New clan wars solution (credits to a guy in the original forums)

[Ajax]

The longer the matchmaking is there is more 'likely' to be a 'fair' match.

No, the opposite is actually true. The longer the search takes, the more the algorithm widens the parameters, so in fact the less likely it is you will get a close match.

This is why some people recommend re-starting the search if you haven't found a match in 20-30 minutes. Note that this only applies to classic wars, there is no benefit at all in restarting the "search" for CWL.

[Def4ultpl4y3r]

Hello. Some people have mentioned that this idea of an OPTION for a one attack war will ruin matchmaking so I have proposed a solution.

solution: timeslots(times when you can start war search and after that you can't). If you started war search before the time slot but there is still no match after the time slot has finished, the war search will carry on until you cancel it. The times listed below are referring to the UK because that is where I live.
00:00 - 01:00
02:00 - 03:00
04:00 - 05:00
06:00 - 07:00
08:00 - 09:00
10:00 - 11:00
12:00 - 13:00
14:00 - 15:00
16:00 - 17:00
18:00 - 19:00
20:00 - 21:00
22:00 - 23:00
(loop)
What do you guys think about these timings? Do you think the slots are too much or there needs to be less slots if we want one attack wars and 2 attack wars to co-exist? This would reduce matchmaking issues because this would force people to start wars at similar times so that there will be a quicker match and also a fairer one. Tell me you don't like this and I'll think of a different solution (credit to Mayankummar for giving me this idea). I think it could work.

[Def4ultpl4y3r]

No, the opposite is actually true. The longer the search takes, the more the algorithm widens the parameters, so in fact the less likely it is you will get a close match.

This is why some people recommend re-starting the search if you haven't found a match in 20-30 minutes. Note that this only applies to classic wars, there is no benefit at all in restarting the "search" for CWL.

Ok. My logic must have been flipped around. This kind of makes sense.

[2222]

Yes but 1 attack wars means that it is harder for attack and defence so people who are up for a challenge get what they want either way.

It is only harder if the other clan gets 2 attacks each. If both clans get only one attack it isn't harder or easier, it is the same. There is no more or less challenge, other than perhaps you could say less challenge with less attacks.

I don't mean an actual problem. I just mean a way to make defence more useful since these one attack wars will force people to make every attack count so they will be more strategic and one wrong war strategy and they will be at a disadvantage.

I find there is less strategy overall in one attack wars compared to two attack wars. I think you really need to get out of your one player 5v5 wars and join some larger clans applying a good strategy to two attack mixed hall wars.

One attack is a problem for some people. It is also a benefit for some people. Longer search times just means that there are very little clans available so the algorithm has to wait until they find a REMOTELY fair match. Take 'fair' with a pinch of salt because you are not going to find every opponent with the exact same development in your clan. The longer the matchmaking is there is more 'likely' to be a 'fair' match. So if you feel like a mismatch is going to happen, take the 2 attack war as you have more chances. I would like a one attack war as a chance because I feel like I'm in a position where I don't get mismatches. Unfortunately not everyone likes this idea so I think there is a bit of a clash.

You aren't any more or less likely to get a "mismatch" with one attack vs. two attack, other than the plan of adding in another type of war increases the chance of mismatches for both sets of wars due to reducing the number of clans in the pool. Also, as others have noted, longer search time doesn't mean closer match.

[Def4ultpl4y3r]

It is only harder if the other clan gets 2 attacks each. If both clans get only one attack it isn't harder or easier, it is the same. There is no more or less challenge, other than perhaps you could say less challenge with less attacks.



I find there is less strategy overall in one attack wars compared to two attack wars. I think you really need to get out of your one player 5v5 wars and join some larger clans applying a good strategy to two attack mixed hall wars.



You aren't any more or less likely to get a "mismatch" with one attack vs. two attack, other than the plan of adding in another type of war increases the chance of mismatches for both sets of wars due to reducing the number of clans in the pool. Also, as others have noted, longer search time doesn't mean closer match.

