Clan War Matchmaking Improvements

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xc3ss1v30n3

I don't know what more information you want? There have been countless posts where people are detailing every aspect of the war map without going into a full on dissertation. I have gone so far as listing every base with a thought as to whether it's engineered, balanced, or just plain rushed, while also giving hero and defense levels. Inside that kind of information one can extrapolate how many "viable" attacks there are. Just, how else are we supposed to compare it if not for lineups/war weights as that's how MM is done? There's no way you, me, or Supercell can look at a map where one side has a couple TH11's and the other has 10 or more and say the match is "fair," and that's without even bothering looking at the bases.

---

I have missed the detailed posts then because so far I have only seen the ones that describe only some aspects of both lineups, like only defensive weights and hero levels, or only list top bases, or only mention TH levels :/
I'd like to see (from both clans) the entire lineup defensive values and full armies listed as well (not just heroes).
I'm not interested in whether you think they are engineered or rushed.

To illustrate what I'm trying to say about viable attacks and defense: if your clan is facing way stronger bases up top maybe the opposing team will have a hard time with the rest of your lineup, remember that each participant only has 2 attacks available so don't focus only on top bases but the whole package.

I'm not saying the current state of war matchmaking is perfect, I'm just saying it is hard to tell how good it is with the feedback I've seen so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darian[Supercell]

Indeed, screaming will just lead to a hoarse throat.

To further expand on the post you quoted, we HAVE seen improvements in the matches since the update went into place and that is what I was referring to when I stated we were happy about that. However, that does not mean we're completely satisfied with it either. We recognize that further iterations are needed and further changes will be made.

We have some additional proposed tweaks planned that we'll talk about when they're ready to be discussed in the next couple weeks.

---

Thanks to Darian for responding amid a storm of criticism. Expectations for the adjustments to MMA values were impossibly high. Although complaints are running rampant I checked some older posts and found that there were complaints on every previous adjustment as well. I find we get some blowout wars, both for and against us. We also get enough close wars that come down to the last attack to keep my interest.

Just keep doing what you are doing. Make adjustments where needed. Increase value of offense, decrease defense, increase value of town hall, double defense score for top 20% of lineup, double offense score for bottom 20% of lineup, whatever it is you are doing it is slowly trending towards a better game.

Not perfect. But I still love playing this game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cnaf

This is where my concern is. Does SC see TH10s matching with TH11s as unfair? Or not?

If they don't, that's a good portion of matches that are deemed fair by SC- but try telling that to the clan that has to hit maxed 11s and defend GW attacks with a TH10.

---

Is it uneven, yes. But is it the most even match between clans seeking a 40-40 match at 5pm on a Friday night? Is it better than a 16 hour search?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Holps

It's going to be pretty pointless posting angry comments about MM without the numbers behind it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

A good question indeed. Unless there's some sort of "Lopsided bases count", that can be quantified to some degree, I'm not really sure how the Dev team are able to quantify "improvements in the matches".:unsure:

---

Exactly, but what numbers? Engineered bases make it pointless to talk about TH or even defense weight (the only numbers we have)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cnaf

Doesn't SC have that info? ...Is it simply based on final score? That would be IMO the worst way to determine whether matches are fair or not, and if SC needed an explanation as to why, then we are all doomed. If that isn't the answer...then doesn't SC have the data? All those random spins where TH10s are seeing TH11s on the other side of the war map?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReplicantRachel

It is hard to see clear evidence of better or worse matches with new system here in forums, every time I look for new war match feedback I get disappointed by the lack of information each of the complaining posts have.

It is my guess SC does analyze the quality of the match and not the final score at the end of war.

My opinion is that it is just best to assess a war by looking at the whole package, and not simply comparing bases vs bases or "war weight" values, but overall viable attacks and defenses of both clans.

---

How to determine quality? Are they going to go 'in lane' on every account and look at what defenses on the other side that each account could conceivably defeat, then compile that for clan total vs clan total? That would not work because of the number of assumptions required. I think that one of the biggest issues with the MM over the entirety of clan wars is that if one clan has advantage at the top and the other at the bottom, the MM sees this as balanced and therefore a good match. I have had numerous feedback from customer service indicating that they see it this way. We all know that the clan with advantage up top will nearly always be in the best position to win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BlindHaze

The majority of posters here seem to have been matched up unfairly with a clan they have no chance of beating. Where are the people shouting about the easy match ups? Surely this must be 50% of players...

