Tie breaker for Perfect wars

[maximooze007]

I don't see your idea ever coming with the current matching. Wars are not matched th by th as you should know so your #1 is not equal to opponents 1. There are plenty of threads complaining that a maxed th X on one side and a mid th higher on the other. Gives a great disadvantage to the lower TH.

If I may ask, what happens to say 2 people with exact max account? literally every piece is at max, will they be juggled between top 1 and top 2 in the roster? or is there something determinant that will keep joe at top 1 and bob at top 2? because if its random then the deciding top 1 is not a good idea...

[Alextzh]

I don't see your idea ever coming with the current matching. Wars are not matched th by th as you should know so your #1 is not equal to opponents 1. There are plenty of threads complaining that a maxed th X on one side and a mid th higher on the other. Gives a great disadvantage to the lower TH.

clan war matchmaking itself is never fair anyway. Although I agree using one base leaves too much to chance, a score derived from the top 5 base is probably fairer in the long term.

At the end of the day, there is always adv to one side in wars. I can work around an imperfect tiebreaker... current situation there is NO WAY to get out of the draw.

A tiebreaker even imperfect gives us hope and a way to shoot for a win.

[Tollboothwillie]

If I may ask, what happens to say 2 people with exact max account? literally every piece is at max, will they be juggled between top 1 and top 2 in the roster? or is there something determinant that will keep joe at top 1 and bob at top 2? because if its random then the deciding top 1 is not a good idea...

You would need to ask George1971 about that.

But yes that's another issue with that idea. #1 doesn't mean the best in current war.

[George1971]

I don't see your idea ever coming with the current matching. Wars are not matched th by th as you should know so your #1 is not equal to opponents 1. There are plenty of threads complaining that a maxed th X on one side and a mid th higher on the other. Gives a great disadvantage to the lower TH. Then there is the fact that your placement on map is based on defense strength not offense. It also implies that you must do mirror attacks if you want a chance in winning your tie breaker.

This tiebreaker, fastest attack on their #1, assumes their highest ranked defensive base is their #1. If they have equal max bases, it nominally doesn’t matter.
It doesn’t matter who attacks what. Everyone can attack #1, and if the 3rd tiebreaker comes into play, the fastest one that achieved 100% is the one that counts.

What gives a lower TH an advantage?
How do mirror attacks come into this?

[Ajax]

If I may ask, what happens to say 2 people with exact max account? literally every piece is at max, will they be juggled between top 1 and top 2 in the roster? or is there something determinant that will keep joe at top 1 and bob at top 2? because if its random then the deciding top 1 is not a good idea...

To all intents and purposes for the end user, it is random, but stays the same for some time.

In actuality, kit is determined by database internal order, which can change at times, but which we can neither see nor affect.

[George1971]

If I may ask, what happens to say 2 people with exact max account? literally every piece is at max, will they be juggled between top 1 and top 2 in the roster? or is there something determinant that will keep joe at top 1 and bob at top 2? because if its random then the deciding top 1 is not a good idea...

For 3rd tiebreak by fastest best attack on #1:

It doesn’t matter if two people have the same exact max account, all that matters is which base is #1 on the lineup. That the base you’ll want to 100% in fast time.

Having defeated every other base 100%, your side can then use every remaining attack to try to improve the 100% attack time on their #1. The simplicity is an important feature. Everyone knows how it works. You can click on the #1, both sides, to see the current best time, and spare attacks can be used to improve on it.

The random choice between equal bases is an irrelevant choice.

[Tollboothwillie]

This tiebreaker, fastest attack on their #1, assumes their highest ranked defensive base is their #1. If they have equal max bases, it nominally doesn’t matter.
It doesn’t matter who attacks what. Everyone can attack #1, and if the 3rd tiebreaker comes into play, the fastest one that achieved 100% is the one that counts.

What gives a lower TH an advantage?
How do mirror attacks come into this?

It does not give lower th an advantage, it gives a disadvantage. If my 1 is a th11 and opponents have th12 then I am attacking up with less and weaker troops vs a stronger defense with more buildings. My opponents th12 has stronger and more troops.

