Yes another Th 12 No Eagle thread→look at the pics⚠️

Bigdome mentioned the following thread should be shown here. Its about th 12 no eagle.
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...eered-no-eagle

Darian confirmed that townhall packs still count in warweight even if the buildings are not placed.
Now i got invited to the clan and i have taken some screenshots to show you the strange ranking on warmap. #6 has no ea but all other buildings are way stronger than #5.
Is it possible that there is a new bug after latest changings to ea?

https://i.imgflip.com/2fc36i.jpghttps://i.imgflip.com/2fc37o.jpghttps://i.imgflip.com/2fc393.jpghttps://i.imgflip.com/2fc3ag.jpgvia Imgflip Meme Generator

even in his mainbase he has no ea placed.

Or maybe they are weighing offence now too for war base placement?

I’m glad you posted this. Apparently, the 6 Base has an unplaced EA that he bought from th pack. But his position on the war map definitely doesn’t reflect that. I am wondering the same as Mr. Mechengin if offense is now playing a role in map placement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMechEngin

Or maybe they are weighing offence now too for war base placement?

---

https://i.imgflip.com/2fc56s.jpgvia Imgflip Meme Generator

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMechEngin

Or maybe they are weighing offence now too for war base placement?

---

Maybe it's the mine and collectors?

Maybe they have brought the eagle in main village and not put it into war base

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gaazookss

Maybe they have brought the eagle in main village and not put it into war base

---

https://i.imgflip.com/2fc3n2.jpg

Or maybe they count it in overall matching weight somehow. I get the feeling the war map ranking has been screwy lately.

The map only shows the order of gold weight. Gold weight is no longer the weight used by the matchmaker. An unplaced eagle won’t change the gold weight and, thus, won’t change the war map ranking.

I think the weight of the eagle might be there contributing to the overall war weight and individual war weight like darian said and the lineup in war will be due to some programming according to buildings placed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

The map only shows the order of gold weight. Gold weight is no longer the weight used by the matchmaker. An unplaced eagle won’t change the gold weight and, thus, won’t change the war map ranking.

---

?????gold weight?????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wotanwaton

?????gold weight?????

---

Check out the war sub forum for lots of discussion on these topics. This thread will probably be moved there. In the past we could see the defensive weight of a base by looking at the amount of gold in the storages on FCs or on battle day in wars (or just by looking at what was available to be looted in the war attack). The map order was based on this. However, players started to discuss the gold weight no longer being used over in the war subforum. Then Darian confirmed some weights were adjusted recently. The gold weights were not, though, so that sort of confirmed that the gold weights are no longer the weights used by the matchmaker, at least not all of them, as some of them have changed. You can’t just look at the war map and know now that based #4 is “heavier” for the war match algorithm than base #5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Check out the war sub forum for lots of discussion on these topics.

---

For example this thread: https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...ive-war-weight

I would caution that it is all speculation. But it's something I've been suggesting for months that map order is no longer related to how clans are matched

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Check out the war sub forum for lots of discussion on these topics. This thread will probably be moved there. In the past we could see the defensive weight of a base by looking at the amount of gold in the storages on FCs or on battle day in wars (or just by looking at what was available to be looted in the war attack). The map order was based on this. However, players started to discuss the gold weight no longer being used over in the war subforum. Then Darian confirmed some weights were adjusted recently. The gold weights were not, though, so that sort of confirmed that the gold weights are no longer the weights used by the matchmaker, at least not all of them, as some of them have changed. You can’t just look at the war map and know now that based #4 is “heavier” for the war match algorithm than base #5.

---

So you are saying that the speculation is that gold weight no is no longer a reflection of defense and is not used to order based on the war map any more? Or am I misunderstanding?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdome757

So you are saying that the speculation is that gold weight no is no longer a reflection of defense and is not used to order based on the war map any more? Or am I misunderstanding?

---

I am saying some of the weights reflected in the gold storages are no longer the weights used by the matchmaker. Some might still be accurate, but others are not. Thus, a base might “weigh” more on defense than a base higher than it on the map. That used to not be the case.

edit: also, as far as the ”changes” to weights go, they seem to be for the better. Infernos and eagles definitely seem to weigh less than they used to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

For example this thread: https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...ive-war-weight

I would caution that it is all speculation. But it's something I've been suggesting for months that map order is no longer related to how clans are matched

---

Well, it was speculation prior to comments by Darian for sure. Onyx was the first one I saw suggest it and I started paying attention to our wars too and it seemed to be true. Then Darian said weights were adjusted, but we could see the gold weights weren’t, so that turned the speculation closer to confirmation. Add to that the comment from Darian that unplaced eagles would count in war weight, yet we can see in threads like this one that they don’t appear to count in the gold weight, it is again moving this speculation closer to confirmation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

The map only shows the order of gold weight. Gold weight is no longer the weight used by the matchmaker. An unplaced eagle won’t change the gold weight and, thus, won’t change the war map ranking.

---

^this. Not sure why there is such confusion around this.

map ranking shows the base without the eagle placed as being “easier” than bases with an eagle. This isn’t surprising. But that unplaced eagle counted when the match was being drawn. This too, given what Darian has said, is also not surprising...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdome757

So you are saying that the speculation is that gold weight no is no longer a reflection of defense and is not used to order based on the war map any more? Or am I misunderstanding?

---

No, it seems the gold weight is used to rank the bases on the map. But no longer used behind the scenes to draw an opponent.

The base without the eagle placed is ranked lower, and has less gold weight, because it’s not employing the eagle. By when the matchmaker searches for an opponent the eagle counts (according to Darian).

Ok. Thanks to the gasps who broke it down for me. I’ve read a bit of that thread but certainly not all 13 pages. So many good discussions over there it’s hard to follow all of them. So basically, looking at gold weight for matchmaking purposes is pointless now. Seeing bases lined up like that is just hard to get accustomed to after so many years otherwise.

Some very convoluted theories here on "ghost war weight".

Can I add one more theory?

Maybe it just doesn't work the way it should. Maybe Darian believes it should weigh in, but it doesn't, just as the intended removal of eagles doing triple damage to golems was announced but not implemented.

Sometimes you just have to follow the evidence. Evidence is starting to mount that the unplaced defenses are NOT being weighed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaTroll

Some very convoluted theories here on "ghost war weight".

Can I add one more theory?

Maybe it just doesn't work the way it should. Maybe Darian believes it should weigh in, but it doesn't, just as the intended removal of eagles doing triple damage to golems was announced but not implemented.

Sometimes you just have to follow the evidence. Evidence is starting to mount that the unplaced defenses are NOT being weighed.

---

It seems that it is the way, but you won't find any logical answer here, maybe they who defends the official statement have some villages with infernoes and eas pack, who knows..

the bases in the pictures are ordered/arranged properly according to what defenses have been placed on the map.

i believe the unplaced eagle still factors in but we can't be sure. either way who really cares, queue up your war and have at it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaTroll

Some very convoluted theories here on "ghost war weight".

Can I add one more theory?

Maybe it just doesn't work the way it should. Maybe Darian believes it should weigh in, but it doesn't, just as the intended removal of eagles doing triple damage to golems was announced but not implemented.

Sometimes you just have to follow the evidence. Evidence is starting to mount that the unplaced defenses are NOT being weighed.

---

I would have to agree here.

I think gold weight does work as intended, and the weight that Darian talked about was not implemented correctly so unplaced eagles do not actually count for weight.

These "ghost weight" and "server side weight" arguments are but speculation under the assumption that SC is God, and makes no mistakes.

Beyond gold weight, I have done some test wars with another clan and the matches themselves indicated a very strong probability they are not being counted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaTroll

Some very convoluted theories here on "ghost war weight".

Can I add one more theory?

Maybe it just doesn't work the way it should. Maybe Darian believes it should weigh in, but it doesn't, just as the intended removal of eagles doing triple damage to golems was announced but not implemented.

Sometimes you just have to follow the evidence. Evidence is starting to mount that the unplaced defenses are NOT being weighed.

---

I have no opinion on the unplaced eagle weight and whether it counts in the war matchmaker other than of course relying on Darian saying it does. We have none in my clan so I don’t know.

As far as his other statement, that gold weights have been adjusted, I definitely think that happened. This is also related to the unplaced eagle weight, though, because I no longer think having the eagle (or infernos) is a disadvantage. For example, 9.11s, in my opinion, are no longer an advantage.

It is difficult to test whether the unplaced eagle counts in the war matchmaker weight, but one thing I would say Papa, is if you are trying to do so, you need to consider that they probably don’t weigh what they used to. You still may have enough evidence to be convinced their weight is 0, but just wanted to throw that out there for you to consider.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

I would have to agree here.

I think gold weight does work as intended, and the weight that Darian talked about was not implemented correctly so unplaced eagles do not actually count for weight.

These "ghost weight" and "server side weight" arguments are but speculation under the assumption that SC is God, and makes no mistakes.

Beyond gold weight, I have done some test wars with another clan and the matches themselves indicated a very strong probability they are not being counted.

