The Builder Base isn’t fair; mismatches; BH1 vs BH8; etc....

[Noctaire]

Solid post, as always Noc. I'd like to, in agreement with a couple of other in the thread, see this as sticky on the subforum. The post eloquently describes why people are encountering what they are seeing and why it happens. Would be great to pull people out of their victim-role style of thinking and instead look past themselves.

I’d like to see a sticky and see mods move all the threads into it as they come through. Especially from other forums. I still think most of the threads are trolls, but for the few that are legit....

[Yachi]

All I've read so far is that matching BHx to BHx is not possible, and to expect that is flawed thinking. Can OP or anyone explain why? I'm currently a BTH5 at 2K trophy range, and my matches are mostly BTH6. The MM system ensures as such I get at least 3 matches that are unwinnable before I get a match on equal ground. This is why so many players are frustrated with the MM system. I just want to understand the logic behind this.

[Noctaire]

All I've read so far is that matching BHx to BHx is not possible, and to expect that is flawed thinking. Can OP or anyone explain why? I'm currently a BTH5 at 2K trophy range, and my matches are mostly BTH6. The MM system ensures as such I get at least 3 matches that are unwinnable before I get a match on equal ground. This is why so many players are frustrated with the MM system. I just want to understand the logic behind this.

You need too read the first post in its entirety. It is a question of what is possible, but how the game is designed. It is a player versus player game, so it is based on offensive and defensive ranking. The system is self regulating, allowing stronger players to meet at both the top and bottom of ranking groups. Matches are not unwinnable simply because someone is at a higher BH level. Every so often, you’ll get a match where you’re an underdog and your skills are not enough to get the win; that just means you’re at the top of your level and either ready to move on to the next level or you pushed beyond your skills and need to drop back (which you will when you lose the trophies).

[Yachi]

You need too read the first post in its entirety. It is a question of what is possible, but how the game is designed. It is a player versus player game, so it is based on offensive and defensive ranking. The system is self regulating, allowing stronger players to meet at both the top and bottom of ranking groups. Matches are not unwinnable simply because someone is at a higher BH level. Every so often, you’ll get a match where you’re an underdog and your skills are not enough to get the win; that just means you’re at the top of your level and either ready to move on to the next level or you pushed beyond your skills and need to drop back (which you will when you lose the trophies).

I'm sorry, I still don't get it. All you are saying is, "That's how the system works, live with it", but I don't understand the rationale behind why this is deemed as the "way it should work". I mean no offence, just wanna learn. If I'm matched with the same level BTH, it is my skills, both in attack and base design, against his. Fair and square. If I'm matched with someone one or two levels higher, I need to overcome more obstacles, while he may have an added advantage in terms of troop lvls, war machine lvls, etc. I can't choose my opponents, the system does that for me. You can even say I'm forced to lose, or some might call it tilt. How would this system not generate frustration from the players? It is just like Clash Royale.

[Rooke]

I'm sorry, I still don't get it. All you are saying is, "That's how the system works, live with it", but I don't understand the rationale behind why this is deemed as the "way it should work". I mean no offence, just wanna learn. If I'm matched with the same level BTH, it is my skills, both in attack and base design, against his. Fair and square. If I'm matched with someone one or two levels higher, I need to overcome more obstacles, while he may have an added advantage in terms of troop lvls, war machine lvls, etc. I can't choose my opponents, the system does that for me. You can even say I'm forced to lose, or some might call it tilt. How would this system not generate frustration from the players? It is just like Clash Royale.

where would you draw the line? if someone had built a bh7 but no upgrades? is it fair that a new bh7 plays against maxed ones? the problem with anything other than trophies (which shows you and he are both winning about 50% of your matches) is you have to start making arbitrary decisions about what is fair, and what isnt, and then we get into - well why dont they weight certain defences then and match on them, offence too...just turns into an mm nightmare.
what happens now wont always feel fair - coz at times you will be outgunned - but in reality somehow you ARE winning half your matches and so are they, so in that sense its kinda fair ?
(wont make the losses feel better)

