be a solid anchor where your offense weight then hurts you. It's about team. You cover your teammates weakness and they cover yours vs trying to be the lone hero.
I am not comparing maxing to any other play style. I am talking about the general arrogance that people that exploit the the matchmaking loop holes are showing. This "we find a way to win, you are an idiot, live with your choices, stop whining" attitude. It's the smugness that erks me, like they unlocked some game secret. Truth is, they are just more willing to start over with a new base, that's about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chang405
and the arrogance of the maxer who claims they would almost always win if they could just get fair matches?Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
The reality is, there is no such thing as a successfully engineered base that isnt someone's mini account. 1 base is max, 1 or more are engineered. Its for clan war advantage.
There is no maxer vs engineer debate. Because secretly, every engineer has a max base. Its the onky reason to engineer.
So if they addressed engineering and fixed it, they wouldnt be losing any players. If people gave up on their engineered bases, im sure they would stil l play their maxes.
Lol! Engineering is dead and still you talk about it.
Show me one engineering clan that don't face extra eagles in wars.
One more eagle for enemy means you will lose war if you can't 3* it.
1000 max th11 offense with 45,45,20 heroes and all max troops is useless if by using those 2000 attacks they could not 3* that single eagle base.
Do you understand?
So show me the advantage of engineering if they face extra eagles
This I agree with. Pretty much all of it. But the extreme mismatches aren't happening over one townhall of upgrades. To gain significant advantage you basically have to start over. And the more people in the clan that start over, the better.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
It's generally those people that are looking down at everyone else like they did something great, but all they did was start over and apply what everyone knows. If they wiped all the bases today and left match making alone, I am willing to bet a lot that the majority of people would "strategically rush", just look at what is happening with the builde base.
But asking people to throw away years of maxing a base because of loopholes that previously did not exist is simply unfair.
I rarely (ever??) see that. I see tons of them complaining it was lost before it began, but that is hardly the same as saying they would win. Most just want a fair war, or the perception of a fair war.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
Lol what? Any other made up facts you want to toss in there?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandbuzz
"Dogs cant eat flying food!! still you talk about flying food, 1000 flying foodbowls and still dogs can't eat, understand?????? lololololol"
You're right may do start over and play smarter the 2nd time. But to get the 2 th difference like you said it doesn't have to be everyone in the clan. Anchors are needed also. So there is a place for everyone moving forward. As far as the loophole that didn't exist Morgauth wrote about it in Feb 2015 it just wasn't popular cause most thought rushed was so bad. Btw that post came from one from Sep 2014 and prior to that Dec 13 before CW existed. So the strategy has pretty much always been around and the advantage has always existed. I saw a complaint in the 1st few pages of the CW section on unfair.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
Yes, but it wasn't until whatever happened in March 2016 that the loophole became significant enough that it became a problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
Still have no idea what happened in March 2016 or why and why they couldn't just revert back to whatever matchmaking algorithm they were using before March 2016.
Any ideas?
They might of changed is a bit but they did basically go back to what they did prior March 2016 however the cat was out of the bag and many had already seen how strong a strategy it was. Prior to march 2016 complaints were largely about bunnies and how often what is now called permamaxers were getting matched with the th above them. Yes there were also complaints about engineered too but most just lumped them into the premie rushed category of not knowing what they were doing. March showed them how wrong they were.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
The fix to extreme engineers (the real problem... not 9.5s or 10.5s etc) is this simple change to war weighting...
Every Townhalls war weight =TH-1 maxed war weight + any new hero levels, defense levels, troops, walls etc beyond what previous max TH could make...
This is very easy fix that addresses the advantage defenseless and 7.11 8.11 9.11 give yet still allows for intelligent upgrading within townhall levels and minor tweaking of war weighting that good upgrading gives.
