Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 40

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Builder base tie 100%

  1. #21
    Centennial Club JaymzWWW66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    The North East Kingdom
    Posts
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by SumoSloth View Post
    Fantastic Job???? Your base got 3 starred 100%, that doesn't sound so fantastic to me, sounds more like your base did a really crappy job of defending. Ties are part of life in the BB, when you get to a high enough level they occur very infrequently. Ties should not be determined by who gets there faster as that's not necessarily an indicator of a better attack.

    On top of that, the idea you put out there is very easily exploitable which makes it a terrible idea, as others have already pointed out.
    Others have pointed out that it is exploitable, yes. I had not thought about that. My idea very much so needs to count as a win as well. I have stated in my other follow ups, though I am going to specifically point out in this comment, that I was only thinking about my offense. It is not often that I get a 100% and even rarer that my battle ends in a 100% tie. Having a strong base is as important to the equation as being able to achieve the three star on your own attack. As you said "when you get to a high enough level [ties] occur very infrequently". I agree with you. That is the mentality I was coming from.

    Perhaps, if this idea was ever taken into consideration, it would be implemented starting at a specific trophy count. Maybe 5000? Any player that is that high on trophies is either done with all their upgrades or really close. Maybe both players must also be BB8 for this to start coming into effect. Okay well now this helps end game players. Maybe. You would still need to get the 100% and so would your opponent. If I get 100% and my opponent doesn't, then my idea doesn't matter. If my opponent gets a 100% and I don't, then my idea doesn't matter. If we tie at anything less that 100%, my idea doesn't matter. It is a very specific event.

    Could it still be exploited. I am sure it can. But there would be no trophies gained and if it counts as a win for both players, then they will still only be able to receive their daily loot "allowance". It may not be perfect, and it could probably be exploited by those who like to cheat the system. I want this for those of us who play the game properly and who are honest about it. But there will always be someone out there who will take advantage of the system and ruin it for everyone else.
    My Stats

    | TH11 | XP 167 | BK 46 | AQ 50 | GW 17
    | #QC8VUPCL |

    CLAN: IRON VENDETTA - LEVEL 14 - CWL: CRYSTAL 1
    #2YVOGVLY

  2. #22
    Forum Elder
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    2,981
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajax View Post
    It isn't that we like having ties, more that all the tiebreak methods so far proposed are, in the opinions of many, much worse than having them.

    All the methods I have seen penalise certain perfectly valid play styles,or come down to sheer luck.
    This sounds like a lack of appreciations as to what a tie breaker is. A tie breaker ONLY comes into play once there already is a tie.

    if you have not got 100%, and the opponent has not got 100%, then the tie breaker method is completely irrelevant.

    If you think you can do stupid spam fast attacks and get reliably 100%, then you are not playing the game I know. I think that concern should be simply tossed out. Spam attacks do not get 100%, and so spam attacks do not feature in the requested tie breaking.

    Many ties are broken by simply random chance. A coin flip. A random ballot. That would be good. No more anticlimax following a 100% win as it is as good as a loss, except no trophy loss. Wastes the clock towers. Does nothing for you. Except, sure, maybe you can tweak your base for better defence, but that is ALWAYS true, for ALL battles, it is not a tiebreaker issue.

    But random coin coin flips are not as interesting for game playing as something. Hence, “faster time”. It’s something you can think about as a secondary concerned, and it has game play meaning. Is it worse than random? Is it worse than “longer time”? You think faster attack time can be gamed? I think gaming tiebreaks for faster attack time massively compromises you can of actually succeeding in getting 100%. It is naturally checked. Longer time could be gamed so so easily, just wait 2 minutes before launching your reliable 100% 1 minute attack.

    It seems pretty obvious to me that for a tie breaker, faster is better than slower is better than random, and that lose-lose is worst.

    It is true that 100% ties are more rare since the last cannon cart nerf. I had lots of PEKKA-cannon army both sides 100% ties, which now don’t 100% easily. They still happen though. But frequency is not an argument for tiebreaking or not tiebreaking. If you are not having a 100% tie, the question is irrelevant. Assume you do have a 100% tie.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    475
    Couldn't a tiebreaker for 100% be # of troops remaining on the map at the end? Or is there some obvious issue i'm missing?

  4.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #24
    [QUOTE=George1971;12136853]This sounds like a lack of appreciations as to what a tie breaker is. A tie breaker ONLY comes into play once there already is a tie.
    [quote]
    I don't have the slightest shadow of a clue why you believe I might not have a full and complete understanding of that. Everything I have said is predicated on exactly that.

    if you have not got 100%, and the opponent has not got 100%, then the tie breaker method is completely irrelevant.
    That is false.

    Ties do not only happen at 100% - in fact as I said earlier in this tread, I have them more often at lower scores.

    If you think you can do stupid spam fast attacks and get reliably 100%, then you are not playing the game I know.
    Why on earth would I think that?

    I think that concern should be simply tossed out. Spam attacks do not get 100%, and so spam attacks do not feature in the requested tie breaking.
    False on several grounds.

