Supercell PLEASE find a solution to roster engineering

[patrickpatrick]

As long as war matching is based on a set formula, it will always be possible to manipulate it to get the most favorable outcome for whomsoever bothers to spend time (and money perhaps).

There is nothing that sc can do about it. Too elaborate a mm system that takes care of too many variables will lead to unbearable delays in finding a match. It has to be balanced between too fine a match and the time it would take to find such a match.

Besides, if the number of clans searching for war is declining, the problem gets compounded.

To sc's credit, the current matchmaker is pretty good 90% of the time imo.

[CosmicCharlie]

I have a TH3 that almost has 300 war stars. I want to try to get the war hero achievement with. Its very slow because about 50% of the wars, there's not even a base I an pick up stars on.

[Adevati]

You're going to cherry pick comments and of course you'll find absolutisms that don't reflect reality.

Is engineering a strategy? Yes.
Does it automatically equal clan wins in war? No.

Not cherry picking anything. Didn't quote anyone. In general, it's a common argument that pro-engineers use to discredit the complaint. Meanwhile, they constantly look for ways to improve their engineered roster.

No, it's not a guaranteed win. Although a strawman argument, it's rather flat to defend engineering. Engineered rosters exploit a weakness in the matchmaking algorithm to give them a much higher probability of favorable matches and thus a much higher probability of wins. No one can argue that fact. Actions and the now developed strategies speak louder than words.

[2222]

As long as war matching is based on a set formula, it will always be possible to manipulate it to get the most favorable outcome for whomsoever bothers to spend time (and money perhaps).

There is nothing that sc can do about it. Too elaborate a mm system that takes care of too many variables will lead to unbearable delays in finding a match. It has to be balanced between too fine a match and the time it would take to find such a match.

Besides, if the number of clans searching for war is declining, the problem gets compounded.

To sc's credit, the current matchmaker is pretty good 90% of the time imo.

I'm not saying SC should do this, but if SC made every base weigh at minimum what a max base one hall below it weighs, that would take care of engineered accounts other than .5s. For roster engineering, though, I'm not sure there is such a quick fix.

[Lunaticfringe]

The TH3 isn't an advantage, it's the effect it has on matching. If the last base on our side is a 50k defence weight TH8 and on the enemy side a 1k defenceless, then either will be 3*ed easily using low attackers and have no impact on the war. However if SC want the 2 total/average weights to match up, then the other clan needs an extra 50k defence weight somewhere else to get the total right. And when that's in the #1 spot and they are simply a TH higher then they have an advantage

You are introducing the concept of defenseless TH, which complicates the issue unnecessarily. I don't understand that.

Further, there are many questionable things about your statement.

Why do you assume that a 50k weight TH8 will, "have no impact on war?"
Why are you assuming that the difficulty in 3* a 50K TH8 war base is the equivalent of a TH3?

Most importantly, please walk me through how you can conclude that the #1 spot is where this difference in weight goes.

It's the extra high level town hall attacks they get from doing it.

Extra attacks? Really??

You actually are shorthanded in attacks, as you need to make up for 2 "wasted" attacks.

The th3 has no purpose other than to lower the overall weight of the clan.

Maybe so, but that comes at a cost that seemingly isn't being considered

When you add enough or done correctly in a line up the advantage becomes significant.

In my case, we're facing a th11&10th vs a th10&9 at the top. This is a 10 player war, if you're getting that kind of advantage I can only imagine how effective it becomes with more players.

Despite my previous comments, I do understand how things can get really interesting in small wars, like a 10-man war.

One of the more outrageous example I have ever heard was a clan who had five max TH11s and then five TH3s. That's very eyebrow raising to me, but, fortunately, I've only heard of one so example

And while it likely is "balanced," that clearly is hitting an extreme and extremes can often be problematic

But that strikes me as a different issue than the way things are being described in this thread. A TH3 isn't some magical TH that simply by its mere inclusion causes wars to patently be unfair.

This is exactly right and it is partially because of the ability to attack twice. The ability to attack twice means a clan doesn't need to use all of its attacks. A th8 or th3 are both getting 3 starred in every war and with 2 attacks per player it is easy to make up for not having two th8 attacks. So, clans go with the th3 rather than the th8 and they get the benefit of being stronger at higher hall levels.