---

Two different issues here. One is whether purchased but unplaced eagle counts in the war matchmaker weight. The other issue is whether war matchmaker weights have been adjusted. I believe the latter has happened. And, since gold weight didn’t change, that means gold weight is no longer reliable.

Not sure if I completely understand, but looks to me like you can engineer th12 if you buy a game pack only, that's very interesting seems like a pay to win move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by alcusmc

Not sure if I completely understand, but looks to me like you can engineer th12 if you buy a game pack only, that's very interesting seems like a pay to win move.

---

you can't because th12 tends to match th12.

even that th12 with no eagle is still above the th11 with eagle on the map and the th11 has higher point d and infernos

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFrostyBlaze

you can't because th12 tends to match th12.

even that th12 with no eagle is still above the th11 with eagle on the map and the th11 has higher point d and infernos

---

This war is in my clan. I found out a long time ago the Th12 itself adds a ton of war weight. Thats why its above the th11 with an eagle. I have a rushed th11 i added infernos and the eagle all lvl 1 and i still placed above a maxed th11 in war. This was a test. If this person placed their eagle they would place mich higher on the war map. Ive been playing for over 5 years and have seen everything the game has had to offer including cheats. This time i can say 100% that the eagle wasnt counted in the war match up. That said I cant say if the war weight was added. I only brought the issue up because if there is something wrong supercell can get on it and clear it up. Its supercells fault that they didnt make them place the eagle before the th12.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wkcinaz1

This time i can say 100% that the eagle wasnt counted in the war match up.

---

You can say that but that does not make it true. You cannot prove it was not counted in the war match up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wkcinaz1

This war is in my clan. I found out a long time ago the Th12 itself adds a ton of war weight. Thats why its above the th11 with an eagle. I have a rushed th11 i added infernos and the eagle all lvl 1 and i still placed above a maxed th11 in war. This was a test. If this person placed their eagle they would place mich higher on the war map. Ive been playing for over 5 years and have seen everything the game has had to offer including cheats. This time i can say 100% that the eagle wasnt counted in the war match up. That said I cant say if the war weight was added. I only brought the issue up because if there is something wrong supercell can get on it and clear it up. Its supercells fault that they didnt make them place the eagle before the th12.

---

You are assuming position on the map reflects what weight was counted for the matching, rather than being SC’s attempt to arrange bases in a rough order of difficulty as small feature meant to be a practical help to clans in working out who might attack what (just an attempt, something that existed before engineering was ever a thing when clan war was first introduced).

You cannot say 100% that it was counted, as that doesn’t allow for the run of the mill kind of match disparity we sometimes see, where clan A has more thX than clan B and nobody’s been playing weight games or leaving off defences etc. That just happens sometimes because the pool of other clans searching a war isn’t big enough to always give us a perfect th level matching at multiple map levels. The top th level in the war is the one they most need to get right in having equal numbers of thX on each side, and they seem do that successfully most of the time for most people.

And it’s not SC’s fault than anyone did or didn’t do anything after purchasing a pack - they made an icon to remind you that you had an unplaced item, and never made any representations about war weight, up until recently announcing that now it counts for matching so you might as well place it of you own it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Two different issues here. One is whether purchased but unplaced eagle counts in the war matchmaker weight. The other issue is whether war matchmaker weights have been adjusted. I believe the latter has happened. And, since gold weight didn’t change, that means gold weight is no longer reliable.

---

Gold weights were adjusted in the TH12 update, more weight was added to lvl 1 items and less to higher weights. If you were balanced before the change you may not notice it as much.

As for eagle weight on unplaced pack items, they so not count even though Darian said they would. More evidence will come and eventually they will do something about it.

Still was a poor way to "close a loophole" since they created this loophole in the first place, all they had to do was make make you place items in tour home village before upgrading.

Ok. I spent some time last night and this morning reading through a few threads here in CW sub to try to get a handle on this. Unless I missed a quote from Darian, all he said was a simple “we have adjusted a few weights” and from that, and screenshots from war maps, a ton of speculation has ensued. If he had said “we have reworked the gold weight system and how bases appear on the war map” I could understand some of the posts about ghost weight and what not. But isn’t everyone missing the simplest explanation? That SC made a mistake and that unplaced buildings still don’t count? Don’t forget the recent golem/EA debacle. Has anyone pointed Darian in onto one of these threads and showed him pictures asking “is this normal?” Look at base 5 and 6 in the OP. There is a fairly big disparity between the level of defenses in each base. Most of 5s defensive buildings are lower level than 6. Infernos, AT, WT, etc. Doesn’t the easiest and simplest explanation say that unplaced buildings still aren’t counting? I know many of us here like to indulge in speculation and many have indeed been correct in the past. But isn’t the simplest explanation usually the right one? At least until proven otherwise?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaTroll

Some very convoluted theories here on "ghost war weight".

---

But this really isn't what "ghost weight" is. Ghost weight refers to bases being given the weight of structures they DO NOT have, like a TH9.11 being given inferno weight since it's a TH11 and should theoretically have them. In this case, the base DOES HAVE an eagle, it just hasn't been placed on the map.

I do not think SC has implemented any form of "ghost weight" to matchmaking. But in the case described by the OP any ghost weight is unnecessary, the TH12 has the eagle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaChampi0nsLiga

It seems that it is the way, but you won't find any logical answer here, maybe they who defends the official statement have some villages with infernoes and eas pack, who knows..

---

I don't know. To me it would seem more logical that SC is weighting structures that the account has, and then ordering the map based actual defensive difficulty. And that war matchmaking is more complex than "gold weight = exact war weight."

The less logical answer, at least in my opinion, is that SC made a coding error and unplaced structures are not being accounted for in MM despite all their statements to the contrary.

Sure, it's entirely possible, SC is not infallible. But I don't think that's the "logical answer."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigdome757

Ok. I spent some time last night and this morning reading through a few threads here in CW sub to try to get a handle on this. Unless I missed a quote from Darian, all he said was a simple “we have adjusted a few weights” and from that, and screenshots from war maps, a ton of speculation has ensued. If he had said “we have reworked the gold weight system and how bases appear on the war map” I could understand some of the posts about ghost weight and what not. But isn’t everyone missing the simplest explanation? That SC made a mistake and that unplaced buildings still don’t count? Don’t forget the recent golem/EA debacle. Has anyone pointed Darian in onto one of these threads and showed him pictures asking “is this normal?” Look at base 5 and 6 in the OP. There is a fairly big disparity between the level of defenses in each base. Most of 5s defensive buildings are lower level than 6. Infernos, AT, WT, etc. Doesn’t the easiest and simplest explanation say that unplaced buildings still aren’t counting? I know many of us here like to indulge in speculation and many have indeed been correct in the past. But isn’t the simplest explanation usually the right one? At least until proven otherwise?

---

No one has suggested the war map was adjusted. In fact, the suggestion is the oppposite: the war map gold weights weren’t adjusted to correspond with the weights the matchmaker actually uses now.

It is possible the unplaced buildings don’t count in war weight even though Darian said they do. I don’t know about that one. I do think the eagle weighs much less than it used to, which might be contributing to people thinking it isn’t being counted in war weight.

I also don’t think the eagle is a disadvantage now. If I had it unplaced I would place it.

Im still saying 100% something is wrong with this picture. 6 is the only one out of place in the war. Half of the time supercell will say one thing and be wrong about it. Easy fix, if you dont have all building placed you cant join in wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wkcinaz1

Im still saying 100% something is wrong with this picture. 6 is the only one out of place in the war. Half of the time supercell will say one thing and be wrong about it. Easy fix, if you dont have all building placed you cant join in wars.

---

Easy doesn’t make it good. It would be much better to have a minimum defensive weight based on hall level than to prevent players from joining wars. Players should be allowed to join wars at a disadvantage if they want to.

As far as the picture goes, if the gold weight that the pictures are based on is no longer the weight used by the matchmaker, it doesn’t matter much that #6 is out of order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wkcinaz1

Im still saying 100% something is wrong with this picture. 6 is the only one out of place in the war. Half of the time supercell will say one thing and be wrong about it. Easy fix, if you dont have all building placed you cant join in wars.

---

You’re not reading what we are suggesting: the place 6 has on the map is likely not to reflect its actual weight contribution to the match, but rather represent something else, most likely some abstract rough conception of its relative difficulty for an attacker compared to other bases there (reflected in its gold weight). It’s easier than the ones above it for lacking an eagle, and harder than the one below it which does have an eagle but lower levels on most other things (and no giga tesla to deal with).

why do people keep saying 6 is out of place?

