Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: What if matches were based strictly on offense

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by 2222 View Post
    The intent of trying to get people to build defense is clear, but the problem is the proposed solution would just change from one type of uneven match to another. Why would we want a system that considers two accounts with the same offense but one with max defense and one with low defense to have the same power?
    I guess I look at it the way I used to play WOW: people who were not maxed lvl players got stomped by max level players (I equate this to building defenses => get everything built). Offense will naturally have to progress in order to continue to max defense. Once people were at max level, then they had to get gear to be competitive (I equate this to max level heroes, all max troops and all max spells).

    The current system does not incentivize people to build max defenses at all, which is a downside. There is also the huge time sink issue, which really needs to be addressed in order to get new players playing against the seasoned veterans. Why would I want seasoned veterans to play against new players? To expand the pool of players. Besides, the seasoned veterans would still win because they have better skill and everything is on a level playing field at that point (max offense and max defense), right?

  2. #12
    Pro Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Parking lot of Grateful Dead show
    Posts
    700
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadrach777 View Post
    I guess I look at it the way I used to play WOW: people who were not maxed lvl players got stomped by max level players (I equate this to building defenses => get everything built). Offense will naturally have to progress in order to continue to max defense. Once people were at max level, then they had to get gear to be competitive (I equate this to max level heroes, all max troops and all max spells).

    The current system does not incentivize people to build max defenses at all, which is a downside. There is also the huge time sink issue, which really needs to be addressed in order to get new players playing against the seasoned veterans. Why would I want seasoned veterans to play against new players? To expand the pool of players. Besides, the seasoned veterans would still win because they have better skill and everything is on a level playing field at that point (max offense and max defense), right?
    The current system incents a clan to build a specific lineup to gain an advantage to win wars. There are no successful engineered clans that are all dless. You will never get the majority of the population to max, given the current system.

    Reversing the algorithm just changes the incentive. In order to get fair, equal matches you need to remove incentives for "creative" troop upgrades and defense builds. The same way TH sniping is effectively removed. You can still leave your th out but the benefit is removed.

    This is on SC to determine what they want the majority of the players to do and incent that behavior and penalize the opposite behavior.

    Whether, they want to do this or can do it is a totally different question. And I don't know the answer to either.
    Last edited by Ripple1972; April 20th, 2017 at 05:48 PM.

  3. #13
    Forum All-Star 2222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    4,999
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadrach777 View Post
    I guess I look at it the way I used to play WOW: people who were not maxed lvl players got stomped by max level players (I equate this to building defenses => get everything built). Offense will naturally have to progress in order to continue to max defense. Once people were at max level, then they had to get gear to be competitive (I equate this to max level heroes, all max troops and all max spells).

    The current system does not incentivize people to build max defenses at all, which is a downside. There is also the huge time sink issue, which really needs to be addressed in order to get new players playing against the seasoned veterans. Why would I want seasoned veterans to play against new players? To expand the pool of players. Besides, the seasoned veterans would still win because they have better skill and everything is on a level playing field at that point (max offense and max defense), right?
    I agree that a problem with the current matchmaker is it encourages people to not build certain defenses. My thought is that should be corrected to properly weight the defense and offense such that there is no disadvantage to building any defense. However, it is not my agreement with your plan which would incentivize people to not build certain offenses. How is that any better than encouraging them to skip defenses?

  4. #14
    Pro Member ajayrayit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    540
    You would have the complete opposite of what is happening therefore it would still remain unbalanced.
    Max TH10, a member of Red Elite.
    Part of the Elite Nation family; Clash with Ash, Battle Elite, Elite Academy, SAC Kings Elite, Mutiny Elite & Paradox.

    Player tag: #R2L9CYP2 - TH10 BK/AQ 40/40
    Est. 2014

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    235
    A balanced player (he who upgrades troops AND defenses in a balanced way) should be having the "advantage". Other upgrade paths either TH defenses with troops for lower TH level OR lower defenses with troops for TH level should be giving a disadvantage in MM.

    However, at the moment lower defenses with upgraded troops seems to be the way to go.

  6. #16
    Pro Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Parking lot of Grateful Dead show
    Posts
    700
    Quote Originally Posted by Prutser View Post
    A balanced player (he who upgrades troops AND defenses in a balanced way) should be having the "advantage". Other upgrade paths either TH defenses with troops for lower TH level OR lower defenses with troops for TH level should be giving a disadvantage in MM.

    However, at the moment lower defenses with upgraded troops seems to be the way to go.
    That would certainly be the view of someone with a balanced base. I think engineers would say offense should have advantage. Defensively rushed would say they should have an advantage.

    The only thing that is true is currently, SC has given the advantage to the offensive ahead of defense. The rest is just personal bias.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    235
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripple1972 View Post
    That would certainly be the view of someone with a balanced base. I think engineers would say offense should have advantage. Defensively rushed would say they should have an advantage.

