Good Job Darian: A Matchmaking Success Story

After matchmaking was changed my clan took it upon ourselves to go back to the way we used to war quite some time ago. We only included in war bases with max defense development or TH .5 development at the minimum. For example, all our TH9s who have 20/20 heroes have x-bows. But our TH10s have 30/30 heroes and no infernos. None of our TH11s have eagles. Post update, wars have been nothing but spot on. Sure, there may be some engineered TH9s here and there on the opponents side, but nothing like we experienced in the past.

My clan has two TH11s, neither have an eagle, and both are the only bases in the clan with infernos. 2-4 TH10s, depending on who is ready for war. The rest are TH9s and TH8. This is basically how we have warred for the past 3 years, aside from before TH11 joining the game. Over the course of several years, I would say a lineup with less TH11 TH10 bases tend to match clans of equal strength more easily. When we made attempts to increase the number of top end bases, matchups would suffer because of it. And from stories I hear on the forum, or clans I visit to study matchups, I would say this is still the case. We traditionally ran 40v40 wars and had a great deal of success in that war size. But with the decline in interest in the game, and lack of motivation to find new players, we run 20v20 wars now.

While many different clans have different kinds of lineups for war I can only show what has worked for us. The main purpose of this thread is to show the matchmaker is currently producing fair and consistent wars for my clan. I will try to update this thread for future matchups.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...ium/warlog.png
War #13 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...dium/war13.png
War #12 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...dium/war12.png
War #11 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...dium/war11.png
War #10 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4324/medium/AA10.png

War #9 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4324/medium/AA9.png
War #8 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/warmap7.jpg

War #7 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/warmap6.jpg
War #6 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/warmap5.jpg
War #5 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/warmap4.jpg
War #4 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/warmap3.jpg
War #3 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/warmap2.jpg
War #2 after update
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/warmap1.jpg

War #1 after update I lost the screen shots. Dead even across the board in terms of THvsTH heroes vs heroes, etc.


War #11 after update, likely 100%
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...dium/AAmap.png

Save

/10 saves

So by engineering extensively with your top order, you win most of your matches...
No big surprise, looks like it's still broken to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

So by engineering extensively with your top order, you win most of your matches...
No big surprise, looks like it's still broken to me.

---

I don't think you bothered to read the post. It clearly states that TH .5 is the minimum base development in the war. You know, the TH .5 that everyone says doesn't work no more and there is no point in doing.


This is not an engineered base, friend.
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...dium/home1.jpg

Actually, I did read the post carefully.
None of your TH11 have Eagles
None of your TH10 have infernos.

I don't really mind if you don't think that is engineering, but in my opinion you are wrong, it is engineering 'friend'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

Actually, I did read the post carefully.
None of your TH11 have Eagles
None of your TH10 have infernos.

I don't really mind if you don't think that is engineering, but in my opinion you are wrong, it is engineering 'friend'.

---

we really need a new word since engineering is impossible to define objectively and the specifically Agreed apon by few.

how about war optimised versus farming/trophy optimised
how about matchmaker cognizant versus matchmaker independant

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

Actually, I did read the post carefully.
None of your TH11 have Eagles
None of your TH10 have infernos.

I don't really mind if you don't think that is engineering, but in my opinion you are wrong, it is engineering 'friend'.

---

After what everyone has gone through in the past year or so, I can understand why you would think that.

Our TH11s match eagles over 50% of the time in matchmaking. Good use of your "engineering" to "TH .5" comparison. Wars are fair on both ends, as seen in the matchups above.

I think sometimes its worth taking a step back to look at the bigger picture.

Firstly, I welcome any feedback such as Bobo's on his clans experience post MM changes. Without such feedback, it's difficult to formulate a balanced opinion, and therefore promote valuable discussion on the forum.

That being said, I certainly wouldn't advocate a 'Good Job Darian' approach, as feedback about a single clan is a raindrop in the ocean.
Making assumptions about the effectiveness of the new Matchmaking system, based upon one clans experience is a path I would rather not walk down.

Going back to the guts of the MM announcement :-
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...g-Improvements

In particular :-
"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"

"Our improved algorithm is an evolutionary step in making sure Clans will be matched more frequently against opponents of equivalent difficulty. 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 think while there is an overall goal to achieve a greater proportion of fair matches, it's fairly clear that the initial emphasis of the revised system is to alleviate some of the volume of lopsided engineered clans v non engineered clans, as this has been the main source of complaints over the last year or so.

Q- Have SC achieved this?
A- I still think it's too early to tell.

Summary : Feedback is needed and appreciated, but lets not make MM generalisations just because of the findings of one clan!:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

That being said, I certainly wouldn't advocate a 'Good Job Darian' approach, as feedback about a single clan is a raindrop in the ocean.
Making assumptions about the effectiveness of the new Matchmaking system, based upon one clans experience is a path I would rather not walk down.



Summary : Feedback is needed and appreciated, but lets not make MM generalisations just because of the findings of one clan!:)

---

I don't see other people saying Good Job Darian, so I can't help but to feel singled out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

While many different clans have different kinds of lineups for war I can only show what has worked for us. The main purpose of this thread is to show the matchmaker is currently producing fair and consistent wars for my clan.

---

This was put in the OP for a reason.


There is a trend going on in the clan war sub forum. People say matchmaking is broken 10 times for every 1 time it isn't broken. People say, no matter what we do we can't get a fair match. People say, matchmaking is less effective as it was prior to the release. It is important to know, that some clans are getting fair matches and the matchmaker is working well for some players. A generalization of good matches is no less significant than generalizations of bad matches.

Thanks for sharing this information!

It looks like your clan had slightly stronger offensive power in all of the top 5 bases shown. Would that mean the enemy bases were full THs - ie - had eagles and infernos to match your offensive advantage? Also, would be good to know a general breakdown of the other 15 bases in each war. Were the TH9s and TH8s primarily balanced down each war?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InflatedCoC

Thanks for sharing this information!

It looks like your clan had slightly stronger offensive power in all of the top 5 bases shown. Would that mean the enemy bases were full THs - ie - had eagles and infernos to match your offensive advantage? Also, would be good to know a general breakdown of the other 15 bases in each war. Were the TH9s and TH8s primarily balanced down each war?

---

No problem. Prior to the matchmaking update we had other bases in war as part of our strategy to combat engineered clans. But we had no engineered TH9 TH10 or TH11s ourselves. After the update we took all those bases out and our lineup consists of mostly max style bases. 1-12 are TH9-TH11 and the 8 lower bases are TH8s, most being maxed defense/offense. If the lineup changes any on the lower end, it's +/- th8s or th9s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

So by engineering extensively with your top order, you win most of your matches...
No big surprise, looks like it's still broken to me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

I don't think you bothered to read the post. It clearly states that TH .5 is the minimum base development in the war. You know, the TH .5 that everyone says doesn't work no more and there is no point in doing.


This is not an engineered base, friend.

---

Stevejnr is right, sorry BoBo, but if your top TH has all heroes maxed, and all save two troops maxed but do not have an eagle and many defences not maxed yet.... then you are engineering, and stating that all your bases in war are like that, makes it worse cubed imo.

I too feel, and it is proven here, that the MM change has helped engineered clans even more than it was before.
My current clan has no engineered base, none at all, not even a .5 nor any 'intelligently upgraded' bases, but we are facing engineered clans every single time since the change, and we war back to back.

Not Fun
TS

EDiT:
Let's look at the numbers, i.e. upgrade time for troops and spells from max at Th10 to max at Th11
Giants....14 days
Wallies....12 days
Balloons..14 days
Wizards...14 days
Dragons...14 days
BabyDs....14 days
Healer......14 days
Miner.......26 days (2lvls)
HogRider..14 days
Bowler.....14 days
Golem.....14 days
Witch.......14 days
Hound......14 days
Freeze.....14 days
Clone.......24 days (2lvls)
and
Poison.....12 days

242 days in total, a lot of time for only one laboratory (which itself takes 7 days)

and in all that time, your 5 builders could not bring your defence further than in your pic? Really??
And you are not engineering?

Who are you trying to kid?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

I don't think you bothered to read the post. It clearly states that TH .5 is the minimum base development in the war. You know, the TH .5 that everyone says doesn't work no more and there is no point in doing.


This is not an engineered base, friend.
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...dium/home1.jpg

---

Weird, this looks exactly like the type of engineered base my clan is drawing every single match. We are kind of suckers though. We built infernos when we went th10 and we built an eagle when we went th11. I think it's probably deserved we get to face double the th11s every war. Clash on!

The th11 in your picture is engineered, right at the top end of what can still be called .5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

Our TH11s match eagles over 50% of the time in matchmaking.

---

Given the max offence on the th11 you pictured, that means that half the time it is matching a softer clan number 1 than the majority of th11 players do, so having an easier war at a lower level of difficulty than is the norm for genuinely nonengineered th11s. That in itself may not be a problem providing it together with the other engineered bases in your clan doesn't contribute to a situation where in matching you pull an enemy that doesn't have an equal level of offence relative to defence.

Whats wrong with you guys lol. Is this some kind of joke?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

Whats wrong with you guys lol. Is this some kind of joke?

---

no, no joke, and I suppose you didn't intend your post as one either.
Good job on the pics in OP, btw :thumbsup:

But honestly you are abusing the MM-System.

I believe many are frustrated by the way Clan War has gone over to engineering in a big way. You are experiencing this inthe answers above. Don't take it personally.

Have Fun
TS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

The th11 in your picture is engineered, right at the top end of what can still be called .5



Given the max offence on the th11 you pictured, that means that half the time it is matching a softer clan number 1 than the majority of th11 players do, so having an easier war at a lower level of difficulty than is the norm for genuinely nonengineered th11s. That in itself may not be a problem providing it together with the other engineered bases in your clan doesn't contribute to a situation where in matching you pull an enemy that doesn't have an equal level of offence relative to defence.

---

How is that base engineered? I just can't see it.

And how is the opposing clan going to be at an offensive disadvantage when OP's clan is only running 10.5/9.5? Even if they have weaker offense, they are facing easier much defensive bases.

At th10, 9.5 was very balanced due to inferno/hero trade-off. The 10.5 route might be a bit less balanced, but I don't think there ever is a significant advantage gained from it.

Can't tell if OP is trolling or oblivious.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stealthmtn

How is that base engineered? I just can't see it.

And how is the opposing clan going to be at an offensive disadvantage when OP's clan is only running 10.5/9.5? Even if they have weaker offense, they are facing easier much defensive bases.

At th10, 9.5 was very balanced due to inferno/hero trade-off. The 10.5 route might be a bit less balanced, but I don't think there ever is a significant advantage gained from it.

---

...erm, maybe you are better off because you trade 1 defence for 2 attacks, while on top of that the opponents' weaker offence makes the weaker defence less an issue?

Have Fun
TS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TullSadum

...erm, maybe you are better off because you trade 1 defence for 2 attacks, while on top of that the opponents' weaker offence makes the weaker defence less an issue?

