Scrap the match cost!!

The match cost is totally pointless. Sometimes I encounter bases with so little gold that can't even cover the match cost!

One little example:

On average one clicks "Next" 4-5 times. Now if you are at town hall 10, that means you are paying (4 x 1,000) 4,000 gold per raid on average. Say if you raid 5 times a day, then you are paying 20,000 gold per day. After a week, you will actually lose 140,000 gold.

EDIT (Taking opinions from other forumers):

Quote:

---

...It doesn't cost that much to search...

---

On the surface, the match cost is indeed small and insignificant. But think about the total cumulative cost.

Quote:

---

How about reducing the cost?

---

The problem is not whether the cost is too large. In fact, many people said the cost is insignificant. What I want to shed light on is the total cumulative cost. Besides, there is not much room for reduction. (Small reduction won't be effective and total cumulative cost will still be burdensome.)

Quote:

---

...this will end up with tons of players abusing the system...

---

Currently, people are pretty much "abusing" the system already. Think about on average how many times you click the next button before attacking a village. If the match cost is designed to prevent people from abusing the system, then it is ineffective and totally pointless.

If the match cost is to keep people from searching endlessly for the "optimal" base, then why is it imposed on us right at the beginning, i.e. the first match?

Quote:

---

...the match cost can keep things fair. People should pay to search for a perfect base...

---

Even with the match cost, some people can find a "perfect" base with just one click, while some have to search for ages and sometimes still cannot find one. Therefore, match cost cannot promote fairness.

Quote:

---

...If everyone were free to always search endlessly for optimal loot bases, there would cease to be any left...

---

The "optimal" loot bases will ever run out, since people's shields end at a different time, besides, different town hall levels mean the different amount of loot available for different players. The demand and supply will be different for everyone and thus there will never be any shortages.

---

Final point, all the villages are randomly generated by the system. It is unfair to have to pay a cost in order to skip a village which is too difficult to attack or too little loot available - the player did not choose to visit it at the first place! Why should we be penalised for not wanting something which is determined by the system?

wow you must find bases with very, very little gold xD

anyway, why should they have to scrap it? in real life wars are not free too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 001rens001

wow you must find bases with very, very little gold xD

anyway, why should they have to scrap it? in real life wars are not free too

---

Yes, you are right. And there are already training costs, research costs, spell making costs... Why is there an "entrance fee" to start a "war"?? Besides, there is no such costs in real life!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Yes, you are right. And there are already training costs, research costs, spell making costs... Why is there an "entrance fee" to start a "war"?? Besides, there is no such costs in real life!!

---

yeah i know what you're trying to say, but remember, these cost are all elixir and the search cost is gold so...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 001rens001

yeah i know what you're trying to say, but remember, these cost are all elixir and the search cost is gold so...

---

so what? to keep the "balance"?!?! Training and research cost elixir....ah! let's make something that costs us gold so as to balance it out! #logic

Everybody pays the search cost. Nobody complains about it. They will never remove it.
Have a fantastic 2014

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 001rens001

yeah i know what you're trying to say, but remember, these cost are all elixir and the search cost is gold so...

---

And in real life armies use lots and lots of oil to fuel their tanks and jets.

But in any case, why are you trying to compare real life to a game where...
- A trunk grows before the actual tree itself does
- Archers can only shoot about 1/10 of the distance they would really be able to shoot
- Barbarians wearing no armor at all can survive not just one but multiple shots from a cannon and even a mortar!
- Dragons that fly too low and too slow (it's more like they are hovering honestly)
- There are animated suits of armor (that are female)
- Where pigs of any sort are able to jump over a wall taller than a full sized man
- etc. etc.

They have the search cost so that u eventually take any amount of loot cause the search cost is adding up...Its a way of keeping things fair

Search cost should be rewarded to the person's base that you hit Next on. Or have it gone *somewhere* instead of just leaving the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chadamus

Search cost should be rewarded to the person's base that you hit Next on. Or have it gone *somewhere* instead of just leaving the game.

---

Yeah i agree,would be cool to see how much u earned from it so u could see how many people skipped you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jensenthejao

Everybody pays the search cost. Nobody complains about it. They will never remove it.
Have a fantastic 2014

---

That's not true! I am and a lot of people are complaining about it for ages. Have a fantastic year too.

