Who's to blame for Champions problems?

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

March 17th, 2014
SuperSteve[Supercell]

Thanks for your posts guys. We are certainly aware of matchmaking difficulties at high trophy levels, and are looking into potential solutions for future updates.

No news yet but when we have it, we'll pass it along!

-Steve
March 17th, 2014
NS2

Trying to be constructive

I am not in champions league and certainly would never have the patience to watch the screen for 40minutes but surely rather than the current system it would actually benefit all of the highest players to introduce a league system based on the actual seasons being played at the moment.

At the start of the league all players over certain cup level are entered in to the league like at the start of a football season this would offer an incentive to enter this league. This may remove the cloud which must be like clashing limbo I do enjoy the occasional push.

A prize could be offered for the top 3 in the competition. League players entering the trophy range would probably increase and open up the competition in that area. The prize would not need to be gems could just be iTunes vouchers which i imagine will immediately probably be turned in to gems.

Trophies could still be awarded but primarily you would be fighting for league points

3points for a victorious defence 1point for each star then 2 weeks later everyone back to 0 and start the new league.

I suspect this would change the competition significantly I do not see a top player wanting to have the most cups but be third in the seasons league this would be good for low levels to watch too. many people in my clan watch the top 5 players like hawks. They want to be up there with you but know the costs involved.

Maybe someone from supercell could actually show the battles on the forum to generate further interest further incentive to get in it.

Look what happened to Online poker when competitions between top players were televised.

It could get sponsorship easily and doesn't have to be on you tube look at the amount of views even the most average you tube vid gets. At the end of each season send out an email like with updates and a link to the details to be retrieved

Just thoughts to try to be constructive
March 17th, 2014
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by 789firespawn

As we all know, everyone hates the loot system. It causes top players 30 minutes to find a good base. Even worse, they only get 1-3 trophies, but lose 34. Clashers throw their complaints left and right, but...is it really SuperCells fault? Could it be the players fault? Or even a flaw in the game?
Time to review the facts!

Game Design
First off, we look at the Games Design. Initially, players had TH8 and the most trophies were 2500 (correct me if wrong). Then, a lot of major updates took place, changing the way we play the game. TH9 was introduced, and this is where we began to have problems. All the new defenses and defense levels meant that bases with higher level defenses could win more battles. And more powerful troops meant that players have stronger armies.
Dark Troops were added, and now, we are introduced to POWERFUL troops, such as the HogRider, Valkyrie, and such. But, where we see the most change was the introduction of TH10. This provided so many new powerful items, the Inferno Tower, even more defense levels. Players were rocketing up trophies, and soon, we have a whole new Champions league. Yet, this is where the flaw comes in:
the game was only designed for 3000 trophies.
TH 10 would seem to be at fault, as well as the higher level troops and defenses. Dark Troops especially carved a hole into this problem, and let's not forget that loot penalty. However, we have more things to review.

Investing in the Game
SuperCell probably didn't expect many players to invest so much into the game, up to hundreds of dollars. Now, everyone will come out and point fingers at them having all this money. While we have to respect their decision of using money in a game, this had a consequence. All the money to help speed up game progress helped them gather Trophies. And with that money came several shields. But worst of all, players who beat the system. They did have their fancy LEGO Machines, screen touch apps, and such. With so many players online, it's hard to find suitable matches.

The Verdict
With sufficient evidence, and clear data to flow, I having collected it, I have reached a final verdict on the Champions problem. I find that both parties are unintentionally at fault, both due to the games limits and designs being broken, and several top players surprising investments in the game.

If you agree and/or have any feedback on my verdict, please give opinions and feedback much! I do not want rude or insulting comments, just a nice business debate like thread. Thanks.

Wrong. Only one party is at fault, Supercell. Supercell created, manages, and alters all aspects of the environment the players play in. If the game's mechanics permit players to play a certain way, that is the fault of the game's designers not the players.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjdofu

The funny thing is that most people here don't really know or give a damn about champ league player and their problems, it's the champ league players themselves who keep talking about the problems. It's like a tourist wandering off the group and climb up to the top of a mountain by himself then complain why the air up there is so thin. Is the tour guide the only one to blame for that? So tell me again, why do SC have to introduce the correct parameter since they've done nothing wrong in the first place and where do you get the idea that they want players to play differently?

I would say that both sides have done nothing wrong (well except those exploiters), yet both sides contribute to the problem, uncontrollably.

Because it is SC's game. They make the rules and they control all aspects of the game. You cannot blame players for play that occurs within the rules of the game. If the game allows for players to essentially break it by using the available game mechanics, the game is flawed not the players.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coathanger

this has been refuted in the recent past.

