Clan Wars: The huge misconception.

I see many, many opinions, beliefs, complaints, etc., etc. All of which have nothing to do with the true reason for having bad wars. SC will not tell you, they can’t just come out and say it, so i will help you guys out.


First, you guys really need to stop using the word engineering. There is no such thing, not in the eyes of SC. The term they use is called, "lopsided". What that means is a base that has max offense with very little to no defense.

A base that has a good amount of defense, even if not all maxed and with some units missing, is not seen as lopsided in the eyes of the MM. Now you guys see a base that you define as engineered and you think the MM is matching you with engineers. That's mistake #1.

Mistake #2: The MM does not look at individual bases when doing the war match calculation. It just add up all the defense and offense of the entire clan into one number. With the new MM, as far as I can tell, all it does is look at the ratio of defense vs offense then decides what group to put you in. So if a clan has an overall high offense to defense ratio, then the MM considers the clan to be lopsided and matches them with a lopsided clan.

HOWEVER, since the MM calculates the clan and not each base as a separate entity, a clan CAN have a few lopsided bases, yet, still have the defense to offense ratio of a “normal” clan. This is why you are getting matched up with “engineering” clans as you call it.

The key to having good wars, has nothing to do with engineered vs engineer max vs max, engineer vs max, all those “opinions” are all misconceptions. The MM is just a calculator, it does not look at a base and say: “Well, well, this is engineered so I better match them with another engineered clan”.

The reason people have bad wars, is because they have an out of balance line up. What do I mean by line up? It’s the composition of bases you have in clan. If your clan is top heavy, you will get unfair matches. The rule you should go by, is to have all TH #’s in war. From TH11’s all the way down to TH3’s. And you want to have less high level TH #’s and lesser and lesser TH #’s as you go down. Example: 1 TH11, 2 TH10’s, 3 TH9’s, 4 TH8’s, 5 TH7’s, 6 TH6’s…. A ratio like that. It does not matter if these bases are maxed, engineered, lopsided, upside down, from the moon, jupiter…. does not matter.

Now, if you really want to say goodby to bad wars, you ALSO upgrade your bases smartly. You want to stair step your base upgrades. What do I mean by that? You never stop at a TH and max it, you “stair step it” into the next TH. As you move up, you never max the defense of a TH up until it’s a TH11. Any other fixated ideas, self imposed rules that you should max your base, are just that. It’s a preference and nothing more. When it comes to war, those preferences don’t bypass the mathematical axiom.


That’s all you need to know about wars. Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

First, you guys really need to stop using the word engineering. There is no such thing, not in the eyes of SC. The term they use is called, "lopsided". What that means is a base that has max offense with very little to no defense.

A base that has a good amount of defense, even if not all maxed and with some units missing, is not seen as lopsided in the eyes of the MM. Now you guys see a base that you define as engineered and you think the MM is matching you with engineers. That's mistake #1.

Mistake #2: The MM does not look at individual bases when doing the war match calculation. It just add up all the defense and offense of the entire clan into one number. With the new MM, as far as I can tell, all it does is look at the ratio of defense vs offense then decides what group to put you in. So if a clan has an overall high offense to defense ratio, then the MM considers the clan to be lopsided and matches them with a lopsided clan.

HOWEVER, since the MM calculates the clan and not each base as a separate entity, a clan CAN have a few lopsided bases, yet, still have the defense to offense ratio of a “normal” clan. This is why you are getting matched up with “engineering” clans as you call it.

The key to having good wars, has nothing to do with engineered vs engineer max vs max, engineer vs max, all those “opinions” are all misconceptions. The MM is just a calculator, it does not look at a base and say: “Well, well, this is engineered so I better match them with another engineered clan”.

The reason people have bad wars, is because they have an out of balance line up. What do I mean by line up? It’s the composition of bases you have in clan. If your clan is top heavy, you will get unfair matches. The rule you should go by, is to have all TH #’s in war. From TH11’s all the way down to TH3’s. And you want to have less high level TH #’s and lesser and lesser TH #’s as you go down. Example: 1 TH11, 2 TH10’s, 3 TH9’s, 4 TH8’s, 5 TH7’s, 6 TH6’s…. A ratio like that. It does not matter if these bases are maxed, engineered, lopsided, upside down, from the moon, jupiter…. does not matter.

