Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 43

Thread: Hypothesis - SC Wants Variation in War Fairness

  1. #11
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    1,247
    Quote Originally Posted by TankSinatra View Post
    ETA but I'm falling into the trap I try to warn about often - max defenseless is the boogyman when we start talking about engineering, maybe everyone else sees them more often than I do, but I just don't see the epidemic. Much more common is heavy .5s, or just going nuts on offense beyond .5. This trend might not bother SC, perhaps they think they're encouraging perma-maxers to continue upgrading (even if not in balance). Basically, keeping them more engaged.
    I see no difference between max TH11 offense and no defense, TH7 defense, TH8 defense, TH9 defense. Basically offense or defense 2 levels out of whack, either way, is a problem for the MM. why? The chances of finding a similar base in a similar roster are now low.

    ( Noone complains about beating up on that TH10 with ferns, grapes, and TH9 offense though. )

    The only solution I see to the problem is ; canned roster leagues, or a MM that rejects, or doesnt match your roster. You assume they have data about who spins war, i have not figured out why there is no evidence that anyone looked at it, did remedial statistical analysis, then corrected or addressed the problems, at which time you could communicate to the player base, and everyone becomes happy. ( or, they did, and dont see a problem. very likely. game lifecycle, revenue analysis, etc. )

    Fixing it would extend the financial viability, in theory. So either bad MM hasnt impacted revenue, or they determined revenue is good, or revenue moved to clash royale..

  2. #12
    Skrags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    221B Baker Street
    Posts
    4,908
    Interesting discussion.

    I think the basic business model for both Clash games is similar. Royale has chests that take a few hours to 24 hours(!?) before you can open them to get more cards.
    You can easily imagine being in a coffee shop on a lunchtime and looking around you to see people playing Clash of Clans, Royale, Candy Crush for a few minutes (3?) for that quick fix.
    This is the key volume market to try and consume the masses, something I keep on banging on about regarding Clash of Clans.

    Both Royale (win trading) and CoC (cheap shielding through to account sharing) have leaderboard issues.

    Legendary cards, when they first came out, weren't available to the 'Free to play' players either generally.

    Here's a vid to explain it better (Chief Pat Jan 2016) :-
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_vHdhSgGmw

    In both games, there will always be drives to bring in revenue, but the basic concept of the business model, and the longevity of the game remains constant.
    If you alienate the casual player, and/or not provide a platform for new players to progress and enjoy the game, then you kill the golden goose.

    What is constant, between the two games, is the leaderboard (highest trophies). With one game you have the history of cheap shielding and account sharing, while on the other you have win trading!

    This is why (only my personal opinion) TH11, and in the future TH12 is largely irrelevant for the future of the game.

    It's all about encouraging new players, and casuals to the TH9 level, and hopefully beyond, if they are hooked.... imo
    Clan Name : SOUTH WEST 45, Clan Tag : #90LP2PL. Highest Win Streak 12!
    Clan Details : Established 2012! Adult, English speaking International Level 10 War Clan (twice a week). Recruitment Thread : https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...H8-s-to-TH11-s My spec: early TH11, 40/40/2

  3. #13
    JFSoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    6,665
    Quote Originally Posted by Skrags View Post
    Interesting discussion.

    I think the basic business model for both Clash games is similar. Royale has chests that take a few hours to 24 hours(!?) before you can open them to get more cards.
    You can easily imagine being in a coffee shop on a lunchtime and looking around you to see people playing Clash of Clans, Royale, Candy Crush for a few minutes (3?) for that quick fix.
    This is the key volume market to try and consume the masses, something I keep on banging on about regarding Clash of Clans.

    Both Royale (win trading) and CoC (cheap shielding through to account sharing) have leaderboard issues.

    Legendary cards, when they first came out, weren't available to the 'Free to play' players either generally.

    Here's a vid to explain it better (Chief Pat Jan 2016) :-
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_vHdhSgGmw

    In both games, there will always be drives to bring in revenue, but the basic concept of the business model, and the longevity of the game remains constant.
    If you alienate the casual player, and/or not provide a platform for new players to progress and enjoy the game, then you kill the golden goose.

    What is constant, between the two games, is the leaderboard (highest trophies). With one game you have the history of cheap shielding and account sharing, while on the other you have win trading!

    This is why (only my personal opinion) TH11, and in the future TH12 is largely irrelevant for the future of the game.

    It's all about encouraging new players, and casuals to the TH9 level, and hopefully beyond, if they are hooked.... imo
    Brilliant insight, and I agree. Well stated.
    Start Dec '12 | Hi Lg/Lv: Legend / 184
    Accounts:
    TH11Hi(745 Stars)|TH9Max(1385)|TH9Max(1385)|TH11Lo(1030)|TH10Max (770)|TH10Lo(520)|2TH9Hi (300+)
    "The two most powerful warriors are patience and time." Leo Tolstoy





  4. #14
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Posts
    1,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Skrags View Post
    This is why (only my personal opinion) TH11, and in the future TH12 is largely irrelevant for the future of the game.

    It's all about encouraging new players, and casuals to the TH9 level, and hopefully beyond, if they are hooked.... imo
    I dont know about Royale, but in clash the cost/time to start is prohibitive. If they fix that, many of us will start 4th/5th/10th accounts to quickly have higher level war play on more accounts. I am surprised we havent seen "catch up" events. like walls lvl 8 and under are discounted for a week.month.

  5. #15
    JFSoul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    6,665
    Quote Originally Posted by ryryshouse View Post
    I dont know about Royale, but in clash the cost/time to start is prohibitive. If they fix that, many of us will start 4th/5th/10th accounts to quickly have higher level war play on more accounts. I am surprised we havent seen "catch up" events. like walls lvl 8 and under are discounted for a week.month.
    Very good observation and idea.
    Start Dec '12 | Hi Lg/Lv: Legend / 184
    Accounts:
    TH11Hi(745 Stars)|TH9Max(1385)|TH9Max(1385)|TH11Lo(1030)|TH10Max (770)|TH10Lo(520)|2TH9Hi (300+)
    "The two most powerful warriors are patience and time." Leo Tolstoy





  6. #16
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    824
    Quote Originally Posted by TankSinatra View Post
    This is not intended as a "flame SC" thread, nor advocacy of anything in particular. It's just an idea I've been kicking around lately, as a possibility, have a foil hat ready.

    I was thinking about how Clash Royale seems to operate. And correct me if I'm wrong here, didn't like the game much so I deleted it, but there was no direct attempt to match based on deck strength for the regular game. You float up or down in trophies based on wins/losses alone, which makes you rise to a level where you often lose. And often, these losses are to someone who just has a better deck, or paid for that OP card that hasn't dropped for you yet.
    The wins are fun, the losses are MOTIVATING. Its the losses (against a better deck) that pressure you to gem, pressure you farm harder, basically get you more engaged.
    The random unfairness could also push players into the tournaments, some of which use different rules that enforce deck parity, and of course cost gems.
    The strategy failed for me, I felt the pressure to gem too strongly, deleted it when it started feeling like a "pay to win" game. But clearly its a successful game.

    Does SC apply the same thinking to clan wars? Thinking about how the player base at large differs from us in the forum here, SC might want substantial variations in clan war fairness. Sometimes you're the hammer, sometimes you're the nail. A group of kids, casuals that bounce between clans recruiting in global, friends and family clans that are tolerant of missed attacks? They need to see a win here and there to keep them engaged, hand them the hammer (beneficial match).
    The better clan will occasionally need to be the nail to motivate them to keep grinding heroes and teching up the TH. When you lose due to an inferno/eagle mismatch, that's pressure to drop them for yourself. This probably seems wrong to most in the war forum, permamax and engineers are overrepresented here, but its probably generally true for clash at large.

    Curious if this sounds ridiculous to others. I can't say I'm certain its true, but can't dismiss the possibility either.
    This was the same conclusion I came to yesterday when I started my other thread. I'm thinking this is the case, because what would be the incentive to upgrade anything if all matches had even parity?