Have Fun
TS

---

That argument can be made, but with no Infernos on OP's th10s, then the enemy #1 has a "free" hit on a th9 layout for the 2nd attack. How is that any different than a max hero 11 having a 2nd attack on a th10 (which I assume has infernos based on matchup images looking like standard heroes v infernos, other than war #2)?

Don't get me wrong X.5s used to be a huge war advantage. If SC has gotten anything right over the years in the mm, it is that they made the mm accounts for X.5 clans significantly better.

The easiest way to decide for yourself whether or not something is engineered or not is to ask yourself this question and be honest with yourself.

'Why have these defences not been built?'

If the honest answer is 'haven't had time yet' then it might not be engineered, it could just be an early development TH. (The one you posted a pic of is definetly not an early development TH)
If however the answer is 'Because it will draw tougher opponents in war if I build them' then it is engineering.

OP, I don't have a problem with your clan building X.5 bases and putting them into wars, it's not my preferred way, but I can completely understand why it is done. The current matchmaker almost forces your hand, to avoid being overpowered by the opposition it seems the only answer is to build these bases by not building certain defences.

My issue is, that your post seems to be saying 'Well done SC, matchmaking works'. When the whole point of the new matchmaking was to 'address engineered bases in matchmaking' which your post actually suggests it has not done and has actually done the opposite. Making good war matches for engineered clans was not what the majority were looking for in this change, although it should have been a side effect of making fairer matches for everyone.

If you can take an objective step back and look at your match ups from the point of view of the opposition, how many of your recent match ups would you think are fair then? I guess the point is that even though you see them as fair wars because you are winning the majority of them does not mean that your opposition feel the same way about the war.

PS. I'm glad you have found a lineup that works for you, and I hope you continue to enjoy your wars, I just hope it doesn't end up being at mine and others expensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

The easiest way to decide for yourself whether or not something is engineered or not is to ask yourself this question and be honest with yourself.

'Why have these defences not been built?'

If the honest answer is 'haven't had time yet' then it might not be engineered, it could just be an early development TH. (The one you posted a pic of is definetly not an early development TH)
If however the answer is 'Because it will draw tougher opponents in war if I build them' then it is engineering.

OP, I don't have a problem with your clan building X.5 bases and putting them into wars, it's not my preferred way, but I can completely understand why it is done. The current matchmaker almost forces your hand, to avoid being overpowered by the opposition it seems the only answer is to build these bases by not building certain defences.

My issue is, that your post seems to be saying 'Well done SC, matchmaking works'. When the whole point of the new matchmaking was to 'address engineered bases in matchmaking' which your post actually suggests it has not done and has actually done the opposite. Making good war matches for engineered clans was not what the majority were looking for in this change, although it should have been a side effect of making fairer matches for everyone.

If you can take an objective step back and look at your match ups from the point of view of the opposition, how many of your recent match ups would you think are fair then? I guess the point is that even though you see them as fair wars because you are winning the majority of them does not mean that your opposition feel the same way about the war.

PS. I'm glad you have found a lineup that works for you, and I hope you continue to enjoy your wars, I just hope it doesn't end up being at mine and others expensive.

---

SUPERBLY written...many thanks for sharing. Concur.

It's .5 engineered, which is generally more acceptable than more extreme forms of engineering. You've got everything from past TH levels and upgraded, which is great, but you are gaining a small advantage by not building the heavily weighted Eagle artillery. I have no problem with this form of engineering myself - it's the ones who go defenseless or don't build all of the stuff at several levels but keep upgrading offense that ruin the game.

Admitted engineers look at heavy .5s and say "yep, that's engineering. Maybe a lighter version of what I do but same goal and same method. Skip some buildings to manage war weight". Leagues and serious maxxers look at heavy .5s and say "we forbid that, that's engineering. We don't skip buildings due to war weight".

But owners of heavy .5s are appalled, APPALLED that anyone might accuse them of engaging in filthy engineering. Nothing new here. I'm a bit disappointed not to see the 'sensible upgrade path' exemption invoked though.

Interesting to see several wars worth of info though. You could have easily posted war 4 or 6 with "OMG warden disadvantage MM sucks!" but as you point out it seems fair overall. I think SC goes for fairness over time (though they don't get there often) and will never be concerned with an individual mismatch.

I wonder about the timeframe of your war size change though. I'd expect better, fairer, lower-engineering wars at smaller sizes. If you went from 40v to 20v recently that could color your perceptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

I don't think you bothered to read the post. It clearly states that TH .5 is the minimum base development in the war. You know, the TH .5 that everyone says doesn't work no more and there is no point in doing.


This is not an engineered base, friend.
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...dium/home1.jpg

---

What do you mean "this is not an engineered base my friend?"
It has 45/45/20 heroes, and unless the Eagle is behind the white bar blocking out the clan castle it's EXACTLY an engineered base, my friend...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stealthmtn

How is that base engineered? I just can't see it.

And how is the opposing clan going to be at an offensive disadvantage when OP's clan is only running 10.5/9.5? Even if they have weaker offense, they are facing easier much defensive bases.

At th10, 9.5 was very balanced due to inferno/hero trade-off. The 10.5 route might be a bit less balanced, but I don't think there ever is a significant advantage gained from it.

---

They would be overpowered if they did not have an equal level of offence, which is to say that the lower defence weight engineered bases were impacting the matchmaking so as to pull some weaker clan into the war with lower th levels in several lanes. The base pictured can attack any max th11 yet it - according to the OP - only matches one with an eagle half the time (never mind what size, a small th11 can own an eagle). With 2 attacks to 1 defence, cumulatively it is devestating, particularly in a match involving a low number of th11.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

The easiest way to decide for yourself whether or not something is engineered or not is to ask yourself this question and be honest with yourself.

'Why have these defences not been built?'

If the honest answer is 'haven't had time yet' then it might not be engineered, it could just be an early development TH. (The one you posted a pic of is definetly not an early development TH)
If however the answer is 'Because it will draw tougher opponents in war if I build them' then it is engineering.

OP, I don't have a problem with your clan building X.5 bases and putting them into wars, it's not my preferred way, but I can completely understand why it is done. The current matchmaker almost forces your hand, to avoid being overpowered by the opposition it seems the only answer is to build these bases by not building certain defences.

My issue is, that your post seems to be saying 'Well done SC, matchmaking works'. When the whole point of the new matchmaking was to 'address engineered bases in matchmaking' which your post actually suggests it has not done and has actually done the opposite. Making good war matches for engineered clans was not what the majority were looking for in this change, although it should have been a side effect of making fairer matches for everyone.

If you can take an objective step back and look at your match ups from the point of view of the opposition, how many of your recent match ups would you think are fair then? I guess the point is that even though you see them as fair wars because you are winning the majority of them does not mean that your opposition feel the same way about the war.

PS. I'm glad you have found a lineup that works for you, and I hope you continue to enjoy your wars, I just hope it doesn't end up being at mine and others expensive.

---

Lucid, well explained, spot on as usual.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pyrotech

Can't tell if OP is trolling or oblivious.......

---

When in doubt, go for oblivious. I think the OP does not realise .5 is engineered, nor see that the picture shows something well beyond what many even call .5 in the sense of that understood as a progression path in early th level for a base intending to max. If it were simply .5 as in "I'm pretty recently th11 and haven't built eagle yet, as I was caught up on doing all those storages, warden, etc" then it wouldn't be sporting max everything else. As Steve said so well, the only conceivable reason for managing to max everything without yet dropping that eagle is that you think it an advantage not to do so... and it's sure not an advantage in multiplayer... your decision surely then is a war one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

The easiest way to decide for yourself whether or not something is engineered or not is to ask yourself this question and be honest with yourself.

'Why have these defences not been built?'

If however the answer is 'Because it will draw tougher opponents in war if I build them' then it is engineering.

---

Absolutely Steve. I'm also quite happy to put my hands up here, and admit freely, that while I've historically advocated the balanced bases approach within my clan, the 'Eagle' is one defence build I just can't recommend building to my clan mates, because it's weight (imo) doesn't justify the value it gives.

Am I being slightly hypocritical? - Yes, I am
Is having a 45/45/20 Max offence TH11 without an Eagle an engineered base? - Yes, of course it is.

That being said, just to add some balance here, I still believe that the main focus of the recent MM was to eradicate the advantages gained by 'lopsided' bases (ie bases with a high degree of offence v defence disparity), as this has been the main source of community anger over the last year or so!
Subjective I know.:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

Wars are fair on both ends, as seen in the matchups above.

---

If you win a huge majority of your matchups by more than a couple stars ... You are either the bests in the world or taking advantage of the system ...

Come play in some league tournament, we'll see where you really stand on the above "énoncé" !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

The base pictured can attack any max th11 yet it - according to the OP - only matches one with an eagle half the time (never mind what size, a small th11 can own an eagle).

---

But the other half of the time it may be matching to a base identical to itself.

I'm not so keen on 10.5s - they may be an advantage due to the insane weight of the eagle - but our 9.5s either match to enemy 9.5s (although the enemy "9.5s" sometimes have max TH11 troops and wardens and 4 xbows :( ); or to inferno bases. In the former case it's like-vs-like so can't really be unfair. In the latter the enemy gets to hit inferno-less bases - which many respected players on here consider an auto-3*. In reality you can defend with them, but you need a good base, AND the attacker not to be too great. And in return you get to try a 10v10 triple on an inferno base - and we all know how easy it is to stomp full TH10s with the OP TH10 troops :smirk:

In general at TH10 (and 11) it's very hard to turn extra offence into extra triples against full/max targets; whereas it's very easy to concede extra triples to your opponent by being under defended. That's just where the 3* line is drawn atm.

There IS however an advantage, I think, in 9.5s, but it's solely a skill one: the sort of inferno+low heroes enemies they sometimes match tend not to be the greatest attackers, which leaves the door open to the 9.5s to win.

So, of course x.5s are engineering, but in the last few months if you're being beaten up by x.5s you're doing something wrong (except maybe 10.5s - I have little experience there, but they are maybe more OP)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

The easiest way to decide for yourself whether or not something is engineered or not is to ask yourself this question and be honest with yourself.

'Why have these defences not been built?'

If the honest answer is 'haven't had time yet' then it might not be engineered, it could just be an early development TH. (The one you posted a pic of is definetly not an early development TH)
If however the answer is 'Because it will draw tougher opponents in war if I build them' then it is engineering.

---

Functionally the same as my definition, letting your knowledge of the matchmaker/weights guide your upgrade decisions. Roughly nobody holds off on xbows/infernos/eagle very long unless they war, and are aware of the matchmaking implications. Strangely defenseless existed before war though, purely as a fun thing.

I've yet to see an alternative definition that doesn't include .5 as engineered, unless its specifically geared to exclude .5s.

The purpose of the matchmaker is not to reward engineers or punish engineers or categorize bases as engineers. It has nothing to do with any of that.

The purpose is to provide a reasonably even (not fair, even) match in a reasonable time frame.