There are many who oppose time tie breakers in BB because your rewarding spam attacks over precision attacks.

I brought up mirror because I misread your post thinking you wanted #1 attack vs #1 attack. I see now it's best of from anyone but still doesn't work because wars are not matched base by base.

[2222]

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???

Perfect ties is about the only thing that stops the win streaks of the good engineering and perma-low maxing clans. They get 100% every time. The only lose their streak when they match a clan that does the same to them.

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.

Getting 100% every time is an important part of their streak. Trying to match clans that don't do the same is another important part which is where the roster engineering comes in. That is for the engineering clans. As for the perma-maxing clans at lower halls, they match other clans that could also perfect score them all the time too. When you have a war of th9 and below, for example, 100% on both sides is not too hard.

If both sides are not maxed and equal weight, I don't see how the tiebreaker will favour one side or the other.

I didn't say it favors one side or the other and don't know how you got that impression. Instead, what I said is it allows a clan to keep its streak going even if the other clan gets 100% against them. The low hall clans 100% ties are much more common than the one you experienced.

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.

I've been a part of perfect 100% tied wars. That said, your comment that most have never seen it doesn't actually further your argument much. If it is as rare as you say, it also isn't a concern for SC to have to address.

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.

I think the better change would to only apply it to wars where both clans have all full max accounts, though, again, the frequency at which those matches result in 100% ties is probably too low for SC to care much about.

[George1971]

on this proposed...
This tiebreaker, fastest attack on their #1

It does not give lower th an advantage, it gives a disadvantage. If my 1 is a th11 and opponents have th12 then I am attacking up with less and weaker troops vs a stronger defense with more buildings. My opponents th12 has stronger and more troops.

There are many who oppose time tie breakers in BB because your rewarding spam attacks over precision attacks.

I consider that this 3rd level tiebreaker giving advantage to higher town halls is already known to be desired by SuperCell, because they want to actively disencourage players or clans camping maxed at a lower TH. This behavior may be fun to play for a while, but it becomes stagnation.

Tiebreakers in BB continue to be a huge relief. I continue to experience 100% ties on lesser accounts.
I have learned to do very fast attacks on BB. I have a few times done the 3 starts in 60 seconds challenge with a single attack. I do not agree that my attacks are spam, even if an observer might think so. I do place all troops in the first ten seconds, but there is a sequence to it, and careful placement, using 6-8 finger tips, and the direction of attack is very precisely chosen. It's not all archers, but it might be three slots of archers, and the practice and experience has taught me that the battle can be predicted, and that it is not a great advantage to dribble archers compared to placing them all in 2-3 waves in the first 10 seconds.

[Kaledonian]

on this proposed...
This tiebreaker, fastest attack on their #1





I consider that this 3rd level tiebreaker giving advantage to higher town halls is already known to be desired by SuperCell, because they want to actively disencourage players or clans camping maxed at a lower TH. This behavior may be fun to play for a while, but it becomes stagnation.

Tiebreakers in BB continue to be a huge relief. I continue to experience 100% ties on lesser accounts.
I have learned to do very fast attacks on BB. I have a few times done the 3 starts in 60 seconds challenge with a single attack. I do not agree that my attacks are spam, even if an observer might think so. I do place all troops in the first ten seconds, but there is a sequence to it, and careful placement, using 6-8 finger tips, and the direction of attack is very precisely chosen. It's not all archers, but it might be three slots of archers, and the practice and experience has taught me that the battle can be predicted, and that it is not a great advantage to dribble archers compared to placing them all in 2-3 waves in the first 10 seconds.

TH13 is nothing like BB.

OP hasn't, IMO, convinced of the overwhelming need for a tiebreaker at all. You, if I'm reading this correctly, are talking about a 3rd level tiebreaker; in the name of all that's sacred, why? There does not absolutely have to be a winner every time, using multiple layers of tiebreakers, each of which requires coding!

If your clan, or any clan, cannot prevent being perfected, then you do not deserve to win. In other words, defend better or own the draw.