---

The other 50% desire a system where they get an advantage in war. They believe that through gems and superior strategy, that they have EARNED that advantage and therefore they see the MM as working correctly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JFSoul

There have been a few of those, mostly troll threads which undermine the credibility. The ones I've seen indicate clans using lopsided bases are still getting favorable matchups. The extreme use of lopsided bases (i.e. almost half the line up are defenseless or using TH3s/TH4s) are now getting paired up with similar clans and facing extraordinarly long search times.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Could it be the ones that are getting many more th11s than their opponents want it to stay that way?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by damnBORG

I kind of feel sorry for the current and previous opponents.. its a waste of 48 hours for them..

---

One hour (on average) for war search and 48 hours of misery.

If it took MUCH LONGER for war search, but resulted in a better experience over the next 48 hours, it would be well worth it. Please SC, drop this ridiculous notion that quick matches are more important than good matches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xc3ss1v30n3

I don't know what more information you want? There have been countless posts where people are detailing every aspect of the war map without going into a full on dissertation. I have gone so far as listing every base with a thought as to whether it's engineered, balanced, or just plain rushed, while also giving hero and defense levels. Inside that kind of information one can extrapolate how many "viable" attacks there are. Just, how else are we supposed to compare it if not for lineups/war weights as that's how MM is done? There's no way you, me, or Supercell can look at a map where one side has a couple TH11's and the other has 10 or more and say the match is "fair," and that's without even bothering looking at the bases.

---

Exactly, every poster has an agenda, so they post the information that they feel is relevant to making their case. SC is allowing us/asking us to give them feedback, but we do not have the tools needed to make this kind of assessment and quantify our experience. I can only give you a qualitative assessment :

Our clan experience stinks! We are tired of looking across the aisle and seeing a base up top that we cannot conceivably three star and a bunch of bases toward the bottom of the map that can spam troops and three star our top bases.

@Prince1999 please read my previous post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReplicantRachel

I have missed the detailed posts then because so far I have only seen the ones that describe only some aspects of both lineups, like only defensive weights and hero levels, or only list top bases, or only mention TH levels :/
I'd like to see (from both clans) the entire lineup defensive values and full armies listed as well (not just heroes).
I'm not interested in whether you think they are engineered or rushed.

To illustrate what I'm trying to say about viable attacks and defense: if your clan is facing way stronger bases up top maybe the opposing team will have a hard time with the rest of your lineup, remember that each participant only has 2 attacks available so don't focus only on top bases but the whole package.

I'm not saying the current state of war matchmaking is perfect, I'm just saying it is hard to tell how good it is with the feedback I've seen so far.

---

I disagree with your comment about clans with stronger tops being in best position to win, but then again it is only my experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReplicantRachel

I disagree with your comment about clans with stronger tops being in best position to win, but then again it is only my experience.

---

I know how you all work Rachel. That is not the typical experience and, excuse me for saying so, it would be very bad for the game if everyone did work that way. I too have had many wars that were won in the middle, but that is because I insist upon putting a lot of effort into base building at every level, where many clans are content to post any old internet base because "it will just get three starred anyways." For the vast majority of clans, the top decides the war.

As to your hope that SC is somehow able to accurately assess the quality of the war. I have ZERO faith in that. Nothing they have ever let slip or that has been said face to face to friends of mine that visited the HQ indicates that they have any ability to do that. That is why they used the phrase "create a greater sense of fair matches" (emphasis added). I have more faith in your ability to crunch the data and tell us if matches are getting better than I do theirs.

Honestly, it's great people are passionate enough about he game to want to post and fix this issues or set of issues. But let's be real here, the MM has sucked and will always suck likely, the only way you're getting a fair match is league play, end of story
League play is akin to a bag of popcorn, where when you open it, you know you're getting popcorn, where random spins are like party mix and you never know what the hell is in there until you open it.
My clan plays a few leavues and that's where we get our enjoyment, as we have max bases, max offenses and we want to match such. We don't really care or invest much time into random wars because we know what will happen, engineers based on our high bases and BD.
You don't want to face engineers, join a league clan or ask your leadership to investigate one, otherwise you're going to match engineers at some point or another and you have to deal with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReplicantRachel

I have missed the detailed posts then because so far I have only seen the ones that describe only some aspects of both lineups, like only defensive weights and hero levels, or only list top bases, or only mention TH levels :/
I'd like to see (from both clans) the entire lineup defensive values and full armies listed as well (not just heroes).
I'm not interested in whether you think they are engineered or rushed.

To illustrate what I'm trying to say about viable attacks and defense: if your clan is facing way stronger bases up top maybe the opposing team will have a hard time with the rest of your lineup, remember that each participant only has 2 attacks available so don't focus only on top bases but the whole package.

