We have a leader board for trophies, why not a leader board for average gold and elixer gained per raid. An average would be good cause then we could see who's a good farmer and who isn't.
We have a leader board for trophies, why not a leader board for average gold and elixer gained per raid. An average would be good cause then we could see who's a good farmer and who isn't.
I really, really think this would be a great addition to Clash of Clans.
It could also potentially give the rest of us a shot at making a leader board since the majority of players will never make it in the top 200 in trophy count.Originally Posted by coolbroski99
Meh...
The problem with this would be that it would be entirely based off of luck (matchmaking is random).
A random leaderboard is inherently flawed.
The trophy leaderboard is based off of skill in both attacking and base-building. This would have absolutely no correlation to skill.
If you want to see if someone is a good farmer, just look at their gold grab stat.
While i'll give you the base design part of your argument, gaining trophies requires no more skill as farming. A person can barch and th snipe pretty high. How else do you explain a lv 26 with 3600 trophies. Thats not skill. Either way trophy hunters and farmers choose their targets carefully, based off of random match making. So that argument is invalid also.
I'll give you that TH sniping takes no skill. Thing is, TH sniping doesn't get you on the leaderboards.
Secondly, loot is much more random than trophies. What's your ratio of finding a base you can at least 1-star to finding a base with combined 1.2+ million combined loot? Exactly.
Thirdly, after a while the loot leaderboards would inevitable fall apart. The loot moves around, and to find it, you have to settle for raids with less loot in order to gain/lose trophies. So inevitably it would end up becoming almost impossible to stay on the leaderboards (which sort of contradicts the purpose of a leaderboard). Additionally, having it be the average would make it impossible for anyone who isn't already on the leaderboards (raiding for lesser loot) be able to make it onto the leaderboards, as the lesser raids they did when they weren't loot-pushing would be eternally holding them back.
Finally, a few questions about how it would actually work
-How do you prevent 1 or 2 bad raids from completely ruining your chances of being on the leaderboard? If you say you wouldn't, see the last sentences of the third paragraph
-What if someone nexted until they got an insanely large raid, and then never raided again?
-How would you balance it so that new players' chances at this board be completely ruined by their raids as a TH2-8?
-
I agree, this seems like it would be based of luck more than skill.
Agreed
10chars
Clash of clans: Lvl: 146
Gc: Jahoon Witt
"Zip Em Up"- Tu Holloway
Finding loot isn't luck. I do agree that it moves to different trophy lv's but the algorithm running this program still follows a normal distribution curve. Meaning that everyone at a certain trophy lv has the same opportunities to find loot. One person isn't going to have all epic raids. While the others have poor loot raids. You can answer the rest of your questions by doing a little research. I'll help you out. Compute the average loot per raid. For the top 50 players in the world, then do the same for any random th 10, 9 and 8. Make sure u take a good sample of each the. Say 10 each. You'll find the results surprising. As for the "nexting" issue. The cost should be deducted from the net loot gained. Same as the troop cost should be deducted from the elixer or dark e gained
Do you have any sort of evidence, or data, or anything, to back up your claim that the "results [are] surprising?"
How is finding loot not luck? From everything I've experienced, and everything I've read on these forums, different people have wildly different success rates of finding loot, even at the same trophy level. How is that not luck? Because it is. Matchmaking is random. Success in matchmaking is due entirely on getting lucky.
And the last 3 sentences...
All that a nexting penalty would do is make the leaderboards even more dependent on luck. If matchmaking refuses to give you a good base early on, this would make even a good raid bad, lowering your average. This leaderboard would just become a casino,where you bet your ranking on random matchmaking, and force people to accept bad raids (lowering average) lest the matchmaking force them to spend more gold nexting (lowering their average). You see yet why this sort of leaderboard would unavoidably fall apart?
The only thing that counting troop costs would do is ruin the chances of higher TH levels to get on the leaderboard, who, due to the loot penalty, need to attack people on their own TH level (and use more expensive troops) to get loot. And if matchmaking forces them to spend high-cost troops for a lowered reward? Exactly.
And of course there are the inherent flaws of having a leaderboard based on averages.
Last edited by Brenn; September 25th, 2014 at 04:34 AM.
