The engineer and the "flop"

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

August 9th, 2017
iBork

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clark11308

I still see that as bad for the game. Even the path you speak of is for nothing more than advantage. If players need to neglect parts of the game for advantage I feel that's bad. A good amount of people enjoy the whole game, not just war. As soon as the ideal base for 1 stinks for the other that's gonna turn people off. Very few have the time to make multiple Accts for different play. They want to be able to do it all with 1 acct and I agree they should be able to. Optimizing doesn't allow that.

Maxing a base before it gets to TH11 is not good for you, wars wise. It will never be no matter how perfect the MM is. You can disagree with that fact, however, it will not change the mathematics. If you want to go pass this obsession of maxing your TH at each level and take a look at the game as a whole, you will see it.
August 9th, 2017
Clark11308

Quote:

Originally Posted by iBork

Maxing a base before it gets to TH11 is not good for you, wars wise. It will never be no matter how perfect the MM is. You can disagree with that fact, however, it will not change the mathematics. If you want to go pass this obsession of maxing your TH at each level and take a look at the game as a whole, you will see it.

I dont know were you come up with these responses but it seems you misinterpret alot thats said, then answer it with some random tirade.
August 9th, 2017
Sservis

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit

I started down that road in late 2014 and believe me at that time there were very few of us. Morgauth, Forgivemenot, Sservis, and SOD were influenced me back then.

Appreciate the compliment. All of those are rushers and optimizers towards a destination. I tend to stay away from suggesting any destination as best as that's very personal depending on goals.

On engineering, I hold out hope that SC will at some point figure out a decent way to make maxing offense not the massive negative it is today. (defensive maxing is meh, have to beat all defenses to beat a base, so it's basically decent, if not best).
August 9th, 2017
Sservis

Quote:

Originally Posted by iBork

Maxing a base before it gets to TH11 is not good for you, wars wise. It will never be no matter how perfect the MM is. You can disagree with that fact, however, it will not change the mathematics. If you want to go pass this obsession of maxing your TH at each level and take a look at the game as a whole, you will see it.

This, over and over again.

The all TH9 clan does not match all TH9s. They match some stronger TH11s/TH10s and weaker TH9s/TH8s. How many is largely a function of how large the clan is. 50 maxed TH9s will match a wider spread than 25 maxed TH9s which will also match wider than 10 maxed TH9s.

Even though you might not be in a clan exclusively made up of one TH, the same thing happens as your clan has more maxed bases (unless they're TH11 maxed bases).
August 9th, 2017
iBork

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clark11308

I dont know were you come up with these responses but it seems you misinterpret alot thats said, then answer it with some random tirade.

https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...1#post10749265

Perhaps you should follow the conversations so you don't get lost.
August 9th, 2017
iBork

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sservis

This, over and over again.

The all TH9 clan does not match all TH9s. They match some stronger TH11s/TH10s and weaker TH9s/TH8s. How many is largely a function of how large the clan is. 50 maxed TH9s will match a wider spread than 25 maxed TH9s which will also match wider than 10 maxed TH9s.

Even though you might not be in a clan exclusively made up of one TH, the same thing happens as your clan has more maxed bases (unless they're TH11 maxed bases).

And that is relevant because?
August 10th, 2017
Sservis

Quote:

Originally Posted by iBork

And that is relevant because?

I guess saying you said a good thing wasn't worthwhile.
August 10th, 2017
Playforwar

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sservis

This, over and over again.

The all TH9 clan does not match all TH9s. They match some stronger TH11s/TH10s and weaker TH9s/TH8s. How many is largely a function of how large the clan is. 50 maxed TH9s will match a wider spread than 25 maxed TH9s which will also match wider than 10 maxed TH9s.

Even though you might not be in a clan exclusively made up of one TH, the same thing happens as your clan has more maxed bases (unless they're TH11 maxed bases).

They should match all 9s. One clan should not have toys that are not available to the other clan(at their level) in a maxer war pool. In the engineered war pool, anything goes. Everyone wins this way, unless the engineered don't really wanna fight each other.
August 10th, 2017
posthoc

Quote:

Originally Posted by Playforwar

They should match all 9s. One clan should not have toys that are not available to the other clan(at their level) in a maxer war pool. In the engineered war pool, anything goes. Everyone wins this way, unless the engineered don't really wanna fight each other.

Maybe they should, but how many clans full of th9 and nothing else do you imagine there are out there? It's rare enough that people coordinate spin times, or set up leagues, to make the search time manageable.
August 10th, 2017
Lunaticfringe

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

The fact that you consider that to be a significant issue shows that you and I have fundamentally different ideas of what strategy is. Maybe competitive strategy games aren't your thing?

Anytime you want to compare resumes, you PM me and we can take it offline.

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

That is the correct definition of begging the question, but my simple proof does not do so because my claim #1 and #2 are different. Yes, point 1 is assumed true. If point 1 is false then yes, it would disprove my simple proof.

Now, if you attempt to disprove my proof by disproving #1 by assuming that engineering is not good for the game, that would be an example of begging the question. To disprove the proof by disproving #1 without begging the question, you would need to do so in a way that does not involve engineering. Is there any non-engineering way that increasing the number of strategies or number of ways to play is not good for the game?

No, it's circular/begging because those 2 play off each other and go round and round. It doesn't matter that you list them separately, it's still circular/begging. You can sum 1,000 different lines in Excel and still have a circular issue. But it really doesn't matter at this point.

You need to provide evidence that more strategies are always good for the game. You posited that and I'm specifically challenging you on that.

