Are we past the point of no return with War MM?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dorsan

Honestly if I were doing the whole matchmaker, I would make a system to analyze weights.

When a war starts, you have the past war records for both clans, you have the weights for both clans. That should be enough to make a prediction about the outcome. If the prediction comes true it means that the weights were ok. If the prediction comes false, it means that there is an error in the system. Of course a war here or there might be an exception, but if you take enough samples a good system could easily find out buildings/units that are underweighted and that are overweighted. You could simply make a system that reevaluates all the weights every 2 days and then slightly reduce/increase any items that show up often in the wars that were predicted incorrectly.

---

Disagree, but not strongly, certain build types and structures will be highly correlated to low attack skills, and certain to very high attack skills. SO this way you will build skill with a negative weighting in the matchmaker. There is no simple way to measure clan skill, so to control for it will be quite tough. Im not saying itncant be done, but it feels pretty complicated, and since supercell cant even build a rudementary matchmaker, I assume you are proposing this for academic pureposes?

Actually to be fair, with the amount of data, even without controling for high or low skill (and maybe very high and very low win % clans can be excluded), you should be able to see some patterns.

right now, to see who wins the war, i count the number of +5 wardens and max bowler/witch, then look at archer Queen level, and you can predict the result. Ironicly another way is to Count Eagles and infenoes, side with less, wins.

A analysis of the data even without controling for skilll would i guess show this.

but my point is, as we stand here today, we know the warden is massively underweighted. For Its impact it probably should weigh 10000 maxed on offence and 1200 on defence. However we need an incentive to raid and gem, so why not weigh it 7000 on offence? Why not do that today? This very afternoon.

same with eagle, we know it should weigh 6000 maxed, but lets be prudent and weigh it maxed at 8000. Lets do that today. The eagle and the infeno would would then weigh the same, even though i would argue the warden has a larger impact on war result than eagle, not because of war weight currently, If they both weighed zero, i would take warden. In fact, If eagle weighed minus 2000 and warden 10000 for a max, i would still take warden.

I know it, you know it, everyone knows it (almost, IBork may disagree, allthough i think the particle that make up the Particles that make up the atoms that make up our brains seam to have recieved some quantumn entanglement some time in the history of the universe, and If I or him have a thought the other has the exact opposition thought, breaking the speed of light universal rule).

since we all know it, why doesnt SC do this one thing today.

reduce eagle weight 20%, increase warden weight 100%. See result.

why? Seriously? It cant be a competence question, someone has to literally change the values of 2 items, it will take 30 seconds per change. They could even do it server side.

its like a soccer manager watching his centre forward, who wears size 10 (44 US) playing in size 15 (65 US?), who is not playing well, and then announcing and evolutionary speed and agilty training program to solve his speed, agility and acceleration issues over 6 months. Sure maybe he has some underlying problems, but of course step 1 is change the boots.

I usually enjoy reading thru the threads, some of the guys who post have some really good ideas and inputs, as well as humour. Unfortunately, more and more, there are folks who's only intention is to try and force their will on others. So lets force the engis to to play our way or quit the game, lets make anybody who was stupid enough to jump levels and become rushed sit out the game until we deem them worthy of playing our game. That will work, we have parity now. But maybe it isnt just our game, just maybe the developers came across a wonderful idea whereby people across the globe can come together and form friendships, maybe they can add a clan war function to the game which we asked for. Well they did that, they listened when people complained it didn't work, over and over. Sure, it still isnt great, but they said they would keep trying. But calling them stupid?.. incompetent?.. how many people here got 100 mill downloads on their cv. And don't need a crystal ball to see folks complaining no matter what they do. We get hit with bad matches same as everybody, but we stay amd play or run away, aint our game we just chooseto play Iit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joshsgrandad

I usually enjoy reading thru the threads, some of the guys who post have some really good ideas and inputs, as well as humour. Unfortunately, more and more, there are folks who's only intention is to try and force their will on others. So lets force the engis to to play our way or quit the game, lets make anybody who was stupid enough to jump levels and become rushed sit out the game until we deem them worthy of playing our game. That will work, we have parity now. But maybe it isnt just our game, just maybe the developers came across a wonderful idea whereby people across the globe can come together and form friendships, maybe they can add a clan war function to the game which we asked for. Well they did that, they listened when people complained it didn't work, over and over. Sure, it still isnt great, but they said they would keep trying. But calling them stupid?.. incompetent?.. how many people here got 100 mill downloads on their cv. And don't need a crystal ball to see folks complaining no matter what they do. We get hit with bad matches same as everybody, but we stay amd play or run away, aint our game we just chooseto play Iit.