Given the scores shown on your war log it looks like most of your wars were reasonably close. Sounds like you are getting enough close matches to say that mm is working at least as well as it was before. Hopefully as we get more wars we will see it continue to improve.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

we really need a new word since engineering is impossible to define objectively and the specifically Agreed apon by few.

how about war optimised versus farming/trophy optimised
how about matchmaker cognizant versus matchmaker independant

---

I would say 0.5 is not engineering, but it does give you a consistent advantage.

glad your clan is having success although as others have pointed out, it does feel to me that you are engineered a bit and it's working for you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

The easiest way to decide for yourself whether or not something is engineered or not is to ask yourself this question and be honest with yourself.

'Why have these defences not been built?'

If the honest answer is 'haven't had time yet' then it might not be engineered, it could just be an early development TH. (The one you posted a pic of is definetly not an early development TH)
If however the answer is 'Because it will draw tougher opponents in war if I build them' then it is engineering.

OP, I don't have a problem with your clan building X.5 bases and putting them into wars, it's not my preferred way, but I can completely understand why it is done. The current matchmaker almost forces your hand, to avoid being overpowered by the opposition it seems the only answer is to build these bases by not building certain defences.

My issue is, that your post seems to be saying 'Well done SC, matchmaking works'. When the whole point of the new matchmaking was to 'address engineered bases in matchmaking' which your post actually suggests it has not done and has actually done the opposite. Making good war matches for engineered clans was not what the majority were looking for in this change, although it should have been a side effect of making fairer matches for everyone.

If you can take an objective step back and look at your match ups from the point of view of the opposition, how many of your recent match ups would you think are fair then? I guess the point is that even though you see them as fair wars because you are winning the majority of them does not mean that your opposition feel the same way about the war.

PS. I'm glad you have found a lineup that works for you, and I hope you continue to enjoy your wars, I just hope it doesn't end up being at mine and others expensive.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

Admitted engineers look at heavy .5s and say "yep, that's engineering. Maybe a lighter version of what I do but same goal and same method. Skip some buildings to manage war weight". Leagues and serious maxxers look at heavy .5s and say "we forbid that, that's engineering. We don't skip buildings due to war weight".

But owners of heavy .5s are appalled, APPALLED that anyone might accuse them of engaging in filthy engineering. Nothing new here. I'm a bit disappointed not to see the 'sensible upgrade path' exemption invoked though.

Interesting to see several wars worth of info though. You could have easily posted war 4 or 6 with "OMG warden disadvantage MM sucks!" but as you point out it seems fair overall. I think SC goes for fairness over time (though they don't get there often) and will never be concerned with an individual mismatch.

I wonder about the timeframe of your war size change though. I'd expect better, fairer, lower-engineering wars at smaller sizes. If you went from 40v to 20v recently that could color your perceptions.

---

I agree. The players that don't think .5 is engineering and/or have trouble defining engineering are those who think it is a bad word, dishonorable, dirty, an insult, etc. It isn't. Like Steve said, if you didn't build that inferno, bow, eagle, etc. because of the war matchmaker, you are engineering. That isn't an insult.

Now, back to OPs purpose of this thread, it is interesting to see someone using .5s but not getting hit with bad matchups. Many others are reporting the opposite so it is good to see it from both sides. I'm not convinced either way yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

They would be overpowered if they did not have an equal level of offence, which is to say that the lower defence weight engineered bases were impacting the matchmaking so as to pull some weaker clan into the war with lower th levels in several lanes. The base pictured can attack any max th11 yet it - according to the OP - only matches one with an eagle half the time (never mind what size, a small th11 can own an eagle). With 2 attacks to 1 defence, cumulatively it is devestating, particularly in a match involving a low number of th11.

---

I am clearly biased here, but I view engineering as "gaining a definitive advantage" due to the mm by controlling weight. However, I think it would be a questionable advantage with the current mm to run a 10.5 up top. It may very well be a disadvantage in some cases, depending upon the match (OP has been fortunate).

This is the result of the current th10 & th11 meta, where th10 v th10 attacks and th11 and th11 attacks may not produce 3 stars at a high rate. Conceding defense like this - with the current state of th10 & th11 offense - does not inherently provide an advantage, and that's why I feel that X.5 is not engineering at this point in war - a few months ago, I would have agreed.

With the mm performing some sort of off & def total checks, there is an increased probability to pull a heavy th11, another off heavy 10.5, or even an extra th11. OP has been lucky, imo, that they have not yet (9.5s may be helping that).

as to evenmatch ups....
If a non engineered clan wins 60-70% of it's wars,they are above average
now post change, this same clan wins 25% of the match ups....did they all suddenly unlern how to play?
The wins are a struggle, the losses are a blow over.
There is something wrong here.
Maybe the lopsided bases no longer get matched, but we encounter 100% uneven matches now. All our opponents have 30-40% .5 bases and some still have lollipop bases at the bottom of the roster.
In effect their top 3 bases are stronger than ours and our 'advantage' is in the lower regions of the map, where three stars would have been the norm anyway.
Their max offense bases with defence at TH10 lvl or lower on roster numbers 5-7 can hit our top bases leaving their maxed bases to crush our 4-11 whereas our top bases (nonmaxed) have to struggle with their maxed bases.
It's the same every war.
It is unfair. This used to be the case now and then and you'd live with it, anoying as it was,but now it's every single time and this is very frustrating.
I have waited to post this as a war or two are no example,but now it has beenlong enough,and I cansay the result the new MM has brought so far is not amusing.
It seems the option is for everyone to start a second account and engineer that.....really, is that the direction we are supposed to be heading??

Have Fun
TS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

I think sometimes its worth taking a step back to look at the bigger picture.

Firstly, I welcome any feedback such as Bobo's on his clans experience post MM changes. Without such feedback, it's difficult to formulate a balanced opinion, and therefore promote valuable discussion on the forum.

That being said, I certainly wouldn't advocate a 'Good Job Darian' approach, as feedback about a single clan is a raindrop in the ocean.
Making assumptions about the effectiveness of the new Matchmaking system, based upon one clans experience is a path I would rather not walk down.

Going back to the guts of the MM announcement :-
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...g-Improvements

In particular :-
"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"

"Our improved algorithm is an evolutionary step in making sure Clans will be matched more frequently against opponents of equivalent difficulty. 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 think while there is an overall goal to achieve a greater proportion of fair matches, it's fairly clear that the initial emphasis of the revised system is to alleviate some of the volume of lopsided engineered clans v non engineered clans, as this has been the main source of complaints over the last year or so.

Q- Have SC achieved this?
A- I still think it's too early to tell.

Summary : Feedback is needed and appreciated, but lets not make MM generalisations just because of the findings of one clan!:)

---

My clan is experiencing a similar to result to bobo's. See full match details here:

https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...n-2-0%29/page4

We also include .5's in our roster and we have had no bad side effects in 8 wars either. We are currently 4 wins 3 losses under the OMMMA, after this war it will probably be 4 wins 4 losses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

The easiest way to decide for yourself whether or not something is engineered or not is to ask yourself this question and be honest with yourself.

'Why have these defences not been built?'

If the honest answer is 'haven't had time yet' then it might not be engineered, it could just be an early development TH. (The one you posted a pic of is definetly not an early development TH)
If however the answer is 'Because it will draw tougher opponents in war if I build them' then it is engineering.

OP, I don't have a problem with your clan building X.5 bases and putting them into wars, it's not my preferred way, but I can completely understand why it is done. The current matchmaker almost forces your hand, to avoid being overpowered by the opposition it seems the only answer is to build these bases by not building certain defences.

My issue is, that your post seems to be saying 'Well done SC, matchmaking works'. When the whole point of the new matchmaking was to 'address engineered bases in matchmaking' which your post actually suggests it has not done and has actually done the opposite. Making good war matches for engineered clans was not what the majority were looking for in this change, although it should have been a side effect of making fairer matches for everyone.

If you can take an objective step back and look at your match ups from the point of view of the opposition, how many of your recent match ups would you think are fair then? I guess the point is that even though you see them as fair wars because you are winning the majority of them does not mean that your opposition feel the same way about the war.

PS. I'm glad you have found a lineup that works for you, and I hope you continue to enjoy your wars, I just hope it doesn't end up being at mine and others expensive.

---

.5 is a form of engineering. But in my opinion if you want everybody to be able to war during town hall transitions, you have to cut some slack to people choosing to level the offense portion of their base first. Otherwise, they would just get excluded from war. So .5's should be referred to as "optimized" even though they are technically engineered. (I reserve "engineering" for anything outside of .5)

.5's used to be a big advantage, but most will agree here that they were nerfed. I believe they are satisfactorily accounted for by the match maker now (with 10.5 because of the warden weight is a possible exception). Bobo's #1 im sure matches eagles some of the time and maybe another 10.5 the rest of the time. There will never be parity in the matchmaker. My own wars posted above are not exact matches and could be closer, but in my eyes, it's close enough that either side will win. The small differences can be made up by attack skill and base design.

I think you guys were missing the over all point of the post. You all got side tracked on the engineering bit. The new match maker (OMMMA) is doing a good job for the average full spread roster. Even though bobo has some "optimized" accounts, OMMMA is still producing acceptable matches.

I think there are still balance issues involving heavy rosters. And, still room to improve. I think it has taken a step in the right direction. Nobody complained about .5's. It was the defenseless/low weight 45/45/20 maxed th11's ruining wars, or the invading max dragon wardens invading th9 and under wars that were the issue. All the complaint threads I ever saw were concerning roster engineering or defenseless th11's.

Bobo, I agree with your post in the fact that average clans seem to have a decent matchmaker. However, it's performance for top heavy clans is still not there yet.

Edit: Also wanted to add, if you lump bobo's #1 into the "engineered" (not optimized) category, then you have to say that excluding somebody from your clan/warring for whatever reason, you are "roster engineering" instead of optimizing your roster for war. You are making your roster up with the clan wars outcome in mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

I agree. The players that don't think .5 is engineering and/or have trouble defining engineering are those who think it is a bad word, dishonorable, dirty, an insult, etc. It isn't. Like Steve said, if you didn't build that inferno, bow, eagle, etc. because of the war matchmaker, you are engineering. That isn't an insult.

Now, back to OPs purpose of this thread, it is interesting to see someone using .5s but not getting hit with bad matchups. Many others are reporting the opposite so it is good to see it from both sides. I'm not convinced either way yet.

---

Check my match thread, Totally jives with bobo's results. Multiple .5's and nothing I would consider a mis match. Some have been more challenging then others though.

I don't recall a true TH .5 being labeled as an engineered base until the effects of what engineering is today came along. It sure seems people have a tendency to change their mind despite what a viable base build was 3, 2, or even 1 year ago from now when considering the fairness in matchmaking in clan wars.

Lets review what a true engineered base is. What an engineered lineup actually consists of.

This is what an engineered base is.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...m/engine33.jpg


You want to call this an engineered base? I'm ok with that.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...m/engine22.JPG

This is not an engineered base.

Based on what y'all believe to be true, it's currently the opposite of an engineered base. Pulling equivalent if not harder TH 11s because of some so called nerf to TH .5 bases.