And don't think I didn't notice you not only ignore my comment that modding is a strategy, so please explain how that fits into your dubious theory, to say nothing about you attempting to shift the burden of proof to me with your question above.

You made the claim, you provide evidence for it

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

Ah, that's the killer caveat, isn't it.

It is more reasonable to look at the effect, not the cause. Unwinnable wars should be prevented by the matchmaker. If the war is not unwinnable, then I don't care how many defenseless TH11 or .5 bases my opponent has. Exactly how to define unwinnable is debated but in another thread a good rule of thumb was proposed: offense advantage + defense advantage above some certain point.

Just one highly engineered base is often not enough to produce an unwinnable war. On the flip side, a large number of just slightly engineered bases sometimes are enough to produce an unwinnable war.

I very much agree. Insignificant engineering, to be defined, would be eyebrow raising to have a huge issue with.

But more and more we see ~entire clans that are engineered. We literally just finished yet another and cleaned their clocks because they couldn't attack for beans. Yes, we still won, but it doesn't make us roll our eyes any less.

Further, it goes beyond the fact that we won, which is important to being unbiased. Others who don't take this (cursed, stupid, annoying! :) ) game as seriously as we do could easily be outmatched simply because of war spins and that I/we have an issue with/can understand the frustration.

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

This goes back to that key caveat above, I think. If you define "engineering" as "only the OP kinds of engineering" or "only the kinds of engineering that produce OP results" then obviously it's bad for the game. I don't define "engineering" that way. Engineering is building your base in an optimized way. Like I said earlier, just one highly optimized base in a clan is sometimes not enough to produce an OP result, and a large number of just slightly optimized bases in a clan is sometimes enough to produce an OP result.

There is an enormous difference between strategically upgrading a base vs. an ~entire clan that is engineered. The former is usually just smart playing, the latter is where the primary issue lies.

And, based on what I'm reading on the forums, it's the latter that is causing the frustration. Just look at the "this is unfair!" threads that constantly show up in this subforum

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

No, not saying that. I'm sure that some people who win are also annoyed. Everything annoys someone. Annoyance is not sufficient reason to eliminate a base development strategy.

Your specific comment was:

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

Like multiplayer, it's fun for me and others, and yet it sure causes immense frustration and/or disappointment with many, many others. Namely, those who lose.

The issue isn't that annoyance being a sufficient reason to, "eliminate a base development strategy," which I haven't read much of anyone saying that is the problem... (this is now flirting with a strawman logical fallacy, which we can discuss at length here as well, if needed)

It's when ~entire clans are engineered (and this doesn't mean all bases are, of course...) that sure seems to be the issue or, as you like to call it, "unwinnable wars."

You direct me to the posts where "insignificant" engineering (which there are some, but I sure can't recall many) exists and I'd quickly fall to the side of, "not really an issue."

But I sure see a lot more going the other direction, to say nothing about what my clan directly has experienced

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

The relevance is that some people claim that engineering is bad because it discourages more people than it encourages, leading to players leaving the game.

Oh, but they have a lot of indicators, yes?

For example, this forum might be one huge one...

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

People often confuse cause and effect. They rage against "engineering" when what they actually care about are unwinnable wars. A single super-engineered base, a defenseless TH11, sometimes does not provide a gamebreaking advantage; and on the flip side, sometimes a bunch of very slightly engineered bases, .5s, do provide a gamebreaking advantage. The problem isn't the technique used to get there, the problem is that the matchmaker allows gamebreaking advantages.

Technically, I agree with the above, but it sure seems like your doing nothing more than playing with semantics here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

In this specific case, allowing lopsided bases is good because different people want to make their bases different ways.

Or, perhaps, they can't attack and want to cover up for their crappy attacking skills by bully attacking. That's a very big reason why many clans/players do this too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by littledoctor

The more I think about the matchmaker, the more I think they are trying to get good outputs by tweaking the inputs and taking whatever the result is, when what I think they should do is filter the outputs and disallow ones that violate whatever criteria they judge to be gamebreaking (such as #1 max TH11 vs #1 max TH9).

This point has some merit.

The MM definitely needs to be improved

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit

No wanting to argue just to get my point across. Also I believe you are looking too deep into it about is it good for the game. I say yes. lopsided bases brought out the flaw in maxed bases and help move the game along to doing things with intention. I don't do defenseless engineering at a high level (th6 and lower is fine) now but have moved on to adding defenses and finding the least amount necessary to defend as well as the least amount of offense needed to 3*. This is where I see CW moving to.

This is head-shaking, seriously. Give me a break...

It brought out the flaws in the MM, often by players/clans that aren't very good at the game, not much else.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit

And there still is a place for maxers. You have to look at everything. Yes I optimize bases for war. That is cause I already have max bases and/or others doing it in my clans. There is no one size fits all base that can be used by everyone in the clan. The clan is a team much like in american football. A team of all runningbacks will lose just like a team of all lineman. Each clan needs to optimize with each style of play to be effective.

The analogy was and remains just bad.

If you have a roster of nothing but max TH11s, who exactly is the QB vs the linemen vs the RB?

It's usually a manipulation of the (faulty) MM, nothing more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by iBork

Maxing a base before it gets to TH11 is not good for you, wars wise. It will never be no matter how perfect the MM is. You can disagree with that fact, however, it will not change the mathematics. If you want to go pass this obsession of maxing your TH at each level and take a look at the game as a whole, you will see it.

Oh, so what you're saying is that players can't play the way they necessarily want to (especially if someone wants to max their TH) and need to upgrade differently. Yup, that sounds like the way the MM should be set up...

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page