That's true that matchmaking is the same for one attack or 2 attack wars but if you have a mismatch on a one attack war you are screwed unless everyone decides to attack 5 ranks down to their spot on the map to counter the issue but if they do that, they a missing a potential 15 stars. A 2 attack war is safer just in case you think you will get a mismatch. With one attack wars, by 'challenging' I think I mean to say more punishing because if you don't get a 3 star on one attack, you've really almost screwed up the war since not getting a 3 star on an easy base loosens the pressure for the enemy clan so they will most likely get the 3 star on your base since nowadays many players are good and if 1 attack wars were implemented, I think the more experienced players will choose them over 2 attack wars. I think one attack wars will be more fun since there is more pressure involved and the fact that scouting is a waste of an attack will make the top base even harder to plan for.

[Tosti111]

One attack wars will reduce war size for many clans, no one will bring deaders to make a multiple of five and more mates who want to war will be sitting. Additionally, why would a clan bring lower Ths at all to a one attack war? Witness how it works in CWL.

Not everyone wants more pressure, many want to just play a game not get a new job.

BTW I. Am very experienced and have no interest in one attack wars, IMO theywouldnt be better and I certainly wouldnt spin one.

[Def4ultpl4y3r]

One attack wars will reduce war size for many clans, no one will bring deaders to make a multiple of five and more mates who want to war will be sitting. Additionally, why would a clan bring lower Ths at all to a one attack war? Witness how it works in CWL.

Not everyone wants more pressure, many want to just play a game not get a new job.

BTW I. Am very experienced and have no interest in one attack wars, IMO theywouldnt be better and I certainly wouldnt spin one.

Ok. However, in a 2 attack war, I feel that the enemy clan can mess up multiple times and still pull off a perfect war. If you have no interest in one attack wars, what are your opinions about cwl and how does it affect your views on one attack wars? I wouldn't bring a th6 or below to a 2 attack war at all. Th7 is fine because the offense is the same strength as a mid developed th8 defence. I have seen how it works in cwl but I've only participated in about 3 cwl wars because either I never have time or whenever the cwl is available, I don't have enough clan members. The reason why the matchmaking is not good in cwl is because of matchmaking against 7 clans. Either all the opponents are 2 town halls above the other opponents or vice versa so there is extreme matching issues because of that. In a one attack war you will only be faced with once clan so the matchmaking is much better since the algorithm only has one clan to find while cwl has to find many clans to group. Even though having one attack wars co exist with 2 attack wars (if you want a 2 attack war roll the 2 attack war and vice versa) may make the matchmaking slightly worse, I have provided a solution above so both war types can co-exist so you can continue the way you've been playing and some people can have a different take on the classic clan wars. They wouldn't be 'better', they'll just be different.

[JD4U]

I apologize if I missed seeing someone else suggest this.

OP? Have you considered spinning a single town hall war? If you only spin 8s then it shouldn’t match with many 10s and you can watch how defenses hold up against 7-9s.

[2222]

Ok. However, in a 2 attack war, I feel that the enemy clan can mess up multiple times and still pull off a perfect war. ...... The reason why the matchmaking is not good in cwl is because of matchmaking against 7 clans. Either all the opponents are 2 town halls above the other opponents or vice versa so there is extreme matching issues because of that. In a one attack war you will only be faced with once clan so the matchmaking is much better since the algorithm only has one clan to find while cwl has to find many clans to group.

Your own clan can mess up and pull off the perfect war in 2 attack wars too, it is no different.

There is no matchmaking in CWL wars. You are randomly put in a group with 7 other clans from the same league, so this whole reference is not correct.

I apologize if I missed seeing someone else suggest this.

OP? Have you considered spinning a single town hall war? If you only spin 8s then it shouldn’t match with many 10s and you can watch how defenses hold up against 7-9s.

I believe he is a one-person clan with 5 accounts. My recommendation is to join a clan that is bigger and uses a good war strategy. Many of his suggestions are impacted by not taking part in a clan with a good war plan. All of us are of course impacted by our own experiences, OP, so that isn't an insult to you, please don't take it that way.

[Def4ultpl4y3r]

I apologize if I missed seeing someone else suggest this.

OP? Have you considered spinning a single town hall war? If you only spin 8s then it shouldn’t match with many 10s and you can watch how defenses hold up against 7-9s.

That's the thing. I don't do single TH wars. My suggestion is not for myself. Other players like the idea of single attack wars which is why I'm promoting the idea.