The hypocrisy doesn't stop here.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...m/engine11.JPG


Nobody cares to mention that TH10.5 do pull full TH11s in war. TH11 with completely maxed bases, perhaps. If our strategy in war, keep in mind the most accepted base development strategy for the past 3 years, is the bane of matchmaking and to the degree of fault for every ones problems, why does matchmaking put our lineup to a disadvantage but we still win?

If our current war, war matchup #8 in the OP, is nothing but manipulating the matchmaking to our advantage due to TH.5s, why does the opponent have an advantage?

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/match11.jpg
http://www.photocamel.com/gallery/da...4/match221.jpg
If our team only has 4 infernos and no EA, surely their TH11s with respectable heroes can roll right over our TH10.5s. But wait, then we have to attack into 2 EA while they have easier bases to hit on the rebound. Suuuuch a huge advantage TH.5s have.

Still going to win the war easily, regardless of their EA, regardless of their opportunity to attack TH11s with no EA, regardless if they clean every single base below.

EA don't defend a TH11. Max point defenses do. An eagle is not needed to defend against a max TH11's attack. You just need to be able to attack a max TH11 with and EA better than an opponent can attack a TH10.5. Which isn't even that hard.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...ium/star11.jpg


It's a sad day for the forums. It's not very often that content is posted on the forum that actually teaches someone something new or with any sense of intervention. Some come here to learn a thing or two, rather than express their frustration with not being successful in wars and not being able to figure it out themselves. All to say a TH.5 is the filth that makes clan wars what it actually is today.

I'm going to keep updating my thread, because there are people who will find it viable. It's times like now that trusting my gut, knowing what success I have had at this game over the years is vastly more reliable than many of the comments made thus far. If I can lead a clan to 50+ war win streaks time and time again, through xmod infested waters, through matchmaking updates, through bad matchups, and through the engineering sprees, with nothing more than TH.5's, that simply means more to me than what most have provided to this discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

we really need a new word since engineering is impossible to define objectively and the specifically Agreed apon by few.

how about war optimised versus farming/trophy optimised
how about matchmaker cognizant versus matchmaker independant

---

The above quote I can throw my support behind, it is really challenging in todays clan war enviroment with such personal bias on what is and isnt engineering whether its done individually or via a roster. To the Op, been clashing pretty much as long as you have and I agree, the accepted transitional strategy of moving up from one townhall to the next for clanwars was .5 within your townhall and was never considered 'dirty engineering' by the majority of forumers and SC. However, Dec 2015 and i believe the update spring 2016 has significantly altered the playing field and possibly forever in random clanwars because the best th in troops,spells,heroes and defenses added a greater and with subsequent updates easier ability to hide those assets in random wars. I am glad for you and your clan that you feel you are getting fair matches and doing well. I would only point out that on this forum i have seen .5 in other similar rosters not working as well, so that makes me scratch my head and say why?

Bobo, with respect Engineering has existed since the beginning of time. That first base you posted above is a truly lopsided base, a single cannon defenceless copy and paste style, and indeed a real demon within the community post March 2016. However, you won't find that kind of base in the most successful engineered clan of all time. Hence all the discomfort of defining engineered....it really is a pit of murky unpleasant waters. Engineering encompasses a whole range of bases attempting to exploit what the matchmaker dishes out...😁

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rambletamble

The above quote I can throw my support behind, it is really challenging in todays clan war enviroment with such personal bias on what is and isnt engineering whether its done individually or via a roster. To the Op, been clashing pretty much as long as you have and I agree, the accepted transitional strategy of moving up from one townhall to the next for clanwars was .5 within your townhall and was never considered 'dirty engineering' by the majority of forumers and SC. However, Dec 2015 and i believe the update spring 2016 has significantly altered the playing field and possibly forever in random clanwars because the best th in troops,spells,heroes and defenses added a greater and with subsequent updates easier ability to hide those assets in random wars. I am glad for you and your clan that you feel you are getting fair matches and doing well. I would only point out that on this forum i have seen .5 in other similar rosters not working as well, so that makes me scratch my head and say why?

---

Thanks ramble.

There could be a million reasons why, but so far our wars have been fair. My only goal was to show what has been working for us, since many of the threads focus on poor matchups. There are some clans who see good in the matchmaking adjustments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

Bobo, with respect Engineering has existed since the beginning of time. That first base you posted above is a truly lopsided base, a single cannon defenceless copy and paste style, and indeed a real demon within the community post March 2016. However, you won't find that kind of base in the most successful engineered clan of all time. Hence all the discomfort of defining engineered....it really is a pit of murky unpleasant waters. Engineering encompasses a whole range of bases attempting to exploit what the matchmaker dishes out...😁

---

Thats a fair explanation. Most players have goals with their base, one way or another.

But in fairness, what is the goal of a max th base? It's to match its equivalent th but one that is weaker than himself. While it surely isn't an intentional exploit, the disparity will happen either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

I don't recall a true TH .5 being labeled as an engineered base until the effects of what engineering is today came along. It sure seems people have a tendency to change their mind despite what a viable base build was 3, 2, or even 1 year ago from now when considering the fairness in matchmaking in clan wars.

Lets review what a true engineered base is. What an engineered lineup actually consists of.

This is what an engineered base is.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...m/engine33.jpg


You want to call this an engineered base? I'm ok with that.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...m/engine22.JPG

This is not an engineered base.

Based on what y'all believe to be true, it's currently the opposite of an engineered base. Pulling equivalent if not harder TH 11s because of some so called nerf to TH .5 bases.

The hypocrisy doesn't stop here.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...m/engine11.JPG


Nobody cares to mention that TH10.5 do pull full TH11s in war. TH11 with completely maxed bases, perhaps. If our strategy in war, keep in mind the most accepted base development strategy for the past 3 years, is the bane of matchmaking and to the degree of fault for every ones problems, why does matchmaking put our lineup to a disadvantage but we still win?

If our current war, war matchup #8 in the OP, is nothing but manipulating the matchmaking to our advantage due to TH.5s, why does the opponent have an advantage?

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/match11.jpg
http://www.photocamel.com/gallery/da...4/match221.jpg
If our team only has 4 infernos and no EA, surely their TH11s with respectable heroes can roll right over our TH10.5s. But wait, then we have to attack into 2 EA while they have easier bases to hit on the rebound. Suuuuch a huge advantage TH.5s have.

Still going to win the war easily, regardless of their EA, regardless of their opportunity to attack TH11s with no EA, regardless if they clean every single base below.

EA don't defend a TH11. Max point defenses do. An eagle is not needed to defend against a max TH11's attack. You just need to be able to attack a max TH11 with and EA better than an opponent can attack a TH10.5. Which isn't even that hard.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...ium/star11.jpg


It's a sad day for the forums. It's not very often that content is posted on the forum that actually teaches someone something new or with any sense of intervention. Some come here to learn a thing or two, rather than express their frustration with not being successful in wars and not being able to figure it out themselves. All to say a TH.5 is the filth that makes clan wars what it actually is today.

I'm going to keep updating my thread, because there are people who will find it viable. It's times like now that trusting my gut, knowing what success I have had at this game over the years is vastly more reliable than many of the comments made thus far. If I can lead a clan to 50+ war win streaks time and time again, through xmod infested waters, through matchmaking updates, through bad matchups, and through the engineering sprees, with nothing more than TH.5's, that simply means more to me than what most have provided to this discussion.

---

It's all good If you're successful and having fun. No reason to get wound around the axle. But, a max offense base without an EA is most definitely engineered. You may be thinking about those defenseless noobs that run up dragons and spam them. That's kiddy stuff. You're doing it right, the way smart engineers do.

I said this awhile back, and I think it still may be of some importance. Sometimes when they make adjustments to the Matchmaker, a clan on accident will be favored by the matchmaker as the ideal roster break down. Then the next update, things get bad for that clan again. I have been though many updates and have noticed patches when the match maker was seemingly treating our clan very well and then other updates not so much. This update seems to be treating us okay. I honestly cannot complain about our matches.

After one update we almost doubled our previous best win streak, (from 6 to 11) The matchmaker was treating our clan well obviously. I could tell that our wars seemed easier. Then the next update, I remember getting a string of very tough wars (we lost 4 in a row), and I remember thinking that SC must have had tried to correct an issue from the previous update and "over tuned" the new one to make wars ridiculously hard.

Under the new update, our wars have had small slants one way or the other, with some being on the more challenging side and others on the less challenging side. We will most likely be 4 and 4 under OMMMA after this war ends. But our matches have all been reasonable (even with the slant 1 way or the other).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMiner

It's all good If you're successful and having fun. No reason to get wound around the axle. But, a max offense base without an EA is most definitely engineered. You may be thinking about those defenseless noobs that run up dragons and spam them. That's kiddy stuff. You're doing it right, the way smart engineers do.

---

This
100 million thises

Good job on your engineering Bobo!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denton

This
100 million thises

Good job on your engineering Bobo!

---

Drags are strong right now though lol

It is the intent that matters. Just because someone is bad at engineering, doesn't mean they aren't engineering. A defenseless base is an engineered base, even though there are better forms of engineering than that and they are even easier to make.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

But in fairness, what is the goal of a max th base? It's to match its equivalent th but one that is weaker than himself.

---

That is an odd claim. While the owner of a max th base might enjoy matching an easier base of the same level (particularly as a refreshing change), it's a long way from there to claiming that is their goal, far less that it is the goal for every owner of a max base. That is basically taking what you might call the "engineering mindset" (how can I pull a weaker enemy?) and projecting it onto everyone else. There's quite a few out there who if asked "what would be an ideal match as your mirror, irrespective of practicalities" would reply "getting a base to attack that is identical in strength to my own".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

That is an odd claim. While the owner of a max th base might enjoy matching an easier base of the same level (particularly as a refreshing change), it's a long way from there to claiming that is their goal, far less that it is the goal for every owner of a max base. That is basically taking what you might call the "engineering mindset" (how can I pull a weaker enemy?) and projecting it onto everyone else. There's quite a few out there who if asked "what would be an ideal match as your mirror, irrespective of practicalities" would reply "getting a base to attack that is identical in strength to my own".

---

Most everyone I know with maxed base has it because they enjoyed maxing the base. Same as every other grind game in the last 20 yrs.

Imagine that eh

I'm happy that your getting good wars. - if we use the craziest most extreme accounts we can muster - we get a war that we can come close to getting 100% in. anything short of our most uniquely engineered accounts and anchors put in and we're looking at red lines.

our more normal clan is getting a hodge podge of enemies... sometimes its close - sometimes spot on -sometimes way off.

-My own tests have shown there is NO standard; every war is a bit different... its tough to claim success when so many complaints are being posted.

I applaud your positive outlook on the topic. I was hoping to learn something; and I did. you all have nice solid .5;s on top and are doing well... as you should be... you'd be doing even better if you were more extreme than .5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

That is an odd claim. While the owner of a max th base might enjoy matching an easier base of the same level (particularly as a refreshing change), it's a long way from there to claiming that is their goal, far less that it is the goal for every owner of a max base. That is basically taking what you might call the "engineering mindset" (how can I pull a weaker enemy?) and projecting it onto everyone else. There's quite a few out there who if asked "what would be an ideal match as your mirror, irrespective of practicalities" would reply "getting a base to attack that is identical in strength to my own".

