How to get Fair and Competitive Wars, and Avoid Engineered Clans

[MossackFonseca]

I agree with you, only players who cheat deliberately did not raise the defense that found a convenient enemy in war, ...

Only one way to punish the minimax / engineering / cheating find them with the same enemy townhal level, no matter the level of defense so that they can feel how hard to win the war without cheating

Engineering is not cheating fyi...I don't like it, but it's annoying to see people coming here to complain about it incessantly without making any effort at all to build a balanced and even clan of their own.

[rian0007]

whether there is something wrong with our clan, we start the search wars by including th 10 by 4 and the rest of th 9 as much as 17 base and TH 8 by 4, but we found the clan TH 11 by 3 and TH 10 by 4, TH 9 total 14, the remaining TH TH 5 and 6, although defense equal to TH TH 11 10 But their forces have the maximum if this can be said to be fair ????

[Skrags]

even though those suggestions have been discussed back and forth over months and months by an amazing range of experienced forum contributors, who've probably experienced 1000's and 1000's of wars during this time?

Provide 1000s and 1000s of wars worth of data? you cant. game specialist maybe, math specialist? unlikely.

I guess my post must have been ambiguous. Probably the word "experience"!

If you take, 10s to 100s of forum contributors, who've kindly donated their time to post opinions since last summer on the forums, about the subject of engineering, including , might I add, some members of the most successful engineered clans in the history of the game with win streaks in 3 figures. How many wars so far are we looking at?
Then add forum posts from others, just posting war rosters for us to view/experience.
Then add individual forum members, for example Cnaf, who has data mined 100's and 100's of war details from his clan alliance/family.

All in all, have the people who've contributed to the making of this thread "probably experienced 1000's and 1000's of wars"?

I would have to say yes, they have. BUT... it is indeed just a guess!

[ryryshouse]

bro, 100 people with 500 wars of data is considerable less then 1000s and 1000s. I will let you work out the magnitude on that. and it is less then 100 people with 500 wars of data. I see more like 20 people with 100s of wars, and the range of roster is so large, versus the pool of clans actively spinning... its a drop in the ocean.

and someone like cnaf, who provides decent insight, runs a particular style of roster. so unless you are running that roster, the mileage will likely vary.

i appreciate the attempt to reverse engineer the mm, that is why I am here. But its clear to me how it functions..esp with regard to our typical roster composition.

[Skrags]

bro, 100 people with 500 wars of data is considerable less then 1000s and 1000s. I will let you work out the magnitude on that. .

I already have, thank you!

...

[StormHeart]

I have found through trail and error that most of you are saying is dead on. However, that word "Guarantee" need to go away. That just not possible. You'll get some engineers no matter what you do. You kind of covered yourself though with the recent war perfomance thing.

We went 15 or more wars without a loss. Were doing some of the things you pointed out not to do and boy did we get four horrible wars in a row. Three of which we lost, one we managed a tie.

It looks like to me you know someone that leaked something. I don't think there is anyway you could know the below by just observations. The below also concerns me. See below:

6. Do not permabase. To the war mm, a fully max th9 looks the same as a 9.5 that wasn't quite fully maxed at th9 but has sf and a couple of troops upgraded. If you have a very large number of "max" bases at a specific th in your clan, then the mm will break its arm patting itself on the back while it matches you with a bunch of .5's from the next th above. Can you get away with a fully max th9 or th10 here and there? Sure, if only one or two of you do it, but be careful that half your clan doesn't camp at that level. If you find your clan in this position at present, then perhaps consider moving a few up to the next th level. Remember, an early .5 doesn't count as unbalanced, it's only when you start maxing out offense/heroes without upgrading any defenses that the mm starts viewing you as unbalanced.s

That one has been bugging me.

Perhaps because I have several TH7s that I do not intend to take to 8. BUT, they have recently been getting matched against TH8s. Usually we can take out those 8s and often go one or two up on the map.

I cannot see any reason why a permabase should have a penalty. I can understand why Supercell doesn't like it. Those bases don't raid, don't buy gems. But that's not reason to go playing with the war matching.

Am I missing something? I don't see why it should. It's been bugging me for the last 24 hours since I saw this message.

Now I do understand that our several maxed 8s are more likely to draw a low TH9 which is bad for us. We have a few of those too. They are not my bases but are mostly from one person. She is about to upgrade one to 9. When I take that base it is when we tend to get that extra nine. But I think that could happen anyway. I do think it gets more likely with several max 8s so that's why I try to leave one out. This I can understand. But some penalty for just not upgrading would be grossly wrong.

Our last two wars saw our TH7s matched to TH8s except for one position. One of the 8s was smart. Just enough defense to make a ground attack a poor choice for a 7 but max AD, level 9 archer towers and higher level wiz towers. Our 7s were unable to three star any of them. In that war we had three max 7s. I realize that matching down low carries less significance but if this happens often and to clans that don't have three or four perma 7s. Then Th7 dragon attacks will become obsolete.

I'm tempted to take those 7s to 8 and do the exact same thing. Leave them as they are on walls, upgrade mortars to 5 and max the AD and wiz towers and maybe the air sweeper because it is generally believed that AD and AS have low war weight.

However, I don't think I will do that. It think supercell will fix it and I like attacking and over achieving with my 7s. If it continues though, I'll have no choice.

Do you have any insights? Is my thinking off here?

[ryryshouse]

I have found through trail and error that most of you are saying is dead on. However, that word "Guarantee" need to go away. That just not possible. You'll get some engineers no matter what you do. You kind of covered yourself though with the recent war perfomance thing.

