Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 44

Thread: This is what frustrates me most about war weights.

  1. #21
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,191
    Quote Originally Posted by joshsgrandad View Post
    I think there is a lesson to be learned here, for those that are insisting on transparency from SC. If you remove any clue as to what is going on, then the only measure you have is the quality of your matches. If your spins are going badly, then you can come to forum and claim mismatch. Or you can take it at face value, that it is time to get your defences in order, and forget about playing the numbers game with the MM.
    Without transparency, you don't know how to get your defenses in order. Use more? Use fewer? We are looking through a glass, darkly. Maxer clans have similar issues to engineered clans in this regard.

    The technical term for what supercell is doing is called "security by obscurity". In the encryption world it is popular among providers but proven to be inferior. The alternative is open review, which allows experts to discover your flaws, which you then fix. If you don't intend to fix the flaws, then security by obscurity is the least bad approach for the provider. In this case, the worst case scenario for supercell is far less severe than the worst case scenario for, say, my bank's website, so it's not that big of a deal for supercell to take a sub-optimal approach.

  2. #22
    Centennial Club
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    165
    So from what Iím gathering from some of the replies is that a bases rank in the war doesnít necessarily coincide with their actual war weight?

    If that is the case itís very frustrating that SC isnít at least a bit more transparent with their war rankings.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    245
    Recently I have noticed that th12s don't have much difference in gold amount irrespective of new upgrades.So, this thing is clear that gold amounts don't represent war weights.So, true war weights seem to be not exactly clear.

    But there's one thing that I think is true but from replies seem wrong. Heard recently that a 9.11 with maxed deff except infrnos n eagle has more weight than th10s with th9 deff but with infrnos. And to explain the higher position of the th10, it is said that still map position is based on gold weights still. Let's suppose this is true. In that case, since 9.11 has more weight, we should hv an extra th11 to compensate for that (irrespective of map position). But this doesn't happen.

    So, what I understand from this all scenarios is, even though gold amounts don't explain much about new war weights, new weights are quite similar n infrnos still weight more. Maybe weight of infrnos is reduced or maybe there are other changes to MM we don't knw to help cope with loopsided bases. But still weight of infrnos is more than other point defenses n this thing is not wrong too. Because decreasing infrnos' weight drastically can result in other types of mismatches (getting difficulty to explain in detail but hope every1 can think of it).

    And one more point is map positions are not based on gold weights but on new weights. This is seen from th12s where gold amount is not changing but position change on big scale for upgrading eagle or infrnos. On this all, since there's no official statements from SC about weights so I think what I have wrote above may or may not be fully correct. So, I'm open for more thoughts on this n hope some1 corrects me if I'm wrong somewhere.
    Last edited by BlazeStormz123; July 11th, 2018 at 06:07 PM.
    Never Give Up Without Even Trying!

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by jrex1000 View Post
    So from what I’m gathering from some of the replies is that a bases rank in the war doesn’t necessarily coincide with their actual war weight?
    Yes, that is what most are saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by BlazeStormz123 View Post
    Recently I have noticed that th12s don't have much difference in gold amount irrespective of new upgrades.So, this thing is clear that gold amounts don't represent war weights.So, true war weights seem to be not exactly clear.

    But there's one thing that I think is true but from replies seem wrong. Heard recently that a 9.11 with maxed deff except infrnos n eagle has more weight than th10s with th9 deff but with infrnos. And to explain the higher position of the th10, it is said that still map position is based on gold weights still. Let's suppose this is true. In that case, since 9.11 has more weight, we should hv an extra th11 to compensate for that (irrespective of map position). But this doesn't happen.

    So, what I understand from this all scenarios is, even though gold amounts don't explain much about new war weights, new weights are quite similar n infrnos still weight more. Maybe weight of infrnos is reduced or maybe there are other changes to MM we don't knw to help cope with loopsided bases. But still weight of infrnos is more than other point defenses n this thing is not wrong too. Because decreasing infrnos' weight drastically can result in other types of mismatches (getting difficulty to explain in detail but hope every1 can think of it).

    And one more point is map positions are not based on gold weights but on new weights. This is seen from th12s where gold amount is not changing but position change on big scale for upgrading eagle or infrnos. On this all, since there's no official statements from SC about weights so I think what I have wrote above may or may not be fully correct. So, I'm open for more thoughts on this n hope some1 corrects me if I'm wrong somewhere.
    Th12 gold weight does change with upgrades and new constructions.