---

Half of what you say is spot on, many people here complain with selfish self serving bias for Iether a buff to their playstyle, or put people currently at an advantage to them, at a disadvantage, because engineering and rushing is baaad mmmmkaaay.

however many people also believe the extent of and ease to obtain a dominating advantage has dangerous implications for the war scene, as more and more will lose interest. Wars have to be competitive, and waiting a matchmaker, that offer more parity more often, with strategic leans build in, is probably a must If the war scene is to service and thrive.

with regards to people calling them incompetant or stupid, thats really the more polite alternative, as the only other explanation, is that supercell deliberatly create an unfair marchmaker, pretend they dont, and dishonstly say they want to improve it. To call them incompetant is actually allowing them enough room to wiggle their way towards a better matchmaker without challenging their ethics, which probably is the best way to go. To say they trying their best, and are amazing at matchmaking, is pretty naive. To weigh a warden next to nothing and Max eagle above 10000, or to ignore offence in matchmaking for months (after announcing it), does border on incompetance, or something worse, theres no honest way around this. After that famous update, so many people said, are you mad, this will hypercharge offence rushed lopsided engineering. If half the forum called it within a few hours, how do you explain supercells decision to do this, which must have taken weeks of planning, development and testing?

Mate. I appologise for making it appear I don't realise or care for the shortfalls within the system. Same as everyone else, it don't take much prediction on who will win, as the matchups are so extreme. I can't complain on that tho, as it is our own fault within our clan. We started out serious and had a good war record, till the engis started to max us. So we relaxed and opened the clan, carry a rushed th11 with eagle, infernos, and th8 and 9 defense, also low troops, down to the usual newbies/ kids. Now we suffer, rushed top vs non rushed, and also rostered, which, contrary to popular belief, usually gives an unfavourable draw. I feel tho that the forum is a good place to let off steam and vent ones frustrations, but strongly disagree that the will of a few should be imposed on the many.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

Half of what you say is spot on, many people here complain with selfish self serving bias for Iether a buff to their playstyle, or put people currently at an advantage to them, at a disadvantage, because engineering and rushing is baaad mmmmkaaay.

however many people also believe the extent of and ease to obtain a dominating advantage has dangerous implications for the war scene, as more and more will lose interest. Wars have to be competitive, and waiting a matchmaker, that offer more parity more often, with strategic leans build in, is probably a must If the war scene is to service and thrive.

with regards to people calling them incompetant or stupid, thats really the more polite alternative, as the only other explanation, is that supercell deliberatly create an unfair marchmaker, pretend they dont, and dishonstly say they want to improve it. To call them incompetant is actually allowing them enough room to wiggle their way towards a better matchmaker without challenging their ethics, which probably is the best way to go. To say they trying their best, and are amazing at matchmaking, is pretty naive. To weigh a warden next to nothing and Max eagle above 10000, or to ignore offence in matchmaking for months (after announcing it), does border on incompetance, or something worse, theres no honest way around this. After that famous update, so many people said, are you mad, this will hypercharge offence rushed lopsided engineering. If half the forum called it within a few hours, how do you explain supercells decision to do this, which must have taken weeks of planning, development and testing?

---

This is a good post and really makes you wonder what side of that coin SC is really on. I'm one who tends to believe they know exactly what's going on. Every move is deliberate and in pursuit of a goal. Problem is players and SC have different goals, that's were spin comes in to make them seem sympathetic. I refuse to believe incompetence is the reason. A company like this isn't built on incompetence, a few mistakes sure but they are quite capable and I'm sure get what they want most times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joshsgrandad

Mate. I appologise for making it appear I don't realise or care for the shortfalls within the system. Same as everyone else, it don't take much prediction on who will win, as the matchups are so extreme. I can't complain on that tho, as it is our own fault within our clan. We started out serious and had a good war record, till the engis started to max us. So we relaxed and opened the clan, carry a rushed th11 with eagle, infernos, and th8 and 9 defense, also low troops, down to the usual newbies/ kids. Now we suffer, rushed top vs non rushed, and also rostered, which, contrary to popular belief, usually gives an unfavourable draw. I feel tho that the forum is a good place to let off steam and vent ones frustrations, but strongly disagree that the will of a few should be imposed on the many.

---

it doesnt seam we disagree on much to be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clark11308

This is a good post and really makes you wonder what side of that coin SC is really on. I'm one who tends to believe they know exactly what's going on. Every move is deliberate and in pursuit of a goal. Problem is players and SC have different goals, that's were spin comes in to make them seem sympathetic. I refuse to believe incompetence is the reason. A company like this isn't built on incompetence, a few mistakes sure but they are quite capable and I'm sure get what they want most times.

---

come now Clark, you know very well supercell is on both sides of the coin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

however many people also believe the extent of and ease to obtain a dominating advantage has dangerous implications for the war scene, as more and more will lose interest. Wars have to be competitive, and waiting a matchmaker, that offer more parity more often, with strategic leans build in, is probably a must If the war scene is to service and thrive.

