Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: The war match maker is fine, its the ways wars are decided that could be changed

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    50

    The war match maker is fine, its the ways wars are decided that could be changed

    Undoubtedly this game has evolved since wars were introduced and has a massive following of war enthusiast. The way wars are decided and allocation of stars for attacks is in my opinion a bit 'simple' for such a successful strategic war game.

    if this was changed and i will outline an example of how it could be achived below, it would create a playing field which disadvantages no one, but ultimately leads to the best team winning due to superior attack skills and organisation in the vast majoirty of wars.

    what i would propose is that each base taken into war is given a 'degree of difficulty' (DOD) score to completely destroy. This would be based on its defensive capabilities alone. When clans select their roster to start a war, they could then be matched with clans of roughly the same aggregate DOD and where possible this should be from top to bottom, much the same as it is now.

    so if we say a max defence/max heroes TH9 has a degree of difficulty of 90 points we can use that as a starting score for that base. If some defences are not max or walls, heroes etc, the score drops to say 85.25 as an example. A max TH8 could be worth 80 points and so on.

    The next factor to then decide the actual score achieved for a successful attack depends on what the attacker brings to the attack. If a player brings 275 max troops space including clan castle reinforcements and 3 max heroes and 13 spell spaces, he would have a relatively low multiplier applied to determine the max score he could achieve for a perfect attack against the TH9 in the above example. Each troop for each level would have a base weight and these are all added up when the attacker decides what he is taking to the attack. Therefore an account owner gains no advantage by upgrading just one type of army for war, because they are judged on what they bring, not what they don't

    to make things interesting, a TH11 could decide they want to improve their maximum potential score by bringing less troops, or spells or heroes into battle. For example, only take 225 troops plus CC to increase the multiplier a bit. An interface similar to the one currently used could indicate what the max score achievable is based on the proposed troop, spell and hero composition currently selected. If the attacker likes it, he proceeds to the attack, if not, he could change things around a bit, maybe take less troops (if feeling confident) or different troops which have a lower weight for war. In a sense every single attack performed is engineered to optimise what you believe can be achived with the lowest possible weight army composition.

    only the best score against each base would count towards the overall war total score.

    If players with low level troops attacks higher DOD bases (this would normally be TH's higher than themselves) they would have increased multipliers. Therefore the potential rewards for successful attacks would be attractive. This would also be a good strategy if you have spare attacks at the end of war, or are trying to chase down an opponents score.

    other considerations, such as not getting the Town Hall, would mean scores could be halved or something like that, thereby placing similar emphasis on destrying the TH as current scoring system.

    if an attack results in damage achieved of say 80%, then the score achieved for that attack would be 80% of the maximum, or 40% if the TH was not destroyed.

    the chances of wars being tied would be remote. The advantage of lopsided bases would be gone, because both teams take similar overall DOD bases into war in the first place. If new defences are dropped during prep day, the value is added, because the score or DOD for each base is calculated immediately at the point war starts. Players could go to war with a hero upgrading, because this would increase their multiplier for attacks, because they are below max attack strength.

    i also think this would reduce search times for wars, because it will be easier to match teams with similar defence capabilities, as the need to factor in offence in the search is negated by the scoring system.

    sorry for rambling on, but i think wars could be so much more interesting and sophisticated and something like this would take it to a whole new level and would at the same time create a more level playing field for everyone, even the casual players.

    the current system for looting outside of war and achieving trophies is not affected by this in anyway and could stay exactly as it is.
    Leader of Heroes Legion - Clan Level12 / Clan Tag #2PGRLJ89 / 328 wins, 81 losses

    TH11, GG 1.75 bil, EE 1.88 bil, HH 13 mil. Lvl 45 AQ / lvl 45 BK/ lvl 20 GW

  2. #2
    Tomville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    5,203
    It's an interesting idea but I'm not sure it would work in the way you think in the case of very engineered bases. Will your bottom of the lineup th9 need to heroless barch that enemy th11 that has only 1 cannon and teslas just to make it worthwhile as a scoring attack? Or is there some bottom DOD limit to impose just because it's an 11, irrespective of any defences had or missing?
    Last edited by Tomville; April 21st, 2017 at 12:57 AM.
    Chapter One #22V00CGY Level 13 International clan
    We welcome strong TH10 and TH11 adult players with big heros for fun warring, maxing bases and some pushing. Active builder base, and must know where the donate button is!

  3. #3
    Centennial Club Hawker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Eastern US
    Posts
    137
    What about heroes? Would someone attacking with high level heroes achieve a lower score because their offensive strength is higher? I would be decidedly against that idea, as would anyone else who has spent countless hours grinding their heroes.

    I also fail to see how this reduces the incentive to engineer bases. The current system highly over-weighs infernos and eagle artillery (among other things), compared to their actual value added. One can still keep their own degree of difficulty (DOD) down by not dropping those defenses and thus attract a lower DOD.
    IGN: Hawker / Leader of Army of Dragons (#2L88RQQR) / Casual but competitive war clan - apply in game or message Hawker_CoC on Kik messenger.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomville View Post
    It's an interesting idea but I'm not sure it would work in the way you think in the case of very engineered bases. Will your bottom of the lineup th9 need to heroless barch that enemy th11 that has only 1 cannon and teslas just to make it worthwhile as a scoring attack? Or is there some bottom DOD limit to impose just because it's an 11, irrespective of any defences had or missing?
    Yes Tom a player may decide to try an attack of this type to maximise their score. The match up from a defensive perspective would need to be similar both sides, so there are roughly equal DOD bases on each side lane for lane, much the same as the current system.

    this is an outline idea that would require a lot of testing with troop and defence weights etc, but would be relatively easy to implement.

    And yes, a player with high/max heroes would score less than a player with lower heroes for achieving the same result against the same base. I have close to max heroes 45/43/20 and believe this is fair. To compensate, i suggested less or weaker troops could be taken into the attack, if its believed by the player he can totally destroy with a lesser force.

    Im not saying this would stop engineering. Lets be honest, whatever is done with match maker, engineering is here to stay and players will adapt to a system which maximises their potential. However, this type of scoring system would make it more difficult to achieve supremacy by virtue of having more lopsided bases with high level troops and wardens etc and would more often lead to outcomes which are decided by attacking skill and good organisation within the team.
    Leader of Heroes Legion - Clan Level12 / Clan Tag #2PGRLJ89 / 328 wins, 81 losses

    TH11, GG 1.75 bil, EE 1.88 bil, HH 13 mil. Lvl 45 AQ / lvl 45 BK/ lvl 20 GW

Similar Threads

  1. Match maker
    By LordChristian in forum Card Balance Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 24th, 2016, 01:48 AM
  2. How are trophy match ups decided?
    By Xax23 in forum General
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: November 5th, 2015, 06:08 PM
  3. No more close wars, broken match maker?
    By Pachlama in forum General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: August 12th, 2015, 06:53 AM
  4. Does clash need a match maker?
    By CptMorgan in forum Ideas & Feature Requests
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 20th, 2015, 05:32 AM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: April 15th, 2014, 03:05 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
  •