    I agree we do not know whether a max 9.11 weighs more in the match than a max th10. I am confident the inferno weights were reduced, but I don’t know whether they were reduced enough (or whether other point defenses were increased enough) to make 9.11s no longer an advantage. I am confident they are less of an advantage than they used to be. Many clans are struggling with that right now. I know many 9.11s that have decided to build infernos and eagle and others that are still holding out. We have one in our clan who likely will be adding defenses.
    Contact SC here. Click here to see how trophies are calculated. My tips/thoughts on Legends here. My legends hope: 14 hours daily search limit to reduce advantage of account sharing; black clouds screen; Legends3 5000-5499 cups, Legends2 5500-5999, Legends1 6000+ and titans/champs canít attack Legends1 or 2 players; while in clouds let us watch war, donate, do FCs, base design. Make a separate PvP trophy ladder option for all, others found here.

  5. #25
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    NE England, UK.
    Posts
    1,572
    Quote Originally Posted by littledoctor View Post
    Without transparency, you don't know how to get your defenses in order. Use more? Use fewer? We are looking through a glass, darkly. Maxer clans have similar issues to engineered clans in this regard.

    The technical term for what supercell is doing is called "security by obscurity". In the encryption world it is popular among providers but proven to be inferior. The alternative is open review, which allows experts to discover your flaws, which you then fix. If you don't intend to fix the flaws, then security by obscurity is the least bad approach for the provider. In this case, the worst case scenario for supercell is far less severe than the worst case scenario for, say, my bank's website, so it's not that big of a deal for supercell to take a sub-optimal approach.
    So you really don't know whether to drop more defence or have less?.. This is a wind up right?.. They have a game whereby you advance your account by adding to it, and then they implement an update whereby you have to drop all items in order to advance.
    I would think you wouldn't need to flip a coin.

  6. #26
    Forum Superstar TankSinatra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,086
    Quote Originally Posted by jrex1000 View Post
    So from what I’m gathering from some of the replies is that a bases rank in the war doesn’t necessarily coincide with their actual war weight?

    If that is the case it’s very frustrating that SC isn’t at least a bit more transparent with their war rankings.

    It's important to be precise - map is ordered by Defense Only weight as reflected in storages (some think that's not the same defensive weight that feeds into the matchmaker, I think it is). There's also offense weight that feeds into the matchmaker, some think your recommended target is an imperfect clue as to what that weight is.
    So when we're looking at an account where the offense and defense weights aren't equal (happens surprisingly often), the spot on the map doesn't indicate the overall effect on the match of a particular base.


    As to actual overall weight, I don't think that's a useful concept. We know there's defense weight, offense weight, and other parameters fed into the MM (THs? Labs? Win record? FLAGS FOR SURE!) but are they cranked into a single number we can call the actual weight? I doubt it. If we had single parameter matching I don't think we'd have so many reported failures to match.
    It's always the closet engineers that are the most bitter. Trying to maintain a righteous pose while doing exactly what they claim to hate, lashing out at anyone that points out the obvious.

  7. #27
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    NE England, UK.
    Posts
    1,572
    Quote Originally Posted by BlazeStormz123 View Post
    Recently I have noticed that th12s don't have much difference in gold amount irrespective of new upgrades.So, this thing is clear that gold amounts don't represent war weights.So, true war weights seem to be not exactly clear.

    But there's one thing that I think is true but from replies seem wrong. Heard recently that a 9.11 with maxed deff except infrnos n eagle has more weight than th10s with th9 deff but with infrnos. And to explain the higher position of the th10, it is said that still map position is based on gold weights still. Let's suppose this is true. In that case, since 9.11 has more weight, we should hv an extra th11 to compensate for that (irrespective of map position). But this doesn't happen.

    So, what I understand from this all scenarios is, even though gold amounts don't explain much about new war weights, new weights are quite similar n infrnos still weight more. Maybe weight of infrnos is reduced or maybe there are other changes to MM we don't knw to help cope with loopsided bases. But still weight of infrnos is more than other point defenses n this thing is not wrong too. Because decreasing infrnos' weight drastically can result in other types of mismatches (getting difficulty to explain in detail but hope every1 can think of it).

    And one more point is map positions are not based on gold weights but on new weights. This is seen from th12s where gold amount is not changing but position change on big scale for upgrading eagle or infrnos. On this all, since there's no official statements from SC about weights so I think what I have wrote above may or may not be fully correct. So, I'm open for more thoughts on this n hope some1 corrects me if I'm wrong somewhere.
    Without going into any sort of detail. You are basing all your assumptions on.. a/ Only looking at a 9.11 base v an IT 10 base, which are single accounts, and the match is made using the full roster, and b/ You are only looking at defensive values, and the match is made using both def and off.