We went 15 or more wars without a loss. Were doing some of the things you pointed out not to do and boy did we get four horrible wars in a row. Three of which we lost, one we managed a tie.

It looks like to me you know someone that leaked something. I don't think there is anyway you could know the below by just observations. The below also concerns me. See below:



That one has been bugging me.

Perhaps because I have several TH7s that I do not intend to take to 8. BUT, they have recently been getting matched against TH8s. Usually we can take out those 8s and often go one or two up on the map.

I cannot see any reason why a permabase should have a penalty. I can understand why Supercell doesn't like it. Those bases don't raid, don't buy gems. But that's not reason to go playing with the war matching.

Am I missing something? I don't see why it should. It's been bugging me for the last 24 hours since I saw this message.

Now I do understand that our several maxed 8s are more likely to draw a low TH9 which is bad for us. We have a few of those too. They are not my bases but are mostly from one person. She is about to upgrade one to 9. When I take that base it is when we tend to get that extra nine. But I think that could happen anyway. I do think it gets more likely with several max 8s so that's why I try to leave one out. This I can understand. But some penalty for just not upgrading would be grossly wrong.

Our last two wars saw our TH7s matched to TH8s except for one position. One of the 8s was smart. Just enough defense to make a ground attack a poor choice for a 7 but max AD, level 9 archer towers and higher level wiz towers. Our 7s were unable to three star any of them. In that war we had three max 7s. I realize that matching down low carries less significance but if this happens often and to clans that don't have three or four perma 7s. Then Th7 dragon attacks will become obsolete.

I'm tempted to take those 7s to 8 and do the exact same thing. Leave them as they are on walls, upgrade mortars to 5 and max the AD and wiz towers and maybe the air sweeper because it is generally believed that AD and AS have low war weight.

However, I don't think I will do that. It think supercell will fix it and I like attacking and over achieving with my 7s. If it continues though, I'll have no choice.

Do you have any insights? Is my thinking off here?

Why would you permabase with a TH7 or TH8 , instead of just doing offense? there is no "permabase" penalty. you have a bunch of TH9 lifers and you have a bunch of dip specialists who sucked at TH9 so they went to TH10 but didnt do defensive so they could continue hitting 9s. neither is right or wrong.

[MrJackrabbit]

I have found through trail and error that most of you are saying is dead on. However, that word "Guarantee" need to go away. That just not possible. You'll get some engineers no matter what you do. You kind of covered yourself though with the recent war perfomance thing.

We went 15 or more wars without a loss. Were doing some of the things you pointed out not to do and boy did we get four horrible wars in a row. Three of which we lost, one we managed a tie.

It looks like to me you know someone that leaked something. I don't think there is anyway you could know the below by just observations. The below also concerns me. See below:



That one has been bugging me.

Perhaps because I have several TH7s that I do not intend to take to 8. BUT, they have recently been getting matched against TH8s. Usually we can take out those 8s and often go one or two up on the map.

I cannot see any reason why a permabase should have a penalty. I can understand why Supercell doesn't like it. Those bases don't raid, don't buy gems. But that's not reason to go playing with the war matching.

Am I missing something? I don't see why it should. It's been bugging me for the last 24 hours since I saw this message.

Now I do understand that our several maxed 8s are more likely to draw a low TH9 which is bad for us. We have a few of those too. They are not my bases but are mostly from one person. She is about to upgrade one to 9. When I take that base it is when we tend to get that extra nine. But I think that could happen anyway. I do think it gets more likely with several max 8s so that's why I try to leave one out. This I can understand. But some penalty for just not upgrading would be grossly wrong.

Our last two wars saw our TH7s matched to TH8s except for one position. One of the 8s was smart. Just enough defense to make a ground attack a poor choice for a 7 but max AD, level 9 archer towers and higher level wiz towers. Our 7s were unable to three star any of them. In that war we had three max 7s. I realize that matching down low carries less significance but if this happens often and to clans that don't have three or four perma 7s. Then Th7 dragon attacks will become obsolete.

I'm tempted to take those 7s to 8 and do the exact same thing. Leave them as they are on walls, upgrade mortars to 5 and max the AD and wiz towers and maybe the air sweeper because it is generally believed that AD and AS have low war weight.

However, I don't think I will do that. It think supercell will fix it and I like attacking and over achieving with my 7s. If it continues though, I'll have no choice.

Do you have any insights? Is my thinking off here?

Since mm can't match exactly perfect a permamax base might trigger a th above that th level. People wanting the same # of th levels have no where to go but the same or down. A th above from experience can be at any degree on that th. Often times rushed to the defense heavy side. So it will be hard to 3*. However since an increase in army camp size and extra spell is usually all that is needed to crush the th below it doesn't take much added offense.
My advice on permamax is to have on or 2 war armies and a several defenses below max preferred splash. That should keep you balanced enough if someone want's to stay at that th level.

[ryryshouse]

I already have, thank you!

...

okay big dog, show me 10000 statistically relevant data sets , we all want to see them.

If you got the evidence, flop it out. I got multiple days to wait for this treasure trove of information.

[ryryshouse]

Since mm can't match exactly perfect a permamax base might trigger a th above that th level. People wanting the same # of th levels have no where to go but the same or down. A th above from experience can be at any degree on that th. Often times rushed to the defense heavy side.

Well.. triggering a base above isnt really the issue. It is full roster matching, so you arent bringing in a mirror, persay. As tank pointed out elsewhere, or skrags, you have had a year for people to become "perma" 9.5 or 10.5. ... grinding walls, heros, lab, and not dropping the new defense.