Now, if you really want to say goodby to bad wars, you ALSO upgrade your bases smartly. You want to stair step your base upgrades. What do I mean by that? You never stop at a TH and max it, you “stair step it” into the next TH. As you move up, you never max the defense of a TH up until it’s a TH11. Any other fixated ideas, self imposed rules that you should max your base, are just that. It’s a preference and nothing more. When it comes to war, those preferences don’t bypass the mathematical axiom.


That’s all you need to know about wars. Cheers.

---

dude, you have to explain why you believe what is true to be true, otherwise the whole post is fluff and we cant have a discussion.

are you joining the CWSF war tommorow at 13:00 GMT.

in feel like i need to meet you in person to understand how you roll.

Well, now that all that is settled. If I remember correctly OP, were you not complaining of unfair wars not so long ago? Why is it that you got unfair wars if you know the secret to success. Perhaps this is a bunch of assumptions that may or may not work.

You lost me with the first sentence where you said SC doesn't use the word engineering.

Directly quoted from the 'Clan war match Making Improvements'

"We wanted to share with you that we are making improvements to how the algorithm functions in order to address 'engineered bases' in the matchmaking feature......."

Anything else you had to say after that was pretty much a moot point when you don't even acknowledge that SC does in fact recognize engineering for what it is.

Why do you suggest not maxing defenses of a TH level when dropping new ones costs more in added weight than upgrading existing ones? Do you mean don't max ALL defenses at a TH level?

OP - you still haven't explained, if the MM is using a single number for the clan, why it is now refusing to match clans with very strange rosters (eg TH11s then TH9s, then TH3s) at all. I know one who searched for about 80 hours - before matching to an identical clan. Rather strange when their clan totals are about the same as a TH8 clan.

Another thing OP hasn't explained is how some heavier maxer clans (maxer style base builds on th10/11s, not all fully max bases) are still - even increasingly - pulling engineered clans.

I am still in the process of testing the new matchmaker, and it is going slowly, but I don't believe OP is anywhere close to how it works.

My theory right now is this:
1) add up squared offensive weight and squared defensive weights for each account
2) sort the accounts by total weight
3) do 1-2 for the other clan too
4) calculate the sum of squared differences on all positions between clan 1 and clan 2 and store it as A
5) add together the squared values of all offensive weights for all accounts in the clan 1 into number B
6) add together the squared values of all offensive weights for all accounts in the clan 2 into number C
7) add together the squared values of all defensive weights for all accounts in the clan 1 into number D
8) add together the squared values of all defensive weights for all accounts in the clan 2 into number E
9) calculate the total error as: A + (B-C)*(B-C) + (D-E)*(D-E)
10) if the total error is below the smaller threshold for the 2 clans, declare this as a match

I also think there is a limit to how much the threshold can grow and after certain amount of time it doesn't grow anymore.

This theory might be slightly or entirely incorrect though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

Another thing OP hasn't explained is how some heavier maxer clans (maxer style base builds on th10/11s, not all fully max bases) are still - even increasingly - pulling engineered clans.

---

The only thing I can think of is that your clan was the best match for them after a potentially long queue. (Don't quote me on that :))



@ Ibork,

Here is my thought on the current war situation.

Darian has made several statements "play styles will match play styles" and "the matchmaking changes will give a better sense of fairness".

From what I have seen on the forums, my own (now 3 wars under OMMMA) experience, and Darians statements, this update addressed extreme offense over defenses villages (th10 and th11) by prioritizing matching them only with other clans that are using them. An explanation why some clans with defensless bases are seeing 12+ hour search times. This would meet the statement of "Matching Play styles" (a politically correct term for all versions of working the MMA). Also clans not matching them would have a greater "sense of fairness" in their matches.

I also am of the opinion that they tweaked a few things as well that have indeed resulted in tougher/more even matches based on my previous stated sources.

Roster Engineering still seems very much un-addressed.

.5's and 9.11's and the type may be better accounted for now that they are sorting offense and defense totals separately. The range in offense to defense of weights of those bases is less manipulable as they tend to be fairly close (though 9.11's are pushing the boundary).

In short, including .5's and 9.11's in your roster does not mean you will match an engineered clan. You will however try to be matched to a clan with similar offense and defense levels. My clans 3 matches seem to fit these observations.