I'm not saying the current state of war matchmaking is perfect, I'm just saying it is hard to tell how good it is with the feedback I've seen so far.

---

This was one of my descriptions of a war...

1) TH11 MAX EXCEPT A FEW LAB UPGRADES / max th11
2) TH11 MAX EXCEPT LAB AND WALLS / max th11 except 3 spells
3) TH11 - MAX DEFENSES - BK25/AQ27/GW20 - LVL 10 WALLS - FEW MAX TROOPS / max th11 with 3 low level troops
4) TH11 - RUSHED - 11 D BUILT WITH TH10 D BK20/AQ22/GW16 / th11 - max d - lvl10 walls - max royals
5) TH10 - BALANCED - BK30/AQ30 / th11 - max 11 d - 10 d all others - max royals - some max troops
6) TH10 - DEFENSE HEAVY - MAX D - LOWER O - BK21/AQ22 / th 10.5 bk18/aq30/gw18
7) TH10 - BALANCED - BK22/AQ23 / th9.5 bk36/aq30
8) TH10 - BALANCED - BK24/AQ25 / th9.11? 9 defenses 11 offense - bk24/aq31/gw12
9) TH10 - RUSHED - 10 D BUILT WITH 9 D - BK20/AQ17 / th9.11? 9/10 lvl defenses 11 offense - bk30/aq/30/gw20
10) TH10 - NEW - NEW D BUILT - BK20/AQ22 / th9.5 low level ad - bk13/aq11
11) TH10 - NEW - NEW D BUILT - BK20/AQ27 / th9 - balanced bk21/aq25
12) TH9 - MAX EXCEPT HEROES - BK25/AQ25 / th9 - balanced bk19/aq29
13) TH9 - NEW - RUSHED BK- LVL2 XBOWS WITH 8 DEFENSES - BK12/AQ6 / th9 - balanced bk18/aq18
14) TH9 - NEW - RUSHED BK- LVL2/3 XBOWS 8/9 DEFENSES - BK10/AQ8 / th9.5 bk14/aq12
15) TH9 - NEW - XBOWS BUILT - RUSHED BK - BK8/AQ1 / th8 - max except walls.

I've seen some worse. I've seen some better. But from a description like that, you and SC can tell all sorts of information that isn't actually included. I didn't copy my overall synopsis of this matchup, but basically you can ascertain that they have 10 max offensive attacks to our 4. They were able to accomplish this by giving up some defensive weight at or near the bottom of the map, particularly around 10-11 and 15. If you want to go the viable attack route (assuming all th9 and below are 3 starred automatically) then we have viable/max attacks to cover 1-4 however their TH11s stretch past 4. They have viable/max attacks to cover our 1-4, plus 6 more bases.

The information is there. Just can't expect each person listing the war information to go into every single detail. At some point, it's on Supercell to actually read these and think to themselves, "Yeah, this obviously isn't working.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darian[Supercell]

Indeed, screaming will just lead to a hoarse throat.

To further expand on the post you quoted, we HAVE seen improvements in the matches since the update went into place and that is what I was referring to when I stated we were happy about that. However, that does not mean we're completely satisfied with it either. We recognize that further iterations are needed and further changes will be made.

We have some additional proposed tweaks planned that we'll talk about when they're ready to be discussed in the next couple weeks.

---

The only people seeing improvements are the Engineers, see my previous 6 posts on our matches, the last one we were outnumbered by 10 TH11s in a 30v30 war.

You are leaving us with no choice but to STOP participating in wars, we are sick of wasting 2 days and resources in fighting these battles.

This is a typical SC update..
Try to fix something, make it worse, then do nothing for a month. (Except carry on working on an update for the side game)

Dont you think it's time to STOP playing around with the Builder Base, and FIX the issues in the core game?


edit: Their #28 (TH11 Max troops) has just got 3* on both our 13 & 14 (TH10), for reference our #28 is a TH9!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaTroll

Is it uneven, yes. But is it the most even match between clans seeking a 40-40 match at 5pm on a Friday night? Is it better than a 16 hour search?

---

If the search only runs for 20 or 40 minutes- how does SC know the pairing is better than a longer one?

I'm not advocating for a 16 hour search, but in response to your question- how can a determination be made?

Sc should have known right off the bat- changing the MM was for many going to reduce the amount of clans in the search pool to choose from. So search times were going to be longer, unless SC changed the acceptable match qualifiers. It seems to me we might have a scenario where SC wanted to redo the MM and keep search lengths roughly the same. I don't see how doing that will bring consistent, balanced matches. You cannot have both.