    The only thing that is true is currently, SC has given the advantage to the offensive ahead of defense. The rest is just personal bias.
    Totally true. But think about players who are fresh. Who are new to each and every TH. I would not recommend rushing because as a player you should have enough time to learn different skills on attacking. I do not think the average player rushing TH's without building defenses will have enough time to learn to use the troops correctly. Especially after TH8. But again, that too is my personal bias.

    Plus I think it is better for the game in general to have players having fun on all kinds of TH levels, I personally believe that the engineering is driving lots of people away from the game after they are getting into the TH10 range of TH levels in their wars. But again, that is my personal experience with lots of newer players in my clans.
    Last edited by Prutser; April 21st, 2017 at 04:06 PM.

  8. #18
    Forum Elder Anarchos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    2,692
    Instead of matching based off troop levels, match based on lab level. Anyone could try to skew a system based off troops levels, but if it took into account your lab level it would be a more solid match.

    however then you'd have people engineering in the opposite direction. Leave the lab at th10 level while getting all new TH11 defenses, etc. the only way to make matches closer to even is to take into account both offense AND defense. Any system that favors 1 more than the other will eventually be used and abused by those with the time and means to crack the system.
    TH10 -- L150 -- GG Billionaire
    275 Magmas
    BK-L34 -- AQ-L40
    Legend Leaguer
    A Cure for the Common Cloud

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by 2222 View Post
    I agree that a problem with the current matchmaker is it encourages people to not build certain defenses. My thought is that should be corrected to properly weight the defense and offense such that there is no disadvantage to building any defense. However, it is not my agreement with your plan which would incentivize people to not build certain offenses. How is that any better than encouraging them to skip defenses?
    My opinion based on my inferior attacking skill, the number of people able to take out max TH9s with low teen heroes is few and far between. I still see people fail to take out max TH9s with lvl 30 and higher heroes. I haven't seen anyone take out a max defense TH10 with teen heroes with any kind of attack as long as the person has some skill in designing a base. I hardly see people take out max defense TH11 with max heroes, so there's no need to talk about teen heroes there.

    Offense counts twice as much as defense. People can argue all about how one base can have an awesome design and takes more than two hits to 3 star (brings lots of enjoyment when my engineered accounts take multiple hits), to me that sounds like a bad attack strategy. The current MMA allows me to take half awesome all-star players and the other half as I don't care (or God love them, they just don't know how to attack players) and we can win more than we lose. This is all because defense matters so much. If the MMA were able to create fair and even matches, it still won't change the dynamic of where only half the roster matters because only their attacks and defenses will count in the end. Think of a roster of half fully maxed TH11s and the other half defenseless TH11s with a parity MMA: 25% of my attacks will be used to take out the bottom half, leaving 75% of my attacks to take out the top half (this is the best scenario possible to the number of attacks to take out max TH11 defenses). Actually this scenario even applies with the current MMA, where any match TH9 and lower will not matter what-so-ever against a max TH11 attack.

    So in my mind, if you flip the dynamic where it's the offense that counts then people have to upgrade their heroes if they ever want to 3 star max bases. In my scenario, everyone has defensively maxed bases for their TH, but it's the heroes people are working on in order to 3 star others. It's a lot more common to see the new people (or uneducated war people) with maxed defenses and teen (or lower) heroes. If people want to engineer in my scenario, I say let them because it's a much harder hill to climb. Let's say people are able to pay for their accounts (because I don't see it happening any other way, unless they bot), and you have half a roster of one lvl 1 barrack, 1 camp, and no spells but max TH11 defenses; and the other half is fully maxed TH11 accounts. In my scenario you would have 50% of your attacks to take out the entire teams roster, so every attack would have to be a 1 shot 3 star, no mistakes. For the opponent, I don't think one would ever be found, but I would expect the opponent to have at least a full roster of maxed TH11 defenses, but the offense would range from 5/5/5 heroes up to maybe 1 account with 45/45/20. I don't know who would win that match, but the other team gets 100% of their attacks to take out the opponent.

  10. #20
    Forum Elder
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    2,291
    I think there should be a toggle switch n the war maps that show players position rank on defense and on offense. And SC should just get rid of the suggested attack "feature".

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Making matches based on level instead of trophy count?
    By Drylore in forum Ideas & Feature Requests
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 3rd, 2017, 11:21 PM
  2. War weight should only be based on offense
    By cappa662 in forum General
    Replies: 56
    Last Post: September 24th, 2016, 03:19 AM
  3. Replies: 128
    Last Post: September 9th, 2016, 03:36 AM
  4. Skill Based Training Matches
    By Danger1penguin in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 22nd, 2016, 06:24 PM
  5. Town Hall based multiplayer matches. WHY?
    By RyDrex22 in forum General
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: December 28th, 2015, 10:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •