Tie breaker for Perfect wars

[joemann8478]

I am just very happy that you don't speak for SC. In fact, I find SC usually hold a different opinon vs yours which is good.

Here's some food for thought: does SC balance the game and make changes to the game around the top .001%, the top 1%, or the majority of the playerbase?

The answer: SC balances the game and makes changes around the majority of the playerbase (the 99% as it were).

What you are proposing is that SC changes a part of the game for .001% (more likely less than that) of the playerbase.

As a company, should SC invest time & money for such a small fraction of players or should they invest that same amount time & money for the majority of players as it pertains to game balancing & changes?

If you owned a company with millions of customers would you cater to the wishes of the top .001%, the top 1%, or would you run your company in such a way as to keep the 99%?

You seem to think that SC should cater to your (one of the top .001%) wish with no regard for the vast majority of players.
The question you need to ask yourself is: Why should they?

[Alextzh]

Here's some food for thought: does SC balance the game and make changes to the game around the top .001%, the top 1%, or the majority of the playerbase?

The answer: SC balances the game and makes changes around the majority of the playerbase (the 99% as it were).

What you are proposing is that SC changes a part of the game for .001% (more likely less than that) of the playerbase.

As a company, should SC invest time & money for such a small fraction of players or should they invest that same amount time & money for the majority of players as it pertains to game balancing & changes?

If you owned a company with millions of customers would you cater to the wishes of the top .001%, the top 1%, or would you run your company in such a way as to keep the 99%?

You seem to think that SC should cater to your (one of the top .001%) wish with no regard for the vast majority of players.
The question you need to ask yourself is: Why should they?

... sigh... how much resources does it need to add in a tiebreaker for perfect wars?

Based on your logic, SC will not invest ANY MONEY in competitive clash. How many players play clash competitively? I am not even that standard so it must be an even smaller percentage.

In all gaming, the top 1% is extremely important. If you cannot see that..

duh... and the recent swiz nerf is proof that SC listens to the top 1%, probably because the 99% honestly don't know what they are saying. (they can't weigh all the pros and cons. There is a reason why they are crappy attackers because they don't understand the game mechanics well. The top 1% knows the game far better.)

And the change does not affect the 99% who does not play perfect wars so it is not in detriment to the masses. To me, it is a no brainer SC will fix this.

[Ajax]

I am just very happy that you don't speak for SC. In fact, I find SC usually hold a different opinon vs yours which is good.

They quite often do, but in this case I'm pretty sure they don't. And while they quite often do, it certainly isn't "usually".

Darian has even stated on here that they don't regard win streak as something that matters, or means anything. And he does speak for Supercell.

[Ajax]

This is a creative suggestion. The fastest time on base 1 as tiebreaker although uses just a few attacks to settle the tiebreak, still is far far better than a mindless draw in which the clans cannot do ANYTHING to get out of.

As I said, any tiebreaker is better than no tiebreaker. I am tired of not being able to lose in a 2 hit clan war format. It is just ridiculous for ANY COMPETITIVE game in which you CANNOT lose no matter who you match.

Sorry, but that is an utterly ridiculous statement.

It is always possible to lose. You just have to not quite play as well as you can.

What you actually mean is that you are claiming to be so ridiculously brilliant that you never fail to perfect your opponents. And if you do that, then you will not lose. TBH, that is exactly as it should be in the opinion of most here.

This does mean I have been very wrong in suggesting you are in the top 0.01% of clans. You are in the top few clans in the game, top 0.000001% There are NO better clans, at all, just a few others who may just be your equals.

I am quite serious here. If you are fighting 40v40, with more than half TH13 and nothing below TH12, and you ALWAYS perfect your opponents, then there are no better clans out there. And your top 15 should be easily winning CWL Champs 1. Which is where it matters.

And BTW, this is a complete reversal from you. Previously, you have never suggested you want to lose, only that you were upset at not winning when you consider yourselves better than your opponents.

[Ajax]

... sigh... how much resources does it need to add in a tiebreaker for perfect wars?

Based on your logic, SC will not invest ANY MONEY in competitive clash. How many players play clash competitively? I am not even that standard so it must be an even smaller percentage.

In all gaming, the top 1% is extremely important. If you cannot see that..

duh... and the recent swiz nerf is proof that SC listens to the top 1%, probably because the 99% honestly don't know what they are saying. (they can't weigh all the pros and cons. There is a reason why they are crappy attackers because they don't understand the game mechanics well. The top 1% knows the game far better.)