6 is in the correct place for the defenses that are showing. not having an eagle dropped on the war map causes him to be below eagle th12s but still above all th11s

I can’t speak to weight but based on my abnormal wars I think the algorithm is now more complex in general. I play with my family we are all rushed we will always pair with other rushed players. I have higher attack stats at th10 than my dad has at th12 and we will always pair with other th12 with sub th8 levels towers and walls you see from TH lvl 7 players. We are almost always paired with people
Who look exactly like us in each respective tier due to his rushed bases at th11 and 12 I end up 2-3 starring the rank 1-2 players each war won them often not being able to even 1 star my th10 and I’m not even near maxed just not turbo rushed. Another example is his th11 pre dropping Eagle the number 2 defense guy never had one he dropped his now the number 2 always has one and they have the same low level towers as before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFrostyBlaze

why do people keep saying 6 is out of place?

6 is in the correct place for the defenses that are showing. not having an eagle dropped on the war map causes him to be below eagle th12s but still above all th11s

---

Because they are thinking Darian said unplaced eagles count in the war weight AND that this weight is reflected in the map order (gold weight). If #6’s unplaced eagle is counted in the map/gold weight, it would be higher. It isn’t higher, so they are assuming it means the unplaced eagle must not have any weight. However, that misses the possibility that the war map/gold weight is not accurate anymore and there instead is a different set of weights used by the matchmaker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Because they are thinking Darian said unplaced eagles count in the war weight AND that this weight is reflected in the map order (gold weight). If #6’s unplaced eagle is counted in the map/gold weight, it would be higher. It isn’t higher, so they are assuming it means the unplaced eagle must not have any weight. However, that misses the possibility that the war map/gold weight is not accurate anymore and there instead is a different set of weights used by the matchmaker.

---

Supercell needs to make this more clear. I havent seen where they have said they changed gold weight. I dont think they know whats going on so Darian says its counted, but doesnt give a clear answer. Everything here said is all speculation and doesnt have any merrort in the game anymore. I want proof they fixed it because from where im standing it doesnt look like it. Having the bases set in this order would and will continue to cause problems for supercell and their credibility in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wkcinaz1

Supercell needs to make this more clear. I havent seen where they have said they changed gold weight. I dont think they know whats going on so Darian says its counted, but doesnt give a clear answer. Everything here said is all speculation and doesnt have any merrort in the game anymore. I want proof they fixed it because from where im standing it doesnt look like it. Having the bases set in this order would and will continue to cause problems for supercell and their credibility in the game.

---

I do not understand any of this. Since when has SC ever confirmed anything about war weight, gold weight etc? It would be nice ofcourse but as far as I am aware, Supercell has never given lists of warweights. So what makes you think SC gives clear answers to this or any proof?

Further more, why do you care so much? I do not see 1 eagle making much of a difference in outcome of the war. If its counted or not, it really does not suddenly make the match more or less fair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wkcinaz1

Supercell needs to make this more clear. I havent seen where they have said they changed gold weight.

---

SC have never used the term "gold weight" AFAIK. In fact that's a term I started using once I suspected it was no longer used for matching. The belief amongst many of the GASPs is that SC haven't changed gold weights. But Darian said this in the Reddit AMA:

Quote:

---

Yes we have made a few changes to the weights in the matchmaking system

---

Note that it's "weights in the matchmaking system". But players didn't notice any change to how bases ranked on the map, nor to gold weights. Interesting...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

But players didn't notice any change to how bases ranked on the map, nor to gold weights.

---

Some did, some didn't. As usual the most knowledgeable won't tell you, or have been banned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

SC have never used the term "gold weight" AFAIK. In fact that's a term I started using once I suspected it was no longer used for matching. The belief amongst many of the GASPs is that SC haven't changed gold weights. But Darian said this in the Reddit AMA:



Note that it's "weights in the matchmaking system". But players didn't notice any change to how bases ranked on the map, nor to gold weights. Interesting...

---

I was referring to the eagle being added to war weight when not placed. They say it does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wkcinaz1

I was referring to the eagle being added to war weight when not placed. They say it does.

---

Yes, they said war weight - ie the weight used for matching. You are disputing that based on looking at the map order. But many of us believe that the map order (and gold) is now totally different from the matching weight. So looking at the map tells you nothing about what's going on in the actual matching. And therefore there's no evidence that the ghost EA isn't being counted. All we've got is SC's statement. They're unlikely to be lying. They might have made a mistake, but without any actual evidence of it, it's more likely they are correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

And therefore there's no evidence that the ghost EA isn't being counted.

---

Well, there's a tiny bit of evidence: the one or two people who war with four ghost EAs don't report being outnumbered by four EAs every war. This is of course not very strong evidence (especially when they war with many-EA lineups that are prone to being off by a few EAs anyway).

OTOH I haven't seen one of those reports for a few weeks. Maybe they realized they actually are being outnumbered by EAs after all.

So the prevailing argument is that the same base has one value while matching and then has another completely different value when the bases are arranged in order of defense strength. I am sceptical.

The photos that began this thread are evidence of something. Maybe we should follow the evidence.

the endless debate that rages on as we utilize our confirmation biases :)

stick to what works for your clan is the way to go. having all our defense is what works for us

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaTroll

So the prevailing argument is that the same base has one value while matching and then has another completely different value when the bases are arranged in order of defense strength. I am sceptical.

The photos that began this thread are evidence of something. Maybe we should follow the evidence.

---

The photos are evidence that gold weights haven’t been adjusted, thus the war map order isn’t adjusted.

Or, the photos are evidence that unplaced eagles don’t have any weight at all.

SC says it is not #2. Possibly they made a mistake, like with eagle damage, but more likely they did not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaTroll

So the prevailing argument is that the same base has one value while matching and then has another completely different value when the bases are arranged in order of defense strength. I am sceptical.

The photos that began this thread are evidence of something. Maybe we should follow the evidence.

---

Illuminati confirmed ! :facepalm:

Serious tho, why is there so much focus on this non issue?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prutser

Illuminati confirmed ! :facepalm:
Serious tho, why is there so much focus on this non issue?

---

because it seems that the missing ea is not weighted as it should.

there was a real big issue with ea extra damage to golem and not more damage at lv 3 which supercell hasnt realised until it was discussed a long time.
it might be possible that there are a lot more unknown failure in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

Yes, they said war weight - ie the weight used for matching. You are disputing that based on looking at the map order. But many of us believe that the map order (and gold) is now totally different from the matching weight. So looking at the map tells you nothing about what's going on in the actual matching. And therefore there's no evidence that the ghost EA isn't being counted. All we've got is SC's statement. They're unlikely to be lying. They might have made a mistake, but without any actual evidence of it, it's more likely they are correct.

---

I have tested a number of wars with all kinds of unique bases as well as visited other clans, participated in wars with TH12s with unplaced eagles, and have been informed of other unplaced eagle testing.

It is my opinion that you are completely wrong with your theory.

There is NO ghost weight or bases being matched differently from their offense or gold weight.

What you perceive as gold weight not being matching weight is a combination of things they changed. More weight is on the initial placement of items and the matchmaker will attempt to closely match town halls. The MM takes offense and defense of the whole clan and looks for clans with similar #s of town halls, and similar weights, this is why rushed clans tend to match other rushed clans, or engineered depending on your definition.

Unplaced eagles DO NOT count in the matchmaking process at any level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

I have tested a number of wars with all kinds of unique bases as well as visited other clans, participated in wars with TH12s with unplaced eagles, and have been informed of other unplaced eagle testing.

It is my opinion that you are completely wrong with your theory.

There is NO ghost weight or bases being matched differently from their offense or gold weight.

What you perceive as gold weight not being matching weight is a combination of things they changed. More weight is on the initial placement of items and the matchmaker will attempt to closely match town halls. The MM takes offense and defense of the whole clan and looks for clans with similar #s of town halls, and similar weights, this is why rushed clans tend to match other rushed clans, or engineered depending on your definition.

Unplaced eagles DO NOT count in the matchmaking process at any level.

---

Really? This thread is 2 days old and you already did multiple wars, enough to proof that unplaced eagles do not count?

Color me skeptical. I sure would like to see your proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freshspown

Really? This thread is 2 days old and you already did multiple wars, enough to proof that unplaced eagles do not count?

Color me skeptical. I sure would like to see your proof.

---

i bet he mean the whole time since th 12 release.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wotanwaton

i bet he mean the whole time since th 12 release.

---

That would make more sense, and kind of random that he tested and focused on eagles. But possible.

Anyway, I still would like to see some proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freshspown

Really? This thread is 2 days old and you already did multiple wars, enough to proof that unplaced eagles do not count?

Color me skeptical. I sure would like to see your proof.

---

There have been more threads than just this one, it is opinion through some testing and various reports since the release of TH12.

I don't have any proof and any proof I may provide would be no more convincing than OP.