    Just because you can't reliably get 100% with spam attacks doesn't mean they don't happen. And ties don't only happen at 100%.

    Many ties are broken by simply random chance. A coin flip. A random ballot. That would be good.
    Well it would be better than any of the methods proposed, but certainly not "good", by any reasonable measuer. Why on earth should a battle be decide by pure random chance?

    No more anticlimax following a 100% win as it is as good as a loss, except no trophy loss. Wastes the clock towers. Does nothing for you. Except, sure, maybe you can tweak your base for better defence, but that is ALWAYS true, for ALL battles, it is not a tiebreaker issue.

    But random coin coin flips are not as interesting for game playing as something. Hence, “faster time”. It’s something you can think about as a secondary concerned, and it has game play meaning. Is it worse than random? Is it worse than “longer time”? You think faster attack time can be ga
    As I said, I have not seen ANY method proposed which is better than just leaving it as a tie.

    It seems pretty obvious to me that for a tie breaker, faster is better than slower is better than random, and that lose-lose is worst.
    Whereas it is equally obvious to me that leaving it as a tie is best, random chance is very poor but next best, anything related to speed is just plain wrong, given that it severely penalises perfectly valid game play styles.

    It is true that 100% ties are more rare since the last cannon cart nerf. I had lots of PEKKA-cannon army both sides 100% ties, which now don’t 100% easily. They still happen though. But frequency is not an argument for tiebreaking or not tiebreaking. If you are not having a 100% tie, the question is irrelevant. Assume you do have a 100% tie.
    Anybody proposing that tiebreakers are irrelevant unless it is a 100% ties doesn't have a clue what tiebrekaer means.

    I cannot think of any way of resolving ties in BB which is better than not resolving them.

    But I live in a society where ties are considered a normal part of sporting competitions, and tiebreakers are only normally used in knockout tournaments.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grill View Post
    But when something like an update is to be expected all stupid breaks loose and it just becomes an idiot storm of catastrophic proportion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Maverick View Post
    Any more balance to th10 will make th10 broken...
    My stats (main account)

  5.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Rascal2013 View Post
    Couldn't a tiebreaker for 100% be # of troops remaining on the map at the end? Or is there some obvious issue i'm missing?
    That is actually a better suggestion than any I have previously seen.

    It actually makes sense, and doesn't penalise any style (provided it is troop slots worth of units, rather than actual numeric values, which would penalise use of tanky troops).
    Quote Originally Posted by Grill View Post
    But when something like an update is to be expected all stupid breaks loose and it just becomes an idiot storm of catastrophic proportion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Maverick View Post
    Any more balance to th10 will make th10 broken...
    My stats (main account)

  6. #26
    Forum Contender Piper139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    4,601
    A tie is a tie. Whether you did it faster, slower, with more troops, less troops, with bm or without bm. You did not win. You get no win bonus. I get it. It's frustrating when you wait 2 more minutes while someone trickles in sneaky archers forever and end in a tie. Still doesn't change the fact that you did not win.
    sig by dharmaraj in sig shop
    Clan: MN ICE #8UCRP8CL
    IGN: Piper139 #2PQQR9Q22

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    475
    Quote Originally Posted by Wdforrest View Post
    When there is a tie, especially at 100% in the builder base there should be credit for the faster time. Win, partial win or something. Thx
    Speed is not skill. Why should a slow but effective attack be outclassed by Giant+Cannon Cart spam, or Night Witches

  8. #28
    Forum Elder
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    2,981
    Quote Originally Posted by Rascal2013 View Post
    Couldn't a tiebreaker for 100% be # of troops remaining on the map at the end? Or is there some obvious issue i'm missing?
    Yes, that could be good.

  9. #29
    Forum Elder
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    2,981
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajax View Post

    Ties do not only happen at 100% - in fact as I said earlier in this tread, I have them more often at lower scores.



    Why on earth would I think that?


    False on several grounds.

    Just because you can't reliably get 100% with spam attacks doesn't mean they don't happen. And ties don't only happen at 100%.
    I have been, throughout, assuming the request for a tiebreaker for 100%-100%. 3 stars 100% is special. 0%-0%, 48%-48%, 90%-90% ties should not be broken, they are not strong wins, lower level ties should stay as they are, lose-lose.

  10. #30
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,671
    Quote Originally Posted by George1971 View Post
    I have been, throughout, assuming the request for a tiebreaker for 100%-100%. 3 stars 100% is special. 0%-0%, 48%-48%, 90%-90% ties should not be broken, they are not strong wins, lower level ties should stay as they are, lose-lose.
    So, following your logic, 99% - 99% is a lose -lose, but 100% x100% is a win-win? If out of 100 possible tie scenarios 99 results are los- lose, it makes no sense that 1 of the 100 possible scenarios are win-win...it too is a lose - lose. The reason tie breakers even exist is because in the event of a tie, there is no winner. A tie is NOT a win.
    Last edited by Tosti111; March 23rd, 2019 at 05:25 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
  •