The true debate.. Is it fair to Engineers to change the MM?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denton

27 pages...really?

Of course it is fair and the sooner and better - hope they remove them from the game so I can revert to being a maxer and get all fair matchups like I didn't before I started engineering...

---

Only 6 pages for me. Change those settings :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Only 6 pages for me. Change those settings :)

---

Ha ha ha no way...

Facts:
- engineering was born from an exploit of the matchmaking
- supercell said that they work on solving this issue
- engineers gain an advantage on war (and also war loot and clan xp) over maxers by not building defenses
- maxers can't remove building to adopt the most efficient strategy if they want to

My opinions
- engineering never should have been born
- engineering is unfair
- it's not fun to loose too easily
- it's not fun to win too easily
- SC should solve this issue without worring of engineers reaction



other opinion:
- it's not like steroids

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

I realized it wasn't you and edited my post before you posted this, but you must have already been in the process of typing it. Sorry.

I'm with you on the no rules supporting it. I don't think the TOS help engineers argue that engineering is honorable, just that they support the fact that it is not cheating. I don't disagree that the developers say it is wrong or at least not intended. Whether they think that or not, I don't know. I will tell you what I think and that is that engineering is bad for the game.

Your experience is different than mine when facing engineers. My experience is they are generally better than average, but I always feel the need to point out I think the average player is pretty terrible at attacking. The average player doesn't read the forums, doesn't watch videos, doesn't put any time into trying to get better, etc. I chat with people in the forums all the time that have no idea what engineering or war matching or war weight even means.

I totally agree wars were intended to be decided as much as possible by the skill of the players in base designing and attacking and I personally agree that is what we should strive for. Some like the "strategy" of engineering, but I do not, or at a minimum I would like to see the advantage it gains to be lessened.

I don't consider roster engineering the same as engineering, no. We are talking about terms of art here so we all may have different definitions. I chatted with a guy on global the other day with 50 perfect wars in a row. 30v30, the bottom 15 were all extremely low weight bases. He was roster engineering to totally throw off the match completely. One of the top war streak clans does some very effective roster engineering.

I guess I differentiate this from just engineering your own account (this is just a matter of opinion that I hold). For example, I have a second account that is a th9. Should I build things that I think cause a war disadvantage because they are weighted too high for the value they bring on defense? I have a th10 too, but I didn't build infernos yet. Do you advise your clan mates to drop infernoes as soon as they go to th10? After all, they help on the multiplayer side of the game. The main reason not to build them is a perception that they are a disadvantage in war for early th10s. That is engineering and I don't find it disrespectful. I blame the matchmaker not the player when it comes to electing what to build or not build. Again, I differentiate that from roster engineering (and defenseless is pretty close).

---

fair enough.

about the bold part though, yes, yes we do. I'm a co-leader in my clan but we, the leadership, have this rule that everyone must build and max everything to go to wars. we don't care, we just have this rule. this is to ensure that we are in no way like those engineers that we hate so much

but it doesn't matter, any disadvantage that this rule can bring to us is neutralized by our attacking and defending skills. we simply don't lose. sometimes not because we're better than the opponent, but because of their own mistakes. but yeah, we take wars seriously

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strandwolfza

fair enough.

about the bold part though, yes, yes we do. I'm a co-leader in my clan but we, the leadership, have this rule that everyone must build and max everything to go to wars. we don't care, we just have this rule. this is to ensure that we are in no way like those engineers that we hate so much

but it doesn't matter, any disadvantage that this rule can bring to us is neutralized by our attacking and defending skills. we simply don't lose. sometimes not because we're better than the opponent, but because of their own mistakes. but yeah, we take wars seriously

---

Props to you and your clan then if you do this as long as they all know. If they know building infernoes instantly at th10 is a disadvantage but do it anyway to take a stand against engineering, then I respect that (which is not to say I disrespect those who don't do the same).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Props to you and your clan then if you do this as long as they all know. If they know building infernoes instantly at th10 is a disadvantage but do it anyway to take a stand against engineering, then I respect that (which is not to say I disrespect those who don't do the same).

---

thanks, but we would end up losing if we had continued going to war. the engineering situation was getting worse and each time we won we were getting tougher opponents (engineers). so we decided to quit wars, unfortunately

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strandwolfza

engineers use the "engineering isn't against the ToS" argument as if "if it isn't against the ToS, then it's right". but the ToS also don't say that engineering is right. it doesn't say anything about engineering at all

---

When engineers say "engineering isn't against the ToS," it's in response to people claiming that engineering should be treated the same as things that are against the ToS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strandwolfza

isn't it "no-defense" the extreme example of engineering?

