Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 118

Thread: CWL Rewards Problems

  1. #71
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,529
    I had another idea, and then realized that it wouldn't work. Because talking about clash is interesting I'll share it here. It uses the random matching within tiers to make sandbagging slightly less unfair. It could be combined with DMoore's idea, or with the current system.

    A few months ago when CWL was new we tossed around the idea of doing war weight matching within a tier, so that the heaviest clans would match each other and the lightest would match each other. The clear flaw with that is 25% of the heaviest clans will drop (when they probably really shouldn't) and 25% of the lightest clans will rise (when they probably really shouldn't.)

    The simplest way to implement the above (flaws and all) would be to let clans sign up for the full two days, then sort them all in war weight order, then divide them up into groups of 8. (This has additional issues but all can be addressed with some cleverness.)

    My new idea is a modification of this sorting by war weight, except, instead of just matching 8 at a time in order, clans in the heaviest 10% are grouped into divisions containing 4 clans from the heaviest 10% and 4 clans from the heaviest 50% (randomly selected). Then once the heaviest 10% are allocated to divisions, the remaining clans are randomly matched with each other.

    The advantage of this modified proposal is that most of the clans in a league do not encounter sandbaggers (unless the sandbaggers are highly skilled with light bases, which most people won't even notice). Clans sandbagging with a bunch of too-big-for-the-league bases will match a combination of each other and the non-sandbagging clans who are best able to give them a good fight. Having most of the divisions be composed of the lowest 90% of the clans decreases the problem of too-light or too-heavy clans getting promoted or demoted.

    The 10% number is just a guess. If supercell wanted to get really fancy, they could graph the weights of the clans on a curve, and if there is a spike at the top, instead of using 10%, use however big that spike is. Maybe it's a lot smaller, like 1%. Probably varies by league.

    This would also help make it a little less unfair when a clan, not intending to sandbag, happens to recruit a bunch of big bases in between seasons. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a clan in gold 3 recruiting 5 TH12s, but under the current system they'll be double dipping on TH10s.

    Champs would not need this method of course, because it does not have any sandbaggers. If they later add more leagues maybe they'd need to start.

    The problem, which for me might make this a showstopper, is war weight. Part of the point of CWL is not having to worry about that any more. All the things that engineers used to do to manipulate war weight could come into play here. In addition, doing what the initial placement algorithm did and basing a clan's weight on the 15 heaviest on the roster (not the war map, which the matchmaker doesn't know about during search time) would make clans not want to include inactive TH12s. We have one non-warring TH12 in our clan and we include him in our roster, but not the war map, because we're nice and want to give him medals when we win wars. Lots of other clans are undoubtedly like us.

  2. #72
    Forum Veteran Shadrach777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,755

    Thumbs up

    tier per win per star clan P stars earned win1 win2 win3 win4 win5 win6 win7
    ch1 17 18 14 14 364 378 392 406 420 434 448
    ch2 13 17 13 15 359 372 385 398 411 424 437
    ch3 12 16 12 16 352 364 376 388 400 412 424
    m1 12 15 11 16 329 341 353 365 377 389 401
    m2 11 14 11 16 312 323 334 345 356 367 378
    m3 10 13 10 17 301 311 321 331 341 351 361
    cr1 10 11 9 18 271 281 291 301 311 321 331
    cr2 8 10 9 19 261 269 277 285 293 301 309
    cr3 7 9 9 21 259 266 273 280 287 294 301
    g1 7 7 8 21 210 217 224 231 238 245 252
    g2 7 6 7 21 182 189 196 203 210 217 224
    g3 7 5 7 21 161 168 175 182 189 196 203
    s1 6 4 6 21 132 138 144 150 156 162 168
    s2 5 4 6 21 131 136 141 146 151 156 161
    s3 5 4 5 21 124 129 134 139 144 149 154
    b1 5 2 5 21 82 87 92 97 102 107 112
    b2 5 2 5 21 82 87 92 97 102 107 112
    b3 5 2 5 21 82 87 92 97 102 107 112
    I like the current model, but would definitely make tweaks. I would change the promotion/demotion to be tied to wins and use stars/destruction as the tie breaker (kept hidden until the end). Clans with more wins will rise up, and clans with less wins will filter down.

