New trap: Quicksand/sinkhole

This trap was thought of by my friend but he recently got banned for spam lol. We worked on this trap together. We call this the quicksand/sink hole. This would be a really original idea because of it having two parts: One to pull in troops and the other to spew them out. ( explained below)

This trap does minimal damage, but is useful because it can help you win a defense.


Radius- 2 by 2 ( giant bomb radius )


Cost-
Level 1: 250k gold
Level 2: 750k gold
Level 3: 900k gold


Re-arm cost-
Level 1: 1,500
Level 2: 2,500
Level 3: 3,500
Level 4: 4,500

Trigger Radius: 2.3 tiles ( when a troop which has a larger housing space than the trap steps on it, it will not go off). Also heroes cannot trigger it. The trap is triggered when 5 housing spaces of troops is on it. It then sucks in the remaining number based on its level.


Appearance- This was the only pic I could find that kinda looks like what I imagined.
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...D-gQMwgcKAAwAA
Level 1: light brown sand with a hole
Level 2: dark blackish brown sand with a hole
Level 3: golden sand with a hole



Amount of quicksand traps at each Townhall level-
Th7: 0
Th8: 1
Th9: 1
Th10: 1
Th11: 2


Purpose- To suck in troops in one part and spew them out of the other. Tap on the trap to set it whether to pull in troops or spew them out. Both parts cannot be set to "suck in" or "spew out".


Th given at- 8


Damage given- 0


Amount of Troops taken in per level-
Level 1: 15
Level 2: 20
Level 3: 25

Usage- The part which sucks in the troops would best be placed in the middle of your base, where you want to protect your main buildings. The other part would best be placed on the edges of the map or by other traps so when the troops come out, they are going to hit the traps.


This idea has been in our minds for a long time. Please give me some feedback to help me improve this. Thanks!Also, PLEASE tell me why (if you did) you voted no. I want this trap to be perfect. Thanks!

any comments on how I should make this better. Also, the person who said no, can you explain why?

Awesome Idea. Very tactical. I wish I thought of it!

But the amount of troops which would get stuck is too large. 10 troops will be thrown away is too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by forever10

But the amount of troops which would get stuck is too large. 10 troops will be thrown away is too much.

---

they don't get thrown away, they just get moved, you can loose WAAY more than 10 to one spring or big bomb.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GarChimp

Awesome Idea. Very tactical. I wish I thought of it!

---

Thanks man. Sorry for replying so late. Do you have any more things you may want to add to this idea? Anything helps.:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThatKlingonKid

they don't get thrown away, they just get moved, you can loose WAAY more than 10 to one spring or big bomb.

---

Yes, that is exactly what happens. However, the trap also does a little bit of damage. The point of the trap is not to kill or hurt the troops. It is basically like an air sweeper for ground troops but better since you can choose where the troops will be moved.

So can it go both ways or just one way?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Radiating

So can it go both ways or just one way?

---

Troops will be sucked in through the first part and they will be spewed out the other part. You decided where to place the parts. I am not sure what you mean by both ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobroCOC

Troops will be sucked in through the first part and they will be spewed out the other part. You decided where to place the parts. I am not sure what you mean by both ways.

---

If I have two trap parts, say A and B, can troops over A be transported to B and troops over B be transported to A?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Radiating

If I have two trap parts, say A and B, can troops over A be transported to B and troops over B be transported to A?

---

No, it can only be one way. A to B

From reading the initial description, it looks like A gets designated as "in", B gets designated as "out" and thats the only way the trap works; unidirectional.

I like it from a defensive perspective. I could see that being very useful in hollow core designs, but could destroy very solid attack strategies that rely on heavy coordination of troops by attacker and I dont think that is a good way to direct the game.

...I think the rule of 10 isnt enough though. I think a trap such as this that doesnt do any damage (I say you should remove the damage component) should be able to move anything that is within its radius when it springs. Delay the trigger until something is standing dead on center, then everything within radius gets warped to the outlet.

[Edit] ...come to think of it, being able to teleport a golem anywhere you wanted would probably be skew game balance too far to defense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DraakarDraekonis

From reading the initial description, it looks like A gets designated as "in", B gets designated as "out" and thats the only way the trap works; unidirectional.

I like it from a defensive perspective. I could see that being very useful in hollow core designs, but could destroy very solid attack strategies that rely on heavy coordination of troops by attacker and I dont think that is a good way to direct the game.

---

Thanks man for your input. Glad you liked it :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DraakarDraekonis

...I think the rule of 10 isnt enough though. I think a trap such as this that doesnt do any damage (I say you should remove the damage component) should be able to move anything that is within its radius when it springs. Delay the trigger until something is standing dead on center, then everything within radius gets warped to the outlet.

[Edit] ...come to think of it, being able to teleport a golem anywhere you wanted would probably be skew game balance too far to defense.

---

Ok thanks for your input. I originally had it as lvl 1 - 15, lvl 2- 20, and lvl 3- 25. Somebody told me that this was too high since a whole pekka could be moved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobroCOC

Ok thanks for your input. I originally had it as lvl 1 - 15, lvl 2- 20, and lvl 3- 25. Somebody told me that this was too high since a whole pekka could be moved.

---

I thought about it after saying "I like it."
Being able to move a pekka is what makes the thing most interesting to me, but its also what probably makes it able to defeat well coordinated attacks single-handedly and that may be too much impact by a single trap, so your initial suggestion of the levels seems more appropriate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DraakarDraekonis

I thought about it after saying "I like it."
Being able to move a pekka is what makes the thing most interesting to me, but its also what probably makes it able to defeat well coordinated attacks single-handedly and that may be too much impact by a single trap, so your initial suggestion of the levels seems more appropriate.

---

So should I change it back to the old way- Lvl 1: 15, Lvl 2: 20, Lvl3: 25 or should I change it more to Lvl1:20, Lvl2:25, Lvl3: 30. Would this new way make it too op? Moving 1 golem could change the way the attack was going? What do you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DraakarDraekonis

I thought about it after saying "I like it."
Being able to move a pekka is what makes the thing most interesting to me, but its also what probably makes it able to defeat well coordinated attacks single-handedly and that may be too much impact by a single trap, so your initial suggestion of the levels seems more appropriate.

---

ok I am gonna change it. Thanks!