Thread: Engineering is fair play
Nope, they should blame themselves for not understanding how the mm is done. The developer is doing a fantastic job right now. And they have data from millions of war match ups as proof - not a couple of anecdotal mismatches from here and there, that sometimes turned out NOT to be a mismatch after further careful analysis.Originally Posted by Chang405
Hard to blame themselves when SC has not explained how MM is done. All we have going is anecdotal evidence of how war MM works; SC never tells the players that its a bad idea to drop 2 crossbows the moment they turn TH9.
MM is erratic. I can put out the same exact lineup in a 25v25 war and within a week I can get one match that clearly favors us, one match that clearly favors the opposition and one even match. People's war weight can't have changed much in 6 days yet MM returns us with a wide range of opponents. If MM was more precise people wouldn't need to worry about whether putting down extra walls is a good idea or when they should drop key defenses.
This would be a good point if what was good for war was consistent with what is good for multiplayer. What was described in the post you replied to (th9s with max defense while working on heroes still only at 20) is an upgrade path that makes sense for multiplayer. If not for war, it would not make sense to not build the bows at th9. The only reason to hold off now is war (although some would say lately the .5 route isn't much of an advantage anyway, but that is another topic). If multiplayer and war were consistent, so that the same upgrade path was good for both, THEN I would agree with you that anyone who doesn't intelligently upgrade along that path deserves every disadvantage they get.
I guess that's my point. Everyone thinks they build in a balanced manner but upon close inspection the vast majority of players have rushed defenses with heroes and walls lagging behind. I'm guessing here but a max TH9 with 30/30 heroes and max walls takes roughly twice as many resources to build as a "max" TH9 with 15/15 heroes with half skulls & legos.
Clash: TH10, BK 40, AQ 40, 210/275 magma walls
Boom: Retired Level 63 RR 47 -- GBE 40, 17, 17, 17 -- PSC 73 -- TD 30, 13 -- TH 32, 14
And that's where I disagree. If multiplayer and war upgrading were the same path it would take a ton of strategy & discipline out of this game.
Everyone would simply rush their TH and defense because it would be advantageous in cup pushing, multiplayer and war.
Personally I feel walls and heroes (the most difficult things to max) should be slightly rewarded by the MM. Currently I believe walls are rewarded but high heroes are not.
Clash: TH10, BK 40, AQ 40, 210/275 magma walls
Boom: Retired Level 63 RR 47 -- GBE 40, 17, 17, 17 -- PSC 73 -- TD 30, 13 -- TH 32, 14
If SC told us exactly how the MM worked then everyone would be able to easily figure out how to game it to a greater extent then they already have.
It isn't SC job to teach of the proper path to build your base or play the game for that matter. I look at it like Madden, the game doesn't tell you how to build your team and call plays. Sure the game teaches you the how to use the tools they have provided but it falls on the users to decide how they will play the game. If SC told us all how to play the game everyone would just have the same bases.
Yes the MM is erratic but it will always be, there is no possible way that every time you hit the start war button that there is another clan with the exact makeup your clan has for you to face. The MM matches you with the closest available clan barring offense and defense on both sides at the time you start your search. That is honestly the best it will ever be without waiting hours for a war match to be found. I mean I am not saying there can't be tweaks made to help find closer matches but we also need to be able to match an opponent in a reasonable amount of time.
edit:
SC explained exactly how mm is done - by matching clans with similar strengths. Yet many incorrectly assume many irrelevant things are in the mm, like: clan level, TH level, perk level, win streak, or that only defense matter, or matching is done by mirror base comparison etc....
BTW, there is nothing wrong with adding the xbows when one turn to TH9. That base will sometimes match to a max TH8, sometimes to another TH9 with only xbow added or sometimes to a rushed TH9. And that is all fair. The issue is that because that base is higher on the war map, and probably matched to a Th9 with similar defenses, and because of the very common flawed mirror attacking strategy, many noobs now assume that they must attack the opposite base. However, since they still only have TH8 offense, they will fail on the opposite base. The sensible strategy would be for them to hit other max TH8, and that is not a liability to their clan.
On the opposite side, defenseless bases tend to believe they do a favor to their clan because they hit much higher on the war map. The issue is how high. If a defenseless TH9 with TH9 offense is hitting another TH8, even though that base is 10 or 20 positions on the war map, that is a liability to the clan. Contrary to the common belief, that defenseless TH9 does not match to a TH5 because they are mirrored on the war map. It probably attracts another full TH9.
This is exactly how SC want the mm to play out. Adding variety in match ups to make war exciting. Having to face the same war composition, weight, and TH every war will get stale quickly.
Last edited by topbtm; January 12th, 2017 at 11:00 PM.
Having a winstreak snapped by an engineered clan thats too top heavy (which is super relevant btw speaking of the top bases) gets stale. When they take the weight of the whole clan that manipulated its weight, it gets paired against a clan that it shouldnt have gotten paired with in the first place. THAT gets stale
I agree the weights of heroes and walls should not be high as those should be rewarded with an advantage. Where we disagree, is you apparently want more of the outcome of war to depend on who upgrades their base in a certain fashion while I prefer it to depend more on the skill of base designs and attacks. Also, I disagree that everyone would upgrade their bases correctly. Half the players out there have no idea what they are doing and don't really care. Those who do, though, should be able to upgrade their base on a way that is best for both multiplayer and war, in my opinion, and I think in the opinion of SC. Until then, though, I don't fault anyone for engineering.
Well said .... 3 wars ago we come up against a very tough clan . We had 3 engineered th11's and they beat us by 1 . They had no engineered bases. One of our members left the clan to congratulate them on a fine effort.
People think you win all the time if you have them , not correct . Anyway wish people would just get over it and move on .
Last edited by GenFgts; January 12th, 2017 at 11:38 PM.
Posting Permissions