    The next change I would perform would be reducing the number of medals per win as shown in chart. To keep the number of medals earned high, I would add a second component tied to clan performance (clan p column) that everyone on roster would get regardless of win, and it would be tied to number of collective stars earned per war. If the clan gets 17 stars for the war, then everyone gets roughly half of the medals earned bonus per war (7 for champion 1). If the clan gets 27 stars for the war, then everyone gets full medals earned bonus per war (14 for champion 1). Hence, if a clan wins absolutely 0 wars in crystal 1, but makes certain to gain 27 stars per war, then everyone on the roster gets 63 medals.

    The last component I would change would be increasing the number of medals per star to healthy amount to promote the idea of getting clans to push to higher tiers. If you look at the column stars earned, I am assuming this is the number of stars each player earns per season (I know 21 is not always possible, but I'm looking at the scenario to prevent farming low). The columns on the far right show how many medals each person on the roster could achieve (using my assumption stated earlier), based on the number of wins the clan obtains each season. If we assume a clan of all TH12s like to farm crystal 3, then if each player earns 21 stars per season (not hard in crystal 3) they can expect to earn 301 medals. If that same clan of all TH12s plays in Master 1, and realistically expect to earn 16 stars per season, if the clan only wins 1 war they get 329 medals.

    These overall changes moves things away from winning, and more towards clan performance with an emphasis on personal performance and takes into account that people are not 3 starring everything in the upper tiers where TH12 gets hard. Sure a clan of 10 or 12 TH12s can still farm in crystal 1 or 2 and go 7/7, but if they were really placed in master 2 as dictated by their clan roster, they would only have to win 2 or 3 wars and get 27 stars per each war to obtain slightly better rewards.
    Last edited by Shadrach777; February 11th, 2019 at 10:28 PM.
    Location: USA
    TH12: 60/60/30 TH12: 60/60/30 TH12: 50/52/30 TH10: 30/30
    Main #LL2JCQ0C

  3. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by BlazeStormz123 View Post
    I mean by that is, is this thread only dedicated to Dmoore's solution? Or we can discuss some other ideas?
    Threads often take on a life of their own and go where they go. I actually doubt SC will totally change the reward system like I suggested above (but I hope I’m wrong). I’d like to keep this thread related to the reward system, not other issues, but I have little control over that.

    Quote Originally Posted by littledoctor View Post
    I had another idea....
    I’ve had all sorts of ideas too. None are perfect, but some I think would improve the current system. I’ve wondered if it would be good to try to sort the groups of 8 with some sort of consideration of whether the clans were promoted, demoted, etc.. That has nothing to do with the reward system this thread is about, but it has crossed my mind.






    Quote Originally Posted by Shadrach777 View Post
    tier per win per star clan P stars earned win1 win2 win3 win4 win5 win6 win7
    ch1 17 18 14 14 364 378 392 406 420 434 448
    ch2 13 17 13 15 359 372 385 398 411 424 437
    ch3 12 16 12 16 352 364 376 388 400 412 424
    m1 12 15 11 16 329 341 353 365 377 389 401
    m2 11 14 11 16 312 323 334 345 356 367 378
    m3 10 13 10 17 301 311 321 331 341 351 361
    cr1 10 11 9 18 271 281 291 301 311 321 331
    cr2 8 10 9 19 261 269 277 285 293 301 309
    cr3 7 9 9 21 259 266 273 280 287 294 301
    g1 7 7 8 21 210 217 224 231 238 245 252
    g2 7 6 7 21 182 189 196 203 210 217 224
    g3 7 5 7 21 161 168 175 182 189 196 203
    s1 6 4 6 21 132 138 144 150 156 162 168
    s2 5 4 6 21 131 136 141 146 151 156 161
    s3 5 4 5 21 124 129 134 139 144 149 154
    b1 5 2 5 21 82 87 92 97 102 107 112
    b2 5 2 5 21 82 87 92 97 102 107 112
    b3 5 2 5 21 82 87 92 97 102 107 112
    I like the current model, but would definitely make tweaks. I would change the promotion/demotion to be tied to wins and use stars/destruction as the tie breaker. Clans with more wins will rise up, and clans with less wins will filter down.

