Page 1 of 16 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 157

Thread: bringing a partial perma/max lineup to war (kids dont try this at home)

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    310

    bringing a partial perma/max lineup to war (kids dont try this at home)

    a cookie to whoever guesses what happened....




    so i waited until war was over an hour ago to post this.

    we random matched an "interesting" war. never seen this before.
    30v30, they were an old/developed clan >300 wins, around 100 losses

    they had all 10s and 9s

    5 fully max 10s as far as i could tell, unless a trap or something hidden was not done.
    4 very developed 10's working on walls / heros / couple of minor building left
    2 looked like very new 10s, coming from max 9's with a few upgrades so far

    13 fully max 9s as far as i could tell, unless a trap or something hidden was not done.
    6 9s fairly well developed, all had bows and working on maxing it looks like

    at the end one of us went to visit to ask a few questions:
    1. it was a random match for them, and they normally bring this sort of lineup
    2. they think "maxing" is the proper/fair way to play
    3. they have alot of people that dont want to upgrade to the next level (obviously i guess) and just play for war.
    4. they regularly match all types of different clans. "normal", "customized", "rushed", "engineered", whatever the cool terms being thrown around now are

    us
    6 th 11s.
    none have eagles
    2 coming from max 10s, upgrading their existing def only, max wardens
    2 coming from max 10s, upgrading warden only. no new defenses
    1 customized (my new cool word of the week) with th 11 lvl defenses from th9 (9.whatever), max warden
    1 defenseless'ish, me yay, max warden, 30's king/queen

    8 th 10s
    3 are close to max, finishing up walls and few minor buildings
    1 has infernos, but still long ways to go for th 10 defenses
    4 are various .5's, customized, etc..

    10 th 9s
    3 are close to max, finishing up walls and few minor buildings
    5 are various .5's, customized, etc.
    2 are defenseless'ish

    6 th 8s
    mix of whatevers, mostly alts. normal / defenseless / minimax blah blah



    ive posted several times before ive never seen a match of ours the opponent couldnt win, but now i guess i eat those words. they really didnt have much of a chance at all.
    results from them
    1* our #1, 2* our #2 - #4, rest all 3*

    results from us
    100%

    what do i take away from all this:

    1. if you are counting on "avoiding" other types of clans by upgrading / building a lineup certain ways, it just doesn't work. it doesn't work for them they said, and we match all types of clans also. you get what you get. seems fairly random to me.

    2. how they could ever get a "fair" match as alot of folks around here want is beyond me. the only type of "fair" i see for a whole bunch of maxed bases is... an exact equal of the same maxed bases? how often is that going to happen with a 10/9 mix.
    they said they hardly ever get what they would call a fair match. they are either overpowering their opponents or getting the shaft. i give them props for sticking to their beliefs though.

    be careful what you ask for out there if thats what you want wars to end up like. theres not much wiggle room to matching a clan like that i think. you want perfect you could end up waiting forever.

  2. #2
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    870
    What is see is more an observation from the years of playing vs tracked and fact but the idea of maxing everything or permamax puts so.eone at the top of that th. Often means sometimes above, same, below that paticular war weight. That means a th10 will be matched up with a slightly lower th10, on that is similar, or the th 11 and that might be a th10.5 or something like that.
    If you're not smarter than the guy you're dealing with you lose.
    You failed to utilize the most effective strategy by not using the most available resources to affect your outcome.
    I play to win. You play to see how tough you are.
    Defeat the enemy anyway you can.

  3. #3
    nerfedname's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,698
    Is anyone else as amused as I am at the OP trying to blame the opponents clan's roster for the mismatch when, by his own admission, his clan employs:

    Quote Originally Posted by jobob145 View Post
    us
    6 th 11s.
    none have eagles
    2 coming from max 10s, upgrading their existing def only, max wardens
    2 coming from max 10s, upgrading warden only. no new defenses
    1 customized (my new cool word of the week) with th 11 lvl defenses from th9 (9.whatever), max warden
    1 defenseless'ish, me yay, max warden, 30's king/queen

    8 th 10s
    3 are close to max, finishing up walls and few minor buildings
    1 has infernos, but still long ways to go for th 10 defenses
    4 are various .5's, customized, etc..

