Printable View
So the other day my clan actually had a draw in clan wars, we had the same stars and attacks used. However our average destruction was much higher than the other clan. I feel it should be changed so if you have the same stars and attacks used, it should go by average destruction. If not can you atleast change it so you get more loot for a draw because we given loot as if we had lost the war and that doesn't seem fair
Average destruction is a meaningless statistic and definitely shouldn't be used as basis to determine a winner. All it means is how many stars you got out of the players you attacked. If every player on your team attacks your opponents' weakest village before finally getting 3 stars, you still attain 100% destruction. If the other team 1-stars and 2-stars your toughest two players in two attacks, they have 50% destruction. Doesn't seem fair to give you the win.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7pifer
Ties are part of the game and are common in many competitions. You just have to deal with it.
The majority of competions have some other sort or deciding factor when choosing a winner for example hockey has overtime, and im not suggesting supercell adds somesort of sudden death to clan wars I just think there needs to be some other way to decide a victor if stars are the same
I totally agree with this one.Quote:
Originally Posted by SharkyFinn
Once again, not saying it has to be average destruction, make it attacks used or average new stars per attack if that makes it more fair, im just saying this should be changed
Don't make it attacks used because then people will just try and counter the other clans stars and not try to attack more, maybe make it top 5/10 bases count onlyQuote:
Originally Posted by 7pifer
i don't necessarily agree with the avg destruction idea... but i do agree with OP's premise that ties should be removed.Quote:
Originally Posted by 7pifer
Ties are basically as bad as losses, cause it keeps a clan from notching another win count... which is needed to keep up with the leaderboard hahaha.
If scores are tied, then let another item determine who wins...
How is average destruction meaningless? It doesn't mean "how many stars you got out of the players you attacked" at all, it means average destruction! I have done 99% damage for one star on more than one occasion, which seems like a better attack than someone that does 50% damage for one star, no? It would be extremely difficult to go for a win in clan wars while also trying to manipulate the average destruction number by having strong players attack weak bases. Letting average destruction decide the winner in the event of a draw makes perfect sense to me. Ties are brutal, and no better than a loss in my opinion. Average destruction may not be perfect, but it's better than not crowning a winner at all!Quote:
Originally Posted by SharkyFinn
No. If 99% were worth more than a star, it'd be worth more than a star, but it's not. Getting 99% and failing to take the TH doesn't make for a better attack than a player who gets the TH, and without question it's definitely not better than a player who got 2 stars with 51% destruction.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
As for manipulation, it wouldn't be as hard as you think and would likely just reward poor planning. We had a recent war that was a pretty close one. What gave us the edge was that our opponent's strongest players 3-starred some of our weakest. At the end of the war, the score was neck and neck, but our opponents' weakest players had no one left to attack and they were left with wasted attacks. By your method, they would only need to have their weakest players attack our bottom player, raise their average destruction, and now they would no longer have to beat us - all they'd need to do would be to tie us to get the win. That doesn't seem fair to me at all.
Lots of sports have ties and lots of sports have tie breakers. But I don't know of any sport that grabs some meaningless statistic as its basis for determining a winner. It'd be pretty anticlimactic to see a referee come onto the field, blow the whistle and say, "After comparing the number of third down conversions, the winner is New England!"
^ Hilarious SharkyFinn and too true.
If you want the win then have a strict strategy and earn the most stars. Simple.
I have only ever drawn one war 104-104 and it was by far the most fun I have ever had online (no jokes please I'm British)! I secured the 1 extra star needed for the draw (There were no realistic 2 star chances) with seconds to spare and to be frank I didn't care about loot or tie breakers it was just a fab ending.
I agree with Sharkman, having some formula then decide who won would have spoilt what I'm sure the other clan enjoyed as much as we did. Leave it as is...and enjoy it when it happens as if you care about the war it's dramatic and fun.
Maybe they work out some over time where each player gets an extra attack to improve the scores to break the tie kinda like extra time in other sports
It would be very interesting to see a CW result screen with tied stars up in giant font, showing there's a winner.
As much as id rather win all of our wars, a draw is about as exciting as it gets. It means the war is gonna go right down to the wire. Everybody is cheering for their clanmates. Clan participation goes through the roof.
When I did the final attack the views were maxed with the guys lucky enough to watch commenting live on the chat so the others knew how my attack was going. The chat board was going mad..Great bonding for the clan and simply great fun which is what it is about after all
As for manipulation, it wouldn't be as hard as you think and would likely just reward poor planning. We had a recent war that was a pretty close one. What gave us the edge was that our opponent's strongest players 3-starred some of our weakest. At the end of the war, the score was neck and neck, but our opponents' weakest players had no one left to attack and they were left with wasted attacks. By your method, they would only need to have their weakest players attack our bottom player, raise their average destruction, and now they would no longer have to beat us - all they'd need to do would be to tie us to get the win. That doesn't seem fair to me at all.
Average destruction would not be used at the main factor in determining a victor for a clan war. If both clans manage to have the exact same stars at the end of a clan war, then it would go to average destruction or another statistic, therefore you wouldn't be able to manipulate theway you think
I didn't say 99% attacks should be worth more than one star, I said a 99% attack for one star is more impressive to me than a 50% attack for one star. Of course a 51% two star is better than a 99% one star. You disagree?Quote:
Originally Posted by SharkyFinn
I can't imagine a clan intentionally trying to manipulate the average destruction figure in anticipation of a tie, instead of just pursuing stars at all costs going for the win. In your example, you state that your opponent exercised poor judgement in the way that they attacked you; so shouldn't you win outright and not worry about a tie breaker? I suppose if you were unable to take the lead on them, they could raise the average destruction rate, but who cares?Quote:
Originally Posted by SharkyFinn
There is nothing more anti-climactic than having a game end in a tie. It's un-American! No winner? What?! I'm not married to the idea of using average destruction to decide the winner, but anything is better than nothing, and it just seems like an easy thing for SC to use.Quote:
Originally Posted by SharkyFinn