---

Would you view the path to maxing a base as engineering (assuming you work within the said construct of the th)? What method of base progression using is not some form of engineering - at least in the context of a war-oriented clan/player?

Just curious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

Drags are strong right now though lol

---

The nice thing is when you face engineers with only drags - select single target inferno...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vikingchief

we really need a new word since engineering is impossible to define objectively and the specifically Agreed apon by few.

how about war optimised versus farming/trophy optimised
how about matchmaker cognizant versus matchmaker independant

---

We have 5 max th11 7 max th10 9 max th9. And we only face engeneer clan . Last war 28 th11 versus only 9 for us. It seem like the more you play fair game the more you get face up against those who dont. Sad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stealthmtn

Would you view the path to maxing a base as engineering (assuming you work within the said construct of the th)? What method of base progression using is not some form of engineering - at least in the context of a war-oriented clan/player?

Just curious.

---

To me engineering depends on intent. If the path to maxing is driven by war weight consciousness, then yes I'd call it engineering of a milder kind. Any method of base progression that isn't driven by the idea of holding off building or upgrading something due to weight impact I would say isn't engineering - a war oriented player is just choosing among the options for next upgrade based on some other notion of efficacy besides war weight (so, for example, choosing archer towers before wizard towers as they do more damage and more effective point damage rather than less effective splash, whereas choosing mortars before eagle or infernos would be just perverse on that outlook).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

The easiest way to decide for yourself whether or not something is engineered or not is to ask yourself this question and be honest with yourself.

'Why have these defences not been built?'

If the honest answer is 'haven't had time yet' then it might not be engineered, it could just be an early development TH. (The one you posted a pic of is definetly not an early development TH)
If however the answer is 'Because it will draw tougher opponents in war if I build them' then it is engineering.

OP, I don't have a problem with your clan building X.5 bases and putting them into wars, it's not my preferred way, but I can completely understand why it is done. The current matchmaker almost forces your hand, to avoid being overpowered by the opposition it seems the only answer is to build these bases by not building certain defences.

My issue is, that your post seems to be saying 'Well done SC, matchmaking works'. When the whole point of the new matchmaking was to 'address engineered bases in matchmaking' which your post actually suggests it has not done and has actually done the opposite. Making good war matches for engineered clans was not what the majority were looking for in this change, although it should have been a side effect of making fairer matches for everyone.

If you can take an objective step back and look at your match ups from the point of view of the opposition, how many of your recent match ups would you think are fair then? I guess the point is that even though you see them as fair wars because you are winning the majority of them does not mean that your opposition feel the same way about the war.

PS. I'm glad you have found a lineup that works for you, and I hope you continue to enjoy your wars, I just hope it doesn't end up being at mine and others expensive.

---

Sure, but the question isn't whether someone is, "engineered" anywhere near as much as "lopsided."

If SC got anything right, it's lopsided that seems to be the bigger issue. The idea that he's still, say, a TH10, but didn't build ITs, but sits at/near the top of a war map---so what??

Maxing all defenses for TH10/11, but not dropping, say, ITs or eagle isn't THAT bad/lopsided.

It's the sorry clans that extensively use mini-max bases and they get to bully throughout the war map---WE ARE JUST ABOUT DONE WITH THIS.

The expletive filled RANT I would give SC right now is not fit to print. When you war with nothing but TH10s/TH9s, all working towards an eventual max, and you consistently see JOKE TH11s/TH10s with strong offense sprinkled throughout the war map, designed to bully attack (because they simply don't have the talent to execute TH for TH attacks)...PATHETIC

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

I said this awhile back, and I think it still may be of some importance. Sometimes when they make adjustments to the Matchmaker, a clan on accident will be favored by the matchmaker as the ideal roster break down. Then the next update, things get bad for that clan again. I have been though many updates and have noticed patches when the match maker was seemingly treating our clan very well and then other updates not so much. This update seems to be treating us okay. I honestly cannot complain about our matches.

After one update we almost doubled our previous best win streak, (from 6 to 11) The matchmaker was treating our clan well obviously. I could tell that our wars seemed easier. Then the next update, I remember getting a string of very tough wars (we lost 4 in a row), and I remember thinking that SC must have had tried to correct an issue from the previous update and "over tuned" the new one to make wars ridiculously hard.

Under the new update, our wars have had small slants one way or the other, with some being on the more challenging side and others on the less challenging side. We will most likely be 4 and 4 under OMMMA after this war ends. But our matches have all been reasonable (even with the slant 1 way or the other).

---

...so CW is about who can engineer better. (Is what is between the lines of OP too.)
Great.

And I was of the oppinion that CW is about testing skills and teamwork against an honourable adversary, my bad I guess.

Have Fun
TS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lunaticfringe

Sure, but the question isn't whether someone is, "engineered" anywhere near as much as "lopsided."

If SC got anything right, it's lopsided that seems to be the bigger issue. The idea that he's still, say, a TH10, but didn't build ITs, but sits at/near the top of a war map---so what??

Maxing all defenses for TH10/11, but not dropping, say, ITs or eagle isn't THAT bad/lopsided.

It's the sorry clans that extensively use mini-max bases and they get to bully throughout the war map---WE ARE JUST ABOUT DONE WITH THIS.

The expletive filled RANT I would give SC right now is not fit to print. When you war with nothing but TH10s/TH9s, all working towards an eventual max, and you consistently see JOKE TH11s/TH10s with strong offense sprinkled throughout the war map, designed to bully attack (because they simply don't have the talent to execute TH for TH attacks)...PATHETIC

---

Its really just a case of varying degrees. In the case of this particular thread the OP only has X.5 bases for the entire top order, there can be only one reason for that, it is done in an attempt to draw weaker offence from the opposition. OP has stated that 50% of the time they draw bases with the appropriate defences built (not a problem, they have the offence to cope), this suggests 50% of the time they draw either the same or lower level bases also.
To me, trying to gain an advantage during the matchmaking process is the same if it is by the use of X.5 bases or the more extreme versions of engineering, it is still trying to gain an advantage over the opposition.
It's a bit like a racing driver saying 'I only removed one of his spark plugs before the race, I could have removed two and stolen his wheels, but I didn't do up my seat belts so it evened itself out.' Unfortunately, quite often the matchmaker allows the games race car drivers (players) to remove their safety devices (Eagles, Infernos etc) and then to balance it out removes the oppositions engines (Bowlers, Wardens etc.).
As I have said before, I understand why people do it. I just think it only adds to the problems for the matchmaking process and makes it harder to find a true balanced match up for those who actually want one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lunaticfringe

Sure, but the question isn't whether someone is, "engineered" anywhere near as much as "lopsided."

If SC got anything right, it's lopsided that seems to be the bigger issue.

---

I agree with the Lunatic. While we can throw mud back and forth about what is engineering, and what isn't, the biggest issue for the community as a whole over the last 12 months or so, has been the exponential surge in offensive lopsided bases.
These are the kind of bases that have ruining the enjoyment of war for many players.
Yes, I accept there are still other issues, but the 'lopsided' trend has created havoc across all aspects of war, which can only be harmful to the longevity of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

I agree with the Lunatic. While we can throw mud back and forth about what is engineering, and what isn't, the biggest issue for the community as a whole over the last 12 months or so, has been the exponential surge in offensive lopsided bases.
These are the kind of bases that have ruining the enjoyment of war for many players.
Yes, I accept there are still other issues, but the 'lopsided' trend has created havoc across all aspects of war, which can only be harmful to the longevity of the game.

---

I'd agree with that. Annoying as it is to find yourself th10vth11 outgunned, it's horrifying to think of the impact routine th11 on th9 has on war enjoyment. If I'm at a disadvantage then it's one thing if it's a stretch (grumble, moan briefly, attack) and something completely different to realise I stand no chance at all.

To me, there is no way a th11 offence should ever face anything less than a big 10 - no matter the defence level - and any way to systematically match only those smaller big 10s also wants shutting down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

No problem. Prior to the matchmaking update we had other bases in war as part of our strategy to combat engineered clans. But we had no engineered TH9 TH10 or TH11s ourselves. After the update we took all those bases out and our lineup consists of mostly max style bases. 1-12 are TH9-TH11 and the 8 lower bases are TH8s, most being maxed defense/offense. If the lineup changes any on the lower end, it's +/- th8s or th9s.

---

Thanks, nice information.

I won't quote your post on page 4, but I agree with what you are saying. The majority of Forum users here will agree that a TH.5 is a disadvantage since they are matching full offence bases, which are apparently harder to attack. You have given evidence showing exactly what you are matching (I really applaud that) - full THs. So why aren't you losing? Your 'engineering' is obviously not a factor controlling your results, since you are matching offensively strong bases. It looks like the matchmaker is working like it previously did for my clan - TH9.5 matching a defensively strong TH10 above 71K weight minimum.

The only thing I don't agree with you on that post is your TH10.5 - in my opinion, that is engineering (and I myself own a near maxed TH9.5) - but that is for another story! Keep continuing the OP, people like myself enjoy reading / viewing what other clans are matching.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

I don't recall a true TH .5 being labeled as an engineered base until the effects of what engineering is today came along. It sure seems people have a tendency to change their mind despite what a viable base build was 3, 2, or even 1 year ago from now when considering the fairness in matchmaking in clan wars.

Lets review what a true engineered base is. What an engineered lineup actually consists of.

This is what an engineered base is.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...m/engine33.jpg


You want to call this an engineered base? I'm ok with that.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...m/engine22.JPG

This is not an engineered base.

Based on what y'all believe to be true, it's currently the opposite of an engineered base. Pulling equivalent if not harder TH 11s because of some so called nerf to TH .5 bases.

The hypocrisy doesn't stop here.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...m/engine11.JPG


Nobody cares to mention that TH10.5 do pull full TH11s in war. TH11 with completely maxed bases, perhaps. If our strategy in war, keep in mind the most accepted base development strategy for the past 3 years, is the bane of matchmaking and to the degree of fault for every ones problems, why does matchmaking put our lineup to a disadvantage but we still win?

If our current war, war matchup #8 in the OP, is nothing but manipulating the matchmaking to our advantage due to TH.5s, why does the opponent have an advantage?

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...um/match11.jpg
http://www.photocamel.com/gallery/da...4/match221.jpg
If our team only has 4 infernos and no EA, surely their TH11s with respectable heroes can roll right over our TH10.5s. But wait, then we have to attack into 2 EA while they have easier bases to hit on the rebound. Suuuuch a huge advantage TH.5s have.

Still going to win the war easily, regardless of their EA, regardless of their opportunity to attack TH11s with no EA, regardless if they clean every single base below.

EA don't defend a TH11. Max point defenses do. An eagle is not needed to defend against a max TH11's attack. You just need to be able to attack a max TH11 with and EA better than an opponent can attack a TH10.5. Which isn't even that hard.