Multiple assumptions are being used here which are confusing to say the least.

The ability to attack twice means more opportunities to gain stars or % destruction on your opponent or, in the case of the war already being won, perhaps loot or practice. If a clan doesn't need to use all of it's attacks to win the war, that's fine, but that's not what two attacks ultimately means.

And a TH8 is not necessarily, "getting 3 starred in every war" as you are assuming that the wars taking place in CoC are with clans of running dominantly TH9+ townhalls. That isn't always the case.

Also, why did you pick a TH8? Picking a TH8 for your example seems to fit a biased agenda. Why not another, say, TH9 in a clan that runs primarily TH9s? That could be a legitimate example where someone gives something up to gain an edge elsewhere. Should that be punished?

Lastly, you still haven't addressed the fact that carrying a TH3 in your war lineup comes with a real drawback. Yes, somewhere on the war map you might have an edge, but my question to you then becomes: why shouldn't you? You are including a TH3, that won't 3* anything, but will get 3* by just about anything...

[2222]

You are missing a lot here lunatic and created some arguments that no one is even making. In the end, in our wars, we don't need two more th8 attacks. If we put a th3 at the bottom rather than a th8, we don't notice the 2 missing th8 attacks. If it gives us an advantage higher up, it is worth it. By the way, we don't actually do this. I'm just saying I understand why it is done.

[Lunaticfringe]

You are missing a lot here lunatic and created some arguments that no one is even making. In the end, in our wars, we don't need two more th8 attacks. If we put a th3 at the bottom rather than a th8, we don't notice the 2 missing th8 attacks. If it gives us an advantage higher up, it is worth it. By the way, we don't actually do this. I'm just saying I understand why it is done.

I'm not sure I've made much of an argument, I'm simply asking questions and challenging certain positions/comments that are being made. I also don't believe I'm missing much of anything, but I welcome you to point out where I'm not understanding, for I very much do want to understand

I do understand the point you have just made, but I don't understand how that translates into wars being unfair by the inclusion of a TH3 in the lineup, which seems to be the overall theme of this thread

[RagingKoala]

Bottom of the war map is nothing, if you lose two or even four attacks down low, and squeeze in a max def base up top you have an advantage. How many attacks will they need to do to get equal % on your max eleven? The 11vs10 you'll get at least one three star, and a big %2. That's huge considering ten vs elevn 2* are not easy on proper bases. So right there with that one guys attack, your tens need to three another high ten, and get high % on another, as well as two star the eleven.

Losing two super low attacks doesn't mean jack in this situation, you just put all the pressure on their top to perform at a similar level to your #1. If they have another max royal ten in their lineup, he now gets to hit his equal or (usually) lesser counterpart. If your top guy didn't perform well on their eleven, and your second guy had to clean it up, now they both need their second attacks to be flawless in order to keep the war close.

Roster engineering gives whoever's doing it a lot of breathing room up top, while tightening the chocker on the enemy. There's a ton of people who crack when under pressure and mess up. As much as an advantage it is skill wise, its doubly an advantage as a mind game.

Probably the only way to nullify this is to not include the bottom few bases Into the war weight, but then you introduce defenseless bases as the next step engineers will take (again). It's really just a loop, and changing it will only push the loop another direction.

[Adevati]

I'm not sure I've made much of an argument, I'm simply asking questions and challenging certain positions/comments that are being made. I also don't believe I'm missing much of anything, but I welcome you to point out where I'm not understanding, for I very much do want to understand

I do understand the point you have just made, but I don't understand how that translates into wars being unfair by the inclusion of a TH3 in the lineup, which seems to be the overall theme of this thread

The overall theme is the concept of roster engineering for an unfair advantage. This thread started as a mere symptom of the problem.

All the rest of this is just noise. If it didn't work, the problem wouldn't be rampant.

[Krsatjhook]

Not to derail the thread too much, but what benefit do you believe this gives you?

Very curious here.

It changes the war time which in turn limits certain time zones from the pool of potential opponents. 6-10 pst isn't called the hours of death for nothing.