Engineering...after all my research... supercell is telling me ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

Minor clarification and a point directed at the general anti-engineer sentiment (not you, but you prompted me to think of it).

I think the discussion isn't about prior to battle day. It's about prior to prep day.

That said, every serious clan has requirements about who they'll put in their spin. The logical conclusion of eliminating engineering's impact on the prior to prep day conversation (with an amazing matchmaker that's perfect!) would be to completely eliminate the need for any sort of requirements about who is put into a spin.

Certain things like Heros up for battle day (if needed), good attackers and base designs would persist, but the requirements for 20/20 at TH9 would be moot. 10/10 wouldn't hurt you if the matchmaker were the idealized perfection.

This is the point that a lot of anti-engineers miss. If the matchmaker is perfect, there is no point to clan account requirements as it pertains to battle day.

Note that some clan requirements work as a filter for seriousness or dedication (minimum donations, minimum heros even) and those requirements are often a proxy for factors that matter. However, the actual items that are the proxy aren't important. (so 10/10 is just as good as 20/20 with the same player for a clan, although the types of players with 20/20 are different than the types of players with 10/10, so have to be careful of selection effects)

---

Insightful comment.

If there was no strategy to war participation, the game would lose something.

There was a similar element to the point system used by my previous favorite game. Because the point system was flawed, min/maxers could enjoy hours of fun poring over unit specifications to come up with a combination that maximized power per point. For example a high speed, high defense, low firepower unit was not very useful by itself, but as a spotter in company with other units that had heavy firepower it was very powerful. The pre-battle planning was all about creating synergy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sservis

Minor clarification and a point directed at the general anti-engineer sentiment (not you, but you prompted me to think of it).

I think the discussion isn't about prior to battle day. It's about prior to prep day.

That said, every serious clan has requirements about who they'll put in their spin. The logical conclusion of eliminating engineering's impact on the prior to prep day conversation (with an amazing matchmaker that's perfect!) would be to completely eliminate the need for any sort of requirements about who is put into a spin.

Certain things like Heros up for battle day (if needed), good attackers and base designs would persist, but the requirements for 20/20 at TH9 would be moot. 10/10 wouldn't hurt you if the matchmaker were the idealized perfection.

This is the point that a lot of anti-engineers miss. If the matchmaker is perfect, there is no point to clan account requirements as it pertains to battle day.

Note that some clan requirements work as a filter for seriousness or dedication (minimum donations, minimum heros even) and those requirements are often a proxy for factors that matter. However, the actual items that are the proxy aren't important. (so 10/10 is just as good as 20/20 with the same player for a clan, although the types of players with 20/20 are different than the types of players with 10/10, so have to be careful of selection effects)

---

I guess my clan is just not so serious. We are pretty casual and just like to have fun. Our biggest decision is whether to war with 10s at top or 9s at top before spin. If we go with 10s and they have more, so be it. Same at 9. Why is it so wrong to want to be able to war against another clan using same tools?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit

On a th weight basis yes engineers would lose to maxers however the colser one get to maxed the increased chance of getting matched with the th above. And if the th above has the advantage. When to upgrade to avoid this adds to the complexity of the game.
That is one of the reasons i dont the mm is far off. Not perfect but not bad either.
To go back to boxing and the weigh in the maxer is fighting at their true weight while the engineer cuts weight for the weigh in and is heavier come fight day (common practice in fighting sports)
Yes you are right about cwl it is only one style.
3 main styles of boxing. Outside, brawler, inside
Outside beats brawler, brawler beats inside, inside beats outside.

---

Not really, that would be like the engineer taking off his defenses and then putting them back on for fight day. I think my description of weigh in was more accurate though I need to improve on my previous "weigh in" scenario that hinted at cheating. So....

The only reason engineering even works is because it takes advantage of the match making system. It's like a machine conducting weigh ins and assigning boxers to a weight bracket. All it can see is the weight number. It does not actually look to see if the boxer is wearing gravity reducing shoes when he is on the scale. So it places him in the featherweight division though he actually should be competing in the heavy weight division. The boxer didn't break any rules as both feet were on the scale, but he knew the machine would not detect him wearing his special shoes. Then come fight day, one boxer is twice as big as the other, the crowd can see that it's a mis match, but nobody can do anything about it except notify the weigh in machine creators that their machine appears to be broken. After the match the "half the size fighter" goes to the boxing organizers and cries foul! He receives some support for his situation, but then other "gravity reducing shoe wearers" say that it wasn't a mis match and he had a chance to win, and that it's his own fault for not wearing gravity reducing shoes at weigh in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

Not really, that would be like the engineer taking of his defenses and then putting them back on for fight day. I think my description of weigh in was more accurate though I need to improve on my previous "weigh in" scenario that hinted at cheating. So....

The only reason engineering even works is because it takes advantage of the match making system. It's like a machine conducting weigh ins and assigning boxers to a weight bracket. All it can see is the weight number. It does not actually look to see if the boxer is wearing gravity reducing shoes when he is on the scale. So it places him in the featherweight division though he actually should be competing in the heavy weight division. The boxer didn't break any rules as both feet were on the scale, but he knew the machine would not detect him wearing his special shoes. Then come fight day, one boxer is twice as big as the other, the crowd can see that it's a mis match, but nobody can do anything about it except notify the weigh in machine creators that their machine appears to be broken. After the match the "half the size fighter" goes to the boxing organizers and cries foul! He receives some support for his situation, but then other "gravity reducing shoe wearers" say that it wasn't a mis match and he had a chance to win, and that it's his own fault for not wearing gravity reducing shoes at weigh in.

