War Starring System 50% = 99%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cowbug

A good amount of the time you get around 80-99%, it means you have strong enough troops to get 100% but screwed up somewhere in your attack/didn't execute your attack as well as you could have. You don't deserve the reward of an extra star and it doesn't necessarily mean you are kore skilled than a 50% attacker. You want more than 2 stars, get better and get 100%. You are trying to watter down the value of 3 stars by adding additional stars. By that same token, 50-60% 2 star on a max/near max TH10 still takes some skill, you cant just spam a gowipe and expext 2 stars. I think the current system is perfectly balanced, you admit its not easy against a decent TH10 to get the 50%+ 2 stars, you cant have a different criteria for 2 stars based on TH level and raiskng the % for 2 stars would furthet limit the ability of TH10s to contribute to clan wars and would likely result in TH10s being kicked from clans, not accepted or opted out of wars on a large scale.

---

When 90+% of attacks pre TH10 achieve 50%, how can you state that it's "perfectly balanced". You can't have a system that only makes sense at one TH level, either, as it does now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meowr

Again, short-sightedness.
You're falsely assuming that you and your clan is somehow vastly intellectually superior, and can squeeze off a higher %, while you will always be matched with "dumb clans" that can't possibly attack the next lowest % to up their score. :rolleyes:

Basic strategy doesn't change.
How can our clan get a few more stars?
How can our clan get a few more %?

Finding the best way to eek out more stars bores you?
How is that any different than trying to eek out a few extra %?

---

It actually changes a lot. Right now, our star optimization means that we want our 9s to two star their 9s on the first pass, then leftover 9 attacks take out their top 8s, then our 8s just have to figure out how to take out their lower 8s. The idea is the two stars on the 9s are easy, three starring 8s from 9s is easy, then we take the easiest 8s and find the most efficient way to three star them. there's no point for our 9s to try more challenging, three star attacks because if they blow them we're likely throwing stars away, and no incentive for our 8s to blow attacks trying to attack their upper 8s. If percents matter, then we have incentive to go for their upper 8s with our upper 8s so our 9s can use their attacks to beat the percents of their 9s.

I'm not saying we're superior, but I'd rather the game be figuring out who is superior at it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebuch4

It actually changes a lot. Right now, our star optimization means that we want our 9s to two star their 9s on the first pass, then leftover 9 attacks take out their top 8s, then our 8s just have to figure out how to take out their lower 8s. The idea is the two stars on the 9s are easy, three starring 8s from 9s is easy, then we take the easiest 8s and find the most efficient way to three star them. there's no point for our 9s to try more challenging, three star attacks because if they blow them we're likely throwing stars away, and no incentive for our 8s to blow attacks trying to attack their upper 8s. If percents matter, then we have incentive to go for their upper 8s with our upper 8s so our 9s can use their attacks to beat the percents of their 9s.

I'm not saying we're superior, but I'd rather the game be figuring out who is superior at it.

---

WOW!
And there you have it. Now we all know why you want more credit for "almost" 3 starring bases.

Another consideration that I haven't seen on this thread yet (apologies if I skipped a page and missed it somewhere):
Oftentimes, really good 3-star strategies may not obtain as high of a % as a solid gowipe or gowiwi. Especially on really tough anti-3 bases, a cb lavaloon or goho or similar high-risk/ high-reward strategy may destroy all but 2 defenses and stall out at 60% or so. Part of the skill in those attacks is snagging the th to at least get 2 stars if you realize things aren't going perfectly according to plan. On the same base, a potentially less skilled attacker could just blast through for a pretty comfortable 80%. This new option is likely safer and has the potential to be more valuable if additional stars or points for higher %s become incorporated in clan war scoring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebuch4

When 90+% of attacks pre TH10 achieve 50%, how can you state that it's "perfectly balanced". You can't have a system that only makes sense at one TH level, either, as it does now.

