Printable View
There needs to be a tie breaker or a series of tie breakers introduced for perfect scores.
My suggestions:
- Least Attempts
- Earliest finish
in priority order.
It makes no sense that the most viable response to an early blitz by the other clan is to abandon the war to reserve resources.
These additional tie breakers would also resolve the rare occurrence where td is exactly the same in imperfect wars.
First one would mean penalizing a perfect war. Second one is too heavily reliant on timezones.
Why would the first one penalize a perfect war? We're talking about two clans who each get perfects against one another and deciding that the one that got "perfect" with fewer attacks gets the tie breaker because each one has 100% td.Quote:
Originally Posted by Radiating
Second one wouldn't be reliant on time zones either. If you don't like the time that your war starts, start your war at a different time. I'm not really sure where you're coming from with the mentioning of time zones.
If my clan gets 60 stars against the other clan using only 20 attacks, how is that deserving of a tie with a clan that gets 60 stars but needs to take 30 or 40 attacks to do it? In this case, my clan was the better clan because we cleared all of our targets with no advanced scouting. Now assume -for the sake of argument- that each of us needed to use 30 attacks to get all 60 stars. The one that completes the task earlier did so with less available time to scout, prep, and plan and did so with less information about what the other clan was going to accomplish in the war.
But to me, "fewer attacks needed" is a much higher priority than "earlier finish." If some clan from across the planet blitzes mine while we sleep there should be an opportunity to respond. With the way that the game currently works, if they got all 60 stars while we slept (even if they needed to use all of their attacks to do so) then we have a mathematically 0% chance to win the war and that is absolute garbage because this just happened. A Chinese clan put in both waves (15v15) while we slept and got all 45 stars, but they needed to use 28 attacks to get them. We cleared all 45 stars with far fewer attacks (21), but the only real point of doing that was to to force a stalemate and keep them from getting winning loot out of spite. We beat them. We should have won. If they were better, they should have been able to clear our bases with fewer chances than it took us.
I wouldn't say that you'd need a tiebreaker for a perfect war, that's like saying that you'll need another tiebreaker method when (lets say...) both clans have exactly 81% each. If you're that evenly matched, then good for you, getting more loot than a loss is better than a loss.
If these 2 tie breakers were added, there wouldn't need to be anything else because they also solve the arbitrary case of "exactly 81.23% td each." If one clan gets to 81.23% (and some number of stars) with 10 attacks but the other clan needs 30 attacks to get that same 81.23% and the same number of stars, how is that an even tie? It really isn't. The first clan should win that because they used fewer attacks than the other clan to accomplish the same mark.Quote:
Originally Posted by uikluspe
Note that I'm saying that this only comes into play when total destruction is exactly the same. If there are open stars, then that is a chance for the second clan can win. If there is "81%" td, then "81.01%" td is a chance for the second clan to win. When they hit exactly the same mark (which is most likely to occur at exactly 100% because total destruction is obviously capped at it) then the lower number of attacks needed to get there should trump.
If all of these line up exactly:
> identical number of war stars
> identical total destruction
> identical number of attacks
then the earliest time to achieve the mark should be the final breaker because that clan got there without knowing exactly what the other clan had done; the second knew their marks to beat and they couldn't do it.
The other option that would be great would be to reward "max stars" with automatic victory, even if that means both clans get to claim victory in the war if both reach max stars.
Automatically getting losers' loot for max stars just seems really wrong.
It's not about "needing" more attacks, clans with good attack allocation use their lower attacks to scout things for their their stronger attackers to maximize their odds of three stars. Not doing this (assuming their targets are cleared) is just poor attack utilization and should not be rewarded.
And you want all your players to get all the war practice they can, which is experience they only get if they attack. You should use all of your attacks every single war, that should NEVER be penalized.
Go up in TH level or learn to defend, the perfect wars will stop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DraakarDraekonis
i know at least in my clan if we have a perfect war we will use the remaining attacks so as we all get loot bonuses so we would use all of our attacks in a war
I think if there is a perfect war, then I think the clan that, on average, took less time to complete their 3 star attacks should win.
Just my idea. :)