Feel the salt flow through you OP.
In the mean time, I have some clans to smash in my engineered clan...
Feel the salt flow through you OP.
In the mean time, I have some clans to smash in my engineered clan...
For a simple .5, yes. i.e., if you upgrade your TH +1 level, then max out your troops/heroes you are penalized sufficiently already. In fact, you might argue you are penalized too much, but surely the penalty is enough to motivate you to upgrade your defenses and balance out a little.Originally Posted by KingKreg
What I am talking about are accounts that upgrade their TH +2 and sometimes +8 levels, max out their offense, and leave their defense 2 - 8 levels lower, or completely defenseless. THOSE are the ones that just need a stronger MM penalty, not a simple .5 that has just +1 level Offense. I've repeatedly stated this, but people keep thinking that I am proposing to further penalize the simple +1 level Offense .5's, when that's not what I've been saying.
Last edited by 2SD; January 26th, 2017 at 07:48 PM.
Agree King.. almost every matchup we see is heroes vs. infernoes to some extent. In fact Onyx was on the "heroes" (and winning) side against our clan not so long ago. We are heavy on .5 but don't have terrific hero development--no 40s and only a sprinkling of 30s--so our matchups can go either direction.
We don't face a ton of massive engineering... And even when we do, typically we have a chance to win anyway. In my experience, massively engineered clans are not ace attackers. For whatever reason... gemming bases instead of getting in the reps at their th level... soft competition eroding their skills... overconfidence... I'd prefer not to speculate tbh.
BTW Denton... the saying is mano a mano, ie. man to man.
Last edited by posthoc; January 26th, 2017 at 08:03 PM.
And that's why you're getting so much pushback in a thread titled "... just has to penalize .5s more...". To everyone else x.5 specifically means within one TH. The term excludes defenceless bases, etc - in fact anything beyond upgrading offence first at a new TH (although can include extreme versions such as completely maxing offence at the new TH before adding any def)
It turns out you think x.5s might already be disadvantaged, so calling for them to penalised is obviously going to run into arguments.
Last edited by OnyxDS; January 26th, 2017 at 08:22 PM.
Various data posts: Who plays what? CWL data 1 (stars), 2 (3* rates), 3 (rosters), 4 (start times and other) Data at end of old Legends And (non-data) how max bases are ordered in war
I think my definition of .5 is different than yours. A base is only a .5 if all the defenses we upgraded and purchased for the previous TH. If defenses are under that level that base qualifies as engineered (various degrees of amount to extreme engineers with defenseless bases)
i view .5 as the only real way to make it into the next bracket of attack difficulty. Ease into it. Just a method of upgrading to max for me. Do my basic offense first camps,CC, spell factory and hero if applicable. After that. Start working regular defenses up to new max before getting any new defenses. Followed by light weight regular defenses and work those. Than heavy weight. Keeping pace with the lab so they time out around the same point. Basically i work heros and follow that path to dump my other loot.
We did get beaten by a heavily engineered clan a couple of wars back. They had more defence up top, plus several TH11 offence bases to clear our top (TH10 or 9.5). It was the usual story that they had weak defence low down. Although oddly not defenceless - just our TH8s (bottom 10) were all facing bases with TH7 or Th6 rated defence.
But as posthoc comments we had a chance to win. It was a very unfair war, but if we'd dropped 10vs10 triples perfectly at the top we could have won. Which is different to Aug/Sept when we were running into wars that were literally unwinnable - they could faceroll a perfect score and they'd have a fully maxed TH11 up top that our TH10s couldn't clear.
It does seem that very lopsided bases are still bringing an advantage; whereas for x.5s the advantage/disadvantage is very debatable. I still feel it's very possible the defenceless advantage is from roster engineering rather than the lopsidedness. By eliminating the wasted defence weight low down (in a mixed war defence on the bottom bases is near irrelevant) some compensating weight is allowed elsewhere to bring the averages close again.
Various data posts: Who plays what? CWL data 1 (stars), 2 (3* rates), 3 (rosters), 4 (start times and other) Data at end of old Legends And (non-data) how max bases are ordered in war
Denton is well aware of the correct saying, which actually translates to hand to hand.BTW Denton... the saying is mano a mano, ie. man to man.
I have previously commented on the animal cruelty aspect of monkey and monkey combat, although I would recommend Hanuman as the deity of choice if you were to engage in it.
How did monkeys enter this thread? (Answer: wherever they wanted?) I apologize for my error.
Mano y mano= hand to hand
Mono y mono= one on one
Both interchangeable sayings in any universe
one money hand to one money kand ? Sign me up!
Posting Permissions