    Quote Originally Posted by ryryshouse View Post
    I dont know about Royale, but in clash the cost/time to start is prohibitive. If they fix that, many of us will start 4th/5th/10th accounts to quickly have higher level war play on more accounts. I am surprised we havent seen "catch up" events. like walls lvl 8 and under are discounted for a week.month.
    I've agreed with this and have been saying as much for quite some time. I look at it more as wanting fresh blood in the game, not so much as creating more than my 3 accounts, because I already get into enough trouble playing.
    Last edited by Shadrach777; April 19th, 2017 at 06:38 PM.

  7. #17
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Parking lot of Grateful Dead show
    Posts
    1,120
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadrach777 View Post
    This was the same conclusion I came to yesterday when I started my other thread. I'm thinking this is the case, because what would be the incentive to upgrade anything if all matches had even parity?



    I've agreed with this and have been saying as much for quite some time. I look at it more as wanting fresh blood in the game, not so much as creating more than my 3 accounts, because I already get into enough trouble playing.

    The cynical side of me says you are giving SC way too much credit. The alternative is they didn't realize the effect their mm changes had in previous updates and now have no clue as to how to fix, tweak, or address the mess they created.

  8. #18
    nerfedname's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    5,026
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripple1972 View Post
    The cynical side of me says you are giving SC way too much credit. The alternative is they didn't realize the effect their mm changes had in previous updates and now have no clue as to how to fix, tweak, or address the mess they created.
    ^this in spades, in my opinion.
    TH11 - Lvl 191 - AQ45 - BK45 - GW20
    Quote Originally Posted by fette View Post
    Is 'jog' in AppStore or google play? I don't seem to find it.
    Click HERE to find out more about "Nerfedname's 'weight tax'" for war MM

    Signature by Gutodh


  9. #19
    Forum Elder
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    2,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripple1972 View Post
    The cynical side of me says you are giving SC way too much credit. The alternative is they didn't realize the effect their mm changes had in previous updates and now have no clue as to how to fix, tweak, or address the mess they created.
    This. I think they may have just wanted a new mm algorithm that would give everyone faster matches. They may have thought far enough ahead to encourage ppl to move up by .5 and then slam the door shut so they could get more 10s & 11s to push. I don't think there are enough of them / they aren't connected to the war scene (I personally don't think the developers have ever warred in a war clan) .. To ever have foreseen the engineering boom. I don't think they can even face that war is more than a sideline to pushing.
    I think the engineering caught them off guard (it shouldn't have if they read their own Forums. It was all predicted) and then they like the gemming involved & could not make a decision. They acted too late & now risk more quitting over both sides of the issue, thus the "slow change" approach.
    Keeping the team very small doesn't seem real smart to me.

  10. #20
    Forum Contender
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    4,983
    Thats a really interesting point. Their are a number of ways to encourage gemming/upgrading. Lets take heroes, you could weigh them regressivly, or you could deliberately write code that the higher the hero level, the less chance of getting a mismatch against you in terms of heroes, or you could simply use a large allowance going both ways. If there is a large random allowance, to protect yourself the play would be to uppgrade heroes as fast as possible as high as possible, to be on the advantage of the randomness more often than against.
    Last edited by Vikingchief; April 19th, 2017 at 08:52 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. MM Hypothesis
    By Shadrach777 in forum Clan Wars
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: December 8th, 2016, 06:48 PM
  2. My hypothesis of the bomb tower
    By SuperCraftHeroes in forum General
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: October 10th, 2016, 10:18 AM
  3. A hypothesis on Zooka Behavior
    By vonline in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 9th, 2016, 11:17 PM
  4. Update Hypothesis
    By Jrut5422 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 30th, 2015, 08:36 AM
  5. Hypothesis: 1 Gem Barracks
    By DJTTop in forum General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: December 5th, 2013, 11:11 AM

Posting Permissions

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