There is a way to reduce the engineered.

Hi Supercell,
I have recently complained a lot about the mismatchup.
The mismatchup is mostly driven by the highly engineered players to take advantage of war weight.

I heard you have alternative ideas to improve the matching algorithm from your recent message to me. In my opinion, as long as defense-low or defense-less players are existing, it is very hard to make it in good balance.

So, my suggestion is to find a way to reduce the engineered. One of options you may think is to put a cap for clan game. Clan games have given many rewards and those are helpful to upgrade many stuffs. So, if only normal th can participate to the clan game, then many engineers may consider to buy more def. buildings and results in lowering the engineers eventually.

The other option you may think, you may have two war categories for a better matchup system. One is for fixed war size or war participant with no engineer players. The other war categories is for just world wide clans with a standard war matching system without any cap. Then each clan will decide which category they will head to. Some clans don't care of the engineers because they are using many engineers. Some clans are not.

I have more ideas but I wanna check these options with other players first. If it is reasonable, why don't you apply it as soon as possible?

thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

Hi Supercell,
I have recently complained a lot about the mismatchup.
The mismatchup is mostly driven by the highly engineered players to take advantage of war weight.

I heard you have alternative ideas to improve the matching algorithm from your recent message to me. In my opinion, as long as defense-low or defense-less players are existing, it is very hard to make it in good balance.

So, my suggestion is to find a way to reduce the engineered. One of options you may think is to put a cap for clan game. Clan games have given many rewards and those are helpful to upgrade many stuffs. So, if only normal th can participate to the clan game, then many engineers may consider to buy more def. buildings and results in lowering the engineers eventually.

The other option you may think, you may have two war categories for a better matchup system. One is for fixed war size or war participant with no engineer players. The other war categories is for just world wide clans with a standard war matching system without any cap. Then each clan will decide which category they will head to. Some clans don't care of the engineers because they are using many engineers. Some clans are not.

I have more ideas but I wanna check these options with other players first. If it is reasonable, why don't you apply it as soon as possible?

thanks

---

Defining what is “engineered” isn’t easy so it isn’t a great option and excluding currently engineered accounts from clan games wouldn’t accomplish much. An easier way to address what you are referring to is to have each base have a minimum weight on defense, such as 90% of the max defense of one hall below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 2222

Defining what is “engineered” isn’t easy so it isn’t a great option and excluding currently engineered accounts from clan games wouldn’t accomplish much. An easier way to address what you are referring to is to have each base have a minimum weight on defense, such as 90% of the max defense of one hall below.

---

the detail plan may be easily adjusted. As long as players r in a same page.

Not to hijack the thread..

But you can also institute a minimum "building" limit...

Every tier you get more buildings. Those buildings have war weight.

Because you cannot really tell people how they must play, if you front load the weight of the buildings, walls and troops, and place a minimum limit of the previous levels allotment, if nothing else, they would need to build all of the previous levels buildings.. even if only to level 1.

If that makes sense...

The only other logical thought is to force players to re-validate their war bases. Opt out everyone system wide..

Those bases without all of the previous TH buildings could be locked from War (opt in is grey out)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

the detail plan may be easily adjusted. As long as players r in a same page.

---

So how do you plan on getting the millions of players on the same page?

There isn't even a consensus on what is engineering amongst the people on the forums and we are just a tiny percentage of the player base

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Somethingnotalreadypicked

So how do you plan on getting the millions of players on the same page?

There isn't even a consensus on what is engineering amongst the people on the forums and we are just a tiny percentage of the player base

---

in general, the less defense building n low level of def vs. offense is considered as the engineered.

supercell already pushed to have all defense buildings before they go to the upper level th.
The same treat for clan game will help a lot to lower the number of the engineered. That’s the goal of the idea, not defining the definition nor making a perfect war matching system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

in general, the less defense building n low level of def vs. offense is considered as the engineered.

---

This is a vague description as it does not say by how much. Are .5s engineers? Many would disagree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

supercell already pushed to have all defense buildings before they go to the upper level th.
The same treat for clan game will help a lot to lower the number of the engineered. That’s the goal of the idea, not defining the definition nor making a perfect war matching system.