I wonder how many accounts might still have unplaced eagles or if it even matters. still seems like a pointless discussion to me.

if you'd ask me i still think unplaced eagles or not having them is putting many clans at a big disadvantage from the start of a war.

currently matched against another asian clan stuck in the old way of engineering trying to run a lot of 9.11s and now we have a 9 eagle and nearly similar inferno advantage against them. say goodbye to their 13 war streak when the dust settles after this one.

on a side note to the thread. we've never seen a th12 in war without their eagle but i still am convinced that regardless if it didn't have one placed that it would still match a normal th12 with eagle in majority of wars. there are still times it might not though but that's just because that can happen on a normal basis. some wars we are down 2, even 6 th12s but it's usually compensated for having close to double the th11 count of the th12 disparity

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AFrostyBlaze

currently matched against another asian clan stuck in the old way of engineering trying to run a lot of 9.11s and now we have a 9 eagle and nearly similar inferno advantage against them. say goodbye to their 13 war streak when the dust settles after this one.

---

I doubt the 9.11s are hurting them, rather they probably helped put together a 13 streak that they couldn't have otherwise. In about 12 hours I'll be sitting on a 100 streak, and our 9.11s have been a big help along the way. Bangkok B is pretty much all 9.11s, doesn't seem to hurt them.

It'll also be a lot less dominant as people add 12s. A 9.11 won't help as much if its a sideshow to a 12v12 brawl.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TankSinatra

I doubt the 9.11s are hurting them, rather they probably helped put together a 13 streak that they couldn't have otherwise. In about 12 hours I'll be sitting on a 100 streak, and our 9.11s have been a big help along the way. Bangkok B is pretty much all 9.11s, doesn't seem to hurt them.

It'll also be a lot less dominant as people add 12s. A 9.11 won't help as much if its a sideshow to a 12v12 brawl.

---

Congrats and welcome to triple ws club, hopefully we dont match, lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wkcinaz1

Im still saying 100% something is wrong with this picture. 6 is the only one out of place in the war. Half of the time supercell will say one thing and be wrong about it. Easy fix, if you dont have all building placed you cant join in wars.

---

Another possibility - someone bought a big defense during prep day. The map doesn't get reordered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaTroll

So the prevailing argument is that the same base has one value while matching and then has another completely different value when the bases are arranged in order of defense strength. I am sceptical.

---

Actually, it is quite plausible from a programming standpoint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whp4

Actually, it is quite plausible from a programming standpoint.

---

Very simple, actually. All it means is they adjusted the weights used by the matchmaker but didn’t adjust the weight used for map order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Very simple, actually. All it means is they adjusted the weights used by the matchmaker but didn’t adjust the weight used for map order.

---

Considering the evidence, it's more plausible that the gold weights are correct and it was never implemented in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

Considering the evidence, it's more plausible that the gold weights are correct and it was never implemented in the first place.

---

I think there is a good chance the gold weights aren’t used by the matchmaker anymore irregardless of this issue of the unplaced eagle, which weighs much less now than it used to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

I think there is a good chance the gold weights aren’t used by the matchmaker anymore irregardless of this issue of the unplaced eagle, which weighs much less now than it used to.

---

No, they just raised the weights of lvl 1 items and upped offense weights a little.

I would say the game specialists are probably the least versed in how matchmaker actually works being max style players, so you guys come up with your theories to support a pre-determined point of view rather than testing from a large pool of unique bases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

No, they just raised the weights of lvl 1 items and upped offense weights a little.

I would say the game specialists are probably the least versed in how matchmaker actually works being max style players, so you guys come up with your theories to support a pre-determined point of view rather than testing from a large pool of unique bases.

---

Could say the same for you. You have a very strong leaning towards a certain play style. If they upped the level of all level one items, dropping infernos and eagle would have greater impact. That's the opposite of what I'm seeing. So who is right? We are all guessing at something that is one factor among a myriad of variables. From my experience in our wars, the big defenses seem to carry less weight. Don't really know or care about the floating eagle as it's not a factor for my clan. They ruined the th11 pack so I didn't buy it nor will my clanmates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

No, they just raised the weights of lvl 1 items and upped offense weights a little.

I would say the game specialists are probably the least versed in how matchmaker actually works being max style players, so you guys come up with your theories to support a pre-determined point of view rather than testing from a large pool of unique bases.

---

What makes you think I’m only a maxed style player?

The changes I’ve noticed definitely aren’t suggestive of simply raising the weights of level 1 items. We are converting our 9.11s in my clan to drop big defenses which appear to have much less weight. My th11 might soon have infernos and an eagle. I added some bows recently on two of my th9s. Heck I might even build a king to go with my level 30 queen on a 3rd th9 account and maybe I’ll even build dragons on that one, not sure. Hmm, what to do with my th10s that don’t have bows or infernos? I’ll probably add those too, but not sure yet.

Ask me again in a year and I will be much closer to a max style player I think....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

No, they just raised the weights of lvl 1 items and upped offense weights a little.

I would say the game specialists are probably the least versed in how matchmaker actually works being max style players, so you guys come up with your theories to support a pre-determined point of view rather than testing from a large pool of unique bases.

---

And to add to what 2222 said, what makes you think that a max style player isn’t in a decent position to observe? I’d have thought that with what we know about nonlinearity that the hardest place to get accurate observations was off a set of more exotic bases. Sure they’ll give some added data you can’t get off a max style account, but the basic matchmaker functioning is simpler to observe in the simplest cases (namely the max style base). So I’d say the whole story needs to be what we can tell from the broadest sweep of bases and clans, from all maxer to all exotic - it’s got to all fit together into one account where you can’t just conveniently dismiss the evidence of some kinds of bases from the story. I’d say the biggest risk for a flawed theory would be to conjecture from only the exotics, as there’s so much more going on there in a complex system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

No, they just raised the weights of lvl 1 items and upped offense weights a little.

I would say the game specialists are probably the least versed in how matchmaker actually works being max style players, so you guys come up with your theories to support a pre-determined point of view rather than testing from a large pool of unique bases.

---

Since Supercell is not going to detail how Clan War matchmaking works, anything anybody who is not a Supercell employee says is going to be purely speculation. But painting all the Game Specialists with the same brush and claiming they're the least versed in playing the game is not only rude, it's wrong.

I've heard enough from Supercell employees to know that looking at war weight was never a direct look at how matchmaking works. There's far more going on under the surface to pair two teams than a simple loot value comparison. I also know that matchmaking has and will continue to evolve, so even if you were able to know how it works today, there's no guarantee it'll work that way tomorrow, or in a different war at a different time when a different team is also searching.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SharkyFinn

Since Supercell is not going to detail how Clan War matchmaking works, anything anybody who is not a Supercell employee says is going to be purely speculation. But painting all the Game Specialists with the same brush and claiming they're the least versed in playing the game is not only rude, it's wrong.

I've heard enough from Supercell employees to know that looking at war weight was never a direct look at how matchmaking works. There's far more going on under the surface to pair two teams than a simple loot value comparison. I also know that matchmaking has and will continue to evolve, so even if you were able to know how it works today, there's no guarantee it'll work that way tomorrow, or in a different war at a different time when a different team is also searching.

---

I think most forumer know gold weight is not the ONLY value used in MM, but it is used

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

And to add to what 2222 said, what makes you think that a max style player isn’t in a decent position to observe? I’d have thought that with what we know about nonlinearity that the hardest place to get accurate observations was off a set of more exotic bases. Sure they’ll give some added data you can’t get off a max style account, but the basic matchmaker functioning is simpler to observe in the simplest cases (namely the max style base). So I’d say the whole story needs to be what we can tell from the broadest sweep of bases and clans, from all maxer to all exotic - it’s got to all fit together into one account where you can’t just conveniently dismiss the evidence of some kinds of bases from the story. I’d say the biggest risk for a flawed theory would be to conjecture from only the exotics, as there’s so much more going on there in a complex system.

---

I don't think that the more max style are in a decent position to observe because it is not their goal to get favorable matchups every war so less risks are taken, less data accumulated. You can learn far more from the exotic bases than you ever could from balanced bases because they are not the norm.

For example, let's say you had access to several hundred exotic bases along with max bases of every TH and every degree imaginable and only used a small subset of those accounts for a war, along with visits to other clans to check out wars, warring in other clans with unique bases, you would be able to adapt much quicker. You can only glean so much when so many bases are so much alike.

As for what is going on under the hood, I am well aware that gold weight is not the only value used, even offense weight is not the only value used. There is a degree of town hall matching being used along with the values to keep everything in check.

Phantom weight? Rubbish, doesn't exist.

Until I see Darian weigh in and say "we had our coders look into it and it is correct" I will argue based on multiple sources of evidence that undropped eagle was never coded correctly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

What makes you think I’m only a maxed style player?

The changes I’ve noticed definitely aren’t suggestive of simply raising the weights of level 1 items. We are converting our 9.11s in my clan to drop big defenses which appear to have much less weight. My th11 might soon have infernos and an eagle. I added some bows recently on two of my th9s. Heck I might even build a king to go with my level 30 queen on a 3rd th9 account and maybe I’ll even build dragons on that one, not sure. Hmm, what to do with my th10s that don’t have bows or infernos? I’ll probably add those too, but not sure yet.

Ask me again in a year and I will be much closer to a max style player I think....

---

Nice try but .5s and 9.11s are/were natural progression (and common bases) I did also mention that offense weight was increased.