-SuperStorm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

Another thing OP hasn't explained is how some heavier maxer clans (maxer style base builds on th10/11s, not all fully max bases) are still - even increasingly - pulling engineered clans.

---

we arent seeing this and we are maxer-ish (obviously all some works in progress but rare to have a genuine 0.5). i think they key difference which you already recognised in your comment is 'heavy' maxer clan.....we have a wider th range than you guys, down to 8 and with few or no 11s per war....maybe easier to match....our matching of late has been really solid. we lost our last one on percentage but was mostly our own fault (well mine tbh); recent ones have all felt close enough to be interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clark11308

Well, now that all that is settled. If I remember correctly OP, were you not complaining of unfair wars not so long ago? Why is it that you got unfair wars if you know the secret to success. Perhaps this is a bunch of assumptions that may or may not work.

---

Correct, we did get 2 or 3 unfair wars. This was after SC changed the War MM algorithm when they rolled out BB6. We have since adjusted and are back to fair wars. The subject of this thread is not about what is wrong with the MM, but charing solutions for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by deathbringer666

Why do you suggest not maxing defenses of a TH level when dropping new ones costs more in added weight than upgrading existing ones? Do you mean don't max ALL defenses at a TH level?

---

I mean don't max defense units up to TH level. By the way, I'm not anti maxing a base. When I say maxing a base for war is bad, I'm not saying it should be bad. Maxing a base should be the way to do it. But under the current MM, it does not benefit you. I have no play style, my clan is designed for what works, not what I like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

OP - you still haven't explained, if the MM is using a single number for the clan, why it is now refusing to match clans with very strange rosters (eg TH11s then TH9s, then TH3s) at all. I know one who searched for about 80 hours - before matching to an identical clan. Rather strange when their clan totals are about the same as a TH8 clan.

---

They most likely fell under the lopsided pool. Not many clans there. It's not the roster, the MM has no clue about rosters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

Another thing OP hasn't explained is how some heavier maxer clans (maxer style base builds on th10/11s, not all fully max bases) are still - even increasingly - pulling engineered clans.

---

I did explain. The MM is looking at offense to defense ratio. Clans that have a lot of maxed bases up top, are the ones pulling in clans with engineered bases. The reason is easy to compute.

Alright, now that I have replied, let me add this.

This is not in response to anyone.

The war MM has issues. We all know that. You may feel, from my posts, that I'm anti maxing. Let me clarify that I'm not. My post are not so much about fixing the MM, though I have offered my suggestions many times, my main reason for posting is to help those that are having bad wars.

We all HATE Russian Roulette wars. Many here in the forum have offered suggestions to fix the MM. I have come to the conclusion that SC can't fix it without rewriting it. I doubt the current MM can even distinguish one unit from another. When the MM calculates, it doesn't look at an Archer Tower and say: "This is an Archer tower level so and so weighing so and so." It only sees a number to be aded to another number.

If this is correct, and I think it is, then the current MM does not even know what TH level a clan has. It's just numbers to the MM. So when we offer the solution that a TH should have a minimum defense weight, the MM has no way of doing that. It's not written in a way to be able to do that. So fixing Roster Engineering is impossible, lane type matching is also impossible.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm not. But if I'm wrong, why can't SC fix it? I believe it's because they can't without re-writing entire code for War MM.

That's why I made this thread. Forget about the MM, forget about blaming each other, and lets together figure out how to get fair wars. For this to happen, we need to let go of how it should be, because how it should be has no bearing on what is.

I have offered you what works for our clan. You can use it or not. Up to you.

PS: Thank you for the negative reputation because I provide no "evidence." Cheers dude.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

PS: Thank you for the negative reputation because I provide no "evidence." Cheers dude.

---

the thing is IBork is frustrating to interact with you, you assert things with conviction, but never explain how you know what you think you know.

An example - you say, the matchmaker has no clue about rostars, and then you provide no bases for that claim.

Of course people get frustrated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

Correct, we did get 2 or 3 unfair wars. This was after SC changed the War MM algorithm when they rolled out BB6. We have since adjusted and are back to fair wars. The subject of this thread is not about what is wrong with the MM, but charing solutions for it.