    The next change I would perform would be reducing the number of medals per win as shown in chart. To keep the number of medals earned high, I would add a second component tied to clan performance (clan p column) that everyone on roster would get regardless of win, and it would be tied to number of collective stars earned per war. If the clan gets 17 stars for the war, then everyone gets roughly half of the medals earned bonus per war (7 for champion 1). If the clan gets 27 stars for the war, then everyone gets full medals earned bonus per war (14 for champion 1). Hence, if a clan wins absolutely 0 wars in crystal 1, but makes certain to gain 27 stars per war, then everyone on the roster gets 63 medals.

    The last component I would change would be increasing the number of medals per star to healthy amount to promote the idea of getting clans to push to higher tiers. If you look at the column stars earned, I am assuming this is the number of stars each player earns per season (I know 21 is not always possible, but I'm looking at the scenario to prevent farming low). The columns on the far right show how many medals each person on the roster could achieve (using my assumption stated earlier), based on the number of wins the clan obtains each season. If we assume a clan of all TH12s like to farm crystal 3, then if each player earns 21 stars per season (not hard in crystal 3) they can expect to earn 301 medals. If that same clan of all TH12s plays in Master 1, and realistically expect to earn 16 stars per season, if the clan only wins 1 war they get 329 medals.

    These overall changes moves things away from winning, and more towards clan performance with an emphasis on personal performance and takes into account that people are not 3 starring everything in the upper tiers where TH12 gets hard. Sure a clan of 10 or 12 TH12s can still farm in crystal 1 or 2 and go 7/7, but if they were really placed in master 2 as dictated by their clan roster, they would only have to win 2 or 3 wars and get 27 stars per each war to obtain slightly better rewards.
    I still see medals tied to wins and stars though? That is the problem with the current system that encourages farming and punishes pushing as high as you can. I don’t see how the current problems would be improved.

    I do note above that I would support medals to the full clan based on performance, but unlike your suggestion it wouldn’t be total stars, it would be where they end up on the ladder, what place did you take and in which tier. Your suggestion of awarding medals to the full clan for total stars doesn’t address the reward system problem, it just gets the whole clan cheering on the tanking, losing on purpose and farming problems.
    Last edited by 2222; February 11th, 2019 at 09:08 PM.
    Contact SC here. Click here to see how trophies are calculated. Main clouds thread here. My tips/thoughts on Legends here. My suggested legends changes found here. Although now I expect we will just wait for project blue skies. Fingers crossed.

  4. #74
    Forum Veteran Shadrach777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,755
    Quote Originally Posted by 2222 View Post
    I still see medals tied to wins and stars though? That is the problem with the current system that encourages farming and punishes pushing as high as you can. I don’t see how the current problems would be improved.
    That's because you didn't look at the numbers in the 7 right columns. Here's a hypothetical with my scenario, let's say your clan tanks to crystal 2, even though you should be in Master 2. If you 3 star every opponent (21 stars) and your clan wins all 7 wars in the league then you get 309 medals. If your same clan is in Master 2 and wins only 1 war and you 3 star at least 2 opponents (16 stars total) you get 312 medals. My system is showing that if you push, the matches get harder but the rewards don't decrease, it rewards pushing. There is still some leeway to flop between two tiers, but when the clan starts dropping more than 1 tier it hurts the medal count.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2222 View Post
    I do note above that I would support medals to the full clan based on performance, but unlike your suggestion it wouldn’t be total stars, it would be where they end up on the ladder, what place did you take and in which tier. Your suggestion of awarding medals to the full clan for total stars doesn’t address the reward system problem, it just gets the whole clan cheering on the tanking, losing on purpose and farming problems.
    My suggestion to reward medals to the full clan addresses the scenario of a clan in 7th or 8th place that didn't win a single war, they can still get medals if the clan performs. The change also balances out the loss in medals since it won't be based in wins anymore, split between wins and clan performance. The change I made to reduce the medals based on wins; to increase the medals based on stars; and to change the promotion/demotion scheme addresses the reward system problem.

