The engineer and the "flop"

[ryryshouse]

I If the question is "should SC preserve the engineering advantage in the matchmaker" then I think the answer is no (though less clearly and the debate pointless since there's nothing we can do about it).

Good post Tank.

I don't see how engineering ( with respect to clan wars, gemming, etc ) fits their design principles and revenue.

It is trivial to fix. I am sure of that. Match data from a few example matches should provide enough insight into what to adjust.

The real question is what is holding them back? Or, what aspects of engineering align to the design principles?

The only thing I can see is that, since it does no adversely impact the game, it is considered not an issue.

By impact the game, I mean things in the game that you can spend gems on. Gems do not buy war wins often. ( such as TH sniping which was free in game money, and allowed players to easily farm and bot farm without leveraging gems )

[TankSinatra]

This statement... Just a week or so ago, Tank, posted something a bit similar to this. It made perfect sense. Supercell wants you to blindly upgrade, aka rush, so you feel as if you're backed into a corner and have to gem your way out.

Oh, you rushed your townhall? Here take one of these here inferno packs. It'll give you the needed loot but also one of the heaviest towers in game.

First post on this page:
https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...-MM?p=10678256

I also point to the lack of fair fights anywhere in the SC universe (outside of one gem-gated mode within CR) to anybody wondering why MM isn't fair. I doubt our type of fairness is even a goal for SC.

[Playforwar]

Thanks for proving the point for him. Since everyone has access to the same tools.

Negative. His point was two competitors using the same tools. Engineers have more advanced tools. Do maxers have access to more advanced tools? Of course we do, but by that logic, we should all be 11s. Heck, why even have ths? We can just have a mad dash to the finish.

There is one certainty in this mm discussion, engineers need maxers to prey on. Some of the best pro engineered posters will probably admit to such. They will admit that they have done so to gain advantage against maxers. That is why I think most engineers want no or limited changes to mm. But I ask, what will you do when the maxers are gone? If only engineers are left, then everyone needs to up there already engineered game. Where does it end and what is left? I say all that will be remaining is a shell of the game that I once really enjoyed.

Maxers have no need for engineers. In fact, we want no part of you. We admit that you are smart and you can crush our base from above. We truly don't care what you do, as long as it doesn't effect us. We just want to fight our own th level. I don't think that is too much to ask.

Just a side note. I've lurked on these forums for years and have really learned a lot from many excellent posts (both pro and anti engineered folks). I only recently started posting when our clan began regularly matching engineered. Thanks to those who have provided a wealth of information in this game.

[TankSinatra]

Negative. His point was two competitors using the same tools. Engineers have more advanced tool. Do maxers have access to more advanced tools? Of course we do, but by that logic, we should all be 11s. Heck, why even have ths? We can just have a mad dash to the finish.

They have precisely the same tools, though over a long time frame. The maxer can't retool on prep day when they see engineered opponents, any more than Fosbury's competitors could imitate him on competition day.
I think the analogy holds. I think those complaining about the state of the game where it takes months to retool to the meta (which they aren't interesting in doing anyway) have a valid gripe too, which should be directed at SC.

[TankSinatra]

By impact the game, I mean things in the game that you can spend gems on. Gems do not buy war wins often. ( such as TH sniping which was free in game money, and allowed players to easily farm and bot farm without leveraging gems )

Yeah I know you've brought up before that the trophy game is where the gemming gets nuts. I see people debating whether there's more gemming from maxers or engineers, the answer's probably that they're both small amounts from SC's perspective.

[Sservis]

I also point to the lack of fair fights anywhere in the SC universe (outside of one gem-gated mode within CR) to anybody wondering why MM isn't fair. I doubt our type of fairness is even a goal for SC.

I think SC's goal with war matchmaking is close to the general concept of "fair". They'd like us to (a) get as much enjoyment out of the game as possible and (b) monetize that effectively into spending gems to facilitate the enjoyment.

In regards to clan wars, I think there's more incentive to spend inside the war if the war is close.* Note that this is not "equally developed opponent", it may include a skill offset component. Although if people find equal opponents more interesting than other sorts of close wars, then SC would prefer to give us those sort of wars over unequal, but close wars.

There may be factors outside the war that influence what sort of wars yield the most revenue, but these are my thoughts about why SC does want close wars more than lopsided ones.


* Specifically gemming donations, armies, or waking sleeping heros that were "in case needed".

[ryryshouse]

Yeah I know you've brought up before that the trophy game is where the gemming gets nuts. I see people debating whether there's more gemming from maxers or engineers, the answer's probably that they're both small amounts from SC's perspective.

Trophy land is maxers. They all max as soon as the update hits via gems.

That overlays to my earlier point about the design principles.

When an update occurs, people do 1 of 4 things.

1. gem it all -> favorable to SC
2. farm it all, maybe spend gem on boost or some aspects -> also favorable to SC. maybe some boosting, maybe gem some. most of the player base in here
3. farm/gem only the offense -> engineers do this , as they may have max off -> does very little for SC as only offense is being worked.
4. nothing, as these players are not maxed yet. also a large player base. does nothing for SC.

And your points about "fair competition" are all spot on also. Not really any examples of that being a priority for SC across their product offerings.

The games are set up to promote microspend toward end game.

Maxing is microspend toward end game.
Engineering is microspend toward end game, but only on 1 aspect ( offense )

likely why there is no issue here.

[ryryshouse]

I think SC's goal with war matchmaking is close to the general concept of "fair". They'd like us to (a) get as much enjoyment out of the game as possible and (b) monetize that effectively into spending gems to facilitate the enjoyment.

In regards to clan wars, I think there's more incentive to spend inside the war if the war is close.* Note that this is not "equally developed opponent", it may include a skill offset component. Although if people find equal opponents more interesting than other sorts of close wars, then SC would prefer to give us those sort of wars over unequal, but close wars.

There may be factors outside the war that influence what sort of wars yield the most revenue, but these are my thoughts about why SC does want close wars more than lopsided ones.


* Specifically gemming donations, armies, or waking sleeping heros that were "in case needed".

Engineers arent gemming troops.

[Sservis]

Engineers arent gemming troops.

I never said they were. I said SC's incentive with wars is to increase gem spend. Inside wars, I think that happens more often when wars are close in a 50/50 way.

[ryryshouse]

I never said they were. I said SC's incentive with wars is to increase gem spend. Inside wars, I think that happens more often when wars are close in a 50/50 way.

Right, those are non engineer wars in which the battle is close.

Which is why I have a hard time reconciling how engineering fits into their principles.

If it had not been for the statement regarding TH Sniping, it would be hard to argue against engineering in any way. One issue SC has, is when you make a statement like they did, folks line up the "well ok, what about this,that and the other thing" questions regarding other aspects of the game.