No it hasn't. They don't remove them. They "remove" them. They are pushed way down in the queue to the point where they are pretty much unreachable. This is the same as removing them from the player's point of view.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjdofu

Sure you you want a competition, lets make it a competition. It's like a mountain climber who decides to climb to the very top of a mountain after he cross the finish line (along with other contestant), then complains why he has trouble breathing up there. Is the tournament company the only one to blame?
I know it's redundant, but that's just to show that your rebuttal is not very convincing.

The finish line here is champ league, or to a certain point after champ league (when things start getting ridiculous), simply because there's nothing there after champ league, just the same thing over and over again. That's the finish line, yet some people of course aren't satisfy with just that. They decide to climb higher, until they are way beyond the line and closer to the top, at all cost (gemming, more gemming and some che@ting). Of course it's gonna be harder, it's only logical.

Again, the problem here lies with both parties, not just 1. It's SC responsible for the game design, and it's the player who's responsible for going beyond the limit of the system.

Again, it's not the player's fault. SC designs and controls "the system" in it's entirety. Either "the system" is broken or is working as intended. Perhaps SC likes the current champion league situation. Only SC can answer that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rjdofu

Stop and think about it for a moment, isn't this already hard enough? Now if they make it easier, just imagine the limit going off the roof, like the animals are cut lose and let roam free. Some might not even come back to the game. More importantly, I can assure you that at some point, the exact same problem will return. Adjusting the mechanic won't fix it, since players can adapt too. That's my point, the whole thing is more dynamic than you think it is.

Wrong. Assuming players do not ♥♥♥♥♥ (and if they do, that is SC's fault too), SC absolutely could redesign the game to eliminate this issue. Capping the number of trophies you can acquire to 3200 would do that quite effectively.

Not to say that is -the- solution, but it is a solution that SC could implement that would eliminate this particular issue permanently.
March 17th, 2014
vinnyXo

If all the top 200 guys weren't in the same clan, It would probably help a little, but not fix the problem completely, also a different trophy formula to calculate cups won for 3600+?
March 17th, 2014
Coathanger

Dahimi, which foil hat did you don while writing that? :D
March 17th, 2014
TehFadez

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinnyXo

If all the top 200 guys weren't in the same clan, It would probably help a little, but not fix the problem completely, also a different trophy formula to calculate cups won for 3600+?

Maybe a limit to the amount of players above a certain trophy level per clan?
March 17th, 2014
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coathanger

Dahimi, which foil hat did you don while writing that? :D

Tell me, how many spiked bases (anti old style wall breaker bases) do you encounter in common match making? How often do you encounter inactive TH7-TH9 bases with reasonable layouts that have no heroes? Perhaps you believe this game is so incredibly awesome that anyone who was playing from 2012-before heroes or new wall breakers were released are still playing.

The issue with base "removal" is one of semantics. SC does not delete bases. Hence they aren't removed in that sense. However, it's quite obvious that SC does push inactive bases down in the queue such that you are less likely (as in lottery odds likely) to encounter them.
March 17th, 2014
Coathanger

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

Tell me, how many spiked bases (anti old style wall breaker bases) do you encounter in common match making? How often do you encounter inactive TH7-TH9 bases with reasonable layouts that have no heroes? Perhaps you believe this game is so incredibly awesome that anyone who was playing from 2012-before heroes or new wall breakers were released are still playing.

The issue with base "removal" is one of semantics. SC does not delete bases. Hence they aren't removed in that sense. However, it's quite obvious that SC does push inactive bases down in the queue such that you are less likely (as in lottery odds likely) to encounter them.

I never encounter old bases of any type.

Inaction does not equate to action they are by definition opposites. SC does not actively "push" inactive bases down the queue, it is their inactivity which causes them to fall there. Can SC bring them forward? Sure they can. The fact that they have not does not equate to removal or denial of access to them. Guaranteed people would find those bases if the player base grew to a level to expose them to raids. So please tell me how does SC obviously push inactives out of reach?
March 17th, 2014
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coathanger

I never encounter old bases of any type.

Good, at least we can agree on that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coathanger

Inaction does not equate to action they are by definition opposites. SC does not actively "push" inactive bases down the queue, it is their inactivity which causes them to fall there.

Nonsense. You act as though this isn't by design. That inactive bases just happen to fall down in the queue all by themselves. As though it's some sort of cosmic law that states in any given queuing system, inactivity causes you to be selected less often.

This occurs because SC coded the game for it to occur that way.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coathanger

Can SC bring them forward? Sure they can. The fact that they have not does not equate to removal or denial of access to them.

How is this at all relevant?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coathanger

Guaranteed people would find those bases if the player base grew to a level to expose them to raids. So please tell me how does SC obviously push inactives out of reach?