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...ium/star11.jpg


It's a sad day for the forums. It's not very often that content is posted on the forum that actually teaches someone something new or with any sense of intervention. Some come here to learn a thing or two, rather than express their frustration with not being successful in wars and not being able to figure it out themselves. All to say a TH.5 is the filth that makes clan wars what it actually is today.

I'm going to keep updating my thread, because there are people who will find it viable. It's times like now that trusting my gut, knowing what success I have had at this game over the years is vastly more reliable than many of the comments made thus far. If I can lead a clan to 50+ war win streaks time and time again, through xmod infested waters, through matchmaking updates, through bad matchups, and through the engineering sprees, with nothing more than TH.5's, that simply means more to me than what most have provided to this discussion.

---

Your experience (highlight above) and my experience are not the same. I have used lopsided bases like the ones you use to my advantage to pull TH10s. When anchored with max TH11s it's a formidable line up and a huge advantage.

I have also gone with balanced bases. For the last 5 wars I've used TH10s to TH8s (with some 9.5s). We have pulled 4 to 5 TH11s similar to the base you have.

IMO, your line up and upgrade path is in line with what many in the forum are calling engineering.

lol @ the white walls on the TH11 but couldn't manage to find the gold to drop the eagle.

lets call it what it is, dip specialists

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

lol @ the white walls on the TH11 but couldn't manage to find the gold to drop the eagle.

lets call it what it is, dip specialists

---

Right, maxed th11 or th10 offenses and point defenses, yet no eagle or no infernos. You are right, that's not engineering, we call that trash in our clan. Time to grow a pair and drop them, it's ok, a loss from a real competitive clan is not the end of the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BoBoTheGoat

I don't think you bothered to read the post. It clearly states that TH .5 is the minimum base development in the war. You know, the TH .5 that everyone says doesn't work no more and there is no point in doing.


This is not an engineered base, friend.
http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...dium/home1.jpg

---

where is your eagle ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ryryshouse

lol @ the white walls on the TH11 but couldn't manage to find the gold to drop the eagle.

lets call it what it is, dip specialists

---

That base is sitting #1 on the map. Unless that clan is using a th10 to reach on the th11 or 10.5 (might be likely) for 2, that player is hitting bases 1 & 2 or 2 & 3. While you can call hitting 2 or 3 dips, the reality is that any clan with 1 th11 up top has to dip to a lower th. That base isn't hidden amongst th9/10s in terms of def weight to show a high powered dip is likely.

Side Note: The fact is that you really don't need an eagle to defend a 3 star in the current game state - you really just need high point defenses & walls. Point defenses take much longer to increase than an eagle...why not do those point defenses first?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TullSadum

...so CW is about who can engineer better. (Is what is between the lines of OP too.)
Great.

And I was of the oppinion that CW is about testing skills and teamwork against an honourable adversary, my bad I guess.

Have Fun
TS

---

That is what SC leads us to think. I am all for hitting your equal and testing skills and base design, but the sad reality is that SC's MMA is not able to provide said matches. My clan utilizes the .5 route to stay competitive in war during transitions. If you look at our roster, outside of our #1 a maxed th11, nobody else has max heroes for their town hall level.

.5 is only engineering because of clan wars. Once you upgrade your townhall, why should it matter if you upgrade your offense or defenses first, especially in a war setting where defenses first is bad? By labeling .5 engineering, people are being a little silly. By that definition, if a player drops all his defenses first, he is technically a .5, and that makes him engineered right? Cause .5 is "engineering".

Maybe a better question is what isn't engineering?

.5 is "optimizing" for war (technically engineering, but should not be considered as so). That should not be an issue with anybody. Anything outside of .5 is real "engineering" and is where the real issues begin. The farther separated that offense and defense are, the more manipulation is taking place.

Again, the point of the thread was to show how well the revised MMA is doing. Not that the OP runs .5's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

But owners of heavy .5s are appalled, APPALLED that anyone might accuse them of engaging in filthy engineering. Nothing new here.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

By labeling .5 engineering, people are being a little silly.

---

FireStorm-9.25|15/19|1936*|SuperStorm-8.5|10/14|1871*
PerfectStorm-8.25|5/7|1217*|BarkStorm-10.1|16/18/5|1170*

Checks out :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

Again, the point of the thread was to show how well the revised MMA is doing. Not that the OP runs .5's.

---

True, I tried to engage on that point as well. But building .5 closet-engineering into the thread is kind of like posting "The moon is made of cheese and here are my thoughts on global warming". Don't be surprised if people can't get past the mooncheese thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

True, I tried to engage on that point as well. But building .5 closet-engineering into the thread is kind of like posting "The moon is made of cheese and here are my thoughts on global warming". Don't be surprised if people can't get past the mooncheese thing.

---

not another cheesy moon conspiracy theory. It is gouda, not swiss. Everbody knows that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stevejnr

Its really just a case of varying degrees. In the case of this particular thread the OP only has X.5 bases for the entire top order, there can be only one reason for that, it is done in an attempt to draw weaker offence from the opposition. OP has stated that 50% of the time they draw bases with the appropriate defences built (not a problem, they have the offence to cope), this suggests 50% of the time they draw either the same or lower level bases also.
To me, trying to gain an advantage during the matchmaking process is the same if it is by the use of X.5 bases or the more extreme versions of engineering, it is still trying to gain an advantage over the opposition.
It's a bit like a racing driver saying 'I only removed one of his spark plugs before the race, I could have removed two and stolen his wheels, but I didn't do up my seat belts so it evened itself out.' Unfortunately, quite often the matchmaker allows the games race car drivers (players) to remove their safety devices (Eagles, Infernos etc) and then to balance it out removes the oppositions engines (Bowlers, Wardens etc.).
As I have said before, I understand why people do it. I just think it only adds to the problems for the matchmaking process and makes it harder to find a true balanced match up for those who actually want one.

---

But the "varying degrees" part is precisely the point & is extremely significant, as Skraggs alludes to. The degree of abuse is often very relevant.

I bet you that if all the defenseless/mini-max bases were removed from the equation, you'd see a massive decrease in complaints about the MM.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

That is what SC leads us to think. I am all for hitting your equal and testing skills and base design, but the sad reality is that SC's MMA is not able to provide said matches. My clan utilizes the .5 route to stay competitive in war during transitions. If you look at our roster, outside of our #1 a maxed th11, nobody else has max heroes for their town hall level.

.5 is only engineering because of clan wars. Once you upgrade your townhall, why should it matter if you upgrade your offense or defenses first, especially in a war setting where defenses first is bad? By labeling .5 engineering, people are being a little silly. By that definition, if a player drops all his defenses first, he is technically a .5, and that makes him engineered right? Cause .5 is "engineering".

Maybe a better question is what isn't engineering?

.5 is "optimizing" for war (technically engineering, but should not be considered as so). That should not be an issue with anybody. Anything outside of .5 is real "engineering" and is where the real issues begin. The farther separated that offense and defense are, the more manipulation is taking place.

Again, the point of the thread was to show how well the revised MMA is doing. Not that the OP runs .5's.

---

That, that, that....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

True, I tried to engage on that point as well. But building .5 closet-engineering into the thread is kind of like posting "The moon is made of cheese and here are my thoughts on global warming". Don't be surprised if people can't get past the mooncheese thing.

---

I utilize .5 and am very open about it. In everyone of my posts I acknowledge its a form of engineering. But, it should not be in the same group as the more offensive engineering like low defense high offense stuff.

For instance:

.5 is "optimizing" for war (technically engineering, but should not be considered as so).

and for the record, my .5 bases would not be labeled even has heavy as they hero levels are below average.

I should probably update my sig now that you reminded me of it :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

I utilize .5 and am very open about it. In everyone of my posts I acknowledge its a form of engineering. But, it should not be in the same group as the more offensive engineering like low defense high offense stuff.

For instance:

.5 is "optimizing" for war (technically engineering, but should not be considered as so).

and for the record, my .5 bases would not be labeled even has heavy as they hero levels are below average.

I should probably update my sig now that you reminded me of it :).

---

Because .5s don't give as much of an advantage as other forms of engineering, I agree they shouldn't be considered the same by the matchmaker. However, does the matchmaker agree? I would like to know the answer to that question, which is why I often ask about .5s when someone says they had a bad match and claims they don't engineer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Because .5s don't give as much of an advantage as other forms of engineering, I agree they shouldn't be considered the same by the matchmaker. However, does the matchmaker agree? I would like to know the answer to that question, which is why I often ask about .5s when someone says they had a bad match and claims they don't engineer.

---

My war matching posted in my thread (now showing 9 matches with the new system) shows no adverse side effects for running .5's. (edited we do still have 2 legitimate .5's but they do not belong to me).

Since we are splitting hairs here, I no longer have any .5's. My 11 has some th11 defenses now so cannot be considered a 10.5 as I have started working on defenses, my 9.5's are now 10's Since I have additional th10 defenses and some have infernos, my 8.5's are now 9's as I have added additional defenses past the th8 quota.

And now that I think about it, OP's number 1 if he has placed the additional th11 defenses other then an eagle, you cannot call him a .5 any more. He has now modified more then half his base. He is just an 11 missing an eagle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

I utilize .5 and am very open about it. In everyone of my posts I acknowledge its a form of engineering. But, it should not be in the same group as the more offensive engineering like low defense high offense stuff.

For instance:

.5 is "optimizing" for war (technically engineering, but should not be considered as so).

and for the record, my .5 bases would not be labeled even has heavy as they hero levels are below average.

I should probably update my sig now that you reminded me of it :).

---

Oh I know you're open about it, and the reasons why. And most would agree .5s are a lighter form of engineering, not as damaging to even matchups as other types are. But they exist because they're thought to be effective ways of getting favorable matches, that's engineering. Nothing wrong with that from the player's side (though it implies something wrong on the MM side of course).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

My war matching posted in my thread (now showing 9 matches with the new system) shows no adverse side effects for running .5's. Although as posted below. I don't have any .5's. So this statement may not actually be true since I do not have .5's.

Since we are splitting hairs here, I no longer have any .5's. My 11 has some th11 defenses now so cannot be considered a 10.5 as I have started working on defenses, my 9.5's are now 10's Since I have additional th10 defenses and some have infernos, my 8.5's are now 9's as I have added additional defenses past the th8 quota.

And now that I think about it, OP's number 1 if he has placed the additional th11 defenses other then an eagle, you cannot call him a .5 any more. He has now modified more then half his base. He is just an 11 missing an eagle.

---

I am (or was) pretty sure a 0.5 is a base that can have all existing defenses upgraded to the max level while leaving out the key heavy defenses (8.5=no xbows, 9.5=no ITs, 10.5=no eagle).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chang405

I am (or was) pretty sure a 0.5 is a base that can have all existing defenses upgraded to the max level while leaving out the key heavy defenses (8.5=no xbows, 9.5=no ITs, 10.5=no eagle).

