Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 124

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Tie breaker for Perfect wars

  1.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #71
    Kaptain Kat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Rundum Hause
    Posts
    12,368
    First Letís travel back in time. Back in the day the winner of CW was decided based on stars. With no tie breaker whatsoever.
    They then introduced the destruction tie breaker, which makes sense. Especially since it matters in more areas of the game and is a consistent factor in how the game decides how well an attacker does.

    They have at that time thought about perfect wars and decided they didn't want a tiebreaker for perfect wars. They felt that if a war is perfect that both clans deserved the tie and no clan deserves to lose, therefore they decided not to implement a tiebreaker for the tiebreaker and the perfect war will just simply end in a tie. Letís not forget that a tie is different in the game in terms of war loot compared to a loss or a win. Not that it matters to certain players but nevertheless the difference is there and matters to SC as theyíve felt the need to implement that difference.

    Now whether or not something is difficult to code or not or takes a lot of resources or not is really not all that relevant. What matters most is SCís opinion on something and if they still feel the same way then there wonít be that tie breaker even if itís 2 minutes work.


    Lastly while I personally can understand where the idea is coming from and how it came about, meaning I can understand why that could be a tie breaker. It does have certain consequences.
    It will encourage some players / engineers to permanent max at certain lower TH levels. And SC doesnít want encourage that type of play. They want each player to feel like they can freely progress as they desire.
    It will also encourage people while being included in the war line-up to be excluded from war attacks or that they are told they arenít allowed to attack anymore. Quite frankly thatís not good for the player and not good for the game and not the message SC wants to send or encourage.

    Thank you! ClashOfHolmes for an awesome sig!

    Just call me K, my name is too difficult to spell.
    Hay Day | Level: 120 | # VL8GVUL | Main Hay Day Topics | Forum Rules | HD Wiki
    Clash of Clans | Level: lost count at 200 | #Y0VJUJG

  2. #72
    Centennial Club
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaptain Kat View Post
    First Let’s travel back in time. Back in the day the winner of CW was decided based on stars. With no tie breaker whatsoever.
    They then introduced the destruction tie breaker, which makes sense. Especially since it matters in more areas of the game and is a consistent factor in how the game decides how well an attacker does.

    They have at that time thought about perfect wars and decided they didn't want a tiebreaker for perfect wars. They felt that if a war is perfect that both clans deserved the tie and no clan deserves to lose, therefore they decided not to implement a tiebreaker for the tiebreaker and the perfect war will just simply end in a tie. Let’s not forget that a tie is different in the game in terms of war loot compared to a loss or a win. Not that it matters to certain players but nevertheless the difference is there and matters to SC as they’ve felt the need to implement that difference.

    Now whether or not something is difficult to code or not or takes a lot of resources or not is really not all that relevant. What matters most is SC’s opinion on something and if they still feel the same way then there won’t be that tie breaker even if it’s 2 minutes work.


    Lastly while I personally can understand where the idea is coming from and how it came about, meaning I can understand why that could be a tie breaker. It does have certain consequences.
    It will encourage some players / engineers to permanent max at certain lower TH levels. And SC doesn’t want encourage that type of play. They want each player to feel like they can freely progress as they desire.
    It will also encourage people while being included in the war line-up to be excluded from war attacks or that they are told they aren’t allowed to attack anymore. Quite frankly that’s not good for the player and not good for the game and not the message SC wants to send or encourage.
    Ok, I see the point that it will discourage non-maxed offense players from hitting. Maybe my tie breaker isn't the right one.

    In the past, perfect wars are very rare mainly because the top level TH triple rate is low. It is understandable to keep perfect wars asa draw as there literally were no clans that can perfect. so it is pointless to differentiate them. Now you have like hundreds of clans who can perfect, surely it is a problem.

    Honestly, the average time to triple the top 3 bases can be used as a tiebreaker like someone suggested. To me, any tiebreaker is better than a draw. All I want is a chance to fight for a win, or lose to a better team.

  3.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #73
    Kaptain Kat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Rundum Hause
    Posts
    12,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Alextzh View Post
    Ok, I see the point that it will discourage non-maxed offense players from hitting. Maybe my tie breaker isn't the right one.

    In the past, perfect wars are very rare mainly because the top level TH triple rate is low. It is understandable to keep perfect wars asa draw as there literally were no clans that can perfect. so it is pointless to differentiate them. Now you have like hundreds of clans who can perfect, surely it is a problem.

    Honestly, the average time to triple the top 3 bases can be used as a tiebreaker like someone suggested. To me, any tiebreaker is better than a draw. All I want is a chance to fight for a win, or lose to a better team.
    It might even discourage maxed offense players from attacking in all maxed hall wars. Which might have a few side effects by the way. Some players are a bit vulnerable and get rusty if they donít attack too often they need the routine. LL and FC just isnít quite the same. Plus extra spare attacks can also be used to further fine tune those skills, try the base you have more difficulty with, try new things etc.
    Its a bit of a shame if all of those possibilities are lost. But most important is that I really donít think SC wants to encourage people being in the line up but told they arenít allowed to attack.