Yes that would solve extreme engineering however that strategy has been posted numerous times and the fault is that it entourages maxing and more importantly permamaxing. It merely shifts the advantage. BTW the largest population in the game is rushed and your simple change would severely penalize them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jcman
No... it doesn't because a maxed th11 carries 100% weight, the 10.5 carries he weight of a th10 maxed plus whatever a 10 couldn't make so say 90% weight allowing other bases more weight. It is proper weighing of bases. The 10.5 has the attacking power more then a 10 so it is fair as well.. is it perfect? No... is it far superior and more fair then we have now? Very much so...Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
To answer the OP, I'd say there would be quite a bit of complaining. But why is having a fair mm such a hard pill to swallow? What is so wrong with taking away the advantages that one particular playstyle seems to enjoy? Having to build your base a certain way, in order to stay competitive, is contradictory to how this game is meant to be played in the first place. That's all most of us want. A fair mm that gives no one an advantage. What's wrong with that?
forgot to address how it hurts the largest pop the casual rusher. And what you describe still encourages maxing over any other strategy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jcman
This base is not useless for war ? It has 2 max attacks . It just will have to attack a high base instead of beating up low ones . The low spots can have a fighting chance against each other .Quote:
Originally Posted by RazorBlade72nd
In theory nothing in practicality to make it fair for everyone is super difficult since there are so many variables and play styles can be a the extreme of 2 different ends.Quote:
Originally Posted by DBlaze
The biggest issue is how do you take away the advantage of the engineer who is rushed and not disadvantage the casual rusher, the largest population in the game who is also rushed. Most example take away the advantage of the rushed engineer but also put the casual rusher at a disadvantage. You don't want to hurt the largest population in the game.
SC has made this game about freedom. There is no "way the game was ment to be played." Players may of all played a certain way in the beginning however as the game has evolved so has the play style.
Nothing is wrong with it and it's how it should be and I hope some day is that way.Quote:
Originally Posted by DBlaze
Funny thing though, when you bring up taking away this advantage and removing the push to play the "engineered" way (adapt or die they say), then they start throwing a temper tantrum and screaming "you can't tell me how to build my base dad!!!"
It is really bizarre.
They should have copied builder base . You can't upgrade your BH unless you have built a certain required defense.
Why do people with defenseless bases feel they are entitled to an unfair advantage? What is SC thinking by wanting players to build defensive structures in a tower defense game, that's just crazy talk. Did SC intend for TH11's to crush TH9's and TH8's in war? I wish SC would implement a bonus star system without even announcing it, that would be hilarious.
So if there is a clan of say th7/8/9 who have near max defenses but only barch troops. Would they have any ground to demand SC make the mm so they have a chance to win the war? I say no. It is an ineffective strategy. What would the maxer say? Build your barracks? Isnt that another way of saying "addapt or die"Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
I have never seen a TH7 or higher with just barch in war but keep trying to justify an unfair and unearned advantage.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
Why don't SC create a Tournament style requirements to enter War?
Feather Weight:
- 10 vs. 10
- All buildings built for current TH
Middle Weight:
- 30 vs. 30
- All buildings built for current TH
- Buildings at minimum 3 levels below current TH max
Heavy Weight:
- 50 vs. 50
- All buildings built for current TH
- Buildings at minimum 2 levels below current TH max
This way, at least SC have a baseline for the matchmaking algorithm to run on..
Unlike current "limitless" combination possibilities..
We already have this it's called friendly wars, or arranged wars. My clan does these often th9-11 completly even matches a lot of fun and close xciting wars were every attack matters.Quote:
Originally Posted by scysk
The difference is that neither group is exploiting a match making loop hole. The difference is one of those groups can modify their existing base to be competitive by progressing and no one has to start over.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
One base is behind in progression and if that base was being matched with bases way ahead then yes, it would be an issue. Anyone who doesn't unlock the more poweful troops probably has a lot more to worry about than just war match making. They are missing out in a great deal of fun content.
And yes, if the "maxers" were saying "adapt or die" and also saying "you cant tell me how to play"
then I would be advocating for the rushers and fair matchups.
But that isn't the world we are in and what-ifs only go so far.
I have a clan with 2 th9's like that. As far as unfair? I know how to use it to make even those accounts unfair. As far as unearned? I put just a tad less work than a max th9.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7hux
as i keep saying you dont have to start iver you just need to create more balance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
Right now I believe balanced bases/stretegic rushed are where engineered wer prior to march 2016. Very few use the strategy it can be adapted and effective at any th except th11 but there a max th11 is an anchor. For some reason you keep going with this starting over stuff. Get that out of your head. I'm not saying start over.
