I may have waited too long for screen shot (some wars may have been finished), but I showed 60% boring matchups (a 20% reduction from War #8), 15% that I would classify as so-so - not completely hopeless, and 25% as relatively close and should be interesting and fun. While much better than War #8, it should not be too difficult to to match clans so that the vast majority of wars produce reasonably close results. I continue to maintain that if including BFE and adjusting for troops usually being less than full strength and the plunder impact of guilds is too difficult, simply match winners vs winners and losers vs losers. Very quickly clans of similar strength should have similar records resulting in mostly close and fun wars.
Interesting. Winners vs winners would also effectively create a playoff system and a true winner. There can be only one. I like it.
I did not think about it that way but sounds fun. Let's see how the guild exploiters do against the tower clans with their massive BFA. You never know, guilds pay so little it might be interesting. That is a match worth seeing.
Jam you didn't know? There are clans that recruit only guild hansels (and perhaps a few LB players) because current matching algorithm improperly value guilds in EE wars with their high plunder and low payout. Some smart clans were quick to realize and exploit this.
easy take out guild hansels? hmmm maybe you never didint saw guild hansels with 1.5 mil spy def in towers.. these you can't attack, assass and scout is very slow ..... they scout bomb you, so you haven't spies to KO them.....
Call guild hansels an exploit or not. A guild hansel of equal is much better than an attack build of similar CS. It is only an exploit because Devs would incorrectly equate the two. Is taking advantage of a program bug an "exploit" or a "strategy." I did not mean to start a debate about the use of guild hansels, merely point out that the problem only exists because of a mistake in the current pairing method.
It's not a program bug you moron. Go think up another crap, butthurt statement about guild hansels, matter of fact is your strategy is just too bad to beat them, when it's so, so easy.
I can start posting screen shots for futures wars, I just figured anyone interested was also watching results. In my opinion, a war is boring when one side quickly has the other side pinned, and maintains that the entire war so that the other side gets off at most 2-3 actions after each KO. It has been my experience that if it is a boring war, the winning clan will have 150% or more plunder than the losing clan. Truly exciting wars have both within 20 percent of each other.
Lol @ guild exploit If the found out about the long name being an exploit then I'm sure they would of figure out about the "guild exploit" this is how the mechanics work if you don't like them go make your own game or go to another game
@Snowman There is a third option, getting the program bug fixed. Guilds are simply a building; the only problem arises because when creating "fair" match-ups developers fail to correctly interpret the relative strength of guilds. If matches no purported to be "fair" e.g. random, it would be totally fine. Leaving things the way they are results in mostly bad mismatches in the EE wars, the point of the thread.
Guilds arent an exploit. They are intnded to be the highest PPU building (next to CoE skimming and T5) and being that they give 27kcs, i feel that while they are counted improportionately in terms of plunder capacity. They are fairly counted (IMO) in terms of hitting strength. And 1mcs spy generally constitutes a guild/ tower build.
destroyer - I agree that stats capture the hitting strength of guilds relatively well, but there is more to hitting strength in EEs. To ignore the other aspects of guilds and call matchups "even" is simply not true. To me, this becomes an exploit when there is clearly a mistake in the way Devs pair clans and you take advantage of it.