Printable View
Why not include the New Stars Per attack/Average Destruction/Average Attack Duration/3 star attacks in the calculation to who's the winner? :confused: So that every attack or percentage counts every war. :D Just win or lose, no draws. :smirk: For glory, of course. XD
Would love this!
No I disagree bad idea......at the end alot of people attack lower if they can't get ew stars just for the loot bonas ......so they could lose it for us...........
That's actually an attack strategy if this idea gets implemented.Quote:
Originally Posted by puppyman121
I don't really agree with this idea. First of all, these factors that decides a winner from a loser seems illogical, such as the Average Attack Duration factor. This factor doesn't even determine how good you are. If this factor could decide a winner from a loser, then attackers would just leave a deployable troop in their possession and wait for the time to run out.Quote:
Originally Posted by JFDrumBeast
Also, if a percentage of a attack is one of the factors, then players would just aim for lower level players so that they could have a higher chance of winning. This would discourage proper cooperation in the game, since higher level players would just attack lower level players when they think they are getting close to a draw.
You guys are talking about these other factors like they would become the primary factor to determine the winner.
You're forgetting that stars will still be the primary factor, and the others like percentage/Destruction are secundairy factors. Why would someone focus their attacks on lower targets to get higher percentages when they still can try and get a star? stars still weight more, and will be primary.
You gotta remember that higher percentages of destruction can only be achieved at targets that are not 100% destroyed yet. In many cases the lower targets are already 3star, and if they're not THEY SHOULD BE A PRIMARY TARGET!
All targets with 3 stars are useless to attack anyways, and in the rare occasions where the CW is tied, almost all bases are 100% destroyed and the only person left with an available attack is one lower in ranks he/she wont be able to get that 2nd or 3rd star on a high ranked target. Meaning the clanwar is over and it's a tie. But if the percentages matter this lower ranked player might be able to make a difference by attacking a higher target not to get that 2nd or 3rd star, but to raise the percentage and maybe win the war.
i don't know how your CW's go, but in my clan it's rare to see any target in the bottom half without 3 stars (so 100% destruction) meaning attacking those tagets to get higher percentages is a waste as it's the stars that win the war, not the destruction rate. ( this is still only ment for tied wars )
So many flaws in this idea. Using new stars per attack would inhibit people with no options from going for loot. People would be required to only use 1st attack and they better 3 star or they're booted. Tons of chaos.
Percent destruction has similar flaws and time is irrelevant either way. Longer time - easy to game. Shorter time - how would they calculate that value for bases not 100%?
I am in favor of eliminating ties. I would propose some sort of play off round and in that play off round you could use all three factors. Perhaps something like this:
- A Super Cell provided base that has approximate strength of the average between each clans #1 player is presented for up to 1 hour. So if the #1 in each clan was a TH9 then the average between those two.
- Same base for both clans
- Neither clan could watch or see the others attack or replay until the war was over.
- Anyone from either clan could attack the base
- Each clan would only get 1 attempt
- Winner is in order: Most stars, then higher % damage, then fastest done. So, if both got 2 stars then the clan that had the highest % damage on the base won. If that was the same then whoever did it fastest. If that was the same - sorry but its still a tie.
- As soon as both clans used their attack the war was over. If one or both did not attack, then the full hour would run out.
If Super Cell had 100 dummy bases for each TH level, it is unlikely people could go online and figure it out.
I don't think this is viable, I like the way it is now. Adding your ideas will make war very complicated and will take the fun out of itQuote:
Originally Posted by JFDrumBeast
First to get to the final score still sounds good.
Simple. Easily explained. Easily understood. Won't alter gameplay except to promote earlier final attacks.
I'm not sure about your idea but I would like them to implement something to make sure theirs no more drawsQuote:
Originally Posted by JFDrumBeast
if it's a DRAW...should set up a penalty shoot out or something everyone gets one attack and a chance to change bases if players would like to
i would rather they give the last person in the list an extra attack to get more star chance for tie break
Couldn't explain more, chief. Why do they think that this idea could alter the clan wars? Imagine a 10v10 all TH7 clan wars and all of them gets a 3 star attack. It would be a draw, of course. But if there's these factors (3 star attacks, fastest attacks, and average %), there would be a winner. Clan wars will be the same and nothing will change. Imagine a war without draws. That'll be glorious!Quote:
Originally Posted by HungryHungryHippo