The engineer and the "flop"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ripple1972

. It was obvious to anyone following, obvious to anyone who was on these forums, what the changes from March 2016 would do.

If you knowingly built heavy defenses after, you were ignoring the consequences.

---

While there were concerns, and raised eyebrows regarding the March 2016 update, I don't think everybody (myself included) foresaw the medium term consequences of that update, because many players were unsure about how far "much bigger role" (in relation to defensive progression) really meant.
Certainly, if my memory serves me right, I don't remember everybody and their mothers, back in April 2016, flooding the forum with tales of the engineering future apocalypse.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing of course.

Plus, if the consequences of that update were so obvious from day one, then one would have to assume that the Devs knew exactly what they were doing back then... they are very clever peeps don't forget, but I guess that's a whole new debate.

Maybe I'm just a little naïve, but I find it hard to believe that the Devs would implement an update knowing full well that it could/would hurt the mass casual players.
I think they just misjudged the ramifications!:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

The reason the analogy breaks down is that Clash incorporates an inability to undo/change your base to use a different build strategy in war. Any skilled high jump could learn the flop. They didn't have to be born jumping that way to adapt. The analogy would hold if Clash incorporated a way to remove levels from structures.

---

It is not necessary to remove levels from structures in order to engineer. Simply having half your clan be .5 has been called "over the line engineering" (I disagree but it's what some claim). The .25 strategy (basically rush to .5) has been working for some of our weaker attackers, increasing their ability to 3 star without dramatically increasing their war weight. (The extra spell alone has a big impact.)

With the flop, high jumpers might start from an equal position, but some spend time learning and practicing the flop (advancing their offense) and others spend their time learning and practicing other techniques (advancing their offense and defense). A high jumper who doesn't practice the flop (maxer) can choose to do so (follow .25) at any time, as long as they are still advancing in their career (reached full TH11).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

While there were concerns, and raised eyebrows regarding the March 2016 update, I don't think everybody (myself included) foresaw the medium term consequences of that update, because many players were unsure about how far "much bigger role" (in relation to defensive progression) really meant.

---

With that release, I remember thinking, maybe supercell supports engineering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Playforwar

Further, if you do upgrade th, you are typically offered a special deal trying to get you to buy the big defense.

---

This statement... Just a week or so ago, Tank, posted something a bit similar to this. It made perfect sense. Supercell wants you to blindly upgrade, aka rush, so you feel as if you're backed into a corner and have to gem your way out.

Oh, you rushed your townhall? Here take one of these here inferno packs. It'll give you the needed loot but also one of the heaviest towers in game.

First post on this page:
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...-MM?p=10678256

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

I think they just misjudged the ramifications!:)

---

They did, which is why they're so cautious about changing anything else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

The reason the analogy breaks down is that Clash incorporates an inability to undo/change your base to use a different build strategy in war. Any skilled high jump could learn the flop. They didn't have to be born jumping that way to adapt. The analogy would hold if Clash incorporated a way to remove levels from structures.

Refusing to change army comps as others have pointed out is much more like refusing to use the flop. Refusing to force grow a second personality so you can use the new technique is quite different.

Edit: Note that adding a simple unbuild functionality sufficient to allow people to "engineer" previously maxed bases would bring back renting of Xbows/Infernos/Eagles (even Wardens maybe), which would definitely be a bad side effect. Other changes would be needed (ex new defenses/levels during prep are not added to war base)

---

I see your point about the undo button and that does make sense. I believe that balanced bases, ones with defenses although lower level, is actually superior even to defenseless. So anyone less than th11 could easily eliminate any disadvantage they might have. Also engineered bases alone won't win wars, you still need an anchor or 2 up top, one with high defenses. This could very easily be a maxed account. This is similar to a lineman in football. While not as glorious and a running back or receiver they are a necessary part of the team/clan.
As far as the high jumper is concerned the other styles the jumpers were shorter and thicker with stronger legs while those that did the flop tend to be taller and more slender. This meant that many of the previous high jumpers were not able to compete with the flop. The previous jumpers were merely pushed out of the event.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ripple1972

I just take exception to some of the tone anti engineers take (doesn't add to Discussion) or the woe is me (not directed at servis) we can't change, when it is not true.

---

I understand you and my take is that most of the people who complain about matchmaking don't want to be bothered working that hard to ensure fair matchups...

As for the anti-engineering rhetoric, I tend to ignore that because as we all know, minds are not likely to be changed - the changing is all on SC to provide fair wars...