    10 th 9s
    3 are close to max, finishing up walls and few minor buildings
    5 are various .5's, customized, etc.
    2 are defenseless'ish

    6 th 8s
    mix of whatevers, mostly alts. normal / defenseless / minimax blah blah
    Hey, who knows. Maybe the other clan read the universally accepted "How to avoid engineered matchups" thread that gets passed around here as gospel with tips/tricks such as:
    1.) Keep a tight spread on TH level (the other clan had only 9s and 10s)
    2.) Build balanced bases (TH10s with infernos, TH9s with xbows)

    and yet they still get screwed in the matchmaking. Who ever would have guessed it (other than me, of course, and I stated as much in the 2nd response on said thread). Engineered accounts and clans have become ubiquitous at this point, there is little hope in avoiding them consistently.

    Quote Originally Posted by jobob145 View Post
    how they could ever get a "fair" match as alot of folks around here want is beyond me. the only type of "fair" i see for a whole bunch of maxed bases is... an exact equal of the same maxed bases? how often is that going to happen with a 10/9 mix.
    This is a fallacious argument. That other clan could have easily matched another clan employing balanced bases without their exact TH breakdown and it would have been far more "fair" than the matchup they received. An opponent clan with maybe 1 or 2 TH11 bases, maybe not fully developed (i.e., non maxed warden), but then fewer TH10s than them and maybe weaker heroes on their TH9s; perhaps a TH8 or two at the bottom to make up for, weight wise, the TH11s at the top, etc., etc.

    The TH breakdown doesn't have to match exactly, clan for clan, for a matchup to be mostly fair. But neither is it fair for them to face a clan with 6 TH11s, 4 of whom have max wardens.

    But by all means, please do carry on and continue blaming the clan without a single non-balanced engineered base in their tight TH-spread lineup for poor matches that they have no chance of winning when your own clan has no fewer than 20 engineered accounts in a 30 man war. Methinks thou doth protest too much...
    TH11 - Lvl 166 - AQ45 - BK45 - GW20
    Quote Originally Posted by fette View Post
    Is 'jog' in AppStore or google play? I don't seem to find it.

    Signature by Gutodh


  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    310
    i think you misunderstand..
    theres no protest and blame here

    there is math and data and statements to show that alot of ideas i see floated around here are conjecture about SC's system.

    i think i know why they got this match (and they have had others like it, so have we). i would say it is because of their lineup. they admit it also.

    times have changed, and if you choose not to adapt, you will get left behind.

  5. #5
    Tomville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,406
    Quote Originally Posted by jobob145 View Post
    i think you misunderstand..
    theres no protest and blame here

    there is math and data and statements to show that alot of ideas i see floated around here are conjecture about SC's system.

    i think i know why they got this match (and they have had others like it, so have we). i would say it is because of their lineup. they admit it also.

    times have changed, and if you choose not to adapt, you will get left behind.
    Actually, no. The matchup was a result of your lineup, the way it gamed matchmaking allowing you to bring higher offence disguised in lower offence and match this clan rather than a more appropriate stronger one. If you hadn't been out there (not only you, all engineers) manipulating weights this way they would have matched someone with more appropriate lower offence strength for their lineup - and if the matchmaker worked more fairly you would have matched tougher defences appropriate to your offence strength, rather then that clan. It's clans like yours and not theirs bringing these kinds of matches about. Their "mistake" insofar as they could be remotely thought to have made one, lies in taking to war good strong big bases at th levels most vulnerable to exploitation (9s and 10s). It would be ridiculous if the idea was they ought rethink that or view it as a mistake, as opposed to an unfortunate situation that made them vulnerable to exploitation due to a flaw in the matchmaker and people eager to game that.

    I agree times have changed, roll on Supercell changing them further in the next update in the direction they say they want to go: removing unwarranted advantage from lopsided clans.
    Last edited by Tomville; 6 Days Ago at 01:24 PM.
    GC: #Major Tom
    FB: Tom Thetabbycat

  6. #6
    Forum Superstar OnyxDS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Brexit Island
    Posts
    3,123
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomville View Post
    Actually, no. The matchup was a result of your lineup, the way it gamed matchmaking allowing you to bring higher offence disguised in lower offence and match this clan rather than a more appropriate stronger one. If you hadn't been out there (not only you, all engineers) manipulating weights this way they would have matched someone with more appropriate lower offence strength for their lineup...
    Only to an extent. If a clan wars with a whole load of fully maxed TH9s, what's it supposed to match to? Once upon a long ago (pre March 2016) it would tend to match to other TH9s and bully them war after war. Since the MM now checks the totals and will reject these matches where one clan is a bit stronger in every single spot that won't work. Which leaves 2 choices: either they get lucky and match to another clan with a whole load of max TH9s - unlikely - or it will need to be a mix of TH9s and weak TH10s. And by "weak" TH10s that probably means ones without infernos (I don't suppose OP's enemy would have been much happier if OP's clan also had a load of extra infernos) - ie a somewhat engineered clan.

