War ties

[kdrakakis]

I watched a video by Clash with Cory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wb5eYFCV9AM.

In it, he claims CoC is currently broken because offense is too strong and wars between pro clans end in perfect war ties. He then goes on to argue that, while strong offense keeps the majority of players happy, it frustrates pro players, and, because the CoC team has been trying to establish CoC as an e-sports game, the team should actually take steps to nerf attack, buff defense etc.

Well, you know me, and you know what I am inclined to respond... But in this case, I see a way out that will allow us to have our cake and eat it too, a win-win situation that will keep everyone happy, without involving any nerfs or buffs.

Currently, wars are won by the most stars. If the stars are tied, the highest percentage of destruction wins. Why don't we add an extra tie breaker? If the percentage of destruction is also tied (as is the case in a perfect war), let us sum the attack times for all attacks of each clan. The clan with the smallest sum wins the war. It's simple, it's elegant, and it's fair! Perfect war ties is a problem that affects an insignificant minority of players, so it should be resolved by a solution that will be applied very rarely!

[joemann8478]

Using time as a means of a tie breaker is a horrible, horrible, idea. Just look how it's destroying the BB.

You claim that using time (sum of all attacks with the lesser, i.e. faster, time wins) is fair.....it is anything but fair.
Would you want to lose b/c your attack took 3 minutes versus an opponent's attack taking 2 minutes and 59 seconds, and that 1 second difference resulted in your clan losing the war?

A faster attack that ends in a triple is neither better nor worse than a slower attack that ends in a triple. Why do you want to punish players who do the exact same thing but takes them a bit longer?

Also, the game is not balanced around the "pro" players who make up less than 1% of the player base.

[vansimon]

How many perfect war Ties were there in the last world championships?
Time is not the answer for tie breakers. Some of the best skilled attacks would be punished if this was the case.
If tie breakers needed, can’t each player nominate one player each to attack again. First player side to not 3 star loses. If both 3 star, a 2nd two are chosen, I realise that in theory this could go forever... but unlikely. Both sides can have additional bases prepared for such needs.

[Tollboothwillie]

I watched a video by Clash with Cory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wb5eYFCV9AM.

In it, he claims CoC is currently broken because offense is too strong and wars between pro clans end in perfect war ties. He then goes on to argue that, while strong offense keeps the majority of players happy, it frustrates pro players, and, because the CoC team has been trying to establish CoC as an e-sports game, the team should actually take steps to nerf attack, buff defense etc.

Well, you know me, and you know what I am inclined to respond... But in this case, I see a way out that will allow us to have our cake and eat it too, a win-win situation that will keep everyone happy, without involving any nerfs or buffs.

Currently, wars are won by the most stars. If the stars are tied, the highest percentage of destruction wins. Why don't we add an extra tie breaker? If the percentage of destruction is also tied (as is the case in a perfect war), let us sum the attack times for all attacks of each clan. The clan with the smallest sum wins the war. It's simple, it's elegant, and it's fair! Perfect war ties is a problem that affects an insignificant minority of players, so it should be resolved by a solution that will be applied very rarely!

How many ties do you have in your war log and what is the %?

YouTubers like claiming the sky is falling and over exaggerate issues for viewing numbers.

[Ajax]

Using time as a means of a tie breaker is a horrible, horrible, idea. Just look how it's destroying the BB.

You claim that using time (sum of all attacks with the lesser, i.e. faster, time wins) is fair.....it is anything but fair.
Would you want to lose b/c your attack took 3 minutes versus an opponent's attack taking 2 minutes and 59 seconds, and that 1 second difference resulted in your clan losing the war?

A faster attack that ends in a triple is neither better nor worse than a slower attack that ends in a triple. Why do you want to punish players who do the exact same thing but takes them a bit longer?

Agree totally. I see no good reason to use time taken in attacks as a further tiebreaker when one isn't even needed, as it is so rare, regardless of what clash with cory might say.

Also, the game is not balanced around the "pro" players who make up less than 1% of the player base.

To be fair to him, he does point out that this will only really affect the elite players, since the rest of us just don't get these perfect war ties.