---

Kind of defeats the meaning of .5. I believe the original term was used because you only level half your base. The offense half. Once you go past the previous quota of defenses, you loose .5 status. And you should just be a TH X missing some defenses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

However, does the matchmaker agree? I would like to know the answer to that question, which is why I often ask about .5s when someone says they had a bad match and claims they don't engineer.

---

Its a very good question which shouldn't be answered by gut feelings or intentions. Upthread a fan of the .5 style was insisting its not lopsided and left me wondering if he knew the weights involved or was he just assuming SC shared his preferences.
If just going by observed weights, a MAX base isn't quite balanced (offense weight is a bit higher than defense weight). Subtract some heavy defense from that without subtracting offense, and you're less balanced. Enough to trip the lopsided check? Who knows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

Kind of defeats the meaning of .5. I believe the original term was used because you only level half your base. The offense half. Once you go past the previous quota of defenses, you loose .5 status. And you should just be a low level TH X.

---

Do not mean to veer this off topic again, but...
I always viewed a "true X.5" to keep all defenses at the previous th level. No level changes, nothing.

However, there are plenty of case of "maxer X.5s", which level up existing structures from previous th level to their current the levels. The final level of that is adding the new defenses and walls for the current the level and maxing, leaving only the "key new defense" for last - which happens to be the heaviest.

I still call these variations as X.5s, even if they are not in the "true" sense.

Personally, I have not seen these "maxer" X.5s as having any advantage at 9.5 & 10.5 levels for a while now. Infernos v heroes, the current th10+ offensive state, and mm currently keep these in check, for the clans & wars I have been apart of (usually with near-max 10/11s included).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

Kind of defeats the meaning of .5. I believe the original term was used because you only level half your base. The offense half. Once you go past the previous quota of defenses, you loose .5 status. And you should just be a TH X missing some defenses.

---

I agree with this. I've always interpreted a true 0.5 to have a high/max offense for a respective TH level, with defenses overwhelmingly at the TH-1 level. Isn't that what it's supposed to communicate? Max the offensive side of the base (i.e. 50% development) and neglect the defensive side?

The more you move towards maxing out defenses for the particular TH in question, the further you move away from a 0.5 and defeat the edge of what 0.5 was intended to do.

At one point, the strategy I read was to run up to 50% of your war bases as 0.5s, with the other 50% (the top half) as legitimate bases, with significant defenses. Then, you hopefully draw TH-1 on the lower half of the base and just abuse them with a TH+1 attack, while they have to struggle to 3* your 0.5 bases with a TH-1 attack. Further, you possibly gain the ability to, "up attack" on the war map with your .5s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stealthmtn

Do not mean to veer this off topic again, but...
I always viewed a "true X.5" to keep all defenses at the previous th level. No level changes, nothing.

---

Agree. I do recall, however, one particular clan saying that adding/upgrading traps were likely okay to do early on and still not add much war weight

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stealthmtn

Do not mean to veer this off topic again, but...
I always viewed a "true X.5" to keep all defenses at the previous th level. No level changes, nothing.

However, there are plenty of case of "maxer X.5s", which level up existing structures from previous th level to their current the levels. The final level of that is adding the new defenses and walls for the current the level and maxing, leaving only the "key new defense" for last - which happens to be the heaviest.

I still call these variations as X.5s, even if they are not in the "true" sense.

Personally, I have not seen these "maxer" X.5s as having any advantage at 9.5 & 10.5 levels for a while now. Infernos v heroes, the current th10+ offensive state, and mm currently keep these in check, for the clans & wars I have been apart of (usually with near-max 10/11s included).

---

Yes, I think they addressed .5's sufficiently a while ago. They were definitely hit with the nerf bat.

However, if we say that having all defenses except the key ones still counts as engineering, then every body engineers until the last possible defense is placed. There has to be a common sense line drawn somewhere. Other wise statements like.....your offense is completely maxed except for 1 level of goblins, you engineer! Trying to fool the matchmaker by not leveling your goblins.......Seem pretty silly right?

Just to confirm here is another of my recent posts in and entirely different thread:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

Adding th3's is roster engineering, and it would be similar to a defenseless max offense th11 level of engineering. Calling .5 "engineering" would be similar to accusing somebody of roster engineering for leaving out villages who are opted in for war if they were worried about how it might effect the outcome of the war.

In my opinion of course, both are silly, lumping .5's into the engineering pile (even though they are technically engineered) and accusing people of roster engineering for being picky on who they take to war.
The engineering I see most complained about are defenseless bases and low loading the bottom of your roster. Those are the engineering areas for concern. .5's (outside of 10.5's (because of the free warden effect)) are not really seen as an issue in general.

I think "engineering" should be reserved for those bases outside the realm of .5. .5's are just a good progression to transition your base and still be acceptable for war and to not mess with the balance on a significant level.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigtone2001

War #9 (40v40)
us
1-13 TH11 with EA
14-16 TH11 no EA (new th11s)
17-29 TH10 with inferno
30-36 TH10 no inferno (new th10)
37-39 TH9
40 TH9 no xbow (new th9)

as as you can see lots have just moved up to the next TH.

them
1-12 TH11 with EA
13-15 TH11 no EA, but Max wardens
16-31 TH10 with inferno
32-37 TH10 no inferno
38-40 TH9

pretty even match up. (Our 2nd on the new MM) .

---

RESULT : 101 (86.95) v 81 (73.93) WIN for us.

War #10
us
1-14 TH11 with EA
15-17 TH11 no EA
18-31 TH10 with inferno
32-36 TH10 no inferno
37-40 TH9

them
1-19 TH11 with EA
20-22 TH11 no EA (Max heroes inc warden & all troops)
23-30 TH10 with inferno
31 TH11 no EA, Max heroes inc warden & all troops.
32-34 TH10 with inferno
35-39 TH9
40 TH6

Back to mismatch again.
Outnumbered by 5 EAs, 6 Wardens and several lots of maxed troops.

Seems like the new MM is working 1 in 5 wars. ( well for us anyway )

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

Yes, I think they addressed .5's sufficiently a while ago. They were definitely hit with the nerf bat.

However, if we say that having all defenses except the key ones still counts as engineering, then every body engineers until the last possible defense is placed. There has to be a common sense line drawn somewhere. Other wise statements like.....your offense is completely maxed except for 1 level of goblins, you engineer! Trying to fool the matchmaker by not leveling your goblins.......Seem pretty silly right?

Just to confirm here is another of my recent posts in and entirely different thread:

---

For me, gaining an advantage for war match-ups via base development is engineering.

And like I said, I don't think [most] X.5 clans see an advantage - especially with these maxer X.5s [which my clan runs, so I am definitely biased]. You'll pull heavier clans, concede more 3 stars, so offensive performance is more paramount.

I do not know how "true" X.5 clans fair, but I still think the current mm checks are enough to minimize the advantage in most instances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

[...] if we say that having all defenses except the key ones still counts as engineering, then every body engineers until the last possible defense is placed. There has to be a common sense line drawn somewhere. Other wise statements like.....your offense is completely maxed except for 1 level of goblins, you engineer! Trying to fool the matchmaker by not leveling your goblins.......Seem pretty silly right?[...]

---

Well 'intelligent upgrading' is a way to play the game and yes, to a small part it mightbe called engineering, but that is not my point.
OP's example shows a clan with not 2 or 3 bases at .5 but 100% of TH10-11 (that area where three starring isn't the norm anymore).
And suddenly a minor thing turns into a big advantage and the MMsystem is abused.
Where to draw the line then? That is a tough question.

The real problem originates elsewhere:
Imo the eagle weight is way too high. Is it still as high as it was when introduced? (it has been nerfed since then).
In many cases the EA is destroyed pretty soon, it's first hit is countered by the GW's ability, the second with a freeze spell and maybe it doesn't even get to fire off a third salvo.
In other cases the attacking troops are spead out enough as to keep the EA's hits from targetting too much of the army in one go, a strategy which follows a QW with her taking out a quarter of the base b4 the EA even activates.
So why so much weight for a defence that quite often can't make the damage equivalent of it's weight?

But let's not forget, or rather: Let's make it clear, that the problem occurs because the MM is being abused by so many players by now.
Abuse has made this problem a threat to the enjoyment of this part of the game and
SC has taken too long to address the situation and allowed it to get viral.

On a more constructive note:
Reduce the EA's war weight
and\or
unlock GW lvls 5-11 only once EA is built and lvls 11-20 at EA L2. Can that be implemented?

Have Fun
TS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TullSadum

.

The real problem originates elsewhere:
Imo the eagle weight is way too high. Is it still as high as it was when introduced? (it has been nerfed since then).

---

When TH11 was first introduced back in late 2015, the key TH11 items (Eagle/GW) were hugely underweighted.
During the next few months there was constant complaints on the forum about TH11 v TH10 mismatches, and simultaneously numerous forum recommendations to rush to TH11 to get these lovely new toys, and plenty of 'adapt or quit' rhetoric.

Then the Developers issued their Matchmaking announcement of March 3rd 2016 :-
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-Matchmaking

And I quote :-
"Powerful, late-game defenses and troops like Inferno Towers, Eagle Artillery and Grand Warden will have much greater matchmaking impact"

The irony can't be lost here. SC seemed to be in agreement with the communities call for greater weight for those Eagles and Wardens in particular, and yet here we are now, in September 2017 calling for the defensive weight of Eagles (in particular) and Infernos to be reduced, and the Offensive weight of Grand Wardens to be increased.

It's actually a great example of how decisions made today may negatively impact the game months down the road!:smirk:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

When TH11 was first introduced back in late 2015, the key TH11 items (Eagle/GW) were hugely underweighted.
During the next few months there was constant complaints on the forum about TH11 v TH10 mismatches, and simultaneously numerous forum recommendations to rush to TH11 to get these lovely new toys, and plenty of 'adapt or quit' rhetoric.

Then the Developers issued their Matchmaking announcement of March 3rd 2016 :-
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-Matchmaking

And I quote :-
"Powerful, late-game defenses and troops like Inferno Towers, Eagle Artillery and Grand Warden will have much greater matchmaking impact"

The irony can't be lost here. SC seemed to be in agreement with the communities call for greater weight for those Eagles and Wardens in particular, and yet here we are now, in September 2017 calling for the defensive weight of Eagles (in particular) and Infernos to be reduced, and the Offensive weight of Grand Wardens to be increased.

It's actually a great example of how decisions made today may negatively impact the game months down the road!:smirk:

---

Yes, you are right, but what about the nerf that followed then? The eagle is now only activated when a larger portion of the army is deployed, did this nerf get reflected in it's weight?

Have Fun
TS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skrags

When TH11 was first introduced back in late 2015, the key TH11 items (Eagle/GW) were hugely underweighted.
During the next few months there was constant complaints on the forum about TH11 v TH10 mismatches, and simultaneously numerous forum recommendations to rush to TH11 to get these lovely new toys, and plenty of 'adapt or quit' rhetoric.