So you're saying if there was enough player activity to reach the bottom of the queue, then the bottom of the queue would be reached? Wow give this person a medal. :rolleyes: You basically agreed with both your opening and closing sentence that inactive bases are at the bottom of the queue. Yet somehow you think that SC didn't put them there. Who do you think did, the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
March 17th, 2014
Jensenthejao

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

Tell me, how many spiked bases (anti old style wall breaker bases) do you encounter in common match making? How often do you encounter inactive TH7-TH9 bases with reasonable layouts that have no heroes? Perhaps you believe this game is so incredibly awesome that anyone who was playing from 2012-before heroes or new wall breakers were released are still playing.

The issue with base "removal" is one of semantics. SC does not delete bases. Hence they aren't removed in that sense. However, it's quite obvious that SC does push inactive bases down in the queue such that you are less likely (as in lottery odds likely) to encounter them.

I found a premature th8 with a 2012 Christmas tree the other day. Couldn't believe it.
March 17th, 2014
Coathanger

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

However, it's quite obvious that SC does push inactive bases down in the queue such that you are less likely (as in lottery odds likely) to encounter them.

So please tell me how does SC obviously push inactives out of reach?

Do not try and distract from the fact that you have not offered any evidence to support this. Failed to answer the 1 question posed to you with any sort of evidence. Or were you suggesting the flying spaghetti monster is responsible? Postulating that SC did this by design to deny access is not evidence.
March 17th, 2014
BonbeeTyrael

This thread has gone miles offtopic! This is a thread about Champion League Problems.

If you want to discuss farming in gold/crystal(inactives) please do it in the proper thread(s).
March 17th, 2014
NioTheDreamer

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

Nonsense. You act as though this isn't by design. That inactive bases just happen to fall down in the queue all by themselves. As though it's some sort of cosmic law that states in any given queuing system, inactivity causes you to be selected less often.

Why do people gash and gnaw about inactives anyway? The flawed mechanic of the game is that the most profitable bases are those that are less active. People cry and moan about the way the queue is designed but what alternate system do you propose? A completely random one where players have to filter through every base possible? Sure the number of inactives and there accessibility would skyrocket but would it make sense? What would your likelihood of being attacked at any given moment become?

I may be of a different mind set, but I find collector raiding intolerably boring. Sure, I enjoyed finding an easy loot base here or there but there is no challenge (typically) in taking the loot. Don't get me wrong, I find hitting next for 15 minutes straight to be worse. However, I don't want this "fixed" by pitting me against players who haven't been online for the last year.

I am Th10 right now. During my Th9 days is when the loot change happened. I raided between 1800-2500 as a Th9. 1800-2000 was typically good but prone to variability. 2000-2200 was a desert that I tried to be above or below. 2300-2500 was often pretty good but weekend loot was often just horrible.

I had been raiding at 2600-2700 for the last month (Masters III) and the loot there was sooo much better. Sure I had to change my raiding style, skip powerful bases, but I didn't have to search 15 minutes just to find something to cover the cost of nexting. In fact, most of the time I could find something in 5 minutes.

There are two things I think that have made my trip to Masters one that I really enjoyed.
1) Loot bonus mattered. I could raid someone for less profit, so I am guessing that more people get taken out the queue rather than us all fighting for sparse loot
2) Nearly everyone is the same th level. 99/100 bases here is Th10 (it feels like) and that fact I have a loot penalty nearly never comes up. So anyone with loot is a viable target.

Sorry to contribute to the off-topic but I get annoyed at all this "Bring back the inactives!"
March 17th, 2014
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coathanger

So please tell me how does SC obviously push inactives out of reach?

Do not try and distract from the fact that you have not offered any evidence to support this. Failed to answer the 1 question posed to you with any sort of evidence. Or were you suggesting the flying spaghetti monster is responsible? Postulating that SC did this by design to deny access is not evidence.

Here you go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rauta

The matchmaking system has always used a sorting that prioritizes active players. The previous system used to run out of targets, which meant it would pick the oldest villages as well. Now the situation is a bit different, as there is a lot more targets that you might not necessarily ever see the older ones. Nevertheless, they are still there and are not removed from the search.
March 17th, 2014
NS2

Quote:

Originally Posted by NS2

I am not in champions league and certainly would never have the patience to watch the screen for 40minutes but surely rather than the current system it would actually benefit all of the highest players to introduce a league system based on the actual seasons being played at the moment.

At the start of the league all players over certain cup level are entered in to the league like at the start of a football season this would offer an incentive to enter this league. This may remove the cloud which must be like clashing limbo I do enjoy the occasional push.