I think we just need to wait and see what change they bring in and how does it affects the war MM.
Almost certainly whatever you are discussing will not be implemented because those seem the best way to you but implementing them will have their own implications.
I personally feel quite positive about the upcoming change considering there has been lot of complaints about engineering and it is something SC has said they didn't intend the gameplay to be.
I do believe it will be less but I'm torn. However, I'm hoping that SC takes an iron pipe to the kneecaps of engineering as it has made me stop hitting the war button. Its not that I can't beat them, it's made war O so boring.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
Looking on the other side of the war map to see multiple high level attacks and maybe 2 bases that are worth attacking while the rest are trash cans yet they possess the attacking skills of an infant but still get close to winning because of their forced handicap is just a rip roaring good time!!!
Well there is actually a nice solution to engineering problem.
The biggest issue about it is maxers vs lopsided.
So... Why doesn't supercell let us chose if we want to search wars based on th level (maxers favorite option) or the current weight system (so lopsided bases and engineering can keep enjoying their war style)?
Wen you search a war, there should be an option to chose between the two war styles.
Yes that is i intend to do act as if the world will keep on spinning and adjust when it changes. As far as sc saying ment to be played, that was about th sniping maxers adopted it to fit their desires.Quote:
Originally Posted by bhavyamamgain
The advantage you are talking about nobody cares about. It's not significant enough to throwQuote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
wars to the point that people will complain.
You are talking about essentially going the .5 route or something similar. No one has ever cared about (generally speaking) that type of progression in war and it is easily matched with similar progression.
It is the extreme engineering that is causing all the commotion. The type of engineering my clan is running is the type people hate. We gain a significant advantage up top and sacrafice a base or two that would be getting 3 starred in every war every time.
It's unfair to our opponents and I dislike playing this way. But if we didn't do it our clan would have most likely disbanded from the losses to teams that were and still are doing it. Maybe we don't need to run those engineered accounts in war anymore but the cat is out of the bag and no one wants to go back to being the underdog in every single fight. So until the match making is fixed, we are reluctantly part of the problem.
We ran 0.5 and other strategic upgrade paths in the past. Those barely had an impact on war, other than to help keep things even (not drawing a base you have no chance against).
It is extreme engineering that is poisoning the war scene and it is extreme engineering that requires you to start over.
No one gives a damn about not placing your current defenses or delaying those, that is all in line with fair matchups. I wouldn't even classify that as engineering. The game has little trouble matching those accounts.
It is the ones that gain additional top end attacks over their opponent that everyone takes issue with.
Cheers if they can put a stop to extreme engineering. The point that making changes to war will hurt rushers... lets be honest they could never 3 star anyways. And the fact that supercell doesn't want to make us play a certain way has already been done. Who remembers when they took snipping away and make them players learn to attack. Adapt to change or quit. Remember to put collectors and storages outside.
There were quite a few but most have been banned from the forums at this point. There was a guy named daddylindo who said that if engineering didn't exist, his maxer clan would literally win 100 in a row because they had uber skills.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
Actually, that's good advice for some th levels and bad advice for others - I'd like to see it in context to see exactly what the person meant. It's great advice for th2-8, the "w/o heros" part is not a good suggestion for th9 although the 3 star goal is right there, and it's just bad advice for th10 and 11 with all heros up and active in the current state of play. The advice doesn't take account of the relative difficulty of 3 starring at the various town hall levels. It's just unrealistic to think any th10-11 ought be able to 3 star another to be an asset, unless we're talking of the special case where everyone is running around with no infernos or eagle... which i doubt is what the advice-giver had in mind for a great state of gameplay across the board. If the advice were good, pretty much nobody should ever build infernos and eagles... and there would then be no such thing as anchors.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
Better advice would be that at th2-8 you are an asset if you can 3 star no heros, at th9 you're an asset if you can 3 star with heros (and if you can't then grow those heros rather than just avoiding building x-bows), at th10 you're an asset if you can 3 star all 9s with ease, get a solid 2 star on any other th10, and 2 star a small-mid eagle 11 with an offset or outside th (and if you can't, grow the heros and the war troops, rather than avoiding infernos) and you're an asset as an 11 if you can 2 star any 11 and 3 star dip on most 10s (and if you can't... you guessed it...). A real asset doesn't need a leg-up from the matchmaker.