---

Yes, it is, but you said above that what you are objecting to is not all engineering, but "no-defense" engineering. I'm saying, if all you object to is "no-defense" then don't condemn all of engineering. Precision aids communication.

I too am on the side that says that defenseless TH11 are OP and need to be nerfed. In my experience these bases are a tiny minority among engineered bases. My clan doesn't have any, and we don't often face clans that have them either (and, as an engineered clan, we face engineered clans the majority of the time. Our last war had something like 5 TH11s on each side, and 1 eagle on each side.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strandwolfza

what advantage? are you saying that just because they're young then they're unskilled players? let me tell you that I've seen a lot of adults who totally sucked at attacking

---

We are able to communicate better; we are not ruled by our hormones; we don't have our devices taken away by our parents as punishment. We have later bedtimes. There are likely others as well.

Obviously there are outliers on both sides. But when picking teams, I'll pick the adults first. Adults have significant advantages over kids. According to whoever made the original statement (you?), that means adults-only clans are cheating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xXXCHRISXXx

Idk Doc, I've met some pretty legit teenaged gamers. I have two myself. A real doc would say, "You can't put an age on matureness." I've met some really immature adults but very mature kids. Yes, your clan would have an advantage over most kids. Wait, why are we using analogies?

---

It's not an analogy, I'm talking about the literal situation. Someone earlier claimed that whenever one clan has an advantage over another, they're cheating. And yet, the game pairs adult clans against kid clans all the time.

I'm not a doctor; my handle is a reference to Ender's Game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ClasherClash443

You know darn well when we are talking about engineering and it's removal we are talking about the type of engineering that

---

You are using what is called the "motte and bailey" argument strategy. First make very broad claims; this is the bailey. Then when challenged, pull back to the motte (the defensible position) and say "Oh we were really just talking about this sub-case".

Precision aids communication. If you mean "5% of engineering is a blight on the game," don't say "Engineering is a blight on the game" and then assume we know you really mean only 5% of it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lunaticfringe

To say nothing about the fact that steroids actually help you train harder, not easier. Many have the misconception that steroids are an, "easy" way, which, in reality, it's the opposite. It helps you, if you have the desire, to train much, much harder. The idea that you just take it and, "BAM!" is totally false, but that is another story...

---

Yes, steroids are much more like modding than they are like engineering. TBH, even if the game natively supported unlimited practice attacks I don't think I'd do it very much, because I don't want to do that much work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by strandwolfza

please, teach me what is "roster engineering". isn't it the same as engineering?

---

Roster engineering is padding the bottom of the map with low weight bases to try to get an advantage up top. Imagine a clan with 10 TH11s and 10 TH3s (in practice this is not an ideal composition). They can be full TH11s, not engineered, and they will likely match a clan of TH9s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littledoctor

Roster engineering is padding the bottom of the map with low weight bases to try to get an advantage up top. Imagine a clan with 10 TH11s and 10 TH3s (in practice this is not an ideal composition). They can be full TH11s, not engineered, and they will likely match a clan of TH9s.

---

Which is exactly what quite a few maxer clans did/do. Clans that then jump on the forums complaining about facing lopsided clans.

The beauty of it- is you are afforded some really neat built in excuses. Such as,

we only include TH3's because we need enough bases to go to war

we only include TH3's because we are trying to maximize Clan XP

we don't want to exclude any new mates from enjoying and participating in Clan Wars

and so on. XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seigedawg

Great point, I agree and respect your thoughts greatly in these forums. Maybe I should say the "root" of engineering was to gain an unfair advantage.

---

The Root of engineering was not to take advantage of the MM. The root of engineering was when players decided to insure against really bad matches by the MM.

The first few MM versions were pretty bad. I remember getting matches where one side had 7-8 th10's while the other side had 2. That meant the th9's (without access to lvl 1 freeze spell at that time) had to bang their heads against th10 bases. Back then nobody had to engineer to get a favorable match, the MM did it for you randomly. You just had to hope your clan was the advantaged one that war.

Then later on after a few blunders by SC tweaks, that insurance against bad matches was taken to the extreme to practically always give you a favorable match.

Then they added th11 and it got even more extreme.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

The Root of engineering was not to take advantage of the MM. The root of engineering was when players decided to insure against really bad matches by the MM.

---

This is correct. It was also created in defense of modding clans that were running rampant and unimpeded. There was a time when the only thing that scared a modding clan, was matching up against an engineered/lopsided clan.