I mean don't max defense units up to TH level. By the way, I'm not anti maxing a base. When I say maxing a base for war is bad, I'm not saying it should be bad. Maxing a base should be the way to do it. But under the current MM, it does not benefit you. I have no play style, my clan is designed for what works, not what I like.



They most likely fell under the lopsided pool. Not many clans there. It's not the roster, the MM has no clue about rosters.



I did explain. The MM is looking at offense to defense ratio. Clans that have a lot of maxed bases up top, are the ones pulling in clans with engineered bases. The reason is easy to compute.

Alright, now that I have replied, let me add this.

This is not in response to anyone.

The war MM has issues. We all know that. You may feel, from my posts, that I'm anti maxing. Let me clarify that I'm not. My post are not so much about fixing the MM, though I have offered my suggestions many times, my main reason for posting is to help those that are having bad wars.

We all HATE Russian Roulette wars. Many here in the forum have offered suggestions to fix the MM. I have come to the conclusion that SC can't fix it without rewriting it. I doubt the current MM can even distinguish one unit from another. When the MM calculates, it doesn't look at an Archer Tower and say: "This is an Archer tower level so and so weighing so and so." It only sees a number to be aded to another number.

If this is correct, and I think it is, then the current MM does not even know what TH level a clan has. It's just numbers to the MM. So when we offer the solution that a TH should have a minimum defense weight, the MM has no way of doing that. It's not written in a way to be able to do that. So fixing Roster Engineering is impossible, lane type matching is also impossible.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm not. But if I'm wrong, why can't SC fix it? I believe it's because they can't without re-writing entire code for War MM.

That's why I made this thread. Forget about the MM, forget about blaming each other, and lets together figure out how to get fair wars. For this to happen, we need to let go of how it should be, because how it should be has no bearing on what is.

I have offered you what works for our clan. You can use it or not. Up to you.

PS: Thank you for the negative reputation because I provide no "evidence." Cheers dude.

---

I deeply diasgree when you said MM algorithm doesnt recognise what th level a clan has. Instead, it knows and bring it as one variable in MM. And the mm give high priority only in top bases. The time you let the mm take search opponents is big matter here.
It based on what i know and faced before the newest mm. I dont know about the newest mm. As i never start war yet after newest mm ,still up hero.

To me the biggest thing op is trying to say is rather than try to figure out for sc how to fix the mm instead figure out what works best with the mm.
Ive played for 3+ years and my play style has changed a lot often to what works best when it come to war since that is the part i like best.
The best advice there play to how it is not how it should be. This applies only if you play to win. If youd like to play a different way no problem just realize that every choice has positives and negativies and be willing to accept them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

Another thing OP hasn't explained is how some heavier maxer clans (maxer style base builds on th10/11s, not all fully max bases) are still - even increasingly - pulling engineered clans.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

I did explain. The MM is looking at offense to defense ratio. Clans that have a lot of maxed bases up top, are the ones pulling in clans with engineered bases. The reason is easy to compute.

---

Then sorry, I have missed or misunderstood the explanation. How is it that two clans with quite dissimilar offence to defence ratios are matching?

Take for example a clan of maxer style th11s and 10s nearer to max than mid for their levels matching a clan with an equal number of maxer style 11s but instead of including 10s has 10.5s or other varieties of th10 defence weight th11 offence capacity bases filling out the bottom of the roster.

Consider this sample pairing - although we all know it doesn't work on base pairing, this is just a one lane weight comparison to think of in terms of contribution to clan total weight. Base 1: Maxer style within a whisker of max th10 all research done, all building upgrades done, 40/40 heros, still with about 40 lava walls instead of magma, gold defence weight 89k. Base 2: 10.5 style base with 41/45/15 heros, th11 level max bowlers, miners, witches and healers, 2 level 3 infernos, 2 level 1 bomb towers, no new th11 defence built, 5 of 7 archer towers upgraded to level 14, 2 of 6 cannons upgraded to level 14, lava walls, gold defence weight 90k. It's clear base 2 is packing a lot more offence punch and only a little more defence (just 7 more point defences have a single extra level on them) so has a very different offence to defence ratio to base 1. Repeat for several more lanes and there is 2 clans with significantly different offence to defence ratio matching each other. There is no "missing" offence on the big th11s on either side that might offset the increased offence on base 2's side bottom end to arrive at an equal ratio overall for both clans.

