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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SharkyFinn

The game has always made an attempt to match clans with similar traits in Clan Wars. Matchmaking has been adjusted many, many times. If an engineered clan (maxed offense, minimal defense) were suddenly matched with maxed clans (maxed offense, maxed defense), I think it'd be unfair. But if engineered clans were matched with similarly engineered clans (and maxed clans with maxed clans, mixed clans with mixed clans, rushed clans with rushed clans, lower level clans with lower level clans), then it'd be in line with other matchmaking adjustments. If this should be what Supercell has in store, I would think it'd be fair.

---

Define engineered at machine language level allow 24 hours for war search

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IAMGROOT1

You don't engineer for any other reason than to cheat the war matching system , it would be pointless and offer you no advantage in the main game.

---

Is it cheating to have candy walls infernos and lvl 10 heroes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HavanaWoody

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MO0r930Sn_8

---

I enjoyed the video, thank you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sheedy17

I hear a lot of complaints from players who state, that MM is not fair and they need to axe engineering etc etc etc

---

Yes and for good reason

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sheedy17

My question to everyone is the opposite, is it fair to change MM on Engineers?

---

Yes it is fair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sheedy17

I hope this can be a discussion and not a thread of flaming, because I really would like to hear feedback

---

Got it , hear my feedback.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sheedy17

The players who are doing this, are not breaking any TOS or technically doing anything wrong, why single them out?

---

Yes agreed they are not breaking rules.

We are not singling them out.

We are only against mm , not engineers, please be clear on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sheedy17

Looking for feedback on both sides of this

So my question, Is it fair to Engineers to change the MM?

---

Here you go,

Yes. It's fair to engineers, doctors, scientists and all the astronauts and players of coc because,

If the mm is based first on similar th lvl , it's fair play, if a player had built his base without proper defence or offence, the player faces the consequence.

Farm raids.. Does it penalise players for rushing? Yes. Loot available drops drastically on lower halls, more often than not you get similar th bases regardless of your rushing or ahem* engineering* . Why does Supercell do this? To be fair to everyone? To prevent higher hall players from harassing lower halls?

So why not pit similar hall players against each other in clan wars? let them face the consequence of the way they built their base. That is fair.

Any change to the game is unfair to somebody. Removing the ability to cancel a new building was unfair to players who were renting infernos. The were within the ToS, they worked hard for their advantage, and they sacrificed loot and trophies to win wars. They could claim that renting infernos was fair because anyone could do it, but other players who had already finished their infernos were shut out from using that strategy. Renting infernos was done for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage in wars. It allowed clans to post amazing win streaks.

In the March 2016 update renting infernos ended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SirRobinDD

Any change to the game is unfair to somebody. Removing the ability to cancel a new building was unfair to players who were renting infernos. The were within the ToS, they worked hard for their advantage, and they sacrificed loot and trophies to win wars. They could claim that renting infernos was fair because anyone could do it, but other players who had already finished their infernos were shut out from using that strategy. Renting infernos was done for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage in wars. It allowed clans to post amazing win streaks.

In the March 2016 update renting infernos ended.

---

Excellent point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SirRobinDD

Any change to the game is unfair to somebody. Removing the ability to cancel a new building was unfair to players who were renting infernos. The were within the ToS, they worked hard for their advantage, and they sacrificed loot and trophies to win wars. They could claim that renting infernos was fair because anyone could do it, but other players who had already finished their infernos were shut out from using that strategy. Renting infernos was done for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage in wars. It allowed clans to post amazing win streaks.

In the March 2016 update renting infernos ended.

---

What about the ones that were only renting 1 xbow and sometimes an inferno because it was their master strategy as a superior gamer? Was it fair to them to remove this feature?

What about the ones that didn't see it as an advantage but did it because they like to express themselves freely? Was it fair to them?

What about the ones who only rented infernos on special occasions like mother's day or their dog's bat mitzvah? Was it fair to them?

What you define as renting other see as a strategy and it's the game within the game within the game, you should respect that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SirRobinDD

Any change to the game is unfair to somebody. Removing the ability to cancel a new building was unfair to players who were renting infernos. The were within the ToS, they worked hard for their advantage, and they sacrificed loot and trophies to win wars. They could claim that renting infernos was fair because anyone could do it, but other players who had already finished their infernos were shut out from using that strategy. Renting infernos was done for the sole purpose of gaining an advantage in wars. It allowed clans to post amazing win streaks.

In the March 2016 update renting infernos ended.

---

The more I think about this, the more I realize how wrong you are. You say the ones that built infernos were locked out? Not true, they made a choice and they need to take responsibility for their actions.

They could have wiped their device, started over from scratch and made better decisions the next time around. No one was forcing them to keep their base and hoard buildings like that. That is called the "hoarder" play style and the hoaders forced their inferior playstyle on everyone else.

Just because they like to mindlessly hoard buildings without any thought to strategy doesn't mean those that were more intelligent about their base clutter didn't deserve an advantage.

Hoarders had their chance and they refused to adapt or quit to a clutter free gaming strategy.

I mean where do you draw the line? Should people that buy extra decorations to make visual distractions on the playing field be forced to remove their decorations?

Not everyone wants to play the game the way you play it. Selling buildings is not against the ToS and just because hoarders refuse to adapt or won't abandon their base of 3 years and start over to they expected the same advantages in war that us base cleaners get. Take responsiblity for your actions and adapt or quit.

I don't care if supercell decided it wasn't how they wanted people to play the game or not. It's not against the ToS so anything you say about it is invalid and wrong.

Can you just make your mind up and stay on one side of the fence please

This conversation is just like everything in life. One has his opinion and wont change it. Irl junior hockey leaque has rules that everybody in team has to get his time on ice, coaches keeps bad players on bench and good players takes their shirt, it looks like every number from team has been on ice. Fair? No, not to the opposite team and not for the bad players. How should rules be changed that you cant bend them? It's impossible, always there are ways to get advantage if you just want it bad enough. What if clan would have somekind of trophy system, like in royale and bb, the more you win, the better opponents you get, engineered or maxed or just good attackers. This way rushers could also war, because their opponents would be also rushed on just poor players. And ultimately heavily engineered clans would be matched against maxed clans.

The summary I've gotten from the debate is most non-engineers and some engineers think it is fair to change the matchmaker to nerf engineers. Those engineers that think it isn't fair often describe a situation that results in destroying engineered accounts completely. So, it seems to me a good compromise would be to significantly limit the advantage of engineered accounts without making them a big disadvantage. Proposals along the line of a minimum defensive weight equal to 2 or 1.5 hall below would be a good start. This would destroy the defenseless type base, but those can quickly catch up by building some defenses. This type of change would not be as good as a matchmaker that just plain works perfectly as intended, but would be better than the huge advantages from engineering we see now. It would still create some advantages, potentially satisfying the players who like that strategy. Unfortunately, it wouldn't do anything to counter the roster engineering that still has some success.