Why not just a decrease in the fee? 30-50% would be alright.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jazzathegreat

They have the search cost so that u eventually take any amount of loot cause the search cost is adding up...Its a way of keeping things fair

---

I'm sorry but I don't understand what you said. But, anyway, I can't see how this is keeping things "fair". If you win a battle, you gain loots and trophies. Vice versa. This IS fair already!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boris1

Why not just a decrease in the fee? 30-50% would be alright.

---

But why not just scrap it? What is the point of having a match cost which benefits no one, not even Supercell...

It should be either reduced or changed to cost elixir.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chadamus

Search cost should be rewarded to the person's base that you hit Next on. Or have it gone *somewhere* instead of just leaving the game.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jazzathegreat

Yeah i agree,would be cool to see how much u earned from it so u could see how many people skipped you

---

That idea has already been ruled out (Read the sticky). But mine is different - more straight-forward: JUST SCRAP IT :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shivampaw

It should be either reduced or changed to cost elixir.

---

again, what's the point?? Why not just scrap it? :s

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

again, what's the point?? Why not just scrap it? :s

---

It doesn't cost that much to search and you should make it back on the reward from your league if the person doesn't have enough

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AresGodOfWar

It doesn't cost that much to search and you should make it back on the reward from your league if the person doesn't have enough

---

The cost itself might appear to be insignificant but still it is a cost, and it doesn't have a clear and valid purpose. Plus, the total cost can get very large if you keep encountering (and skipping) villages that not worth raiding.

As for the reward from the league, it is meant to be a bonus, not for compensating the cost of searching.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Yes, you are right. And there are already training costs, research costs, spell making costs... Why is there an "entrance fee" to start a "war"?? Besides, there is no such costs in real life!!

---

Transportation.

You're just cheap, all the other army's cost are in Elixir/DE its totally fair that you have to pay gold.

I would love to see how many people skip me lol and be able to see their bases

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mountaindrew

You're just cheap, all the other army's cost are in Elixir/DE its totally fair that you have to pay gold.

---

You are ridiculous. How does the fact that army costs elixir has anything to do with the match cost?

I think you miss my point. The argument is not about whether the match cost should be in gold or elixir. It is about whether or not there should be a match cost at all. How is it fair to have an extra cost which is totally pointless?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

You are ridiculous. How does the fact that army costs elixir has anything to do with the match cost?

I think you miss my point. The argument is not about whether the match cost should be in gold or elixir. It is about whether or not there should be a match cost at all. How is it fair to have an extra cost which is totally pointless?

---

Your troops need a way to get there, supposedly that's what the gold is buying

By the way I think this is a terrible idea, this will save you a tiny bit of gold! I'm saved!!!(Sarcasm) really it's not that much gold, just deal with it

The match cost is necessary to keep people from searching endlessly for the perfect base.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahimi

The match cost is necessary to keep people from searching endlessly for the perfect base.

---

Dahimi, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you this time. If the purpose of the match cost is to keep us from skipping villages, then why is it imposed on us right at the beginning?

Though, I understand your point. However, I can't see how the match cost can keep people from abusing the "Next" button. You won't attack a village if you have no chance to win, will you? Besides, I don't see how it will become a problem if everyone is trying to find their "perfect" bases, since everyone has a different preference and different attack strategies.

All the villages we encounter are randomly generated by the system - it is out of our control. It is unfair to force us to attack a village, or to "penalise" us, if there's no point in attacking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpiderPig

By the way I think this is a terrible idea, this will save you a tiny bit of gold! I'm saved!!!(Sarcasm) really it's not that much gold, just deal with it

---

On the surface, the match cost seems to be insignificant. But the total cost can get very large. And this cost is unnecessary and benefits no one.

I am here to help to improve this game. I won't just sit back and "deal with it".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Dahimi, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you this time. If the purpose of the match cost is to keep us from skipping villages, then why is it imposed on us right at the beginning?

Though, I understand your point. However, I can't see how the match cost can keep people from abusing the "Next" button. You won't attack a village if you have no chance to win, will you? I don't see how it is a problem if everyone is trying to find their "perfect" bases, since everyone has a different preference and different attack strategies.

All the villages we encounter are randomly generated by the system. It is unfair to force us to attack a village, or to "penalise" us, if there's no point in attacking.

---

People mainly skip villages not because they can't win but because the loot isn't to their liking. The match cost causes people to have to make a choice to attack villages that are sub optimal. If everyone were free to always search endlessly for optimal loot bases, there would cease to be any left. Furthermore because troops build while you look, folks could look for a very long time to find the bases. For example unboosted balloonions could have people searching for an hour without any penalty whatsoever if there was no search cost.