What is it I'm not understanding in your explanation that makes sense of the kind of situation above?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrJackrabbit

To me the biggest thing op is trying to say is rather than try to figure out for sc how to fix the mm instead figure out what works best with the mm.
Ive played for 3+ years and my play style has changed a lot often to what works best when it come to war since that is the part i like best.
The best advice there play to how it is not how it should be. This applies only if you play to win. If youd like to play a different way no problem just realize that every choice has positives and negativies and be willing to accept them.

---

Can't agree more with this sentiment.

Apparently I have to spread some reputation around before giving you more rep.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

First, you guys really need to stop using the word engineering. There is no such thing, not in the eyes of SC. The term they use is called, "lopsided". What that means is a base that has max offense with very little to no defense.


Mistake #2: The MM does not look at individual bases when doing the war match calculation. It just add up all the defense and offense of the entire clan into one number.

The reason people have bad wars, is because they have an out of balance line up. What do I mean by line up? It’s the composition of bases you have in clan.
That’s all you need to know about wars. Cheers.

---

A lot of info and opinion iBork....a few thoughts...

1) Lopsided bases v Engineering.
The earliest reference to lopsided bases that I'm personally aware of can be found here in an interview between Jonas and Chief Pat published in November 2015 (22.40) :-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puV_QBYPxKk

There may be earlier references, I'm just not aware of them. Jonas uses the phrase "these players with these extremely lopsided accounts"
In context, Jonas is specifically referencing Pat's own defenceless account, that he was running at the time.

With regard to Engineering, this is a community defined term that has been used since the dawn of clan wars.
It is an all encompassing term that reflects all aspects of attempted matchmaking manipulation. These very forums are littered with historic references to all kinds of engineering, for example this one published in early Nov 2015 about X.5:-
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-are-welcome

To state that there is 'no such thing as engineering' is inaccurate.
Engineering has always existed in many forms, lopsided bases is just one facet.

2) Individual bases.
While I'm certainly not making assumptions about the MM system as of August 31st 2017, to state that MM doesn't look at individual bases is also a statement that historically I cannot agree with.
In the 'From the Devs desk : Clan wars matchmaking' announcement of March 3rd 2016 the Developers stated :-

"Additionally, Clan Wars matchmaking has been fitted with new routines aimed at better balancing entire teams, rather than just individual lanes"

It's clear that individual lanes and bases have indeed been 'looked at'.
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-Matchmaking

3) Additional Routines/Checkboxes

Nowhere in your post have you referenced these checkboxes/routines that we know exist, regardless of individual or clan war weights. 'Recent war performance" being the obvious example.

4)Out of balance line up

I do share your thoughts here to some degree. I've always suggested a balanced bases within a balanced roster approach, should be at least considered by players/clans, especially if it increases the likelihood of finding a clan with a similar roster, but this is obviously just a potential help to avoid engineered clans, and certainly isn't the holy grail answer, as statistically there's always a chance that the matchmaker can throw a curve ball.

Just my thoughts!:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

1) Lopsided bases v Engineering.
The earliest reference to lopsided bases that I'm personally aware of can be found here in an interview between Jonas and Chief Pat published in November 2015 (22.40) :-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puV_QBYPxKk

There may be earlier references, I'm just not aware of them. Jonas uses the phrase "these players with these extremely lopsided accounts"
In context, Jonas is specifically referencing Pat's own defenceless account, that he was running at the time.

With regard to Engineering, this is a community defined term that has been used since the dawn of clan wars.
It is an all encompassing term that reflects all aspects of attempted matchmaking manipulation. These very forums are littered with historic references to all kinds of engineering, for example this one published in early Nov 2015 about X.5:-
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-are-welcome

To state that there is 'no such thing as engineering' is inaccurate.
Engineering has always existed in many forms, lopsided bases is just one facet.

2) Individual bases.
While I'm certainly not making assumptions about the MM system as of August 31st 2017, to state that MM doesn't look at individual bases is also a statement that historically I cannot agree with.
In the 'From the Devs desk : Clan wars matchmaking' announcement of March 3rd 2016 the Developers stated :-

"Additionally, Clan Wars matchmaking has been fitted with new routines aimed at better balancing entire teams, rather than just individual lanes"

It's clear that individual lanes and bases have indeed been 'looked at'.
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-Matchmaking

3) Additional Routines/Checkboxes

Nowhere in your post have you referenced these checkboxes/routines that we know exist, regardless of individual or clan war weights. 'Recent war performance" being the obvious example.