    People won't be able to win 5-7 wars anymore and play the star game not to get promoted. I forgot to mention the stars and destruction are kept hidden until the end, I'll amend my original post.
    Location: USA
    TH12: 60/60/30 TH12: 60/60/30 TH12: 50/52/30 TH10: 30/30
    Main #LL2JCQ0C

  5. #75
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    NE England, UK.
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadrach777 View Post
    That's because you didn't look at the numbers in the 7 right columns. Here's a hypothetical with my scenario, let's say your clan tanks to crystal 2, even though you should be in Master 2. If you 3 star every opponent (21 stars) and your clan wins all 7 wars in the league then you get 309 medals. If your same clan is in Master 2 and wins only 1 war and you 3 star at least 2 opponents (16 stars total) you get 312 medals. My system is showing that if you push, the matches get harder but the rewards don't decrease, it rewards pushing. There is still some leeway to flop between two tiers, but when the clan starts dropping more than 1 tier it hurts the medal count.


    My suggestion to reward medals to the full clan addresses the scenario of a clan in 7th or 8th place that didn't win a single war, they can still get medals if the clan performs. The change also balances out the loss in medals since it won't be based in wins anymore, split between wins and clan performance. The change I made to reduce the medals based on wins; to increase the medals based on stars; and to change the promotion/demotion scheme addresses the reward system problem.

    People won't be able to win 5-7 wars anymore and play the star game not to get promoted. I forgot to mention the stars and destruction are kept hidden until the end, I'll amend my original post.
    Whole thing does indeed have merit.
    But it is dependant on the clan being somewhat competent at attacking.
    Our cwl team is average at best. We did ok, finished 4th in crystal 3, but with many 1 star attacks throughout the week.
    Without number crunching, I would expect an average clan like ours to gain more with the 2222 proposal, whereby it is solely final position, than with a criteria that was (also) linked to stars gained.

    I use our clan as a yard stick when mulling over the proposals, and best fit for us so far would be final position. We also rarely change the daily line up, so the 1/7th per day would also benefit us. I am sure everyone would have their own "best fit" depending on clan structure, and appreciate each to their own needs to be understood.

  6. #76
    Such a good thread! I'm a big fan of a couple things mentioned throughout the thread...a "clan only" rewards system, and better medal distribution at each step up the ladder. The specifics can certainly be tweaked, but those two big ticket items will go a LONG way toward focusing CWL on competition rather than farming. I'm not gonna re-hash all the things mentioned so far...but I think there's something interesting/positive to note about how pushing and farming co-exist in that format.

    Having a more significant bump up in medals when jumping from league to league is a good incentive to push out of one league and into the next...it's an even BETTER incentive when you realize that if you're NOT farming, you might move directly to 6th place in the next league up (there may be farming teams that are happy to take 7th/8th place and then throw their clan away...let them have it!).

    Also, to 2222's point about setting minimum requirements in order to collect medals to discourage "zero-participation" clans...I like the idea, but maybe there's a solution to that using clan stats (it's all about the clan, after all). Perhaps something along the lines of the "30% to get a shield" rule...clan must achieve 30% total destruction to qualify for whatever medals would have been handed out (whether that is calculated at the end as an overall, or figured out match-by-match as 1/7th of the available medals AFTER knowing the ending position).

    I think the two main changes would go a long way to righting the ship, and could easily be tweaked to account for zero-participation clans, farmers, and STILL be able to reward clans for fighting hard to see just how good they are, regardless of how many TH12s are on the other side of the board.
    Last edited by eghere; February 19th, 2019 at 02:06 AM.

  7. #77
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    NE England, UK.
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by eghere View Post
    Such a good thread! I'm a big fan of a couple things mentioned throughout the thread...a "clan only" rewards system, and better medal distribution at each step up the ladder. The specifics can certainly be tweaked, but those two big ticket items will go a LONG way toward focusing CWL on competition rather than farming. I'm not gonna re-hash all the things mentioned so far...but I think there's something interesting/positive to note about how pushing and farming co-exist in that format.

    Having a more significant bump up in medals when jumping from league to league is a good incentive to push out of one league and into the next...it's an even BETTER incentive when you realize that if you're NOT farming, you might move directly to 6th place in the next league up (there may be farming teams that are happy to take 7th/8th place and then throw their clan away...let them have it!).

    Also, to 2222's point about setting minimum requirements in order to collect medals to discourage "zero-participation" clans...I like the idea, but maybe there's a solution to that using clan stats (it's all about the clan, after all). Perhaps something along the lines of the "30% to get a shield" rule...clan must achieve 30% total destruction to qualify for whatever medals would have been handed out (whether that is calculated at the end as an overall, or figured out match-by-match as 1/7th of the available medals AFTER knowing the ending position).

