Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Just lost CWL by 30ish stars - won every round

  1. #1
    Centennial Club
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    105

    Just lost CWL by 30ish stars - won every round

    This seems fishy to me…the clan that won was horrible…

    I believe people are teaming up with other clans once war is set to lay down a round.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    South East of China, not that far away from Shanghai, or Hong Kong, just where my heart is...
    Posts
    4,670
    Quote Originally Posted by bct View Post
    This seems fishy to me…the clan that won was horrible…

    I believe people are teaming up with other clans once war is set to lay down a round.
    There is, unfortunately, nothing we can do about it.

  3. #3
    Centennial Club
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by MasterEdy View Post
    There is, unfortunately, nothing we can do about it.
    Well it sounds harsh but maybe require clans to be closed during CWL?

    I know it’d suck for clans with members coming and going from side clans doing CWL etc. (like ours) and there are loopholes like discord.

    But I feel once this catches on and we keep seeing it (which we will), it’ll ruin CWL, which as we all know is the best thing about this game.

    Come to think of it last month I had a member from a competition CWL clan constantly send me an invite before start to the point I left it not to be sent another one. Didn’t think much of it then but pretty clear now what was going on.

  4. #4
    2222's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    21,364
    Quote Originally Posted by bct View Post
    Well it sounds harsh but maybe require clans to be closed during CWL?

    I know it’d suck for clans with members coming and going from side clans doing CWL etc. (like ours) and there are loopholes like discord.

    But I feel once this catches on and we keep seeing it (which we will), it’ll ruin CWL, which as we all know is the best thing about this game.

    Come to think of it last month I had a member from a competition CWL clan constantly send me an invite before start to the point I left it not to be sent another one. Didn’t think much of it then but pretty clear now what was going on.
    I think the negative outweighs the positive with that suggestion. I know personally I would be way more often negatively impacted by forced clan closure than I am by collusion. Also, the clans can still chat via clan descriptions or outside chat services.

    What I do think, is SC should be way more proactive on punishing collusion. The sense I get is that they do very little and usually rely on reports to them (and even then do very little). For awhile, Onyx was publishing the data here that he pulled which showed the huge deviation from the norm for certain wars and it was pretty clear where there was collusion going on and SC did almost nothing about it. The same cheating/colluding clans were still in CWL the next month.

    If SC all along had been looking at the same data (I don't want to hear excuses about resources, time, etc. we have people doing it on their free time just for the fun of it) and severely punishing clans (suspend the clan from taking part in any wars, classic or CWL for 45 days for first offense, delete the clan on second offense) we'd probably be seeing very little of it by now as clans would have learned it wasn't tolerated. Instead, clans have learned it is tolerated.

    Contact SC here. Click here for how trophies are calculated. 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.

  5. #5
    Centennial Club
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by 2222 View Post
    I think the negative outweighs the positive with that suggestion. I know personally I would be way more often negatively impacted by forced clan closure than I am by collusion. Also, the clans can still chat via clan descriptions or outside chat services.

    What I do think, is SC should be way more proactive on punishing collusion. The sense I get is that they do very little and usually rely on reports to them (and even then do very little). For awhile, Onyx was publishing the data here that he pulled which showed the huge deviation from the norm for certain wars and it was pretty clear where there was collusion going on and SC did almost nothing about it. The same cheating/colluding clans were still in CWL the next month.

    If SC all along had been looking at the same data (I don't want to hear excuses about resources, time, etc. we have people doing it on their free time just for the fun of it) and severely punishing clans (suspend the clan from taking part in any wars, classic or CWL for 45 days for first offense, delete the clan on second offense) we'd probably be seeing very little of it by now as clans would have learned it wasn't tolerated. Instead, clans have learned it is tolerated.
    Well if this is the case, that collusion is largely ignored, perhaps the clan that has the most stars AND the one that wins all rounds should BOTH be promoted.

    And in the same sense the clan with the least stars AND the one that loses the most rounds (if they’re different) should be demoted.

    And I agree there should be more resources put towards this.
    Last edited by bct; June 10th, 2021 at 03:46 PM.