Let's see what they have in store for us in the next update! :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xXXCHRISXXx

They did, which is why they're so cautious about changing anything else.

---

I wonder how many of their "prerelease playtest/analysis volunteer" group are hardcore engineers. If they don't have any, it would probably make sense to recruit some. There are obviously plenty in the forums here. The risk is that the inescapable logic of the engineer might start to infect the developers. With the power of dev builds they could create some truly amazing engineered bases, which would be so much fun they'd get less work done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit

First of thank you for the response. Here is the logic. The flop gave the jumper a 20cm advantage over the other styles of jumps and the event has been evolved. In coc accourding to the forum majority who always face engineering clans, which would mean the majority would be engineered clans based on that logic, are at a disadvantage much like the jumpers who had a 20cm disadvantage. 20 cm is a lot so was it an unfair advantage or just an advantage.
Good or bad for the game is a different discussion i could logically challenge also in another thread but respect the idea.
This thread isnt about changing sc mind in the mm but more in response to the numerous threads where a groups uses words as unfair, exploiting, manipulative, etc., words that are used with such negative conotation vs accepting as a legit style of play and strategy based on the evolution of the game. If maxers could accept this vs hate it and demand that sc eliminate it from the game entirely, which still occurs on the forums a lot.

---

And I disagree with that as well. In no way should engineering be nerfed or even eliminated altogether. It's a legit playstyle. It's not cheating. It's some players' preference. My beef is not with the players who choose to go this route. Although My concern with engineers is that they fail to see the long term effects if this were to continue. Casual players/clans will slowly be pushed out and the game will suffer because of that. But my real issue is with the mm itself. It obviously doesn't weigh everything properly. As a result, it gives engineers too big of an advantage. Supercell says offense and defense are both weighed evenly but how is it that a max offense and low defense gets to chill with the lower ths but a max defense with low offense gets shoved to the top of the war map? That's because certain defensive strictures weigh too much or offense isn't weighed enough. The inferno towers and ea are most likely your biggest culprates whereas the gw is pretty much the most important troop of the game but he doesn't weigh nearly as much as an ea. Therefore what most of us maxers would like to see is a mm that doesn't favor any playstyle. Maxers that say engineering should be eliminated are not helping in the discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littledoctor

It is not necessary to remove levels from structures in order to engineer. Simply having half your clan be .5 has been called "over the line engineering" (I disagree but it's what some claim). The .25 strategy (basically rush to .5) has been working for some of our weaker attackers, increasing their ability to 3 star without dramatically increasing their war weight. (The extra spell alone has a big impact.)

---

I will be the first to suggest that clans should strongly consider adding offense until they 3 star everything reasonable. For many casual clans this means offense significant ahead of defense.

My suggestion of a way to remove levels was an attempt to find a way to make the transition easier. Much like you can swap army compositions or base layouts fairly easily, if there's a "best base/clan engineering" then bases and their clans need to be able to transition to that fairly easily. Otherwise you get the forum rage and people getting disinterested in the game, neither of which are things that SC wants.

There are builds that maxers can grow into that are decent for war (other than max TH11). They all require skipping defenses. Basically if SC offers a gem pack for a defense at TH8 and higher, building it is not that great an idea. Skipping such defenses and upgrading an extra TH level (and all your other defenses that extra level) often produces an interesting base. Note that at TH8 and below, I'd also consider skipping some of the wizard towers and mortars. Witches don't show up en mass until TH9.

Edit, an example: If you're max TH9, you'll need to go to TH11 to have an interesting base (as you already have the Xbows). Upgrade TH10 and skip infernos, go TH11 and max everything (don't build the EAGLE). Keep your offense in the TH10 range, nothing from TH11. You'll end up with a TH10 weight class base and offense. TH8 can do it at TH10 by skipping xbows/infernos and upgrading everything else to TH10 levels (keep offense strictly TH9). Note that in the second example, you won't be able to max all walls or you'll go over the max weight for TH9.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DBlaze

Maxers that say engineering should be eliminated are not helping in the discussion.

---

I am sorry, not meaning to single you out, but I see this statement a lot. This kind of statement reek of being obtuse.

Of course the people who say "eliminated" mean that they do not want to match engineers in war. Of course they do want to see the advantage that engineers get in the war match making get itself eliminated. If they do not match with them they are "eliminated" for them from war. They do not mean that they want to see engineers kicked. Sure there is a troll here and there that post that kind of nonsense, but overall the majority of people want the match making to be changed. Even if they are being angry at the xth time being engineered into a non fun war and saying things they do not mean.