    So for a clan trying to war with a load of perma-9s I don't see what other choice the MM had. Even if you did the MM manually I think you'd have to pick a semi-engineered opponent. Obviously you could score OP's defenceless and what-not more appropriately than SC do and give a better match than this - but the perma-9s would have to match to something in the style of OP's clan even if a bit more balanced.
    TH9.5 | 1700+ war stars | Trophy record as TH9: 4579 (rank #4141, #67 in UK); as a 9.5: 5205
    XX: 4800+ | FF: 1700+ | AA 100+ | GG/EE/HH: who's counting?
    Holder of the world record for the longest ever "How to fix war matching" suggestion... Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5

  7. #7
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    1,525
    Quote Originally Posted by nerfedname View Post
    Is anyone else as amused as I am at the OP trying to blame the opponents clan's roster for the mismatch when, by his own admission, his clan employs:



    Hey, who knows. Maybe the other clan read the universally accepted "How to avoid engineered matchups" thread that gets passed around here as gospel with tips/tricks such as:
    1.) Keep a tight spread on TH level (the other clan had only 9s and 10s)
    2.) Build balanced bases (TH10s with infernos, TH9s with xbows)

    and yet they still get screwed in the matchmaking. Who ever would have guessed it (other than me, of course, and I stated as much in the 2nd response on said thread). Engineered accounts and clans have become ubiquitous at this point, there is little hope in avoiding them consistently.
    Not sure what your problem is lately, but you've cherry picked items from that thread to support your case rather than taking an entire section. For example, the relevant section actually reads:

    1. Keep a tight spread of th's - But not too tight. If you want to match with a comparable opponent, then you want to have a war roster that is relatively similar to a bunch of other clans. A good rule of thumb is to try to stick to around a 3 th spread on your war roster, though the actual power of the bases matters a lot more than the specific th level of each base. I have personally seen a huge number of fair and even contests when running th7-9, th 8-10, and th9-11 wars, though generally slipping in a new th 11 in an 8-10 roster or a high 8 in a 9-11 roster doesn't cause issues. Certainly there are other typical war roster compositions, as well. Skrags has a good discussion about this topic in post 210 of this thread, here:

    https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...=1#post9632806

    Quote Originally Posted by nerfedname View Post
    This is a fallacious argument. That other clan could have easily matched another clan employing balanced bases without their exact TH breakdown and it would have been far more "fair" than the matchup they received. An opponent clan with maybe 1 or 2 TH11 bases, maybe not fully developed (i.e., non maxed warden), but then fewer TH10s than them and maybe weaker heroes on their TH9s; perhaps a TH8 or two at the bottom to make up for, weight wise, the TH11s at the top, etc., etc.

    The TH breakdown doesn't have to match exactly, clan for clan, for a matchup to be mostly fair. But neither is it fair for them to face a clan with 6 TH11s, 4 of whom have max wardens.

    But by all means, please do carry on and continue blaming the clan without a single non-balanced engineered base in their tight TH-spread lineup for poor matches that they have no chance of winning when your own clan has no fewer than 20 engineered accounts in a 30 man war. Methinks thou doth protest too much...


    As for the rest of your post, I get that you hate engineers. I don't like them much, either. But your response seems a bit out of proportion to the OP.
    Last edited by MossackFonseca; 6 Days Ago at 01:47 PM.

  8. #8
    Tomville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,406
    Quote Originally Posted by OnyxDS View Post
    Only to an extent. If a clan wars with a whole load of fully maxed TH9s, what's it supposed to match to? Once upon a long ago (pre March 2016) it would tend to match to other TH9s and bully them war after war. Since the MM now checks the totals and will reject these matches where one clan is a bit stronger in every single spot that won't work. Which leaves 2 choices: either they get lucky and match to another clan with a whole load of max TH9s - unlikely - or it will need to be a mix of TH9s and weak TH10s. And by "weak" TH10s that probably means ones without infernos (I don't suppose OP's enemy would have been much happier if OP's clan also had a load of extra infernos) - ie a somewhat engineered clan.