My weight on my 10.5 didn't change with the TH12 update which would tell me that most of the higher level weights are about the same but I noticed the biggest change when dropping the eagle (huge weight) but very minimal weight from level 1 to level 3.

A TH12 with only lvl 1 items also weighs close to a max 11, not far off from a max TH11 going into TH12.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

For example, let's say you had access to several hundred exotic bases along with max bases of every TH and every degree imaginable and only used a small subset of those accounts for a war, along with visits to other clans to check out wars, warring in other clans with unique bases, you would be able to adapt much quicker.

---

And if you have the details of a couple of hundred various bases, you then have enough data, with a bit of programming, to solve for the actual values used in calculating the gold weights of all guns. Funny thing is those values don't seem to have changed much, if at all, over the last couple of years.

Quote:

---

As for what is going on under the hood, I am well aware that gold weight is not the only value used, even offense weight is not the only value used. There is a degree of town hall matching being used along with the values to keep everything in check.

---

But I don't particularly see TH matching. I've been 1v4 or 2v5 on TH12s AND they had extra engineered TH11s lurking down the list. So their gold weights were higher. Their TH numbers were higher. But oddly, the one thing that matched better was the effective strength of the bases - better point defences and such on the low weight side.

I'm looking at an example now; a clan (not mine) with 2 10.5s up top and a couple of 9.11ish lower down. Enemy has a 5* Th12 and an EA TH11 up top; then both are similar TH10s. So gold weights on those top 2 are:
96 : 114
95 : 102
It's not outrageous, but it's a biggish gap at the top where the MM seems to focus. TH matching isn't that close either as the opponent has a bunch of defenceless TH11s and such, so rather more TH11s in total.
But that upper defence is much closer than it looks. Level 15 point guns on the left, vs level 12/13 and bad walls on the right. I'm not certain which I'd prefer to have

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

My weight on my 10.5 didn't change with the TH12 update which would tell me that most of the higher level weights are about the same but I noticed the biggest change when dropping the eagle (huge weight) but very minimal weight from level 1 to level 3.

---

But nothing has changed there. I don't have data from TH12, but at TH11 the level 1 eagle was about 85% of the weight of the L2 eagle. Eagles and infernos were always the 2 where the weight was disproportionately concentrated on level 1.
And that effect can be exaggerated by the conversion to gold weights. That 85% was in the underlying linear weights. Adding guns in the 70k > 90k range added around 50% more to the gold weight than adding above 90k. So adding an eagle to a base under 90k can make the L1 appear even higher. Likewise if the EA is added to a TH11 under 110k, but then upgraded at TH12 (and so above 110k) - the weight gains will have a smaller effect on gold above 110k, so making L2 and L3 upgrades appear even smaller than they were. So if the 0>1 and 1>2 upgrades are done different sides of these boundaries it would be expected that the second might produce 10% of the gold increase of the first - and that was the case way back in 2016.

Quote:

---

A TH12 with only lvl 1 items also weighs close to a max 11, not far off from a max TH11 going into TH12.

---

Again nothing has changed. Obviously TH12 is new, but a TH11 with everything at level 1 was above a max TH10. And you'd expect the same at TH12 assuming a fairly biggish weight is assigned to the giga-tesla.

When it nerfed, I told about individual base it seems weight too much on IT. But SC adjust MMA, seems no one believe. Same issue on th11 or th12 now. Without doubting, individually base weight is not the key point in current MMA, a good lineup and maxed everything before upgrading to next TH will help you better for war due to TH level is a quite criteria in for now.
An EA can weight 40k or 10k on your defense, it was based on your def.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

Nice try but .5s and 9.11s are/were natural progression (and common bases) I did also mention that offense weight was increased.

My weight on my 10.5 didn't change with the TH12 update which would tell me that most of the higher level weights are about the same but I noticed the biggest change when dropping the eagle (huge weight) but very minimal weight from level 1 to level 3.

A TH12 with only lvl 1 items also weighs close to a max 11, not far off from a max TH11 going into TH12.

---

9.11s are not a natural progression. Th10s without bows or infernos or bomb towers or mortars are not natural progression. Th9 with level 30 queen and no king is not natural progression. Th9 without dragons, but with max witch slap is not natural progression. Th9 without splash is not natural progression. Th9 with wiz towers but no other splash is not natural progression. In any event, testing the gold weight changes when various defenses are dropped doesn’t require an exotic base, although it is best to test it on both types since the weight isn’t linear.

You are referring to gold weight, which you assume is the defensive weight used by the matchmaker, but you don’t know that it is. It used to be what the matchmaker used. I’m not convinced it still is accurate.

As for your eagle, when did you drop it and what was the gold weight change?

As for phantom weight, that is just in reference to the unplaced eagle. That has little to do with gold weight. Gold weight no longer being used doesn’t have to have “phantom” weights. All it means is they adjusted the weights of various defensive units used by the matchmaker but didn’t adjust the amount reflected in the gold storages, perhaps intentionally so as not to show what was adjusted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

9.11s are not a natural progression. Th10s without bows or infernos or bomb towers or mortars are not natural progression. Th9 with level 30 queen and no king is not natural progression. Th9 without dragons, but with max witch slap is not natural progression. Th9 without splash is not natural progression. Th9 with wiz towers but no other splash is not natural progression. In any event, testing the gold weight changes when various defenses are dropped doesn’t require an exotic base, although it is best to test it on both types since the weight isn’t linear.

You are referring to gold weight, which you assume is the defensive weight used by the matchmaker, but you don’t know that it is. It used to be what the matchmaker used. I’m not convinced it still is accurate.

As for your eagle, when did you drop it and what was the gold weight change?

As for phantom weight, that is just in reference to the unplaced eagle. That has little to do with gold weight. Gold weight no longer being used doesn’t have to have “phantom” weights. All it means is they adjusted the weights of various defensive units used by the matchmaker but didn’t adjust the amount reflected in the gold storages, perhaps intentionally so as not to show what was adjusted.

---

Why have max witchslap? Witches are so heavy that it negates not having dragons and the missing items only for the most part makes the account kinda balanced for weight. The bases you listed are only closer to .5s and will not tell you as much as more extreme bases.

Do you know what gold weight is and how it's actually used? I don't think you do with your phantom weight theory and I don't think you've ever actually warred with some of these no eagles to test it out.

Find some no eagle 12s, do some test wars and get back to me then.

Funny thing is that I don't really have to prove anything because I'm not a game specialist so I don't have any title I need to back up, I'm just the arrogant engineer winning wars that everyone loathes :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

Why have max witchslap? Witches are so heavy that it negates not having dragons and the missing items only for the most part makes the account kinda balanced for weight. The bases you listed are only closer to .5s and will not tell you as much as more extreme bases.

Do you know what gold weight is and how it's actually used? I don't think you do with your phantom weight theory and I don't think you've ever actually warred with some of these no eagles to test it out.

Find some no eagle 12s, do some test wars and get back to me then.

Funny thing is that I don't really have to prove anything because I'm not a game specialist so I don't have any title I need to back up, I'm just the arrogant engineer winning wars that everyone loathes :)

---

All different bases for different experiments. Regarding the th9 I have with max witches and healers but no drags, I did that one because I find it easier to 3 star max th9s with witchslap than I do with elixir troops.

The bases are getting closer to .5s as I add more defenses now that I think the big defensive weights have been reduced, but they started out not close to .5s at all. I had a defenseless th10 at one time. Always making changes. The point isn’t to discuss the details of my bases, but to counter your suggestion that all gasps are maxers. I have one maxer base. I have a lot of other kinds.

Yes, I know what gold weight is. No, neither of us knows for sure whether it currently is consistent with the weights used by the matchmaker or whether the matchmaker uses some weights that are not consistent with the weights shown in gold. Based on what I have seen recently and on the posts others, I think some of the gold weights are no longer the same as the weights used by the matchmaker.

I’m not sure what phantom weight theory you claim I’m trying to sell? Are you still talking about unplaced eagle weight? I think maybe you are mixing up discussions with me and others. As I’ve said before on that issue, all I know is Darian said they now have weight. I don’t have unplaced eagle bases to test it out, so I can’t evaluate whether what he said is accurate or not. Possibly they made a mistake, but more likely they didn’t.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

All different bases for different experiments. Regarding the th9 I have with max witches and healers but no drags, I did that one because I find it easier to 3 star max th9s with witchslap than I do with elixir troops.

The bases are getting closer to .5s as I add more defenses now that I think the big defensive weights have been reduced, but they started out not close to .5s at all. I had a defenseless th10 at one time. Always making changes. The point isn’t to discuss the details of my bases, but to counter your suggestion that all gasps are maxers. I have one maxer base. I have a lot of other kinds.

Yes, I know what gold weight is. No, neither of us knows for sure whether it currently is consistent with the weights used by the matchmaker or whether the matchmaker uses some weights that are not consistent with the weights shown in gold. Based on what I have seen recently and on the posts others, I think some of the gold weights are no longer the same as the weights used by the matchmaker.