Random village selection is actually the fairest way to do it. It levels the field for everyone. You are by no means forced to attack anyone, but you do have to pay for the privilege of looking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

so what? to keep the "balance"?!?! Training and research cost elixir....ah! let's make something that costs us gold so as to balance it out! #logic

---

Stop... Please just stop

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jazzathegreat

Yeah i agree,would be cool to see how much u earned from it so u could see how many people skipped you

---

Yeah sometimes I wonder how many people have skipped me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahimi

People mainly skip villages not because they can't win but because the loot isn't to their liking. The match cost causes people to have to make a choice to attack villages that are sub optimal. If everyone were free to always search endlessly for optimal loot bases, there would cease to be any left. Furthermore because troops build while you look, folks could look for a very long time to find the bases. For example unboosted balloonions could have people searching for an hour without any penalty whatsoever if there was no search cost.

Random village selection is actually the fairest way to do it. It levels the field for everyone. You are by no means forced to attack anyone, but you do have to pay for the privilege of looking.

---

I think as a Clash of Clans' player you realise sometimes you will encounter some villages that have too little loot. (I'm talking about 9k or less each. This usually happens during public holidays or after updates.) If you attack those villages, not only you don't gain much, but there's also a risk of revenge attack. People should not be penalised for skipping bases that are generated by the system and not worth attacking.

Secondly, I don't think the "optimal" loot bases will ever run out, since people's shields end at a different time, besides, different town hall levels mean the different amount of loot available for different players. The demand and supply will be different for everyone and thus there will never be any shortages.

I agree random village selection is fair. But, as explained before, the match cost is a bit excessive and ineffective.


P.S. I don't get the "unboosted balloonions" example you raised... ^__^"

The bigger problem is there is too much sh!t in matchmaking which wastes everyones time. It's not uncommon to hit next for over 5 minutes to find something half decent to attack. That is really, really boring.

I would rather a time saving then a cost saving. While a cost saving would be nice sure, if that happened we would only get a reduction though - it would never get scrapped.

Jail broken devices would have an even greater advantage if searching was for free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

I think as a Clash of Clans' player you realise sometimes you will encounter some villages that have too little loot. (I'm talking about 9k or less each. This usually happens during public holidays or after updates.) If you attack those villages, not only you don't gain much, but there's also a risk of revenge attack. People should not be penalised for skipping bases that are generated by the system and not worth attacking.

Secondly, I don't think the "optimal" loot bases will ever run out, since people's shields end at a different time, besides, different town hall levels mean the different amount of loot available for different players. The demand and supply will be different for everyone and thus there will never be any shortages.

I agree random village selection is fair. But, as explained before, the match cost is a bit excessive and ineffective.


P.S. I don't get the "unboosted balloonions" example you raised... ^__^"

---

9K Or less? What trophy level are you at? lol
I believe the cost is nessesary as it discourages players from power rushing to high trophy levels and sucking money out from the Win Bonus from the respective leagues.

EXAMPLE. If there's no cost for skipping bases. I can spend 10 mins to find a base with a townhall station outside and snipe the townhall with 3 archers. Lets say I am in Crystal league. (trust me. I've been there and done it)
win bonus is at 55,000k resources each and 200 dark elixir.

I can earn easy money in a very short time with typically very little troops.

My point is that removal of the fee to search for bases will end up with tons of players abusing the system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RawFodog

9K Or less? What trophy level are you at? lol
I believe the cost is nessesary as it discourages players from power rushing to high trophy levels and sucking money out from the Win Bonus from the respective leagues.

EXAMPLE. If there's no cost for skipping bases. I can spend 10 mins to find a base with a townhall station outside and snipe the townhall with 3 archers. Lets say I am in Crystal league. (trust me. I've been there and done it)
win bonus is at 55,000k resources each and 200 dark elixir.

I can earn easy money in a very short time with typically very little troops.

My point is that removal of the fee to search for bases will end up with tons of players abusing the system.

---

True.Very true.I can't agree more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RawFodog

My point is that removal of the fee to search for bases will end up with tons of players abusing the system.

---

Yep, fighting for a reduction is a little more realistic; SuperCell would never agree to totally scrapping it. And I would not want that either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Yes, you are right. And there are already training costs, research costs, spell making costs... Why is there an "entrance fee" to start a "war"?? Besides, there is no such costs in real life!!