4)Out of balance line up

I do share your thoughts here to some degree. I've always suggested a balanced bases within a balanced roster approach, should be at least considered by players/clans, especially if it increases the likelihood of finding a clan with a similar roster, but this is obviously just a potential help to avoid engineered clans, and certainly isn't the holy grail answer, as statistically there's always a chance that the matchmaker can throw a curve ball.

Just my thoughts!:thumbsup:

---

Great links Skrags. Speculative takeaways - since SC for a long time only used the word 'lopsided' when addressing the issue, its possible they don't see engineering as an issue outside of offense heavy lopsided accounts. That won't satisfy this forum, but its not necessarily stupid, lopsided accounts are (by population) the majority of the issue.

I don't think they've ever addressed roster engineering as a potential issue, perhaps because it gives a general advantage but significant downsides (advantage isn't consistent, gives up attacks) and if they nerf it too much they hurt the 13 person clan that legitimately brings ringers to hit 15.

The lanes vs whole clan issue continues to puzzle me. Older statements indicate lane-by-lane, I see evidence ofat least an attempt at lane-by-lane matching at the top with my eyeballs - we usually run zero th11 weights, and draw one rarely. Unless I add a true th11, then its guaranteed. I think roster engineers see it too, run anchors + junk and you match with anchors + junk often enough.

But latest statements indicate its clan by clan, Dorsan's offenseless test supports that though we just have one data point. But should we even trust the latest statements? SC sent Darian to a youtuber to free-form riff for half an hour, but he's not a dev and maybe we shouldn't put too much weight on one sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

A lot of info and opinion iBork....a few thoughts...

1) Lopsided bases v Engineering.
The earliest reference to lopsided bases that I'm personally aware of can be found here in an interview between Jonas and Chief Pat published in November 2015 (22.40) :-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=puV_QBYPxKk

There may be earlier references, I'm just not aware of them. Jonas uses the phrase "these players with these extremely lopsided accounts"
In context, Jonas is specifically referencing Pat's own defenceless account, that he was running at the time.

With regard to Engineering, this is a community defined term that has been used since the dawn of clan wars.
It is an all encompassing term that reflects all aspects of attempted matchmaking manipulation. These very forums are littered with historic references to all kinds of engineering, for example this one published in early Nov 2015 about X.5:-
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-are-welcome

To state that there is 'no such thing as engineering' is inaccurate.
Engineering has always existed in many forms, lopsided bases is just one facet.

2) Individual bases.
While I'm certainly not making assumptions about the MM system as of August 31st 2017, to state that MM doesn't look at individual bases is also a statement that historically I cannot agree with.
In the 'From the Devs desk : Clan wars matchmaking' announcement of March 3rd 2016 the Developers stated :-

"Additionally, Clan Wars matchmaking has been fitted with new routines aimed at better balancing entire teams, rather than just individual lanes"

It's clear that individual lanes and bases have indeed been 'looked at'.
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-Matchmaking

3) Additional Routines/Checkboxes

Nowhere in your post have you referenced these checkboxes/routines that we know exist, regardless of individual or clan war weights. 'Recent war performance" being the obvious example.

4)Out of balance line up

I do share your thoughts here to some degree. I've always suggested a balanced bases within a balanced roster approach, should be at least considered by players/clans, especially if it increases the likelihood of finding a clan with a similar roster, but this is obviously just a potential help to avoid engineered clans, and certainly isn't the holy grail answer, as statistically there's always a chance that the matchmaker can throw a curve ball.

Just my thoughts!:thumbsup:

---

Superb response...bookmarking this for future reference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

The lanes vs whole clan issue continues to puzzle me. Older statements indicate lane-by-lane, I see evidence ofat least an attempt at lane-by-lane matching at the top with my eyeballs -.

---

You're not alone here Tank, it's a very murky and confusing area. There's little doubt that varying degrees of in lane matching have been tried in the past. As for right now, we probably need a lot more feedback.:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

3) Additional Routines/Checkboxes

Nowhere in your post have you referenced these checkboxes/routines that we know exist, regardless of individual or clan war weights. 'Recent war performance" being the obvious example.