---

I understand what you are saying however this isnt a competition on who's analogy is better. I can go into more detail on mine later.
Hiwever look at the two ideas. One takes responsibility to figure out how to maximize results, the other blames something else. In life who typically gets further ahead the one who figures out how to do it or the one who blames?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by littledoctor

Actually, no. Breaking the law to avoid tax is punishable, but a loophole is by definition not illegal. Maybe a translation issue?

Usually loopholes are either accidental or added on purpose to favor some specific group of people.

None of that is illegal.

---

What you are saying is correct, tax 'avoidance' is not illegal in most countries, tax 'evasion' is. I can place my money in legal accounts and give it away, legally, to avoid paying taxes. If I simply refuse to pay a tax demand, or under declare my income to reduce tax demands I am breaking the law.

All slightly off topic, so to bring it in line, engineering is currently in the avoidance bracket. Not breaking any rules at present. Although many countries, particularly the UK and USA are getting tough on companies who avoid tax. What they do may well be legal, but is not deemed ethical. Maybe engineering too fits in that bracket, I dont know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit

I understand what you are saying however this isnt a competition on who's analogy is better. I can go into more detail on mine later.
Hiwever look at the two ideas. One takes responsibility to figure out how to maximize results, the other blames something else. In life who typically gets further ahead the one who figures out how to do it or the one who blames?

---

I'm not trying to win the analogy contest with you, I was just noting that to me your version didn't quite line up with the situation, not to say it doesn't make sense to somebody else. Then added the version that makes sense to me. It could also not line up with the situation at hand.

I agree that there are applications where the person who finds the best way to go about doing something in head to head competition deserves to get father ahead, but clan wars is not one of those applications, to me. Mostly because the moderator is a machine that is blind to certain "issues". If this was real life, most likely there would be a human or group of humans moderating the event exercising common sense.

The problem with boxing or any other 1 v 1, is clan wars is not 1 v 1. Successful engineered clans don't have all dless, or generally all engineered, as that is not optimal. It is finding the right combination of bases. Engineering leads to mis matches, as 1 team is optimizing the other is not.

There is no taking advantage of, loop holing or any other derivative of manipulation of the match making. It is making the best informed upgrades to be best positioned for a random match. The match maker is the same for both sides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ripple1972

The problem with boxing or any other 1 v 1, is clan wars is not 1 v 1. Successful engineered clans don't have all dless, or generally all engineered, as that is not optimal. It is finding the right combination of bases. Engineering leads to mis matches, as 1 team is optimizing the other is not.

There is no taking advantage of, loop holing or any other derivative of manipulation of the match making. It is making the best informed upgrades to be best positioned for a random match. The match maker is the same for both sides.

---

A valid point.

It seemed to me though that the discussion was on a single player engineering. Not on clan wide engineering. And, from a single player point of view, optimizing your "weigh in gear" knowing the weaknesses/limits of a system put in place to generate sensible matches would be called what then?

Maybe just simple oversight by the weigh in machine creators.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ripple1972

The problem with boxing or any other 1 v 1, is clan wars is not 1 v 1. Successful engineered clans don't have all dless, or generally all engineered, as that is not optimal. It is finding the right combination of bases. Engineering leads to mis matches, as 1 team is optimizing the other is not.

There is no taking advantage of, loop holing or any other derivative of manipulation of the match making. It is making the best informed upgrades to be best positioned for a random match. The match maker is the same for both sides.

---

I will agree that engineers have indeed positioned themselves very well with current mm. Fingers (and toes) crossed that changes soon or at least soonish.

Here is the thing that bothers me most. Maxers are perfectly fine with the idea of being seperated from engineers. They do not care if engineers fight each other. Maxers simply wish to fight similar bases. Engineers want to keep maxers in their war pool to maintain their advantage. An actual max base has a small advantage over other bases at it's level. Engineered bases enjoy a huge advantage over lower levels at the moment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Playforwar

I will agree that engineers have indeed positioned themselves very well with current mm. Fingers (and toes) crossed that changes soon or at least soonish.

Here is the thing that bothers me most. Maxers are perfectly fine with the idea of being seperated from engineers. They do not care if engineers fight each other. Maxers simply wish to fight similar bases. Engineers want to keep maxers in their war pool to maintain their advantage. An actual max base has a small advantage over other bases at it's level. Engineered bases enjoy a huge advantage over lower levels at the moment.

---

While i agree that most engineers do want to keep maxers in the mm pool i for one want to pool to be as large as possible. Then comes the where is the dividing line between maxer and engineer? Most of my accounts have all defenses at various levels to make a midlevel th. I look more rushed than anything else.
A final reason is more pleasure but with such negative comments made by maxers in the forums with reguards to who attacks better, why no engineered in cwl, the way the game was ment to be played it feels good to sometimes whip up on a maxer clan. Of course rather than owning up to the loss its becomes its the mm fault and the cycle repeats over again. Guess i should just stop.