---

This is the heart and soul of many discussions on matchmaking, the future implications for everyone, and therefore the game as a whole. While there will always be players who care only about their own little Clash bubble, my own historic experience of the forums, is that the majority (maxer or engineer) recognise the longer term negative implications that may result from ANY playstyle that rewards big advantages in matchmaking.
While the main complaints in the last year have centered around offensively lopsided bases, there has always been an underlying community facepalm (:facepalm:) surrounding the individual weights (offensive or defensive) of certain items.

The recent announcement from Darian about individual weights is worrying, and yet gives hope too :-

"Furthermore, we have also built in a certain degree of flexibility into the new system that allows us to fine tune the matchmaking weights as needed. This will allow us to monitor the matchmaking, make changes if we feel the weights are either too heavy or not heavy enough. "

I have zero knowledge of programming, code, or development, but the above quote suggests to me that the system that's been in place since April 2014 hasn't had the flexibility to do this, hence the constant 'additional routines/checkboxes' being gradually added.
This sounds crazy to me on the surface, and I'm sure many players would agree, but maybe... just maybe... there's some truth in there somewhere!:unsure:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

Yes it fixed it for you, ruins it for other people, puts you at the advantage, means rushers will have to quit, is just as unfair as now.

because who cares about people that are not you? Come on Dude, fair for all, or stop moaning that the matchmaker isnt fair.

---

The trouble is we will never have fair for all, and as long as SC tries to make it 'fair for all' they'll never achieve making most people happy. The sheer magnitude of variations clans have come up with, varying offence and defence means a fair match up is very unlikely (unless two maxer clans match each other with an even lineup). They should just come out and say how they think everyone should play, just so we all know, and give people the chance to adapt to that line of thinking. If SC truly believes lopsided bases are the way, maxers should be given the chance to undo upgrades they wish to.

However I fail to believe SC have taken all the content in COC, divided it into 11 town hall levels, spent time working out what is unlocked at each level, and how far we can upgrade that item at the town hall level, spent time working out what spells can be unlocked at each town hall level, how many of them we can take and to what affect they have, how many troops can be used at that town hall level and their how far they can be upgraded, and even restricted the size of troop we can take in our cc to make sure nothings too overpowered - and then gone you know what, we think you should just play how you want forget the years of time and development we put in to make sure each town hall level is balanced.

For me SC knows the issues, and I guarantee they know how to fix it, but it's clear they never will sort it out, shame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGame1

The trouble is we will never have fair for all, and as long as SC tries to make it 'fair for all' they'll never achieve making most people happy. The sheer magnitude of variations clans have come up with, varying offence and defence means a fair match up is very unlikely (unless two maxer clans match each other with an even lineup). They should just come out and say how they think everyone should play, just so we all know, and give people the chance to adapt to that line of thinking. If SC truly believes lopsided bases are the way, maxers should be given the chance to undo upgrades they wish to.

However I fail to believe SC have taken all the content in COC, divided it into 11 town hall levels, spent time working out what is unlocked at each level, and how far we can upgrade that item at the town hall level, spent time working out what spells can be unlocked at each town hall level, how many of them we can take and to what affect they have, how many troops can be used at that town hall level and their how far they can be upgraded, and even restricted the size of troop we can take in our cc to make sure nothings too overpowered - and then gone you know what, we think you should just play how you want forget the years of time and development we put in to make sure each town hall level is balanced.

For me SC knows the issues, and I guarantee they know how to fix it, but it's clear they never will sort it out, shame.

---

why wont dorsans solution bring parity? It should bring excellent parity for all.

why wont onyx solution bring parity, If you pretend he never wrote part 4 of 5, and replaced that moment of Madness with nerfednames weight tax?

i would really like to hear your views on why these solutions will not be fair to all? Onyx solution is in his signiture, unless dorsan has put his double list marchmaker in his signature (cough cough, what the point of writing it If no one can find it, and also link the follow up no problems left behind as an alternative to your third iteration - no limits best fit) then someone Hopefully has saved the 2 links, the one that describes the system and the one that describes some adjustments and fixes.

seriously, i would enjoy your input on their systems.

DORSANG! Seriously, what is the point of development arguably the best parity marchmaker suggestion (double list) and then writing a follow up to fix some issues (no problems left behind) if its not in your sig and no one can read it. Onyx has his in his sig, maybe thats why hes got the badge and your out in the cold? Ill bet if you had to ask forumers what is dorsans solution and how does it work, less than 30 people could answer. What was the point then, getting you to put the ideas in your sig is a great parrelel to asking supercell to fix the matchmaker, is clearly the right thing to so, would make people happy, would save you time repeating yoruself, yet you refuse. Why Dorsancell, why?

this may require a sumounging, but it doesnt have to come to that.