It proves nothing of the sort.

They nerfed it based on their data.

And the change does not affect the 99% who does not play perfect wars so it is not in detriment to the masses. To me, it is a no brainer SC will fix this.

First, they would have to consider it broken, even though there is nothing to suggest it might be.

Then, they would have to consider it happens frequently enough to be worth investing some time in changing.

Those may be "no brainer" to you, but I would be very surprised indeed if they are even considering the possibility that anything might need doing.

If they were seeing perfect wars with high level bases fighting more than 10v10 at a rate of more than a few a week, they might start looking to see if anything should be done. But I'm sure they aren't seeing that.

Again, they may consider the 1% to be more important than the rest (I don't believe they do, but it is possible). But I'm sure they don't consider the 0.0001% to be more important than the rest. And you are most certainly in that percentage.

[maximooze007]

...To me, it is a no brainer SC will fix this.

We can only speculate, whether we're knowledgeable or not with how software are written.

There are hundreds of QoL requests that most people might agree that it far more outweighs this issue, if I'd put myself on their shoes, I'd rather spend my resources that will benefit the majority. I'm not against the idea nor supportive, I just find it hard to understand the importance of this thing compare to other stuffs such as recruitment tool issues if we keep on assuming how no brainer any changes could be.

[Alextzh]

Sorry, but that is an utterly ridiculous statement.

It is always possible to lose. You just have to not quite play as well as you can.

What you actually mean is that you are claiming to be so ridiculously brilliant that you never fail to perfect your opponents. And if you do that, then you will not lose. TBH, that is exactly as it should be in the opinion of most here.

This does mean I have been very wrong in suggesting you are in the top 0.01% of clans. You are in the top few clans in the game, top 0.000001% There are NO better clans, at all, just a few others who may just be your equals.

I am quite serious here. If you are fighting 40v40, with more than half TH13 and nothing below TH12, and you ALWAYS perfect your opponents, then there are no better clans out there. And your top 15 should be easily winning CWL Champs 1. Which is where it matters.

And BTW, this is a complete reversal from you. Previously, you have never suggested you want to lose, only that you were upset at not winning when you consider yourselves better than your opponents.

It is not a reversal. My stance from the start has been clear. If the opponent has a better hit rate I would rather lose than draw as I know my suggestion works both ways. Isn't that obvious?

You really have to get out of your clan and join a C1 clan. There are hundreds of those clans around. Then you will realise how ridiculous some of your perceptions about hit rates are.

I have REAL LIFE experience. We just got hunted by a nobody clan. I posted in Prep day forecasting a perfect war and we (not just our clan but enemy clan whom we know nothing about) did with hits to spare. How can I predict the outcome?? BECAUSE it is really not impossible to perfect in current TH13 meta, especially if you know your opponent are good. 0.0001%??? common how can I predict our opponent will be 0.0001%??? The fact is in current TH13 meta, you don't have to be the top to perfect.

I have told you many many times that but I now believe no words can convince you.

Common, you REALLY have to get out of your clan and see it for yourself.

[Alextzh]

It proves nothing of the sort.

They nerfed it based on their data.

Perhaps they don't nerf it based on the 1% but the 1% suggestions and wishes are usually collaborated by the data SC has, ie the 1% talk more sense from the point of view of SC.

It is not a coincidence that SC actions and the wishes of the 1% are in sync most of the time. It is common sense that the good attacker has a much better understanding of the game mechanics than your average player.

[Alextzh]

We can only speculate, whether we're knowledgeable or not with how software are written.

There are hundreds of QoL requests that most people might agree that it far more outweighs this issue, if I'd put myself on their shoes, I'd rather spend my resources that will benefit the majority. I'm not against the idea nor supportive, I just find it hard to understand the importance of this thing compare to other stuffs such as recruitment tool issues if we keep on assuming how no brainer any changes could be.

I don't think this is a QOL issue. It is like the game is broken in calculating war win/lose once your hit rate goes over 50%... which SC allowed it to make the game more accessible to the masses.

[maximooze007]

I don't think this is a QOL issue. It is like the game is broken in calculating war win/lose once your hit rate goes over 50%... which SC allowed it to make the game more accessible to the masses.

I'm really not going to argue with your issue with the wars, I just more on the side of far more important things for the mass players and I'm sure they have to make the game accessible to the masses otherwise we won't be here discussing anything at all...