---

I wonder what that stat actually is? Way back when I was in other clans, the 2 star rate definitely wasn't even close to 90%. Of course I was normally in farming clans that only warred once per week. You would have to look at what all town halls attack actually looks like and then decide accordingly. It could be that this issue is strictly related to your clans th8/9's or clans that are very serious war clans. Though the system should be designed for all players.

Meh.....I find the system as it is fine. The current star system is difficult but a rewarding one. Adding more stars doesn't make things easier, it just inflates war scores. IMO, if people aren't able to 2 star in their range then they are just not funneling their troops properly.

We are beginning to see it in our clan. People who were great TH7 and low TH 8's are struggling at max TH8 and 9 because they can't adapt to the new tactics. The game doesn't need to change because its difficult, people need to step up their game to match the learning curve.

Adding more stars is basically akin to just giving out participation trophies in sports to everyone so they can feel special for doing an OK job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thebuch4

When 90+% of attacks pre TH10 achieve 50%, how can you state that it's "perfectly balanced". You can't have a system that only makes sense at one TH level, either, as it does now.

---

I didn't say it only makes sense at one TH level, that TH level illustrates the validity of the system but the same holds true at all levels. Like I said, if you want the reward of extra stars, get better and get 100%. Dont water down the system with extra stars for being slightly higher on the spectrum of mediocrity.

Dont settle for 75%, 90% or even 99%, be awesome, get 100% you can do it, I know you can!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meowr

WOW!
And there you have it. Now we all know why you want more credit for "almost" 3 starring bases.

---

Hey, you're the one who has been insisting the system is fine, then generally will say something along the lines of "learn to exploit the system", then I point out how our star optimization system works extremely well (in wars with only a few nines at the top) and takes most of the talent out of the game, and then you try and turn the problem around like it's on me. Most 8's aren't three starring upper 8s these days since the building HP increase, so given the choice between 50/50 for 3 at a 9 or 2 stars and a sure 3 on an upper 8, star optimization says we should let the 9 3 the 8 and 2 the 9 and we'll end up with the consistent most amount of stars.. Since this system works in 90% of our wars and we would have won the remaining wars had we stuck to it better, how am I to be faulted for exploiting the system like the people who want it to be the same say I should learn to do?

My point has always been the system sucks. 50% and hitting the TH are too close together. If we were to start over designing the game, would we ever think that we should make a game where 20% of the attacks are three stars, 70% of the attacks are two stars, 5% are one stars, and 5% are no stars? Or something like that. I think we'd say that maybe 10-20% of the attacks should be 3 stars, then the next 20-30% should be 2 stars, then maybe that same amount of percent again should be one stars, and then 30-40% of the attacks in wars should be losses. That would be balanced, the current system is anything but.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SterlingArcher99

Meh.....I find the system as it is fine. The current star system is difficult but a rewarding one. Adding more stars doesn't make things easier, it just inflates war scores. IMO, if people aren't able to 2 star in their range then they are just not funneling their troops properly.

We are beginning to see it in our clan. People who were great TH7 and low TH 8's are struggling at max TH8 and 9 because they can't adapt to the new tactics. The game doesn't need to change because its difficult, people need to step up their game to match the learning curve.

Adding more stars is basically akin to just giving out participation trophies in sports to everyone so they can feel special for doing an OK job.

---

Even when they struggle at max TH8 and TH9, they should easily be able to get two stars (unless they're hogging, then you're getting 1 or 3).

The game needs to change because the grading system until TH10 is NOT difficult.. Other than for three stars.

And giving two stars out for most TH8-TH9 attacks is the participation trophy so everyone can feel special.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cowbug

I didn't say it only makes sense at one TH level, that TH level illustrates the validity of the system but the same holds true at all levels. Like I said, if you want the reward of extra stars, get better and get 100%. Dont water down the system with extra stars for being slightly higher on the spectrum of mediocrity.

Dont settle for 75%, 90% or even 99%, be awesome, get 100% you can do it, I know you can!

---

The system already is watered down. Looking through the last couple of war logs I can see, on both sides, want to guess the amount of bases that weren't two starred at a minimum? 0 out of 80. That's a watered down system, folks.