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

[OnyxDS]

Strictly making educated guesses here- one would have to suspect that this massive update, this update that is going to be diffferent than any other update we've seen...is going to incorporate some type of league or tournament style regarding the war aspect of Clash.

A new TH level has been ruled out- so really what else out there could be on any grandiose scale?

Making predictions is always difficult, especially about the future. But my prediction would be a new game mode, especially something that requires clan cooperation or similar, rather than this.

I think it would be harder to call a clan war tournament bigger than war itself. Also I think I recall someone posting a quote of one of the mods/youtubers rowing back on the hype just a little and saying that "some players will prefer war still" - as if it's an alternative, not an extension

I also think a clan war tournament by SC would require some drastic conceptual changes to the game. CWL works because all the clans buy/recruit accounts upgraded to the limit of the allowed b/d. Events like the forum cup no-dip worked because the organisers could assemble the clans so they matched (and just leave out all the engineered etc accounts that didn't match well). A tournament for existing clans has serious problems with matching, that will make the current MM look like perfection.

[CasimirEffect]

I also think a clan war tournament by SC would require some drastic conceptual changes to the game.

It would require transparent design choices in line with SC's core design values and public statements and that the game mode provide the players and clans incentive to follow the bread crumbs.

Ideally, such a system would leave clan wars as a casual alternative but reward players who participate in game play which is in line with said design values. This leads to standardization of rosters, greater search pools within the tournament/league structure, and an environment which clearly defines competitive play. The first 2 are necessary and lead to exactly the opposite of what you suggest since roster restrictions would ideally make it impossible for engineered accounts to participate in an exploitable roster slot until these accounts have upgrades which are in line with clearly stated design choices for this game mode. It is quite simple really and requires no magic or radical changes to concepts. In fact, the current algorithm has proven sufficient to match clans who already participate in this style of game play every time clans spin for Pot Luck. Fortunate for SC they have a template which has been very well received by the community to build from.

Is this what we will be provided in the update? Unlikely, but a step in this direction would be promising.

[COCsuggester]

When starting a war search, I think there should be two available options:
a) Attack Twice and Defend Once
or
b) Attack Twice and Defend Twice

Anybody who likes the status quo can choose #1 (Eg: engineered/lopsided clans). Anybody who is tired of strong offense overwhelming weak defense can choose #2 (Eg: non-engineered/balanced clans). Both styles of play would be officially sanctioned and encouraged.

[ThePeskyDingo]

When starting a war search, I think there should be two available options:
a) Attack Twice and Defend Once
or
b) Attack Twice and Defend Twice

Anybody who likes the status quo can choose #1 (Eg: engineered/lopsided clans). Anybody who is tired of strong offense overwhelming weak defense can choose #2 (Eg: non-engineered/balanced clans). Both styles of play would be officially sanctioned and encouraged.

I'm no sure how this would work... If you attack twice how do you only defend once? If it's 10 v 10 then that means 20 attacks but only 10 bases to defend.... You lost me.

And why wouldn't engineers choose whatever variation they think they have the better chance of a lopsided war with? That's why they are engineered in the first place. To get a cheap advantage.

[SuperStorm103]

Only a small % of the player base is 100% maxed at a specific town hall. If there is a league ranking systems all of these elite rosters will be pushed into higher leagues and face each other. There will be plenty of non maxed rosters in the lower leagues to match for fierce competition. Probably bigger pools in the lower leagues compared to the top leagues. And skill levels will be on par which is a far closer match then what you can currently get. You could match a cwl clan currently.

At least in the system, the worst attackers in the world would be matched against the 2nd worst attackers in the world. At some point when player skills drop to a certain level, it no longer matters if their base is maxed or not. So in the lower leagues it shouldn't matter even if you not maxed roster meets a maxed roster (which would be rare).

[COCsuggester]

I'm no sure how this would work... If you attack twice how do you only defend once? If it's 10 v 10 then that means 20 attacks but only 10 bases to defend.... You lost me.

When someone starts a clan war, they could choose choose from 2 different types of war:

a) "Attack twice and defend once" war. This of course is how clan wars currently behave, where each player can gain 6 stars attacking but only give up 3 stars defending. For example in a 20x20 war, the maximum number of stars is 60. Because of the unbalanced point system, players at the top are more important than players at the bottom, wars are usually decided at the top, and engineered clans thrive.

or

b) "Attack twice and defend twice" war. Each player could gain 6 stars attacking and could lose 6 stars defending. For example in a 20x20 war, the maximum number of stars would be 120. Using this point system, every attack (and thus every defense) would matter. Players at the bottom would gain importance, and I believe balanced bases/clans would thrive. Skillful attacking against your mirror would be rewarded.

This would allow everyone to play the game however they want. Engineered clans would probably continue to start "attack twice and defend once" wars, and balanced clans would probably start "attack twice and defend twice" wars.

For an "Attack twice and defend twice" war, on the "Defenses" tab you would see 2 defenses per base (similar to how the "Attacks" tab currently shows 2 attacks per player). Each base would show "Defense 1" and "Defense 2", with up to 3 stars per defense.

The same war base would be used for both "Defense 1" and "Defense 2".

Cleanup attacks would still be possible. Getting 0 stars (or even 1 star) would be very bad, because doing a cleanup attack would mean you're giving up 3 stars somewhere else.

[TankSinatra]

[QUOTE=COCsuggester;10054661][FONT=arial]When someone starts a clan war, they could choose choose from 2 different types of war:

QUOTE]

If one of the major problems with the matchmaker is the small size of the pool, as many think it is, splitting the pool further won't help.

[COCsuggester]

[QUOTE=If one of the major problems with the matchmaker is the small size of the pool, as many think it is, splitting the pool further won't help.[/QUOTE]

I am guessing (hoping) that a positive change of this magnitude would reinvigorate clan wars and therefore more clans would start warring.

[Tomville]

I am guessing (hoping) that a positive change of this magnitude would reinvigorate clan wars and therefore more clans would start warring.

Doubtful, and even then you'd need to double the number of clans at least to arrive at the same size pools as we have now. I don't believe the solution lays where you suggest in setting up a dual system. If they were to change it (and I don't think they should personally) then it would better to change it for all with no second option. so, for example, change it so everyone has just one attack and one defence. But that idea has problems, of course.

[JFSoul]

Doubtful, and even then you'd need to double the number of clans at least to arrive at the same size pools as we have now. I don't believe the solution lays where you suggest in setting up a dual system. If they were to change it (and I don't think they should personally) then it would better to change it for all with no second option. so, for example, change it so everyone has just one attack and one defence. But that idea has problems, of course.

Agree, or go with a suggestion by Tank in another thread (I think) in which you essentially abolish the current war weight system and just go with your bases "as is," getting matched by the number of bases you bring and not total weight. Would lend itself to a league system and be somewhat similar to what we have in multiplayer mode. There would be some limits, like we have in multiplayer mode, in that a clan of all TH11/10ss would most likely not match with a clan that wars with all TH9s/8s, unless that clan of TH9s/8s starts moving up in leagues, which would increase the chances of encountering higher TH levels.

[Apologies Tank if I'm misrepresenting your idea all together--regardless, I kind of liked it].

Would abolish engineering and be something everyone can easily understand, and would also be a game changer imo.