---

Engineers have been around even before Clan Games. Not being able to participate in clan games will not stop them due to the low cost of progression.

Not to mention you will also be punishing the rest of the clan who may not playing lopsided bases. You are removing players that can help them get to the top tier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorbash098

This is a vague description as it does not say by how much. Are .5s engineers? Many would disagree.

---

it means many would agree, too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorbash098

Engineers have been around even before Clan Games. Not being able to participate in clan games will not stop them due to the low cost of progression.

---

at least, they can’t grow fast because they won’t receive the rewards. Also, if your fact is true, why supercell made all def. buildings as a requirement for going to upper level? Your critics doesn’t make any sense either. S

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

it means many would agree, too

---

Haha so the player base is not on the same page and therefore the definition of engineer is not universally accepted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

at least, they can’t grow fast because they won’t receive the rewards. Also, if your fact is true, why supercell made all def. building as a requirement for going to upper level? Your critics doesn’t make any sense either. Seems like to protect the current format due to your own benefits.

---

Which fact and criticism are you referring to?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

in general, the less defense building n low level of def vs. offense is considered as the engineered.

supercell already pushed to have all defense buildings before they go to the upper level th.
The same treat for clan game will help a lot to lower the number of the engineered. That’s the goal of the idea, not defining the definition nor making a perfect war matching system.

---

The same treatment for clan games would completely wreck the game, and would be totally unfair.

Saying you had to have all defensive buildings before you could enter clan games would mean you couldn't enter them when you have just upfgraded your TH - just the tie when you need them most.

It would severely reduce the incentive to upgrade TH, which is very much against what SC want, and what most players would want.

And it wouldn't even make any difference to engineers - most of them don't want to upgrade, so don't need clan games rewards.

There just isn’t any reason to exclude players from war when you can instead allow them to war but at a disadvantage. That disadvantage will encourage them to change their base to no longer be at a disadvantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax

The same treatment for clan games would completely wreck the game, and would be totally unfair.

---

The unfairness is also relative concept. The mismatched war is also unfair relatively. Even, the recent update which doesn't allow us to go to the next level th is unfair because many other did it before. So, making a rule for clan game will be, yes, unfair. but if it reduces the number of the engineer, yes, it will be fair to someone who doestn' like war with the engineer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax

Saying you had to have all defensive buildings before you could enter clan games would mean you couldn't enter them when you have just upfgraded your TH - just the tie when you need them most.

---

then, supercell can make a trick to solve this issue. there are many possiblities to solve this simple "unfair" thing, comparing to solving "unbalanced war matchingup".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax

It would severely reduce the incentive to upgrade TH, which is very much against what SC want, and what most players would want.

---

then, no one will go to th12 because of this issue? i don't believe so. Th11.5 is very powerful tho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax

And it wouldn't even make any difference to engineers - most of them don't want to upgrade, so don't need clan games rewards.

---

time will be a treat. the good example is the recent update which is pushing us to buy all def. before we go up to the next level.
Unfortunately, I don't see any good rebuttal yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

The unfairness is also relative concept. The mismatched war is also unfair relatively. Even, the recent update which doesn't allow us to go to the next level th is unfair because many other did it before. So, making a rule for clan game will be, yes, unfair. but if it reduces the number of the engineer, yes, it will be fair to someone who doestn' like war with the engineer.




then, supercell can make a trick to solve this issue. there are many possiblities to solve this simple "unfair" thing, comparing to solving "unbalanced war matchingup".



then, no one will go to th12 because of this issue? i don't believe so. Th11.5 is very powerful tho.



time will be a treat. the good example is the recent update which is pushing us to buy all def. before we go up to the next level.
Unfortunately, I don't see any good rebuttal yet.

---

A good rebuttal is the fact that there is no consensus of what constitutes engineering. One man's. 5 is another man's engineer account. You will never get everyone to agree.

Hell we had people defending modders on here saying they we're good cause t help develop new strats.

If people can disagree on modding what hope is there to get people to agree on engineering.