  6. #6
    Forum Veteran Rizzob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Over there ---->
    Posts
    1,526
    Quote Originally Posted by bct View Post
    Well if this is the case, that collusion is largely ignored, perhaps the clan that has the most stars AND the one that wins all rounds should BOTH be promoted.

    And in the same sense the clan with the least stars AND the one that loses the most rounds (if they’re different) should be demoted.

    And I agree there should be more resources put towards this.
    I agree with your frustration - collusion in a competitive ladder is cheating and should be handled severely.

    I don't want to overly reward war wins though - in the lower leagues this encourages people to keep higher level inactive accounts in for their defense. For the higher leagues (where you must be if there's only one clan being promoted), this isn't an issue.

    I bet if you look at the war breakdowns, you can easily tell which clans were colluding.

  7. #7
    rowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    "This is the way the world ends, not with a bang, but a whimper" T S Eliot
    Posts
    12,193
    In my own eyes, a simpler solution is to use the same identical system in place for any and all other group play round robin tournaments that I am aware of, final rankings by number of wins. Total stars, and/or % destruction can be used as a tie breaker, but should not be the primary ranking criteria. Their system promotes and rewards collusion. Two teams can collude to crate a win equivalent for both teams. If wins were the criteria, like all other tournaments, the best two teams could do is tie, creating no win equivalent for either team.

    Have said it often before, and will say it again. "Stars, not wins" is the most mind boggling decision they ever made for the game. And no, they have never explained that decision.
    Last edited by rowman; June 10th, 2021 at 04:28 PM.

  8. #8
    Forum Veteran Rizzob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Over there ---->
    Posts
    1,526
    Quote Originally Posted by rowman View Post
    In my own eyes, a simpler solution is to use the same identical system in place for any and all other group play round robin tournaments that I am aware of, final rankings by number of wins. Total stars, and/or % destruction can be used as a tie breaker, but should not be the primary ranking criteria. Their system promotes and rewards collusion. Two teams can collude to crate a win equivalent for both teams. If wins were the criteria, like all other tournaments, the best two teams could do is tie, creating no win equivalent for either team.

    Have said it often before, and will say it again. "Stars, not wins" is the most mind boggling decision they ever made for the game. And no, they have never explained that decision.
    IIRC, you didn't get any bonus stars for wins at the start, they added that in later. Minor bit of trivia, as I don't remember what, if any, explanation was given for that change.

    But here's why I disagree with the concept of wins over stars. In the "stars" system, offense is the name of the game. The best attackers will rise to the top. Individual defenses don't matter as much. In the "wins" system, defense matters more, and can impact an individual war much more than a week's worth of wars. You might say "good, defense should be rewarded". But this is where the sports analogy breaks down - dead bases can still defend.

    If I've got a dead TH13 on my roster, I might be more inclined to keep the dead TH13 in the war rather than put in the next strongest base, which might be a TH9. The stars the TH13 will prevent might be more than the TH9 will gain. If the TH9 gets a 0-star, and gets 3-starred, that's a net of -3 for that war. If the TH13 doesn't attack, but only gets 2-starred, that's a net of -2 for that war. That one star is more likely to swing an individual war than the entire week. So, I might be more likely to keep the dead TH13 and leave the very alive TH9 on the sidelines. That's not healthy.

    And yes, this is a very real decision I have to make sometimes in CWL. I'm in crystal league, so we deal with turnover and non-attackers.

    Of course, all this is assuming that everyone is playing in good faith, and the existence of this thread shows that's not always the case. But what if they're not? Onyx was able to pull data from the API that showed what clans were colluding in champions league. Seriously punishing those clans would be enough to put a stop to it/cut waaaay down on it, wouldn't it? (2222 gave a simple baseline of how to punish such transgressions.) And it seems like a fairly low-effort way to do it. It also seems safer than changing the entire scoring system and dealing with the unintended side effects of that.

  9. #9
    Millennial Club
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    1,282
    Quote Originally Posted by Rizzob View Post
    IIRC, you didn't get any bonus stars for wins at the start, they added that in later. Minor bit of trivia, as I don't remember what, if any, explanation was given for that change.