[vlix]

I'm sorry, I still don't get it. All you are saying is, "That's how the system works, live with it", but I don't understand the rationale behind why this is deemed as the "way it should work". I mean no offence, just wanna learn. If I'm matched with the same level BTH, it is my skills, both in attack and base design, against his. Fair and square. If I'm matched with someone one or two levels higher, I need to overcome more obstacles, while he may have an added advantage in terms of troop lvls, war machine lvls, etc. I can't choose my opponents, the system does that for me. You can even say I'm forced to lose, or some might call it tilt. How would this system not generate frustration from the players? It is just like Clash Royale.

Try seeing the cups system as a whole.

It's a single cups system that contains ALL BH levels.
Because it contains ALL BH levels, cross level matches need to happen to naturally bracket each BH levels.

Now, if we don't want this cross level matches, there are 2 options:
1. Create artificial limit to each BH levels, e.g. BH5 can only reach 3000 cups, no more.
2. Create leaderboards for each BH levels, so each BH levels can reach as high as possible, e.g. BH4 in 6000 cups.

IMHO, both of this system is not really ideal.
The first one limit your ability to push further, even though your skills are good, you are limited by the artificial limit.
The second one devalue cups. There'll be BH1,2,3,4,5,6, and 7 at 6000 cups. And each time we mention cups level, we need to also mention what BH level we're at. Too many leaderboards will also fragment the player base further.

Maybe you have another idea for the cups system?

[Astaguna]

*BB 4 vs BB 5 or 6 or 7... BB 5 vs BB 6 or 7...
off course it's unfair. Then they just tell you to back off, go to your point range!!

*Night witch againts all unit. You lost!! 100% lost!!
Then they tell you, go to your star laboratory and finish your research!!

Just build your base until max then attack with night witch! Trust me it's work!
What the hell!!
So where is the fun? Where is the art of war?

The fact: one by one coc's fans go to other game, supercell need to update the game play, if they want to survive. But in the other side, coc didn't contribute much money for them. Thats why they try hard to drain money from us.

Question: do you love coc more than your money?

If you say yes, just buy alot of gems. Let the game survive.

If you say no, go find another games. (This is my choice)

[Noctaire]

I'm sorry, I still don't get it. All you are saying is, "That's how the system works, live with it", but I don't understand the rationale behind why this is deemed as the "way it should work". I mean no offence, just wanna learn. If I'm matched with the same level BTH, it is my skills, both in attack and base design, against his. Fair and square. If I'm matched with someone one or two levels higher, I need to overcome more obstacles, while he may have an added advantage in terms of troop lvls, war machine lvls, etc. I can't choose my opponents, the system does that for me. You can even say I'm forced to lose, or some might call it tilt. How would this system not generate frustration from the players? It is just like Clash Royale.

Ok...I don’t get it. What do you want to learn?

I’ve explained the system, as have others. We’ve explained the alternatives and why they would be problematic. We’ve explained that this is the way PvP games are typically set up and you allude to CR as well (which is another PvP game). You’re making an assumption that equality in competition can be only at the same BH level; that’s simply not true. Some players are stronger at offense while others may be stronger at defense. A really good BH5 attacker can easily overpower the typical BH6 defense; lots of us do it all the time. It’s like the experienced fighter who gets jumped by 6 people and says it isn’t a fair fight because they didn’t bring enough people.

I call the system self regulating because it is just that. Someone at an early level of the game should not be able to advance to high levels within the trophy rankings. That just makes sense in a player versus player game (really...in any ranked game). You can regulate this one of two ways - either by setting arbitrary limits within the ranking system, or by allowing players to continue to rise through the ranks until they reach a point they can no longer be competitive without increasing the level of their game’s capabilities (in this case, upgrading the BH, new defenses/troops, etc).