I happen to think that it's a viable strategy and should not be punished at all (and I'm a maxer). So not only do people disagree on what engineering is people disagree on if anything is wrong with it and if it should be addressed at all

Also by separating warring clans in to separate groups you diminish the pool of available clans for wars. There are already a lot of clans experiencing long wait times searching for wars. If you split up the clan's waiting times will only get worse

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Somethingnotalreadypicked

A good rebuttal is the fact that there is no consensus of what constitutes engineering. One man's. 5 is another man's engineer account. You will never get everyone to agree.

---

Then, why supercell recently pushes us to buy all def? Based on the message which I received from SC through "contact us", they wanna help to solve the war matching balance. I interpreted it like they are trying to reduce the engineer and foster the better war culture. It means although there is no good consensus about the definition of the engineered, the engineeered is existing out there and we know it. it means there is a consensus.

so, how long there is no consensus about the engineer definition?. Idk how long but it seems to be very long based on you guys' saying. then, did we try to define it before? or leave it as it is because some are satisfied with the engineered war because they are running with the engineer?
The consensus means as long as we are talking about this issue, that's the consensus about the terminology. But we don't want to define it because it is kind of conflict of interets of many clans and many players. The defining the word itself is not meaningful, at this moment. For example, SC's recent update is one of trials to solve the engineer issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Somethingnotalreadypicked

Hell we had people defending modders on here saying they we're good cause t help develop new strats.

If people can disagree on modding what hope is there to get people to agree on engineering.

I happen to think that it's a viable strategy and should not be punished at all (and I'm a maxer). So not only do people disagree on what engineering is people disagree on if anything is wrong with it and if it should be addressed at all

---

I am a maxer too. I have several accounts from th9 to th 12. all are maxed out. I posted another separate idea up there (about sharing war roster info). why don't you share your war roster information?, I would like to learn how your clan is managing war tho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Somethingnotalreadypicked

Hell we had people defending modders on here saying they we're good cause t help Also by separating warring clans in to separate groups you diminish the pool of available clans for wars. There are already a lot of clans experiencing long wait times searching for wars. If you split up the clan's waiting times will only get worse

---

Well, the time for matching up is tolerable to some just like me as long as war is fairly matched. We have almost 3 million clans in the world. The matching time is not decided by clan pool but "their war roster war weight based on war matching aloriths" So, I believe if there is another type of war, then it may reduce war searching time dramatically. I don't agree with your opinion. I am a professional scientist in the real lief. Until we try it, we don't know it. A good example is, friendly war. It was released based on many requests. but, many clans don't use it. That option is for only small group of clan, also very rarely. in the beginning when it was introduced, we thought "wow". but now "well..."
that's waht we learned so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

Then, why supercell recently pushes us to buy all def? Based on the message which I received from SC through "contact us", they wanna help to solve the war matching balance. I interpreted it like they are trying to reduce the engineer and foster the better war culture. It means although there is no good consensus about the definition of the engineered, the engineeered is existing out there and we know it. it means there is a consensus.

so, how long there is no consensus about the engineer definition?. Idk how long but it seems to be very long based on you guys' saying. then, did we try to define it before? or leave it as it is because some are satisfied with the engineered war because they are running with the engineer?
The consensus means as long as we are talking about this issue, that's the consensus about the terminology. But we don't want to define it because it is kind of conflict of interets of many clans and many players. The defining the word itself is not meaningful, at this moment. For example, SC's recent update is one of trials to solve the engineer issue.

---

You are conflating the existence of engineering with the definition of engineering. There is no question at all that engineers exists, it is the definition that we need consensus so that it can be identified programmatically in order to implement what you are suggesting. What we are asking is for the consensus on the definition and not on the existence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

I am a maxer too. I have several accounts from th9 to th 12. all are maxed out. I posted another separate idea up there (about sharing war roster info). why don't you share your war roster information?, I would like to learn how your clan is managing war tho.