    But here's why I disagree with the concept of wins over stars. In the "stars" system, offense is the name of the game. The best attackers will rise to the top. Individual defenses don't matter as much. In the "wins" system, defense matters more, and can impact an individual war much more than a week's worth of wars. You might say "good, defense should be rewarded". But this is where the sports analogy breaks down - dead bases can still defend.

    If I've got a dead TH13 on my roster, I might be more inclined to keep the dead TH13 in the war rather than put in the next strongest base, which might be a TH9. The stars the TH13 will prevent might be more than the TH9 will gain. If the TH9 gets a 0-star, and gets 3-starred, that's a net of -3 for that war. If the TH13 doesn't attack, but only gets 2-starred, that's a net of -2 for that war. That one star is more likely to swing an individual war than the entire week. So, I might be more likely to keep the dead TH13 and leave the very alive TH9 on the sidelines. That's not healthy.

    And yes, this is a very real decision I have to make sometimes in CWL. I'm in crystal league, so we deal with turnover and non-attackers.

    Of course, all this is assuming that everyone is playing in good faith, and the existence of this thread shows that's not always the case. But what if they're not? Onyx was able to pull data from the API that showed what clans were colluding in champions league. Seriously punishing those clans would be enough to put a stop to it/cut waaaay down on it, wouldn't it? (2222 gave a simple baseline of how to punish such transgressions.) And it seems like a fairly low-effort way to do it. It also seems safer than changing the entire scoring system and dealing with the unintended side effects of that.
    Offense would still be just as important as it is now due to the fact that in order to win a war in cwl you must score more stars than your opponent.

    And I've always agreed that wins should be the determining factor in cwl, with stars as a 1st tie breaker and damage total being the 2nd.
    A third tie breaker would be the winner of the head-to-head match.

    Why do I support wins over total stars in cwl? For two main reasons: 1) as with most round robin style tournaments, wins are the primary deciding factor.
    2) because there are clans that win every war, but lose out on promotion because they scored less stars than another clan.

    SC should remove the bonus stars for a win. Personally I don't buy the whole "a win should reward the clan with something" argument since the clan already gets one additional bonus pack of medals to hand out per win.
    Additionally, SC should change the primary factor to wins and use stars as a 1st tie breaker.

  10. #10
    Forum Champion joshsgrandad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    NE England, UK.
    Posts
    5,005
    It is unfortunate that the likelihood of collusion is still present within the cwl system.. More so since Onyx and prob others have shown how easily those cheaters can be identified.

    It also seems that the use of stars as the primary method of scoring would appear to be an odd decision by SC, for those that play more competitively..

    In my view, it is either/or.. We play in crystal 2 and farm medals.. Our goal is simply to try and avoid demotion whilst hitting our 8 stars..

    But I can see the sense in SC's decision, once you get towards the lower end of the structure..
    From crystal down, the no shows and patched up rosters start to show..

    If the primary scoring were to be wins, then the likelihood of a total no show on war day would become much more likely, such is the difference between roster weight from one day to the next..
    And a total no show would not just impact on the day's opposition..
    Anyone within the no show team whom would like to be active would be denied the choice in realistic terms, since that raid would not affect the scoring at all..

    By using stars as primary score, any scoring raid has an impact..
    And folk of all ability levels like to achieve some level of success..
    That is the purpose of playing in the first place.

    So, I dont personally care what scoring system they use, but not perplexed why they picked the method they did..
    Seems like simple psychology to me..
    A scoring system aimed at the masses, not the few.

    The 10 bonus stars for the win was included with the revamp to rewards in March '19..
    I dont think it was simply "to reward a clan for the win"..
    I more like to think, that under normal circumstances, those bonus stars will make it more likely that the clan with the biggest number of wins is more likely to win the league..
    It still doesnt take away from the fact that cwl is predominantly an offense orientated system, so a clan that wins all wars due mainly to their defense can still lose out to a more aggressive offensive team, even tho they beat them on the day.

    Collusion, on the other hand, is something that SC need to get sorted themselves.
    Last edited by joshsgrandad; June 11th, 2021 at 08:33 AM.

Posting Permissions

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