    The tie breaker was introduced a long time ago and perfect wars existed back then as well. They were rare and still are rare when looking at the game as a whole.

    Average time is quite arbitrary for some people as it will easily stir up the debate of ďskill-/mindless spam attacksĒ versus the ďskilled multi stage attacksĒ. But thatís a different topic up for heavy debate by a lot I might add.

    Thank you! ClashOfHolmes for an awesome sig!

    Just call me K, my name is too difficult to spell.
    Hay Day | Level: 120 | # VL8GVUL | Main Hay Day Topics | Forum Rules | HD Wiki
    Clash of Clans | Level: lost count at 200 | #Y0VJUJG

  4.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Alextzh View Post
    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.
    I have no idea why you think I need to get out of my clan. I don't need to see it to know what the numbers are.

    Not that any C1 clan would have me, I am nowhere near a good enough attacker for that.

    And that wasn't a "nobody clan", it was one formed (as you have said yourself) for the specific purpose of hunting your clan. In order to do that, they would have had to include only players from among the very best.

    And no, I do not believe there are hundreds of clans who can perfect their opponents every time when playing mainly TH13 at 40v40.

    A few dozen, maybe, but not hundreds.

    Though even if it were hundreds, when you consider there are at least 2 million active clans, that is still an incredibly tiny proportion.

    And you are quite right that no words you can say will convince me that "The fact is in current TH13 meta, you don't have to be the top to perfect." because the facts say otherwise. Not only the FCAT that in CWL, the rate in C1 is still well under 50%, but also the FACT that in 500 wars, we have only seen one perfect from either side, and that is backed up by experience from others above.

    If you didn't have to be at the very top to perfect, then we would be seeing higher numbers than that.

  5.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Alextzh View Post
    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 not sure why you think SC allowed that?

    The simple fact (and you are right that no words you can say will convince me otherwise) is that those able to hit decent TH13 bases at over 50% triple rate is incredibly tiny.

    And it has to be well over 50% before you get to the point where you will perfect almost every time - 50% hit rate does NOT equate to 100% with two hits available, that is a statistical fallacy.

    There are a few hundred players, among the 30 million or more, who can triple decent Th13s at well over 50%.

    This month (January 2021) there were over a million clans took part in CWL, of which fewer than 500 were in C1. So that is the top 0.005% of clans. And even that very tiny top proportion still only managed a 42.8% triple rate. That is simple fact, and really cannot be argued with. The numbers are there.

  6. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Alextzh View Post
    As I said, any tiebreaker is better than no tiebreaker.
    You've said that, but I've given you examples of why that is not the case. You've admitted the issue of non-max players not being able to attack is a negative. You've continually ignored the issue of encouraging engineering and perma-max lower hall players. You know, the part of the game where the clans get 100% every single war. The only thing that breaks their streaks are ties.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alextzh View Post
    0.0001%??? common how can I predict our opponent will be 0.0001%???
    No one suggested that wat the chance of YOUR particular war ending at 100% tie. The point is out of all wars, the 100% tie is rare. And, as noted previously, the most common situation for 100% ties is not at all th13 wars. It is with lower halls and engineered clans.

    If you limited your proposal to only apply to wars where both clans were all full max of whatever the top hall is, it would be pretty good. It would avoid the problem of less-than-max players not getting to attack and it would avoid the problem of encouraging and rewarding engineering and perma-maxing at lower halls. I don't think SC would take the time to code it since it is such a small issue, though.

    Contact SC here. Click here for how trophies are calculated. Click here to see how war map placement of max halls is determined. An idea to improve legends here. I wish max players had a separate loot bank as described here. Caution, I often discuss for the sake of discussion and enjoy having my opinion challenged (or approved of) even when I care little about the actual issue. My balance wish: get rid of tornado trap, make it a decoration.

  7. #77
    Forum Elder
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    2,910
    As I understand it, 15v and 20v are the most common war sizes. 40v is much more rare. I have to also believe that a 40v with 36 TH13s and 4 TH12s make it an even rarer animal. I would be even more surprised if all 36 TH13 are full max both offensively and defensively.

    I have said many times that there is a reason the streaker clans do not go to battle with a lineup of only full max def/off TH13s because it leaves no room to engineer in any form. The Op started this all off with his concern about losing their streak and how they were hunted and how easy it is to get a perfect war. If getting a perfect war were as easy as he claims, how did his clan get a winstreak of 30? Even with my limited math skill, I come out with a 1/30 = approx 3% chance of a perfect war. That also suggests that there is a very small likelihood that they were meeting full equals for at least 29 of those wars. Especially if they were all full max 13s.

    All I see is a clan that at best has stumbled into a niche roster that they can consistently win without maxxing fully or that they intentionally roster engineer to extend their streak. I find it odd that for 29 wars, not a peep from the OP when they should have tied all those times.

    Let the OP prove his 29 winstreak with full max TH13s both offensively and defensively against equally developed TH13s. I suspect that the OP has a strong bias to offence over defence as a tactic to extend the winstreak and oddly enough, increase the chances of being perfected due to self inflicted wounds. It is easier to get perfect wars against lesser opponents and pretty easy to be perfected when your defense is lagging. The longer this goes on the more sour grapes i hear.
    Last edited by Tosti111; 4 Weeks Ago at 06:21 PM.
    OP Defense: Any defense the poster doestít like or know how to work around, nullifies their attack or denies them their rightful three star.