I’m not sure what phantom weight theory you claim I’m trying to sell? Are you still talking about unplaced eagle weight? I think maybe you are mixing up discussions with me and others. As I’ve said before on that issue, all I know is Darian said they now have weight. I don’t have unplaced eagle bases to test it out, so I can’t evaluate whether what he said is accurate or not. Possibly they made a mistake, but more likely they didn’t.

---

Well, I've been trying to keep more on topic of the unplaced eagle weighting (phantom weight) but it is easy to get off track. GASPS are the champions for all, and in that respect are limited to push the boundaries of what is possible and mostly when they talk about weights, the more prominent engineers on the forums tend to have better insight in that particular area.

If Sam is saying he's done testing with his results, I've seen testing first hand, and we have this particular thread with some more evidence it is more likely that it doesn't really count, and there is no phantom weight.

Though the best way would be MORE testing to know for sure and to be able to see the WHOLE roster rather than just the top bases so you know the missing weight isn't being traded elsewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

Well, I've been trying to keep more on topic of the unplaced eagle weighting (phantom weight) but it is easy to get off track. GASPS are the champions for all, and in that respect are limited to push the boundaries of what is possible and mostly when they talk about weights, the more prominent engineers on the forums tend to have better insight in that particular area.

If Sam is saying he's done testing with his results, I've seen testing first hand, and we have this particular thread with some more evidence it is more likely that it doesn't really count, and there is no phantom weight.

Though the best way would be MORE testing to know for sure and to be able to see the WHOLE roster rather than just the top bases so you know the missing weight isn't being traded elsewhere.

---

Just so you know, there is no “champions for all” code or anything GASPs need to live by. We can support engineering or not. I’ve never been down on engineers and have spent a lot of time here defending it (and doing it myself in the game).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

Well, I've been trying to keep more on topic of the unplaced eagle weighting (phantom weight) but it is easy to get off track. GASPS are the champions for all, and in that respect are limited to push the boundaries of what is possible and mostly when they talk about weights, the more prominent engineers on the forums tend to have better insight in that particular area.

If Sam is saying he's done testing with his results, I've seen testing first hand, and we have this particular thread with some more evidence it is more likely that it doesn't really count, and there is no phantom weight.

Though the best way would be MORE testing to know for sure and to be able to see the WHOLE roster rather than just the top bases so you know the missing weight isn't being traded elsewhere.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Just so you know, there is no “champions for all” code or anything GASPs need to live by. We can support engineering or not. I’ve never been down on engineers and have spent a lot of time here defending it (and doing it myself in the game).

---

Yes agree, 2222 was a more neutral Gasp regarding engineering, but lately i saw your post is more maxer style, especially after the GASP title.

I am pretty sure unplaced defenses does not count, because we already done a few test war with extreme unplaced ea th12, it was a 100k weight th12, and after a few wars, we never draw any ea from the other side, and mostly only 9.11 or 10.5, in some wars we even draw a th10 on top. We got a big advantage from top to bottom when we did the test war. And some forumers also totally convinced when seeing those wars. But again no definitive proof since it is all server side

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

Find some no eagle 12s, do some test wars and get back to me then.

---

No we haven't, and never said we had. But if you look at the first post in this thread, it was showing the map order of bases as proof that the unplaced EA didn't count to matching. And that's the logic we've been arguing against. If map order is now totally unhinged from the matching, then that isn't evidence.
We've said that maybe SC did mess up and not actually count the hidden EA (it wouldn't be the first time); but we'd want some actual evidence, along the lines of...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samratulangi

I am pretty sure unplaced defenses does not count, because we already done a few test war with extreme unplaced ea th12, it was a 100k weight th12, and after a few wars, we never draw any ea from the other side, and mostly only 9.11 or 10.5, in some wars we even draw a th10 on top.

---

Have you got the player tag for the account? I'm curious to see what else it has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

Have you got the player tag for the account? I'm curious to see what else it has.

---

Sent you PM about this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samratulangi

Yes agree, 2222 was a more neutral Gasp regarding engineering, but lately i saw your post is more maxer style, especially after the GASP title.

---

Total nonsense. Sorry, I’m not usually that blunt, but in this case it is the best way to describe it. My position on engineering has always been the same. I’ve always described engineering as doing nothing more than upgrading the way the matchmaker tells you to. I’ve consistently referred to the problem as being a matchmaker problem, not an engineering problem. I’ve said over and over that engineering is only a symptom of faults in the matchmaker. I’ve constantly disagreed with players who refer to engineering as cheating or who say negative things about engineers.

I’ve used the following example dozens of times since being a GASP: if I have gold to spend and I think spending it on defense A is better for my clan wars than spending it on defense B, why should I spend it on defense B? If anything spending it on defense B is selfish. I used that example so many times in response to players saying engineering is cheating that I started apologizing for using it so much. This is all after I was a GASP.

Now, at the same time, I’ve also consistently supported SC trying to change the matchmaker to remove the faults. I think a perfect matchmaker results in a match that is determined as much as possible in the attacking and base defending skill of the players in the clans and NOT on their knowledge of how to upgrade. I support trying to improve the matchmaker to make the matches as even as possible and I support players upgrading their base in the way they think gives their clan the best advantage. I have supported, for example, a minimum defensive weight set at 90% of the max defense of the hall below. That would still allow some thought being put into what to upgrade and some advantage able to be gained by it, but not a huge one.

About the only type of engineering I’ve always been against is the roster type engineering of filling the bottom with low junk. That isn’t a base upgrading decision. That is simply filling a roster with low junk to then totally blow away an unsuspecting clan due to a huge fault in the matchmaker not giving enough importance to the top of the rosters. Thankfully, that isn’t as easy to do as it once was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OnyxDS

No we haven't, and never said we had. But if you look at the first post in this thread, it was showing the map order of bases as proof that the unplaced EA didn't count to matching. And that's the logic we've been arguing against. If map order is now totally unhinged from the matching, then that isn't evidence.
We've said that maybe SC did mess up and not actually count the hidden EA (it wouldn't be the first time); but we'd want some actual evidence, along the lines of...



Have you got the player tag for the account? I'm curious to see what else it has.

---

Let's say for arguments sake that it did count, but was hidden.

This would cause far more problems in itself because you SHOULD be able to tell whether or not you are actually accruing that weight. If someone buys an eagle with gold and places it in their main base but doesn't place it in their war base it still counts for weight, and gold weight is visable on the map. Players quickly see that they need to add new buildings they dropped into their war base because it is only a disservice not to. If it were the same situation where they would get new buildings in their home base but not put them in their war base and would not visually see by gold weight and map ordering, players would constantly be getting handicapped thinking that it doesn't count when it does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

Let's say for arguments sake that it did count, but was hidden.

This would cause far more problems in itself because you SHOULD be able to tell whether or not you are actually accruing that weight. If someone buys an eagle with gold and places it in their main base but doesn't place it in their war base it still counts for weight, and gold weight is visable on the map. Players quickly see that they need to add new buildings they dropped into their war base because it is only a disservice not to. If it were the same situation where they would get new buildings in their home base but not put them in their war base and would not visually see by gold weight and map ordering, players would constantly be getting handicapped thinking that it doesn't count when it does.

---

SC never told players to use gold “weight” on the map and I suspect they wish they had never used it in the matchmaker to begin with. That said, I do wish Darian would respond by checking in to confirm they didn’t make a mistake and the weight is being counted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToxicTroll

But what do I know?

---

There are separate issues at play here. We have specific SC (through Darian) word that an unplaced eagle (SPECIFICALLY AN EAGLE BOUGHT THROUGH A PACKAGE) (yes all caps justified here) counts for MM weight. We don't see that in storage weight. Some question whether this means storage weights are unreliable, some question whether this means Darian is unreliable. I personally think storage weights are close enough to make good decisions, and am agnostic as to whether Darian is wrong in this instance.

A very few took a flight of fancy & decided this means all unplaced buildings carry phantom weight. This is obviously wrong as you seem to know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

Let's say for arguments sake that it did count, but was hidden.

This would cause far more problems in itself because you SHOULD be able to tell whether or not you are actually accruing that weight. If someone buys an eagle with gold and places it in their main base but doesn't place it in their war base it still counts for weight, and gold weight is visable on the map. Players quickly see that they need to add new buildings they dropped into their war base because it is only a disservice not to. If it were the same situation where they would get new buildings in their home base but not put them in their war base and would not visually see by gold weight and map ordering, players would constantly be getting handicapped thinking that it doesn't count when it does.

