Tie breaker for Perfect wars

[Alextzh]

If both clans get 100% destruction each, then it’s a draw.
If you make the tie breaker based on attacks used, then the game is discouraging players from participating.
Why would you make something that means the clan that didn’t participate as much wins?

you do know that this tie breaker only works for a perfect draw clan war. Errr... you still have to triple every base on the map and it won't be in the minds of 99.9% of the clans who probably won't perfect.

[joemann8478]

you do know that this tie breaker only works for a perfect draw clan war. Errr... you still have to triple every base on the map and it won't be in the minds of 99.9% of the clans who probably won't perfect.

And of the potentially tens of thousands of wars a week that take place in CoC, how many of those are perfect wars/draws?
You don't know because only SC has that kind of data.

My guess is: the percentage is probably so small that SC has decided there needn't be any kind of a tie-breaker for a perfect war b/c it would only affect a small percentage of wars. I.E. making a change would only benefit a very, extremely, minute percentage of the player base, so it is not worth the investment of time and money to implement such a change.

[Kaledonian]

you do know that this tie breaker only works for a perfect draw clan war. Errr... you still have to triple every base on the map and it won't be in the minds of 99.9% of the clans who probably won't perfect.

So if its only for 0.1% (it's probably fewer) of wars, it's not the community that you have to convince. You need to justify, to Supercell, that the time & resources required to code this are worthwhile. Given the sheer number of minor fixes asked for & QoL requests, I seriously doubt there's much urgency for this.

Edit: ninja'd by joemann

[Ajax]

I agree elite clans will treat close elite wars differently after this rule and allow the best attackers to go first. But is this worse than the current state of err "DRAW " ?

Yes, IMO it is much worse than the current situation which correctly results in a draw.

And no, it won't affect my clan in the slightest, but first it means work for SC developers for a ridiculously tiny percentage of players, and second, IMO, it is just wrong in principle to force unnecessary tiebreakers.

They have to do it in knockout competitions, but shouldn't do it anywhere else.

[Alextzh]

Yes, IMO it is much worse than the current situation which correctly results in a draw.

And no, it won't affect my clan in the slightest, but first it means work for SC developers for a ridiculously tiny percentage of players, and second, IMO, it is just wrong in principle to force unnecessary tiebreakers.

They have to do it in knockout competitions, but shouldn't do it anywhere else.

.... let me ask you then, why isnt a war with the same number of stars considered a draw currently??? Your logic does not make sense at all. An even war when both sides used up all attacks but got the same stars (not perfect war) should not be a draw while an uneven war with one side perfecting the other side with 70% of hits vs the other side reqiuring 90% of hit should "correctly" be a draw.

[Alextzh]

And of the potentially tens of thousands of wars a week that take place in CoC, how many of those are perfect wars/draws?
You don't know because only SC has that kind of data.

My guess is: the percentage is probably so small that SC has decided there needn't be any kind of a tie-breaker for a perfect war b/c it would only affect a small percentage of wars. I.E. making a change would only benefit a very, extremely, minute percentage of the player base, so it is not worth the investment of time and money to implement such a change.

The change is probably very simple. Just a slight change in the way war win is calculated.

Whether it is worth it depends on how seriously SC treats the competitive players I guess.

[Ajax]

.... let me ask you then, why isnt a war with the same number of stars considered a draw currently??? Your logic does not make sense at all. An even war when both sides used up all attacks but got the same stars (not perfect war) should not be a draw while an uneven war with one side perfecting the other side with 70% of hits vs the other side reqiuring 90% of hit should "correctly" be a draw.

Because damage is significant. It makes a difference in other parts of the game, not just in war (it affects the loot bonus you get, and in LL it affects the number of trophies you get), so it is quite reasonable to use it as a tiebreak.

No further tiebreak is needed beyond that.

We did actually have a non-perfect draw a few months ago - 38-38 on stars, both with 86.07% damage. And I am perfectly satisfied that deserved to be a draw.

Though I think I may well have been opposed even to the damage tiebreak as well at the time. I have generally been opposed to introducing unnecessary tiebreaks. They are not commonplace in UK sporting culture, and we tend not to see a need for them.

[Thegreatpuma]

If you add this sort of tie breaker to classic war you will ruin the game for mixed hall wars. The reason is, no one would want their weaker attackers to attack. Scouting attacks by lower accounts would stop. Weaker players would not be able to practice as their hits might cost the clan the war.

So, let me get this straight - because you are part of a clan in the top 0.0001% of the game that can regularly perfect 40v Th13 wars you want to ruin the game for the other 99.9999% of us just so you can have some sort of win streak maintained?

.... let me ask you then, why isnt a war with the same number of stars considered a draw currently??? Your logic does not make sense at all. An even war when both sides used up all attacks but got the same stars (not perfect war) should not be a draw while an uneven war with one side perfecting the other side with 70% of hits vs the other side reqiuring 90% of hit should "correctly" be a draw.

You are just being willfully obtuse here, and it's not helping your argument. You know exactly why it's not a draw. And it makes sense that damage % is the tie breaker in these scenarios.

[SumoSloth]

Let me ask you a question, have your clan ever perfected a war in the last 3 months? I am not even talking about double perfect.

The tie breaker is only for PERFECT TIEs. Does it even apply to your clan??? If you don't play perfect wars, why would you even affect the way your clan plays??? I mean honestly, what is your clan chance of getting a perfect war? 0.1%? Are you going to hold attacks just in case you get perfect and your opponent perfect you?

If you are in a clan getting perfect draws you won't be saying this... Clan wars are meant to be competitive and not a foregone conclusion.
In my last war, even during prep day, I already posted I expected a perfect draw and true enough we did and both sides have hits to spare.

I agree elite clans will treat close elite wars differently after this rule and allow the best attackers to go first. But is this worse than the current state of err "DRAW " ?

common... you must have some logic right?

It's exactly the fact that I have some logic that I understand how this will negatively affect lower / mixed ths much more than it will affect the top .1%. Wars which include only th10 and lower have a much higher chance of getting a perfect tie, I've seen plenty of them in my time. People who are below th13 are still developing their bases and their skills. Your suggestion will encourage clans to not let those players develop or fail because it may cost them a red streak on their war record.

I've seen perfect draws more than enough times to know and understand that a draw is exactly that - a draw. As I've already said if you're that good (meaning you and your clan) why even bother about or worry about regular clan wars, parts of the game have evolved to suit your (meaning your clan) needs where you can have competitive wars against other top level people. Why make a change based on an arbitrary thing like you suggested, which in the end only benefits the top .1% and potentially damages a much larger base which is still developing in the game? Where is the logic in that?

[2222]

My thought is the same as it was for your same idea posted in the war forum. I like the idea of number of attacks as a tie breaker much better than the common suggestion of time as the tie breaker. However, I still don't like the idea. OP, you are thinking of it in terms of perfect-perfect wars at th13, which are a very tiny % of the perfect-perfect wars. The much more common ones are from lower hall wars with clans that intentionally stay at lower halls, engineer, etc. Your system would encourage that. So, the bad outweighs the good, I'm afraid. A tie is a tie.