To the OP, I very much doubt there would be nearly as much complaining. The octopus forcibly and suddenly permanently removed cheaters from their beloved games, never to play their bases of years standing again. Changing the war matchmaker just needs engineers to think about what change of direction is best for adapting their base to the new conditions, and to make some relatively quick changes to do that. Even if it was a huge change, the only ones hit very hard would be the extreme 1 cannon defenceless kind (which are almost always 2nd or 3rd etc accounts).
People complaining about engineered B will still be upset by match making . Every clan wants to win and that can't happen ...
In that case you shouldn't have started it, no offence but any thread that includes either word 'nerf' or 'engineering' is only going to start a flame war, putting both words together in the title was just asking for trouble. I think you knew that and it's why you started the thread...Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
As far as your question goes, I don't think there was much outcry when the 'octopus' was introduced, just a few bitter cheats that had already been warned and decided to carry on cheating, and quite a few trolls pretending that they were angry about it just to get a reaction out of others, far more people pleading how sorry they were and promising not to cheat anymore if they could have their account back. So I do predict a worse outcry, but only because there wasn't that much of an outcry about the octopus.
There will be some but there always is with any change in the game, there will be more trolls trying to get a reaction out of people than actual complainers.
If you were to ask about an update that did cause a storm on the forum (Dec '15) then the answer would be less by a huge amount.
As to people arguing that engineers spend so much money on the game, why is it that most posts I've read the engineers claim they don't spend money on it as it is a second or third account?
Others have already mentioned that a large amount of engineered accounts were only created because of the 'if you can't beat them, join them' mindset, I would expect nearly all of those would be happy about any change that 'nerfed engineering'.
One final point, to all the ones who claim engineers can't win with an even match, and the ones who claim maxers are just bad at the game and angry because they are not winners. Let's just wait and see what Darian has to say first, and if they make it a level playing field the answers will come in wars, not by arguing on the forum.
to be more specific level 10 point, level 6 splash, max hidden, ad, air sweeper, walls, and level 3 xbows work very well as long as you arent an anchor. No please stop trying to nit pick every little thing and actually try what im saying before you discount it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
it actually works good for th10 as well and in theory th11 as long as you are not one of the top 2 anchors. Then one could progress to be an anchor. And as my sig suggests a real asset uses all available resources that could affect the outcome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomville
Nope, I was genuinely curious what people thought. You obviously were not around when the permanent bans went down if you think there wasn't much outcry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevejnr
I don't think the mods have ever been busier than during that time. I also believe the largest (had to be broke into multiple) thread ever made on the forums was about the bans. Pretty sure they had to divide it up because it was causing loading issues. Correct me if I am wrong, but I am willing to bet the bans caused far more activity and outcry than the Dec 15 update.
But in any case the forums were a mess when the bans happened.
You don't have to worry about me, I am honestly not even sure what point you are arguing anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit
I think you're using the word "outcry" differently to stevejnr. It usually means a disapproving or angry response, rather than just a lot of noise. There was considerable wailing, pleading, begging etc, but an overwhelming approval for the octopus action in cleaning up the game. So yes, there was lots of noise, but little outcry, as everyone except those caught thought it was right, and those caught weren't generally saying "it was wrong to act" but rather "you should have given me another chance or more warnings first... plus it was my little brother's dog that did it".Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
This one was about how you dont have to start over to and abandon years of work to get the same advantage an engineer has. And since you honestly couldnt stay focused on that. I'm done.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
I was definitely around check my join date....Quote:
Originally Posted by ClasherClash443
Dec 2015 was by far worse, copied from the forum below, I couldn't even access the forum it basically crashed...
Most users ever online was 182,725, December 4th, 2015 at 11:25 PM.