---

I’m not sure where that “should” comes from. There is no need at all to reflect undropped buildings in gold storage weight or map ordering. And there is good reasons not to if the purpose of those is to provide enemy some basic rough degree of difficulty ranking - not fine grained and accurate to the inch for the specialist, but broad and near enough for the casual. Nobody would be disadvantaged if there was no indication either of those places of the undropped item, since SC designed in a button that tells you when you’ve got undropped items on the war base... it’s (base edit icon) right there in front of you when viewing the war map on prep day and only visible when it applies to you, so no need to even view your own base, never mind go clicking gold storages and comparing to previous in order to know you forgot to drop something new. The war icon exclamation mark also stays there prep day on main base view when it’s that situation, rather than disappearing on the first time you visit to map to donate a troop or see who you matched. So plenty of notice in 2 layers, so nobody is handicapped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

I’m not sure where that “should” comes from. There is no need at all to reflect undropped buildings in gold storage weight or map ordering. And there is good reasons not to if the purpose of those is to provide enemy some basic rough degree of difficulty ranking - not fine grained and accurate to the inch for the specialist, but broad and near enough for the casual. Nobody would be disadvantaged if there was no indication either of those places of the undropped item, since SC designed in a button that tells you when you’ve got undropped items on the war base... it’s (base edit icon) right there in front of you when viewing the war map on prep day and only visible when it applies to you, so no need to even view your own base, never mind go clicking gold storages and comparing to previous in order to know you forgot to drop something new. The war icon exclamation mark also stays there prep day on main base view when it’s that situation, rather than disappearing on the first time you visit to map to donate a troop or see who you matched. So plenty of notice in 2 layers, so nobody is handicapped.

---

Lol no, in the case of no eagle vs not placing war items, the uninformed would think that they are gaining an advantage by not placing items in their war base and we would be buried in threads like this one.

You actually test unplaced eagle?

Go test unplaced eagle and get back to me when you do.

So many better ways to handle a loophole SC created and yet all I see is blind defense without consideration OR a better solution, which I have provided on previous threads about this issue.

All they needed to do was to to force people to place pack items in order to upgrade the town hall when they introduced the the build all policy and we wouldn't be here debating whether it counts or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

Lol no, in the case of no eagle vs not placing war items, the uninformed would think that they are gaining an advantage by not placing items in their war base and we would be buried in threads like this one.

---

No need to lol, I’m raising a serious point here: why “should”? That assumes the gold weight and map order is meant to feed back defence weight information rather transparently to engineers.

I’m suggesting that maybe that was never what map position and gold weight was about. It may well have had a different function: to convey rough but good enough information about relative difficulty of bases to the attacking clan. If so then it’s not far fetched to imagine that while it did happen to feed back information to engineers, it would not need to remain so if some need came up - as has done - to weigh unplaced items. If that’s the case it’s reasonable to think the designers retain that original purpose of the map order and gold weight, rather than visibly adding weight and changing that when in fact the degree of difficulty for the attacker hasn’t changed as the items are still unplaced (just penalised in the matching itself in some way we don’t know that isn’t observable).

What I’m suggesting is that perhaps we never really had a firm grasp on what rather designers were doing there or why they were doing it, just thought we did as it had seemed to work for ages... I rather doubt they ever did it with the intention of providing min-maxers specific detailed transparent information on base defence weights. So then, why “should”? Why would they continue with something that they not only realised fed back too much information but in fact cut across that original intent of why it was there in the first place?

They’ve made it clear: the unplaced items are now supposed to count (and probably do, but we don’t know for sure and are unlikely to get an official confirmation that it’s presently working as they intend and say). Why would they be interested in providing detailed feedback on base defence weights to “help” any of those who they saw as exploiting a loophole? There is no reason on earth besides the motive of min-maxing why you’d have an unplaced item at all for anything longer than a day or so in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

There is no reason on earth besides the motive of min-maxing why you’d have an unplaced item at all for anything longer than a day or so in the first place.

---

I would like to add a reason. I think some people would have bought an item in a deal with other items. They wanted to use the other items but not yet all the bought items because they think it will give them an advantage not to place that item. Now if SuperCell would just come out and clearly state in game how things should work, that would put this debate to bed. Then it would become a bug report.

As far as I now know and understand is that it is still unclear
- if eagle is counted correctly
- if non placed eagle is counted or not
- if gold weight shown has any relevance to the war matchmaking
- if gold weight shown has any relevance to war map placement

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

All they needed to do was to to force people to place pack items in order to upgrade the town hall when they introduced the the build all policy and we wouldn't be here debating whether it counts or not.

---

I agree forcing people to place the purchased Eagle or even just putting it on their war map somewhere is a better solution than giving it weight even if not placed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freshspown

I would like to add a reason. I think some people would have bought an item in a deal with other items. They wanted to use the other items but not yet all the bought items because they think it will give them an advantage not to place that item. Now if SuperCell would just come out and clearly state in game how things should work, that would put this debate to bed. Then it would become a bug report.

As far as I now know and understand is that it is still unclear
- if eagle is counted correctly
- if non placed eagle is counted or not
- if gold weight shown has any relevance to the war matchmaking
- if gold weight shown has any relevance to war map placement

---

SC has already clearly stated that the purchased but unplaced item does count in the war weight. Some players here have been testing it and they think SC made a mistake and didn’t actually give it weight.

As for the unclear:
-I’m not sure what you mean about eagle counted correctly, but I think you are referring to the weight of the eagle. I believe it was significantly reduced to be more appropriate.
-See above regarding unplaced eagle.
-Gold weight and war matching, yep that one has not been specifically explained by SC.
-Gold weight and map placement, it definitely is relevant. The map placement is based on the gold weight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freshspown

I would like to add a reason. I think some people would have bought an item in a deal with other items. They wanted to use the other items but not yet all the bought items because they think it will give them an advantage not to place that item.

---

We have a terminology fail, that’s exactly what min-maxing is, advantage seeking by exploiting some game dynamic or weakness. The only kinds of non min-max reasons one might have that explain a short period of delay would be things like called away mid task and not online again for a bit, wanted to redesign the base first, just plain forgot that needed to get placed as while distracted temporarily missed seeing the icon. There is no explanation I can think of for purchasing it and keeping it unplaced for days, weeks and months of play that does not reference any kind of advantage seeking... which was what they wanted to end. And which is only connected to the thread discussion insofar as I was replying to a person who thought SC ought give such an advantage seeker clear unambiguous notice that it was no longer an advantage by transparently signalling it in one or both of gold weight and map position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

No need to lol, I’m raising a serious point here: why “should”? That assumes the gold weight and map order is meant to feed back defence weight information rather transparently to engineers.

I’m suggesting that maybe that was never what map position and gold weight was about. It may well have had a different function: to convey rough but good enough information about relative difficulty of bases to the attacking clan. If so then it’s not far fetched to imagine that while it did happen to feed back information to engineers, it would not need to remain so if some need came up - as has done - to weigh unplaced items. If that’s the case it’s reasonable to think the designers retain that original purpose of the map order and gold weight, rather than visibly adding weight and changing that when in fact the degree of difficulty for the attacker hasn’t changed as the items are still unplaced (just penalised in the matching itself in some way we don’t know that isn’t observable).

What I’m suggesting is that perhaps we never really had a firm grasp on what rather designers were doing there or why they were doing it, just thought we did as it had seemed to work for ages... I rather doubt they ever did it with the intention of providing min-maxers specific detailed transparent information on base defence weights. So then, why “should”? Why would they continue with something that they not only realised fed back too much information but in fact cut across that original intent of why it was there in the first place?

They’ve made it clear: the unplaced items are now supposed to count (and probably do, but we don’t know for sure and are unlikely to get an official confirmation that it’s presently working as they intend and say). Why would they be interested in providing detailed feedback on base defence weights to “help” any of those who they saw as exploiting a loophole? There is no reason on earth besides the motive of min-maxing why you’d have an unplaced item at all for anything longer than a day or so in the first place.

---

No, again you are wrong

Within the rules of the game and pack items, you are only offered the deal of grand warden and eagle together and if you get one of those items under normal circumstances then the deal goes away.

This means if you got the pack and dropped both items you have a lvl 1 warden and lvl 1 eagle so if you have to place both items at the same time you will be matched against bases that you cannot beat as you need a higher level warden in order to take them. There is no reason why you should need to place both items at the same time as you would never do that normally anyways so if unplaced eagle had weight (at TH11), you are silently punished for providing revenue for the game.

Gold weight as an indication in relation to not placing items in a war base (but placed in home base) has always been a positive because you know you are being disadvantaged when it "looks wierd" being above stronger bases on a war map. If there was phantom weight added for matchmaking but position was lower many would ignore the little indicator saying they need to place those items.

There is more of a negative to using phantom weight in this way as you would almost entirely punish all the average players. The more informed engineers typically plan out, research to a high degree, and carefully build their bases. Darian said they want it to count, I don't think it does and they made a mistake but I wouldn't get the pack items if the rest of my base wasn't progressed because when they do eventually fix it my base is ruined until it can catch up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

...Within the rules of the game and pack items, you are only offered the deal of grand warden and eagle together and if you get one of those items under normal circumstances then the deal goes away. This means if you got the pack and dropped both items you have a lvl 1 warden and lvl 1 eagle so if you have to place both items at the same time you will be matched against bases that you cannot beat as you need a higher level warden in order to take them. There is no reason why you should need to place both items at the same time as you would never do that normally anyways so if unplaced eagle had weight (at TH11), you are silently punished for providing revenue for the game.....