---

I just wanted to pick up on something regarding the 'Recent war performance' checkbox.
I posted my theory on this about a month ago, which can be found here :-

https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...in-CW-MM/page3

To summarise :-
"While I'm often found sticking up for the 'pick up and play' casuals (which I accept), my logic( :facepalm:) suggests that this checkbox is far more prevalent for the losing clans, than the winning ones"

Coincidence alert :-
I was just taking in a Royale video on the upcoming Royale updates, (Ash) and something caught my eye.
The video is linked below :-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_99geT3VHE

It's a Q&A Developer video (featured on reddit), that talks about Royale matchmaking etc. The interesting bit is (14.40):-

"Players on a losing streak are put in a losing streak pool. While there, you get matched against others in that pool until you win"

Of course, Royale is a different game, but I can't help thinking about the reasoning behind the above, with reference once again to the reasoning behind the introduction of the recent war performance checkbox back in March 2016.

A coincidence? Possibly.... but I'm not a huge believer in coincidences!:caticon:
Food for thought!:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

the thing is IBork is frustrating to interact with you, you assert things with conviction, but never explain how you know what you think you know.

An example - you say, the matchmaker has no clue about rostars, and then you provide no bases for that claim.

Of course people get frustrated.

---

Sorry if I frustrate you buddy. You want proof, I have no proof. The only proof I have are the wars people are matched with and what SC has said. They aren't very open, but they have given us all we need to know. If you listen to Darian's interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qei_m6cL5mM

11:21 Darian: "...it's going to try to find a clan with similarly weighted bases..."
11:36 Ash: "...is it matching individual bases? ...is it individual matching?..."
11:54 Darian: "...no, it's more of a clan weight..."

Right there, that tells you there is no roster checking. The only way to do roster checking, is to do individual base checking.

You can also look at wars, compare the bases from one clan to the other and see there was no roster checking.

So the "evidence" I speak of, comes from taking what we know, then looking at the matches the War MM is spinning for some and not for others, and you have a very good grasp of what is going on.

As to the win streak algorithm. Yes, that one is a mystery. I have reason to believe that that is what is creating strange wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

Sorry if I frustrate you buddy. You want proof, I have no proof. The only proof I have are the wars people are matched with and what SC has said. They aren't very open, but they have given us all we need to know. If you listen to Darian's interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qei_m6cL5mM

11:21 Darian: "...it's going to try to find a clan with similarly weighted bases..."
11:36 Ash: "...is it matching individual bases? ...is it individual matching?..."
11:54 Darian: "...no, it's more of a clan weight..."

Right there, that tells you there is no roster checking. The only way to do roster checking, is to do individual base checking.

You can also look at wars, compare the bases from one clan to the other and see there was no roster checking.

So the "evidence" I speak of, comes from taking what we know, then looking at the matches the War MM is spinning for some and not for others, and you have a very good grasp of what is going on.

---

you see, now there is platform for a discussion, i can check the interview, then Iether be convinced or i can give reasons back why Im not convinced, which i assume will follow shortly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iBork

Sorry if I frustrate you buddy. You want proof, I have no proof. The only proof I have are the wars people are matched with and what SC has said. They aren't very open, but they have given us all we need to know. If you listen to Darian's interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qei_m6cL5mM

11:21 Darian: "...it's going to try to find a clan with similarly weighted bases..."
11:36 Ash: "...is it matching individual bases? ...is it individual matching?..."
11:54 Darian: "...no, it's more of a clan weight..."

Right there, that tells you there is no roster checking. The only way to do roster checking, is to do individual base checking.

You can also look at wars, compare the bases from one clan to the other and see there was no roster checking.

So the "evidence" I speak of, comes from taking what we know, then looking at the matches the War MM is spinning for some and not for others, and you have a very good grasp of what is going on.

---

It sounds to me that he is saying it isn't straight individual matching, it is more based on clan weight, but that there is still some sort of check of the roster/individual. If not, then he should've said it is "only" clan weight, rather than saying it is based "more" on clan weight. That said, I don't know that we can assume he knows the exact details of it to 100% certainty and/or that he can describe it 100% accurately to this fine of a point while having an unscripted conversation about it. I would be more comfortable picking apart a written statement from SC to this level of specificity than a conversation.