A prize could be offered for the top 3 in the competition. League players entering the trophy range would probably increase and open up the competition in that area. The prize would not need to be gems could just be iTunes vouchers which i imagine will immediately probably be turned in to gems.

Trophies could still be awarded but primarily you would be fighting for league points

3points for a victorious defence 1point for each star then 2 weeks later everyone back to 0 and start the new league.

I suspect this would change the competition significantly I do not see a top player wanting to have the most cups but be third in the seasons league this would be good for low levels to watch too. many people in my clan watch the top 5 players like hawks. They want to be up there with you but know the costs involved.

Maybe someone from supercell could actually show the battles on the forum to generate further interest further incentive to get in it.

Look what happened to Online poker when competitions between top players were televised.

It could get sponsorship easily and doesn't have to be on you tube look at the amount of views even the most average you tube vid gets. At the end of each season send out an email like with updates and a link to the details to be retrieved

Just thoughts to try to be constructive

After that can of worms has been closed any thoughts on a solution this was mine lower levels do care and do watch what happens at the top could someone at coc check to see how many players see clouds for 10minutes and work from that as the league.
March 17th, 2014
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by NioTheDreamer

Why do people gash and gnaw about inactives anyway? The flawed mechanic of the game is that the most profitable bases are those that are less active. People cry and moan about the way the queue is designed but what alternate system do you propose? A completely random one where players have to filter through every base possible? Sure the number of inactives and there accessibility would skyrocket but would it make sense? What would your likelihood of being attacked at any given moment become?

Why are you saying this to me? Where did I say that SC should bring back the inactives? I'm merely arguing that they do in fact push them down in the queue to the point where they are unreachable.
March 17th, 2014
Coathanger

Quote:

Originally Posted by SSofJetlife

This thread has gone miles offtopic! This is a thread about Champion League Problems.

If you want to discuss farming in gold/crystal(inactives) please do it in the proper thread(s).

Trying to have this SC is some sort of devilish entity sitting at a keyboard trying to deny people loot and force champions to watch clouds discussion. But really if you look at the OP this thread could be about anything. *shrugs*
March 17th, 2014
NS2

First it is highly unlikely any inactive bases are going to stay in the trophy ranges you are discussing it is so competitive they will drop to low champions league and masters very very quickly.
March 17th, 2014
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coathanger

Trying to have this SC is some sort of devilish entity sitting at a keyboard trying to deny people loot and force champions to watch clouds discussion. But really if you look at the OP this thread could be about anything. *shrugs*

Better that we worship at the feet of SC eh?

Acknowledging the fact that the game has design flaws and that SC does indeed purposefully do some things that people don't like does not imply they are some sort of devilish entity.

Note I didn't comment as to whether or not the situation with inactives is bad. Just merely that it exists.
March 17th, 2014
789firespawn

Can I request a Mod to close this thread. I see where this is going to go, and I don't want it to happen. I see a flame war brewing. I just want to prevent one...not start one. I feel like I did something wrong by posting this thread. Like I got too many hate comments here and there, and big strong debates going out of control. This never should've happened. Close this please.
March 17th, 2014
BonbeeTyrael

Quote:

Originally Posted by 789firespawn

Can I request a Mod to close this thread. I see where this is going to go, and I don't want it to happen. I see a flame war brewing. I just want to prevent one...not start one. I feel like I did something wrong by posting this thread. Like I got too many hate comments here and there, and big strong debates going out of control. This never should've happened. Close this please.

Just send a personal message to a moderator like Kendra, Daddy, ZachUVA, Bighowie, Raindragon, Sneakydave, sneakymaori, or twister.
March 17th, 2014
789firespawn

Quote:

Originally Posted by SSofJetlife

Just send a personal message to a moderator like Kendra, Daddy, ZachUVA, Bighowie, Raindragon, Sneakydave, sneakymaori, or twister.

Yea, yea. I just had like a mini panic attack or something. Ok, I'll go do that.
March 17th, 2014
SuperSteve[Supercell]

This is factually incorrect:

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

The issue with base "removal" is one of semantics. SC does not delete bases. Hence they aren't removed in that sense. However, it's quite obvious that SC does push inactive bases down in the queue such that you are less likely (as in lottery odds likely) to encounter them.

SC does nothing to actively push bases further down the queue.

Please avoid further flaming or this thread will definitely be closed.
March 17th, 2014
789firespawn

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperSteve[Supercell]

This is factually incorrect:

SC does nothing to actively push bases further down the queue.

Please avoid further flaming or this thread will definitely be closed.

Can you please close this Steve? I am the OP requesting it be deleted/closed. Thanks. Reason why is just I don't want to start a flame war.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page