Well, the time for matching up is tolerable to some just like me as long as war is fairly matched. We have almost 3 million clans in the world. The matching time is not decided by clan pool but "their war roster war weight based on war matching aloriths" So, I believe if there is another type of war, then it may reduce war searching time dramatically. I don't agree with your opinion. I am a professional scientist in the real lief. Until we try it, we don't know it. A good example is, friendly war. It was released based on many requests. but, many clans don't use it. That option is for only small group of clan, also very rarely. in the beginning when it was introduced, we thought "wow". but now "well..."
that's waht we learned so far.

---

What you are proposing here is for SC to go ahead and implement your idea even though you are unsure of the outcome. You want SC to spend time and resources away from the path that they are currently taking just so that you can see if your idea would work or not. How do you expect to convince anyone here that your idea is feasible if you, yourself lack confidence in it.

If you are indeed a scientist you would use the scientific method to figure out what combination of bases that would lead your clan out of getting matched with engineered clans. Perhaps removing the bases which are TH6 and below that do not even attack in war would help your match up. If you are indeed a good attacker that is looking for a fair matchup perhaps you would do well going to war with only the TH12s, TH11s and TH10s. You know that you have enough of these bases to start a war. Come up with a hypothesis and test it. Do not expect someone else to test your hypothesis for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorbash098

You are conflating the existence of engineering with the definition of engineering. There is no question at all that engineers exists, it is the definition that we need consensus so that it can be identified programmatically in order to implement what you are suggesting. What we are asking is for the consensus on the definition and not on the existence.



What you are proposing here is for SC to go ahead and implement your idea even though you are unsure of the outcome. You want SC to spend time and resources away from the path that they are currently taking just so that you can see if your idea would work or not. How do you expect to convince anyone here that your idea is feasible if you, yourself lack confidence in it.

If you are indeed a scientist you would use the scientific method to figure out what combination of bases that would lead your clan out of getting matched with engineered clans. Perhaps removing the bases which are TH6 and below that do not even attack in war would help your match up. If you are indeed a good attacker that is looking for a fair matchup perhaps you would do well going to war with only the TH12s, TH11s and TH10s. You know that you have enough of these bases to start a war. Come up with a hypothesis and test it. Do not expect someone else to test your hypothesis for you.

---

Read the edited paragraph. U replied to me before it was edited. I m not conflated. U seem to visit my clan. So that’s your suggestion? Why don’t u share your clan war roster with me! U seem to be well knowledged about avoiding mismatchup. Then let us know. Before many players like me are trying all combinations. It s a huge wasting energy n time for many players. If u know something simply disclose it.

when I read all replies from kinda seniors here, I m very much curious how many of u use the engineered in your own clan war.

Also, the new update about pushing players to buy all def is not designed to give any previllage to someone who is strategically using the engineered in their clan war, but to foster better clan war culture instead.

then, your critics to my idea is not valid. To prove my idea, do I gp have to do all? That’s the role of supercell. I m not defending my suggestion but u guys r trying to defend for the engineered based on the difficulty of the definition of the engineered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

Read the edited paragraph. U replied to me before it was edited. I m not conflated. U seem to visit my clan. So that’s your suggestion? Why don’t u share your clan war roster with me! U seem to be well knowledged about avoiding mismatchup. Then let us know. Before many players like me are trying all combinations. It s a huge wasting energy n time for many players. If u know something simply disclose it.

when I read all replies from kinda seniors here, I m very much curious how many of u use the engineered in your own clan war.

Also, the new update about pushing players to buy all def is not designed to give any previllage to someone who is strategically using the engineered in their clan war, but to foster better clan war culture instead.

then, your critics to my idea is not valid. To prove my idea, do I gp have to do all? That’s the role of supercell. I m not defending my suggestion but u guys r trying to defend for the engineered based on the difficulty of the definition of the engineered.

---

Even with the edition you have made you are still conflating because what we need is an agreement on the definition of engineering not an agreement on the existence. If we cannot agree on the definition then we cannot determine which base should be excluded and which one to include. The definition of consensus is not talking about something it is an agreement.