  8. #78
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,038
    Quote Originally Posted by Alextzh View Post
    ... 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.
    The swiz was not nerfed based on the top 1%.
    Go to the general section of this forum and read the thread about nerfing swizards. Most of the people responding in that thread are not in the top 1% but are part of the 99%.

    You do realize that the vast majority of those on the forums are in the 99% and represent quite a small portion of the millions of CoC olayers worldwide?

    SC looks at the data THEY have when it comes to game balance and changes.

    SC has invested time & money in the competitive scene: world qualifiers and finals ring any bells?
    As a company, they will (and do) invest in the top 1% only if it will bring revenue to the game.

    So, explain how your idea that would affect less than 1% of CoC players would help bring in revenue for SC?

  9. #79
    Centennial Club
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by 2222 View Post
    You've said that, but I've given you examples of why that is not the case. You've admitted the issue of non-max players not being able to attack is a negative. You've continually ignored the issue of encouraging engineering and perma-max lower hall players. You know, the part of the game where the clans get 100% every single war. The only thing that breaks their streaks are ties.

    No one suggested that wat the chance of YOUR particular war ending at 100% tie. The point is out of all wars, the 100% tie is rare. And, as noted previously, the most common situation for 100% ties is not at all th13 wars. It is with lower halls and engineered clans.
    I ignore the issue of encouraging engineering and perma-max bases because I think it is senseless. Why would it encourage engineering than what it already is???

    Let me ask you something, you are talking about engineering based on personal experience or just some imagination??

    Engineering win streaks DON'T win wars because they can get 100% I think. Based on my understanding of the game. It is illogical. The only way they can build a win streak is by matching, matching crappy clans that will never ever get perfect.

    They are the LAST CLANS EVER to get a perfect tie because if they do they lose their streak and duh... so much for engineering... If they never/super rarely get perfect ties, then why would they even bother about this rule? Beside a tiebreaker does not guarantee a win anyway so they will still engineer to avoid the perfect tie, rather than try to win the perfect tie. (ie same as before)

    Perma max issue has been around all the time. Being maxed grants you adv in ALL WARS. Every single war gives you adv if you are maxed assuming your opponent is not. If both sides are not maxed and equal weight, I don't see how the tiebreaker will favour one side or the other.

    Anyway, does a new tiebreaker that affect wars that most of you probably have NEVER SEEN before really encourage people to go perma maxed than what it already is? common... you have to be logical.

    My tiebreaker main issue is discouraging participation by non-maxed offense players.

    I think a better tie breaker would be the number of defenses (2 stars and below) by the top 5 bases of each clans.

    This will let the lower offense people participate and still retain skill as the main factor for the tiebreaker.
    Last edited by Alextzh; 4 Weeks Ago at 11:05 PM.

  10. #80
    Centennial Club
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Tosti111 View Post
    As I understand it, 15v and 20v are the most common war sizes. 40v is much more rare. I have to also believe that a 40v with 36 TH13s and 4 TH12s make it an even rarer animal. I would be even more surprised if all 36 TH13 are full max both offensively and defensively.

    I have said many times that there is a reason the streaker clans do not go to battle with a lineup of only full max def/off TH13s because it leaves no room to engineer in any form. The Op started this all off with his concern about losing their streak and how they were hunted and how easy it is to get a perfect war. If getting a perfect war were as easy as he claims, how did his clan get a winstreak of 30? Even with my limited math skill, I come out with a 1/30 = approx 3% chance of a perfect war. That also suggests that there is a very small likelihood that they were meeting full equals for at least 29 of those wars. Especially if they were all full max 13s.

    All I see is a clan that at best has stumbled into a niche roster that they can consistently win without maxxing fully or that they intentionally roster engineer to extend their streak. I find it odd that for 29 wars, not a peep from the OP when they should have tied all those times.

    Let the OP prove his 29 winstreak with full max TH13s both offensively and defensively against equally developed TH13s. I suspect that the OP has a strong bias to offence over defence as a tactic to extend the winstreak and oddly enough, increase the chances of being perfected due to self inflicted wounds. It is easier to get perfect wars against lesser opponents and pretty easy to be perfected when your defense is lagging. The longer this goes on the more sour grapes i hear.
    no sure why I am replying to this but just to bump up the thread.

    I already told we run 36 th13 and 4 th12. That probably allow us to avoid the pro/modder clans who run full th13. That is why we have a streak (I think it was 60 something) without getting dual perfected sooner. I asked our clan leaders to run full th13 for wars a few times (so we get stronger clans in wars) but they were not willing to leave out some of the long time th12....

    I also already told we got hunted. But this is not about getting hunted. I don't mind getting hunted. I actually don't mind losing the streak to a better clan with higher hit rate. I just think it is senseless once two good clans get matched, a draw becomes the inevitable result.
    Last edited by Alextzh; 4 Weeks Ago at 10:50 PM.

Posting Permissions

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