---

I agree, although I would say this is less true now than it was in the past because the eagle weight doesn’t have nearly the impact on a match like it used to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

No, again you are wrong

Within the rules of the game and pack items, you are only offered the deal of grand warden and eagle together and if you get one of those items under normal circumstances then the deal goes away.

This means if you got the pack and dropped both items you have a lvl 1 warden and lvl 1 eagle so if you have to place both items at the same time you will be matched against bases that you cannot beat as you need a higher level warden in order to take them. There is no reason why you should need to place both items at the same time as you would never do that normally anyways so if unplaced eagle had weight (at TH11), you are silently punished for providing revenue for the game.

Gold weight as an indication in relation to not placing items in a war base (but placed in home base) has always been a positive because you know you are being disadvantaged when it "looks wierd" being above stronger bases on a war map. If there was phantom weight added for matchmaking but position was lower many would ignore the little indicator saying they need to place those items.

There is more of a negative to using phantom weight in this way as you would almost entirely punish all the average players. The more informed engineers typically plan out, research to a high degree, and carefully build their bases. Darian said they want it to count, I don't think it does and they made a mistake but I wouldn't get the pack items if the rest of my base wasn't progressed because when they do eventually fix it my base is ruined until it can catch up.

---

I think we’re actually talking past each other, rather than right/wrong.

What I’m trying to do is suggest it might be useful in considering the thread topic if we try to think our way into the head of a game designer who specifically IS NOT designing with any min-max or advantage seeking opportunity in mind, and at some points designing with the secondary aim of feeding back little exploitable information. Moreover, this imagined designer is designing for the whole gamut of Clash players who behave the ways they do, not only the most savvy or competitive segment, and is designing in ways that meet their perceived needs (one of which is having some clue what to attack in war when you’re pretty clueless and hanging out with a bunch of equally inexperienced people all newer to wars and at a mix of relatively low th levels).

One aspect of what this means is, for example, is that it’s pretty certainly not true “one would never do that normally” when speaking of the whole Clash population and what they do on buying a multi item th pack. It is very likely true speaking of the much smaller segment with a knowledge or and interest in securing matching advantage. Only SC know what’s “normal” here for the whole gamut of players, as only they know of all the packs they sold how many have undropped items a good while after the purchase date, which packs, which items, and what town hall levels.

As to the idea that dropping eagle and warden together was - from the designers own point of view - a punishing or disadvantaging thing... how would we know? We don’t in fact know how normal it is to continue warring straight through th level transitions across the game, as opposed to taking a few weeks off war. We don’t know that the designer thinks in terms of bases always ideally handling their own weight, or even in terms that war is a primary consideration and you ought think out order of defence upgrades with that in mind. We’ve even got some clues in other parts of the game they don’t think this way: upgrade your town hall and bang, by design straight to matching mostly that town hall level out farming even though you’ve not upgraded any troops or camps yet.

So to me it doesn’t help in understanding what’s going on if we just keep reasserting the more advantage savvy assumptions unquestioned, like that gold weight and or map position should always continue to show this or that *because* that’s what the designers would have been up to or should be up to. We just don’t know, and they carefully don’t say much about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

I think we’re actually talking past each other, rather than right/wrong.

What I’m trying to do is suggest it might be useful in considering the thread topic if we try to think our way into the head of a game designer who specifically IS NOT designing with any min-max or advantage seeking opportunity in mind, and at some points designing with the secondary aim of feeding back little exploitable information. Moreover, this imagined designer is designing for the whole gamut of Clash players who behave the ways they do, not only the most savvy or competitive segment, and is designing in ways that meet their perceived needs (one of which is having some clue what to attack in war when you’re pretty clueless and hanging out with a bunch of equally inexperienced people all newer to wars and at a mix of relatively low th levels).

One aspect of what this means is, for example, is that it’s pretty certainly not true “one would never do that normally” when speaking of the whole Clash population and what they do on buying a multi item th pack. It is very likely true speaking of the much smaller segment with a knowledge or and interest in securing matching advantage. Only SC know what’s “normal” here for the whole gamut of players, as only they know of all the packs they sold how many have undropped items a good while after the purchase date, which packs, which items, and what town hall levels.

As to the idea that dropping eagle and warden together was - from the designers own point of view - a punishing or disadvantaging thing... how would we know? We don’t in fact know how normal it is to continue warring straight through th level transitions across the game, as opposed to taking a few weeks off war. We don’t know that the designer thinks in terms of bases always ideally handling their own weight, or even in terms that war is a primary consideration and you ought think out order of defence upgrades with that in mind. We’ve even got some clues in other parts of the game they don’t think this way: upgrade your town hall and bang, by design straight to matching mostly that town hall level out farming even though you’ve not upgraded any troops or camps yet.

So to me it doesn’t help in understanding what’s going on if we just keep reasserting the more advantage savvy assumptions unquestioned, like that gold weight and or map position should always continue to show this or that *because* that’s what the designers would have been up to or should be up to. We just don’t know, and they carefully don’t say much about it.

---

To take that a step farther, the designer might think dropping the eagle and warden at the same time is NOT a disadvantage. After all, if they realized it was a disadvantage, wouldn’t they change the war weights to make it no longer a disadvantage? That is what a war matchmaker is supposed to do after all. I think some of the matchmaker issues are related to the difficulty of trying to handle the countless combinations of defense, offense, etc. out there. However, I think some of them historically have been directly related to the developers not really understanding the finer aspects of the game that more competitive players either understand or soon figure out. That is not meant to insult the designers, there is no way they can equal millions of players when it comes to figuring out advantages and disadvantages.

consider me in the camp that thanks dropping eagle day 1 of th11 isn't disadvantageous even with only level 1 warden.

my logic being that if you were to have been a max th10 before going to th11, then you were probably used to drawing eagle th11s anyway so whats the difference, now you could at least compete slightly better against them because you have closer to equal defense

that is at least how matchmaking has worked for my clan over the last couple years.

on the flip side, an engineer that has much higher offense than defense ratio would not see the move of having eagle day 1 as closing the gap because it would make them match drastically different opponents over night meanwhile players that had all of their defenses dropped and max were already experiencing the increased defense on the other side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tomville

I think we’re actually talking past each other, rather than right/wrong.

What I’m trying to do is suggest it might be useful in considering the thread topic if we try to think our way into the head of a game designer who specifically IS NOT designing with any min-max or advantage seeking opportunity in mind, and at some points designing with the secondary aim of feeding back little exploitable information. Moreover, this imagined designer is designing for the whole gamut of Clash players who behave the ways they do, not only the most savvy or competitive segment, and is designing in ways that meet their perceived needs (one of which is having some clue what to attack in war when you’re pretty clueless and hanging out with a bunch of equally inexperienced people all newer to wars and at a mix of relatively low th levels).

One aspect of what this means is, for example, is that it’s pretty certainly not true “one would never do that normally” when speaking of the whole Clash population and what they do on buying a multi item th pack. It is very likely true speaking of the much smaller segment with a knowledge or and interest in securing matching advantage. Only SC know what’s “normal” here for the whole gamut of players, as only they know of all the packs they sold how many have undropped items a good while after the purchase date, which packs, which items, and what town hall levels.

As to the idea that dropping eagle and warden together was - from the designers own point of view - a punishing or disadvantaging thing... how would we know? We don’t in fact know how normal it is to continue warring straight through th level transitions across the game, as opposed to taking a few weeks off war. We don’t know that the designer thinks in terms of bases always ideally handling their own weight, or even in terms that war is a primary consideration and you ought think out order of defence upgrades with that in mind. We’ve even got some clues in other parts of the game they don’t think this way: upgrade your town hall and bang, by design straight to matching mostly that town hall level out farming even though you’ve not upgraded any troops or camps yet.

So to me it doesn’t help in understanding what’s going on if we just keep reasserting the more advantage savvy assumptions unquestioned, like that gold weight and or map position should always continue to show this or that *because* that’s what the designers would have been up to or should be up to. We just don’t know, and they carefully don’t say much about it.

---

So many words but yet such little information....

I have been arguing from a game designers point of view, you would want the player base to know to an extent purely because it makes your life easier not having to answer debates on a regular basis. On the engineering front, it can be both and not something to fear so no point in hiding it if the rest of the balancing is sound, as it would only cause more problems.

I've yet to see any actual testing from the game specialists (or darian weighing in) on this issue so until you can provide some quantifiable proof rather than theories and "imagining" it only amounts to fluff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MajorJohnson

I've yet to see any actual testing from the game specialists (or darian weighing in) on this issue so until you can provide some quantifiable proof rather than theories and "imagining" it only amounts to fluff.

---

the game specialists cant acces any game files nor do they work for supercell. they forumers like you and me. only supercell is able to do the needed tests or to look into game files. i wish someone would look into it and to claryfy whats going on with matchmaking and warmap positioning.