I am sharing the experience that I have but you are stuck on outright rejecting the suggestions without even considering it or testing it. You seem to want to have others do the work for you. You are the one that came up with the idea, it is only appropriate that you do the work to test that idea. If you are incapable of proving that your idea is valid then we are justified to reject it. As a scientist you should know this.

I do not see anyone here defending engineers, at least not in this thread. We are questioning your premise, as well as your conclusion. However, it seems to me that to you, anyone who does not agree with you is talking in defense of engineers. There is a difference between defending engineers and questioning your idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gorbash098

Even with the edition you have made you are still conflating because what we need is an agreement on the definition of engineering not an agreement on the existence. If we cannot agree on the definition then we cannot determine which base should be excluded and which one to include. The definition of consensus is not talking about something it is an agreement.

I am sharing the experience that I have but you are stuck on outright rejecting the suggestions without even considering it or testing it. You seem to want to have others do the work for you. You are the one that came up with the idea, it is only appropriate that you do the work to test that idea. If you are incapable of proving that your idea is valid then we are justified to reject it. As a scientist you should know this.

I do not see anyone here defending engineers, at least not in this thread. We are questioning your premise, as well as your conclusion. However, it seems to me that to you, anyone who does not agree with you is talking in defense of engineers. There is a difference between defending engineers and questioning your idea.

---

well I m in bed now . I may edit my response tomorrow. But my impression is like this.
1.we means u r the employee of sc?
2. Did we agree with the new updates which sc made before? I didn’t even think about pushing us to buy all defenses b4 I up th. It means the existing engineered will receive the permanent privillahe. When we introduce a new idea, sc needs agreement from all players?
3. Did u share your idea with me? U just sneaked in my clan war log n judged how I have warred so far. I m involved in 4 clans wars at a time . Thought enough feeling to post my idea with my own analysis, then u pointed out many things with negative nuance. That’s what I read
4. If someone has an idea, the person needs to prove it? This forum was made to collect idea instead of ignoring the opinion by the rejection like what u said. Also that’s the job of sc, not idea tossing player.
5. Finally, If u r a senior here then your attitude is completely awarkard. I will add some more here tomorrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

well I m in bed now . I may edit my response tomorrow. But my impression is like this.
1.we means u r the employee of sc?

---

No, it does not mean that I am an SC employee, we represents those who are questioning your idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

2. Did we agree with the new updates which sc made before? I didn’t even think about pushing us to buy all defenses b4 I up th. It means the existing engineered will receive the permanent privillahe. When we introduce a new idea, sc needs agreement from all players?

---

SC does not need our permission to push an update. They push updates and changes the way they see fit.

If you are going to present your idea here in the forums, people may choose to discuss it and that includes questioning and criticizing it. That is the function of the forums.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

3. Did u share your idea with me? U just sneaked in my clan war log n judged how I have warred so far. I m involved in 4 clans wars at a time . Thought enough feeling to post my idea with my own analysis, then u pointed out many things with negative nuance. That’s what I read

---

Yes, I did share my idea on how you can perhaps avoid engineered clans. Which includes removing the low TH levels at the bottom of your war roster and warring with TH12, 11 and 10. I also suggested that you use the scientific method to determine which war roster would yield less probability of matching with engineered clans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

4. If someone has an idea, the person needs to prove it? This forum was made to collect idea instead of ignoring the opinion by the rejection like what u said. Also that’s the job of sc, not idea tossing player.

---

If you want your idea to be accepted, you have to show that your idea is valid. Forums are a place of discussion that may or may not agree with your idea. This is not a place where ideas are accepted even if that idea is invalid. It is not the moderators' job to sort out which idea is valid and which is not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

5. Finally, If u r a senior here then your attitude is completely awarkard. I will add some more here tomorrow.

---

The title under my user name is only indicative of how many posts I have made and does not dictate how I should act. The forum rules is what dictates how I should behave and nothing in those rules that says I have to agree with what you say.