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    245
    Quote Originally Posted by joshsgrandad View Post
    Without going into any sort of detail. You are basing all your assumptions on.. a/ Only looking at a 9.11 base v an IT 10 base, which are single accounts, and the match is made using the full roster, and b/ You are only looking at defensive values, and the match is made using both def and off.
    Well I had put a practical example of every scenario. Well repeating again, as told by many 9.11 had higher weight than IT bases. And 9.11 has better troops n heroes than a th10 so, more offensive weight too. And it is lower in map due to gold weight but has higher weight working behind. So, what I'm telling is in that case we must have an extra th11 if its true but that doesn't happen. So, my thought is even if there's new war weights 9.11 has some advantage still. Agree MM has improved but we don't know about the changes clearly. What i told is clearly after taking complete roster in mind.

    And isn't it assumption too that IT bases have lower weights than 9.11 when wars prove the opposite. And this assumption is not based on complete roster either.
    Last edited by BlazeStormz123; July 11th, 2018 at 09:15 PM.
    Never Give Up Without Even Trying!

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    245
    Quote Originally Posted by 2222 View Post
    Yes, that is what most are saying.



    Th12 gold weight does change with upgrades and new constructions.

    I agree we do not know whether a max 9.11 weighs more in the match than a max th10. I am confident the inferno weights were reduced, but I don’t know whether they were reduced enough (or whether other point defenses were increased enough) to make 9.11s no longer an advantage. I am confident they are less of an advantage than they used to be. Many clans are struggling with that right now. I know many 9.11s that have decided to build infernos and eagle and others that are still holding out. We have one in our clan who likely will be adding defenses.
    While our top 5 th12s have same gold amount 116k. #1 has max eagle,#2 has max infrnos,#3 has max giga, #4 has 1 infrno max n #5 has only th11 deff n 3*giga. Well this tells us gold is no longer useful which is said by every1 here. As some have told that changes have been made to weights but gold amounts are still same. But they can be same as before fr older things while th12 is new one so, having same gold amount and no much increase satisfies that part too. Overall agree on point that gold amount can't tell the weights now.

    I also believe that MM has improved n will improve more in future as well. Just that point of 9.11 having more background weight was not digestable.Well talking about infrnos' weights is kinda useless too.Because decreasing it much will result in other kinds of mismatches. Back then when SC made defensive weight supreme while matchmaking, it was kinda appropriate. Because high offensive weight was causing confusion b/w defensive n offensive sides of bases and creating mismatches (stated in patch notes or some thread by supercell staff).
    https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-Matchmaking

    Matchmaking and engineering are tough issues n hope SC gets a way out of all the issues in near future. That's all I can say.
    Last edited by BlazeStormz123; July 11th, 2018 at 09:24 PM.
    Never Give Up Without Even Trying!

  10. #30
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    NE England, UK.
    Posts
    1,572
    Quote Originally Posted by BlazeStormz123 View Post
    While our top 5 th12s have same gold amount 116k. #1 has max eagle,#2 has max infrnos,#3 has max giga, #4 has 1 infrno max n #5 has only th11 deff n 3*giga. Well this tells us gold is no longer useful which is said by every1 here. As some have told that changes have been made to weights but gold amounts are still same. But they can be same as before fr older things while th12 is new one so, having same gold amount and no much increase satisfies that part too. Overall agree on point that gold amount can't tell the weights now.

    I also believe that MM has improved n will improve more in future as well. Just that point of 9.11 having more background weight was not digestable.Well talking about infrnos' weights is kinda useless too.Because decreasing it much will result in other kinds of mismatches. Back then when SC made defensive weight supreme while matchmaking, it was kinda appropriate. Because high offensive weight was causing confusion b/w defensive n offensive sides of bases and creating mismatches (stated in patch notes or some thread by supercell staff).
    https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rs-Matchmaking

    Matchmaking and engineering are tough issues n hope SC gets a way out of all the issues in near future. That's all I can say.
    I think it would be difficult for you to judge, due to your overall heavy roster, and I get your point on the IT v 9.11 BTW.
    We however, run a light roster, with 3x 10s at the top. So I feel our roster would be more sensitive to change, due to the lower total weight.
    what we found, after the 12 drop, is that our 10s would have equal numbers on oppo, but always at least one of theirs would carry IT, whereas ours didn't. Our #1 dropped IT, and usually 2 came up on oppo roster. Our #2 has dropped, and their is still 2 on oppo.
    So, either they are matching halls, as much as possible, at the top, regardless of the maturity of the build, or the weight of IT has been reduced sufficiently, that the "maxed for hall" bases that litter our roster, are making the overall totals close enough to match. Is either/or in my opinion, not sure which, don't care too much, as our bases are growing so roster is fluid anyway.
    To clarify.. We stretch our roster, not so much low loading, not roster engineering, as is balanced thru the halls, and we always match likewise, so feel either they look to match the roster rather than simply weights, and this would leave little wriggle room for heavy IT to sneak into our oppo ranks, with a purely weight based MM.

Posting Permissions

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