Then the Developers issued their Matchmaking announcement of March 3rd 2016 :-
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-Matchmaking

And I quote :-
"Powerful, late-game defenses and troops like Inferno Towers, Eagle Artillery and Grand Warden will have much greater matchmaking impact"

The irony can't be lost here. SC seemed to be in agreement with the communities call for greater weight for those Eagles and Wardens in particular, and yet here we are now, in September 2017 calling for the defensive weight of Eagles (in particular) and Infernos to be reduced, and the Offensive weight of Grand Wardens to be increased.

It's actually a great example of how decisions made today may negatively impact the game months down the road!:smirk:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TullSadum

Well 'intelligent upgrading' is a way to play the game and yes, to a small part it mightbe called engineering, but that is not my point.
OP's example shows a clan with not 2 or 3 bases at .5 but 100% of TH10-11 (that area where three starring isn't the norm anymore).
And suddenly a minor thing turns into a big advantage and the MMsystem is abused.
Where to draw the line then? That is a tough question.

The real problem originates elsewhere:
Imo the eagle weight is way too high. Is it still as high as it was when introduced? (it has been nerfed since then).
In many cases the EA is destroyed pretty soon, it's first hit is countered by the GW's ability, the second with a freeze spell and maybe it doesn't even get to fire off a third salvo.
In other cases the attacking troops are spead out enough as to keep the EA's hits from targetting too much of the army in one go, a strategy which follows a QW with her taking out a quarter of the base b4 the EA even activates.
So why so much weight for a defence that quite often can't make the damage equivalent of it's weight?

But let's not forget, or rather: Let's make it clear, that the problem occurs because the MM is being abused by so many players by now.
Abuse has made this problem a threat to the enjoyment of this part of the game and
SC has taken too long to address the situation and allowed it to get viral.

On a more constructive note:
Reduce the EA's war weight
and\or
unlock GW lvls 5-11 only once EA is built and lvls 11-20 at EA L2. Can that be implemented?

Have Fun
TS

---

Both of you guys are spot on. I actually had placed an eagle when it was relatively low weight on my th11 (now just a paper weight) as it had all defenses down, they just were not at super high levels. Then SC adjusted the weight of the eagle, and instead of sitting as one of the lower 10's, i jumped up to the bottom of the th11 section over maxed 10's! That account got shelved, while I slowly catch it's offense back up to it's defense levels now.

Part of the reason for the balance issues we see now as well are SC adding all kind of new troop levels and defense levels and not revisiting the weights. 9.11's have become extremely powerful with the addition of lvl 15 point defenses and new troop levels. They are super efficient given the lack of appropriate weight for high level point defenses and wardens. The warden needs to carry enough weight to guarantee a match with a high level th10. This would stop them invading th9 and under wars and even th10 and under wars. It's been long enough SC should look at adding weight to the warden now as they are still causing balance issues in wars. If I could have my way. the warden should have enough weight to guarantee drawing a th11 or a bunch of 10's with infernos. Just like defenses, if you are not ready to face th11's, do not drop a warden.

It seems that SC may have made a mistake and added all the weight to the eagle instead of putting half of it on the warden. In one of the clans I have an alt in, looking at their match 25 vs 25 (no trace of th11 on their side) they are facing a clan with 6 th11's + high level wardens and heroes. They also have a good amount of maxed th11 troops. Highest defending base of their clan is a th10 with 1 lvl 2 inferno. Opposing clan has no eagles or infernos. Most likely this will result in both sides getting a perfect score, but one side has an extremely easy path to a perfect war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

It seems that SC may have made a mistake and added all the weight to the eagle instead of putting half of it on the warden. In one of the clans I have an alt in, looking at their match 25 vs 25 (no trace of th11 on their side) they are facing a clan with 6 th11's + high level wardens and heroes. They also have a good amount of maxed th11 troops. Highest defending base of their clan is a th10 with 1 lvl 2 inferno. Opposing clan has no eagles or infernos. Most likely this will result in both sides getting a perfect score, but one side has an extremely easy path to a perfect war.

---

I can <insert swear word here> guarantee I (and anyone else) will throw this game out from all six of my accounts if they change the weighting of the Warden. Can you image HOW MANY PEOPLE are upgrading to TH11 as we speak (There is another post where a clan green-lit anyone going to TH11) for the warden because it is the ONLY way to compete in mis-matched wars??? For them to turn around and suddenly penalize people ?!?!?! That is one change I could not take and this game would cease to exist in my world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by damnBORG

I can <insert swear word here> guarantee I (and anyone else) will throw this game out from all six of my accounts if they change the weighting of the Warden. Can you image HOW MANY PEOPLE are upgrading to TH11 as we speak (There is another post where a clan green-lit anyone going to TH11) for the warden because it is the ONLY way to compete in mis-matched wars??? For them to turn around and suddenly penalize people ?!?!?! That is one change I could not take and this game would cease to exist in my world.

---

so instead of solving the problem you are joining the crowd. Do I get that right?
And again it seems you are saying, that CW is about who engineers better, when it ought to be about skill and teamwork.
Yes CW has started down the wrong road, I hope that stops, and I'd rather it did that sooner than later.

Have Fun
TS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TullSadum

so instead of solving the problem you are joining the crowd. Do I get that right?
And again it seems you are saying, that CW is about who engineers better, when it ought to be about skill and teamwork.
Yes CW has started down the wrong road, I hope that stops, and I'd rather it did that sooner than later.

Have Fun
TS

---

I think there is more going on than that. I believe we can all admit the game is broken and in need of some sort of correction. I also believe that because SC has refused or has been unable to fix the problem, players are adapting. This adaption is then exacerbating the problem and we are all in a giant spiral... The longer they take, the worse it gets...

What I am saying is that people are making decisions - AFTER WAITING YEARS - based on there NOT BEING A FIX... and for SC to suddenly 'fix it', or to change things drastically 'back to norm, or as intended', it will put a lot of people out. I am simply saying that "ya, if they do that, then I would quit because I am so far down an extreme path that it would take too much time or money to make it right". AND.. based on the anger in the forums, I do not think I am alone on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by damnBORG

I think there is more going on than that. I believe we can all admit the game is broken and in need of some sort of correction. I also believe that because SC has refused or has been unable to fix the problem, players are adapting. This adaption is then exacerbating the problem and we are all in a giant spiral... The longer they take, the worse it gets...

What I am saying is that people are making decisions - AFTER WAITING YEARS - based on there NOT BEING A FIX... and for SC to suddenly 'fix it', ior change things drastically 'back to norm, or as intended', t will put a lot of people out. I am simply saying that "ya, if they do that, then I would quite because I am so far down an extreme path that it would take too much time or money to make it right". AND.. based on the anger in the forums, I do think I am alone on that.

---

Hey, I know exactly how you would feel. It happened to me with the eagle defense on my now paper wight th11. It's useless. The reason the warden was brought into the game was to generally help with attacking other th11's. Why should we be able to use it on anything less? Okay, maybe th10's are acceptable as dipping is unavoidable in a large % of wars.

But how do we deal with clans that sneak a th11 with warden and maxed dragons into a clan war where the other clans highest base is a th9? Outside of giving the warden a big weight, there is no way to ensure that a match like that doesn't happen. They cannot add the weight to the town hall. They can not put it on dragons. It has to be placed on the warden. Allowing th11 troops do not gain you near as much with the warden support. Though there would still be an issue with lvl 6 dragons in a th9 and under war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

Hey, I know exactly how you would feel. It happened to me with the eagle defense on my now paper wight th11. It's useless.

---

OUCH.. I play 4 - 6 accounts.. about 3 of those I Could walk away from and never look back.. of the 3 remaining, any changes to Warden would make me lose 1 and the other two, a Max9 and TH8.5, would be ok.. and I would be stuck at TH9 which is the best level... The MAX Dragon, MAX lightning, WEAK TH11 seems to be the engineer attack of choice these days for killing pretty strong TH10.5s... and weak 11s.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperStorm103

But how do we deal with clans that sneak a th11 with warden and maxed dragons into a clan war where the other clans highest base is a th9? Outside of giving the warden a big weight, there is no way to ensure that a match like that doesn't happen. They cannot add the weight to the town hall. They can not put it on dragons. It has to be placed on the warden.

---

Channeling my best Morpheus voice from The Matrix,

and why do you think it is, that something so seemingly easy to accomplish...has yet to be implemented?

:cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by damnBORG

The MAX Dragon, MAX lightning, WEAK TH11 seems to be the engineer attack of choice these days for killing pretty strong TH10.5s... and weak 11s.

---

That is my attack, but nowhere near as easy as you imply. There needs to be a weakness in the enemy base. Some xbows set to ground, neglected air defenses, air defense near outer walls (lavaloon defense) infernoes both to multi etc. Many upper level town halls believe that ground attack is the only threat at this level. I remind them that air is still out there.

Another week has come and passed, nothing but acceptable matchups straight from Supercell. We keep perfecting these clans, even though they have 2 EA 6 Infernos to our 0 EA and 2 Infernos. Or this beauty of a matchup right here. We call this the, "oh sweet we got an easy win, oh wait never mind." When you got it, you got it.

OP updated

http://photocamel.com/gallery/data/4...dium/AAmap.png

what are you trying to say? we cant see hero levels, defense levels, etc.

Dang BoBo, 341 Wins and 25 Losses. Solid War Log! Looks like OMMMA is treating you right. And with your line up relatively free up engineering, you got a good streak going!

Are the opposing clan full of lower hero dragon rushers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by damnBORG

I can <insert swear word here> guarantee I (and anyone else) will throw this game out from all six of my accounts if they change the weighting of the Warden. Can you image HOW MANY PEOPLE are upgrading to TH11 as we speak (There is another post where a clan green-lit anyone going to TH11) for the warden because it is the ONLY way to compete in mis-matched wars??? For them to turn around and suddenly penalize people ?!?!?! That is one change I could not take and this game would cease to exist in my world.

---

On my 2 bases I recently upgraded to a warden as my way to keep up... I also dropped eagles. Having a fun time with both. I'd have no problem at all if they raised the warden weight considerably, as I was already needing to attack ones my own size or more often bigger. I'd like to see an end to featherweight warden builds gaining advantage, to get everyone back on a more real footing in terms of having an appropriate level of offence for the targets they tackle in war.

Totally my own sense of how it is for me, but I'd feel embarrassed attacking anything below a max th10 now, and really I've no business attacking max 10s unless that's what the matchmaker delivers me without anyone jiggling its elbow to try to arrange that outcome. I'm not yet big enough warden-wise or whole of army composition troops wise to be the best person my clan has to try a cleanup 3 star dip on a 10, and putting a 10 across from my two bases would be unfortunate as a mismatch for the other clan. But then maybe I'm odd, as to me a war doesn't feel as much fun if I don't have a sense both sides could be happy with the equity of the match. If I feel a hankering to beat up smaller things, well that's what the "next" button is for in farming.

The number of threads I see that turn into a bun fight over what is or is not 'engineered' worries me. Personally I don't care what people want to call things, 0.5, rushed, lopsided, maxed, engineered etc...none of that matters, they are just labels. What really matters is the experience, and for me and my clan mates it just isn't good. Nothing more needs to be said.