    I think the two main changes would go a long way to righting the ship, and could easily be tweaked to account for zero-participation clans, farmers, and STILL be able to reward clans for fighting hard to see just how good they are, regardless of how many TH12s are on the other side of the board.
    +1. Agree. Only thing I would be a little nervous about, and probably being over cautious, is the 30% minimum to collect rule.
    I appreciate it has merit, and would make farming a little harder, but there are innocent scenarios that could affect non farming clans, eg over pushing, mass clan exodus, even clan opt outs for hero down/real life commitments etc. Clans would be hesitant to rotate rosters, it would be biggest available (which may be a draw back to final position rewards also).

    It is difficult to look for punishment without collateral damage, but if rewarding is the essence of change, then there can be no losers.
    And I am good with people spawning high every season. Everybody gets what they want from cwl then. Bring the fun back.

  8. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by joshsgrandad View Post
    +1. Agree. Only thing I would be a little nervous about, and probably being over cautious, is the 30% minimum to collect rule.
    I appreciate it has merit, and would make farming a little harder, but there are innocent scenarios that could affect non farming clans, eg over pushing, mass clan exodus, even clan opt outs for hero down/real life commitments etc. Clans would be hesitant to rotate rosters, it would be biggest available (which may be a draw back to final position rewards also).

    It is difficult to look for punishment without collateral damage, but if rewarding is the essence of change, then there can be no losers.
    And I am good with people spawning high every season. Everybody gets what they want from cwl then. Bring the fun back.
    I think something similar to that might be a good idea for any clan based awards. For any individual awards (such as getting 1/7th of the available individual medals for each war) I would stick with the requirement I suggested of getting one star. That would avoid players getting those individual medals for just being on the roster. They have to attack and at least use a strong enough attack to get a star. I’d make it be a new star too, not everyone attacking the one base that happens to have a hall near the edge.
    Contact SC here. Click here to see how trophies are calculated. Main clouds thread here. My tips/thoughts on Legends here. My suggested legends changes found here. Although now I expect we will just wait for project blue skies. Fingers crossed.

  9. #79
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,306
    Quote Originally Posted by 2222 View Post
    I think something similar to that might be a good idea for any clan based awards. For any individual awards (such as getting 1/7th of the available individual medals for each war) I would stick with the requirement I suggested of getting one star. That would avoid players getting those individual medals for just being on the roster. They have to attack and at least use a strong enough attack to get a star. I’d make it be a new star too, not everyone attacking the one base that happens to have a hall near the edge.
    Having to get only new stars wouldnt accomplish anything sadly. All the artists would do is attack the bottom base achieve 1 star and stop, then the next guy up would attack for 2 stars and stop and then the third from the bottom would attack for the three star. They would never bother attacking anything higher than the bottom 5.

  10. #80
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    NE England, UK.
    Posts
    1,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Tosti111 View Post
    Having to get only new stars wouldnt accomplish anything sadly. All the artists would do is attack the bottom base achieve 1 star and stop, then the next guy up would attack for 2 stars and stop and then the third from the bottom would attack for the three star. They would never bother attacking anything higher than the bottom 5.
    Good thinking Tosti. Stands to reason (although I had overlooked it).
    But at least they would be having to put in some, even tho minimal effort. And they would be enrolled in a tier where they are achieving less of an issue, although non competitive for the clan that faces them.
    Still, I wouldnt expect farming to be so prolific as it is likely to become with the present system. And tanking would no longer be required.

    Maybe an allowance shared amongst the entire roster is looking a better option, albeit there would then be no need for commitment from those that spawn.
    Another option, as is being suggested, is look towards new clans being disadvantaged, in order to prevent the re spawn.
    But with new clans being formed every day for genuine reasons, there are also drawbacks here too (as well as still having heavy clans in lightweight tiers).

    I dont personally like any idea of penalising dip attacks.
    It is a legitimate tactic used by many clans in war.
    Once the dynamics of a system based around "normal" war plans are changed, then a path towards a completely different fundamental system has been created.
    There is already the No Dip League, set up to allow the perma max clans enjoy their niche within the game.

    Whatever they decide, it needs to cater for the general masses that make up the bulk of the player base.
    Last edited by joshsgrandad; February 19th, 2019 at 06:01 PM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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