Ok, what is your definition of an engineered base? Where is the line so players before that line are not considered engineered by you and players after that line are?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clemsonkim

Then, why supercell recently pushes us to buy all def? Based on the message which I received from SC through "contact us", they wanna help to solve the war matching balance. I interpreted it like they are trying to reduce the engineer and foster the better war culture. It means although there is no good consensus about the definition of the engineered, the engineeered is existing out there and we know it. it means there is a consensus.

so, how long there is no consensus about the engineer definition?. Idk how long but it seems to be very long based on you guys' saying. then, did we try to define it before? or leave it as it is because some are satisfied with the engineered war because they are running with the engineer?
The consensus means as long as we are talking about this issue, that's the consensus about the terminology. But we don't want to define it because it is kind of conflict of interets of many clans and many players. The defining the word itself is not meaningful, at this moment. For example, SC's recent update is one of trials to solve the engineer issue.




I am a maxer too. I have several accounts from th9 to th 12. all are maxed out. I posted another separate idea up there (about sharing war roster info). why don't you share your war roster information?, I would like to learn how your clan is managing war tho.



Well, the time for matching up is tolerable to some just like me as long as war is fairly matched. We have almost 3 million clans in the world. The matching time is not decided by clan pool but "their war roster war weight based on war matching aloriths" So, I believe if there is another type of war, then it may reduce war searching time dramatically. I don't agree with your opinion. I am a professional scientist in the real lief. Until we try it, we don't know it. A good example is, friendly war. It was released based on many requests. but, many clans don't use it. That option is for only small group of clan, also very rarely. in the beginning when it was introduced, we thought "wow". but now "well..."
that's waht we learned so far.

---

If you are a scientist then please explain to me how potentially cutting the pool of available clans in war in half would reduce the wait time.
If there are 1000 clans looking for a war and my clan is one of them that's potentially 999 other clan's we could match. Now if you were to cut that in half (best case scenario for both types of wars) that means there is only 500 potential clans to match. Yet some how this will reduce the wait time?
There are some clans that wait full days for a match. Last war my clan had was postponed a day cause after 6 hours of searching it pushed us outside of our time table that we like to have for wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Somethingnotalreadypicked

If you are a scientist then please explain to me how potentially cutting the pool of available clans in war in half would reduce the wait time.

---

My point is we don't know it until we try it. But based on experience at the other game which I used to play before (starcarft), there was a game style called "Ladder", and it didn't take long for matching up.

My suggestion for this separate war category option must be based on a few details things such as fixed war size and fixed th. Many war clans are not doing "heavy war". they prefer a relatively small size such as 10. If the size of war is fixed, i think it is easy to find an opponent by system. Again, we have 3 million clans. Idk how many clans will do war at a time. But, assuming the 50% of clans do war every other day, then 1.5million clans will be in war everyday, in average. Then, Let's assume 3% is a war oriented clan. then 45K clans will be in 24 hrs war searching. If we consider 6 hrs war searching is a limit, then around 12K clans will be in war pool. Based on the other variations such as th, considering only th8 to th12 and only one type of th is in war, 10% of 45K clans will be in each th war matching up. It is not bad at all. I just calculated these numbers with basic assumption. Idk if it is feasible calculation or not until we do a serious simulation test. But, that's the role and responsibility of Supercell, not me. Someone here, looking a senior or staff whatever, told me, I have to prove my concept to save their time. BUT, I don't care if Super cell is spending lots of energy or not. My point is I can toss up an idea. The staff or senior here can't "REJECT" my idea with very rude attitude while sneaking in my clan. Again, the forum is not designed for staffs or senior to make a decision, such as REJECT, that's how he described!, but for a channel to interact with individual player and supercell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Somethingnotalreadypicked

there are 1000 clans looking for a war and my clan is one of them that's potentially 999 other clan's we could match. Now if you were to cut that in half (best case scenario for both types of wars) that means there is only 500 potential clans to match. Yet some how this will reduce the wait time?
There are some clans that wait full days for a match. Last war my clan had was postponed a day cause after 6 hours of searching it pushed us outside of our time table that we like to have for wars.

---

IDK how many clans are looking for a war every day. Supercell knows it. but as far as I know, we have 3 millions clans out there based on the cocstat.

This thread is getting much too personal, particularly from the OP.

Closed before it gets rude enough to require infractions.