In any event, based on reports here so far, it seems there is "some" level of individual/roster check because clans with very extreme rosters have spend days searching to find one just as extreme (rather than quickly matching a more typical roster with the same total weight). However, that "more" based on clan weight does seem to be accurate, because people are still reporting bad mismatches as a result (apparently) of roster engineering.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

In any event, based on reports here so far, it seems there is "some" level of individual/roster check because clans with very extreme rosters have spend days searching to find one just as extreme (rather than quickly matching a more typical roster with the same total weight). However, that "more" based on clan weight does seem to be accurate, because people are still reporting bad mismatches as a result (apparently) of roster engineering.

---

Perhaps that has nothing to do with the roster and has more to do with defense to offense ratio? It seems we are no longer seeing clans that have tons of defenseless H11's being matched with "normal" type roster clans. We are still seeing clans that have some engineered bases being matched with clans that don't have much engineering going on. But if the MM is doing clan wide calculation, that would explain that. A clan that has some engineered bases does not necessarily have lopsided defense/offense ratio.

This is our current war. One can see that both clans have almost identical war weight. However, their rosters are totally different. We clearly have the advantage in war. I also see no lane check from the MM in this war, nor any of our past wars. I'm not saying that there isn't, I'm just saying I don't see it.

Attachment 205060

#1 Max TH11 (45/45/20)#1 Max TH11 (45/45/20)
#1 Max TH11 (45/45/20)#1 Max TH11 (45/45/20)

#2 TH11 (30/33/20) All defenses in except Eagle. lvl 2 infernos, lvl 4 bows, rest is TH9 war troops maxed.
#2 TH10 Max (27/28) not all war tropps maxed.

#3 TH11 (18/21/9) All defenses in except Eagle. lvl 2 infernos, lvl 4 bows, rest is TH9 war troops maxed.
#3 TH10 (40/40) No infernos, only 2 lvl 4 bows, max ADs, rest is TH10 level, war troops maxed.

#4 TH10 (25/22) All defenses in except infernos, lvl 3 bows, rest is TH9 war troops maxed.
#4 TH10 (26/30) No infernos, only 2 lvl 4 bows, max ADs, rest is TH10 level, war troops maxed.

#5 TH10 (24/21) All defenses in except infernos, lvl 2 bows, rest is TH8 war troops maxed.
#5 TH10 (25/25) No infernos, only 2 lvl 3 bows, max ADs, rest is TH9’ish level, war troops maxed.

#6 TH9 (21/20) All defenses in, lvl 1 bows, rest is TH8 war troops maxed.
#6 TH10 (30/30) No infernos, only 2 lvl 3 bows, rest is TH9’ish level, some war troops maxed.

#7 TH9 (11/10) All defenses in except bows, rest is TH8 war troops maxed.
#7 TH10 (21/21) No infernos, only 2 lvl 3 bows, rest is TH9’ish level, some war troops maxed.

#8 TH9 (10/8) All defenses in, lvl 1 bows, rest is TH7’ish war troops maxed.
#8 TH9 (18/10) All defenses maxed, war troops maxed.

#9 TH8 (10) All defenses in, max AD's, rest is TH7’ish war troops maxed.
#9 TH9 (10/14) All defenses maxed, some war troops maxed.

#10 TH7 (2) All defenses in, max AD's, rest is TH6’ish war troops maxed.
#10 TH8 (8) All defenses maxed, war troops maxed.

#11 TH6 All defenses in, level TH4’ish war troops maxed.
#11 TH6 some missing defenses in, rest TH4’ish war troops maxed.

#12 TH6 All defenses in, level TH4’ish war troops maxed.
#12 TH6 All defenses in, level TH4’ish war troops maxed.

#13 TH6 All defenses in, level TH4’ish war troops maxed.
#13 TH5 All defenses in and maxed, war troops maxed.

#14 TH5 All defenses in, level TH4’ish war troops maxed.
#14 TH7 one cannon defenseless base, no drags.

#15 TH5 All defenses in, level TH3’ish war troops maxed.
#15 TH6 one cannon defenseless base, max troops.

And here's proof that the MM does have pools for types of clans:

https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...fair-Clan-Wars

I went and looked at each of their bases, lopsided offense vs lopsided offense. HOWER, the MM calculated total defense/offense weight for clan. They both weigh the same as each other. Yet, with totally different rosters.