    So for a clan trying to war with a load of perma-9s I don't see what other choice the MM had. Even if you did the MM manually I think you'd have to pick a semi-engineered opponent. Obviously you could score OP's defenceless and what-not more appropriately than SC do and give a better match than this - but the perma-9s would have to match to something in the style of OP's clan even if a bit more balanced.
    Take your point, a large number near max probably isn't common as a lineup and the matchmaker needs do something there.

    I'd say for e.g. a lineup with any group of max 9s in it, it ought deliver a result you could average out over a number of wars to call fair, so sometimes giving harder th10 inferno opponents, some true baby 10s (ie not upgraded war offence much if any, just a little defence), sometimes easier mid th9 ones, and many others max 9. The problem to me is just too often it instead returns offence max big hero 9.5s with existing defence upgraded which have become too ubiquitous, bringing th10 offence levels to the table more frequently. If you were doing it manually you'd be limiting the overall number of those considered to match over time, with an eye to their offence rather than their defence in that move.

    Where I'm coming from in this is from the perspective of a top heavy th11 clan of balanced bases doing 15v or 20v wars, and there is a definite correlation between how many big th9 we take to war at the bottom of the lineup (usually 1-3) and how often we lose. (And to how often we match engineers.)
    Last edited by Tomville; 6 Days Ago at 02:07 PM.
    GC: #Major Tom
    FB: Tom Thetabbycat

  9. #9
    Super Member TankSinatra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    944
    I think the guidelines were generally true when posted, and that was in December after a few months of coming to terms with the new update. Seems like something's changed more recently, and fair (ish) matches at larger war sizes have become less likely. Part of the issue is probably the shallowness of the pool, that would certainly explain why larger wars (fewer clans involved) see the worst examples.

    I think the guidelines still work though not perfectly, and they shouldn't be expected to work perfectly. They're just some trends we've noticed, not a coded fix to the matchmaker. For the detractors complaining that there are too many 'rules' involved (Balanced bases! Not too many maxxed! Tight spread! Small wars!) that's true. For many its a big change in war comp, for an incomplete solution.

    It's also all we've got, our own incomplete solutions. So its reasonable to refer anyone complaining about mismatches to that thread, and reasonable to suggest CWL. Because anyone that's been playing a long time can tell you that SC's fixes take a long time, might not work, and might not give us what we want.
    Level 10 Adult War Clan METAMUCIL.
    And some of us are old enough that its not just a funny word...
    Metamucil keeps the red out of our logs. Small wars, great record, low pressure.
    48-2 last 50 wars as of 3/2017, whole record 362-79-8, best streak ended 3/7/17 at 29 wins.

  10. #10
    Millennial Club xXXCHRISXXx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,412
    Quote Originally Posted by MossackFonseca View Post
    1. Keep a tight spread of th's - But not too tight. If you want to match with a comparable opponent, then you want to have a war roster that is relatively similar to a bunch of other clans.
    Not going to get into the specifics of that thread in particular, I honestly thank you for taking the time out to help others. However, my question is this: Why should a balanced/trying to be balanced clan have to jump through holes and loops just to war?

    Imo, it's beyond ridiculous a balanced clan has to stand on one foot while spinning a daisy and praying to the sun gods just for a fair match. Then players like the OP come in and blame the balanced clan for the mismatch.

    Imo, wars are all over the place right now. Mismatches both ways. My only conclusion as to why is because more and more lopsided accounts are being made with even more clans in a demand for them. Goes back to the whole 'adapt or quit' motto. More clans are 'adapting' slowly reducing the pool of balanced clans.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 5 Days Ago, 08:25 PM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: September 1st, 2016, 03:37 PM
  3. [Recruiting Members] Want to join an active task force that spends money to build? Leave the kids at home!
    By Roy39 in forum Task Force Recruitment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 23rd, 2015, 01:51 AM
  4. Starter Th7 Lvl 51 Looking for a perma home
    By Masterex25 in forum I Need A Clan!
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 11th, 2015, 09:03 AM
  5. Kids Account looking for a home
    By SilverSword2 in forum Clan Talk
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 26th, 2013, 07:13 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
  •