In all honesty, a trophy system with arbitrary limits is very frustrating for players. It is difficult to set the limits in such a way as will reflect the dynamic nature of the game and players inevitably complain about the lack of competition, being matched to more advanced players, and a lack of matches (clouds). However, in the self regulating system, these are not concerns because players are simply matched based on their overall skills and naturally progress upwards as their capabilities improve (or downwards if they do not). You still get the occasional mismatch, such as when an already advanced player begins a new game or someone gems and must climb the trophy rankings to sit among their peers, but these are the exception rather than the norm.

You also see matchmaking issues when there are significant changes to the game (like a new level is released, something is nerfed/buffed) or the ranking system undergoes a reset (like the seasonal reset) both of which occurred recently. These are short term issues though, as we’ve seen here on the BB.

[Revellations]

If you’re the underdog, that usually means you are at the top of your BH level’s trophy range and should consider upgrading. It may also mean that your opponent is still getting his Clash creds and needs more practice. In any case, it isn’t really an unfair match - you’re both at roughly the same level as an overall reflection of your game.

I definitely agree with you to some extent on your views. The only thing I'd like to touch on is how intense the limiters are. I would prefer if there were a one Builder Hall buffer both up and down. I understand that there will be the odd cases of someone with low skill level etc but as a high-upgraded Builder Hall 4 I have battled a medium level BH 6. A one Hall difference differs to skill, if I can attack better thats fantastic I have a shot at winning, if my skill isnt there (I probably wouldnt be at 1700) and there wouldnt be a chance.
But back to my example, this BH 6 had the builder machine up to only 4, but he had 2 double cannons, a roaster, 2 mortars, larger camps, 2 crushers and higher level troops. If he cant beat me in an attack unless he isnt trying to win then.. 😅. At some point those people who are poor at attacking and are way too low for their level, need to be cut off. Id say if he hit a BH 5 even if it was relatively fresh it would be more fair.
The builder base just works slightly different and two Hall differences is a little much in my opinion.
So to recap I agree, your skill will show where you should be and when u can succeed anymore due to differences in base level, upgrade. But there should be a 1 hall cap just to ensure (unless they are engineered and their weight is very low).

[Noctaire]

I definitely agree with you to some extent on your views. The only thing I'd like to touch on is how intense the limiters are. I would prefer if there were a one Builder Hall buffer both up and down. I understand that there will be the odd cases of someone with low skill level etc but as a high-upgraded Builder Hall 4 I have battled a medium level BH 6. A one Hall difference differs to skill, if I can attack better thats fantastic I have a shot at winning, if my skill isnt there (I probably wouldnt be at 1700) and there wouldnt be a chance.
But back to my example, this BH 6 had the builder machine up to only 4, but he had 2 double cannons, a roaster, 2 mortars, larger camps, 2 crushers and higher level troops. If he cant beat me in an attack unless he isnt trying to win then.. . At some point those people who are poor at attacking and are way too low for their level, need to be cut off. Id say if he hit a BH 5 even if it was relatively fresh it would be more fair.
The builder base just works slightly different and two Hall differences is a little much in my opinion.
So to recap I agree, your skill will show where you should be and when u can succeed anymore due to differences in base level, upgrade. But there should be a 1 hall cap just to ensure (unless they are engineered and their weight is very low).

Well...I don't agree that the BH and TH only differ slightly; I think the two are significantly different.

As a player, I'd certainly prefer to never see more than BHx+1. My kid's BH4 has actually gone up against a BH7 in the last few days and that's just ridiculous.

What's worse is that I beat him.

The problem is how do you "cut them off" as you describe it? The system is either self-regulating or it has arbitrary limits. You can't really have it both ways. Cutting someone off means elevating them to some level at which they can't play at all...and then they quit. Likewise, if the levels allowed to compete against each other were restricted, you'd end up with clouds when there weren't enough people of those levels online to play.

Going simply by trophy levels (ranking) allows players to compete against each other in as even a fashion as possible while encouraging movement up the rankings ladder for those who are stronger/better/etc. Most of the complaints I see here on the forums don't understand that they've reached above their BH's typical ranking or hit a fluke mismatch. I've seen it myself many times (10 games here) and it's never been serious enough of an issue for me to do much more than quit playing a few hours and go back.