---

Lol fair enough point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Why not just scrap it?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

JUST SCRAP IT :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

But why not just scrap it?

---

Lol.............

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RawFodog

9K Or less? What trophy level are you at? lol
I believe the cost is nessesary as it discourages players from power rushing to high trophy levels and sucking money out from the Win Bonus from the respective leagues.

EXAMPLE. If there's no cost for skipping bases. I can spend 10 mins to find a base with a townhall station outside and snipe the townhall with 3 archers. Lets say I am in Crystal league. (trust me. I've been there and done it)
win bonus is at 55,000k resources each and 200 dark elixir.

I can earn easy money in a very short time with typically very little troops.

My point is that removal of the fee to search for bases will end up with tons of players abusing the system.

---

But the fact is, people are already "abusing" the system. Ask yourself a question: How many times do you click the next button before actually attacking?

Okay, let's forget other things and focus on the issue of the system abuse. What exactly will happen if the match cost is scrapped? How will the system be abused? And how big will the problem be?

I don't think there is much of a different to the system if the match cost is scrapped. Different level player will see different amount of loot available. Also, different players will have different preferences, e.g. some might be impatient and don't care much about the loots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

I think as a Clash of Clans' player you realise sometimes you will encounter some villages that have too little loot. (I'm talking about 9k or less each. This usually happens during public holidays or after updates.) If you attack those villages, not only you don't gain much, but there's also a risk of revenge attack.

---

It so happens that SC agrees with you on this point.
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...ew-Loot-System

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Secondly, I don't think the "optimal" loot bases will ever run out, since people's shields end at a different time, besides, different town hall levels mean the different amount of loot available for different players. The demand and supply will be different for everyone and thus there will never be any shortages.

I agree random village selection is fair. But, as explained before, the match cost is a bit excessive and ineffective.

---

Gonna have to disagree with you here. Clearly there are a lot more bases with tiny amounts of loot than ones with huge amounts or you wouldn't be complaining. You're taking this to far to an extreme. Sure there will always be bases, but my point is that their availability will drop to near zero. Because everyone would be hunting endlessly for them, the frequency that you personally would see them would drop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

P.S. I don't get the "unboosted balloonions" example you raised... ^__^"

---

If the search cost were removed, the only cost people would experience for searching would be time based. Since troops build while you search, the cost of searching for the entire build time would be zero. So let's say you queue up an army that takes an hour to build. That means you can search for an entire hour if need be to try and find a base that offers 500k gold.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daz258

The bigger problem is there is too much sh!t in matchmaking which wastes everyones time. It's not uncommon to hit next for over 5 minutes to find something half decent to attack. That is really, really boring.

I would rather a time saving then a cost saving. While a cost saving would be nice sure, if that happened we would only get a reduction though - it would never get scrapped.

Jail broken devices would have an even greater advantage if searching was for free.

---

Agreed. The solution here is to use league bonuses based on th level to make it so every match is potentially a good one.

With the boosts in action I have been farming at masters league for well over a week. The bonus of 75k is huge. It makes any base with 6 figures available to loot a good raid provided you win. Better yet 400k bases that I can take two storages with balloonions are also pretty common. I know once the boosts are over this will change because balloonions will take 60m instead of 15, but right now at masters nearly every match that comes up is quite profitable and it comes down to whether or not i believe an attack will be successful.

IMO this is how the whole game should be.

Fair point. I doubt Supercell will remove it though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaffadill

Fair point. I doubt Supercell will remove it though.

---

I agree boss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

The match cost is totally pointless. Sometimes I encounter bases with so little gold that can't even cover the match cost!

EDIT: Many people said the match cost is small and insignificant. But think about the total cost. That amount of gold should be saved! We should not be penalised for skipping a village that is not worth attacking!!

---

I make a thread exactly like this not so long ago, I do agree that this cost is pointless
So I support +1
And almost every single response I got made fun of my idea!!:mad:
I got replies like this
"While your at it, why not remove the cost of upgrades"
I hate these replies I get!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saltin

I make a thread exactly like this not so long ago, I do agree that this cost is pointless
So I support +1
And almost every single response I got made fun of my idea!!:mad:
I got replies like this
"While your at it, why not remove the cost of upgrades"
I hate these replies I get!

---

True, In the real worlds past armies didn't pay to go to war with someone but they did pay for traveling to an enemy so that's why I think they have the searching cost, as a travel expense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

But the fact is, people are already "abusing" the system. Ask yourself a question: How many times do you click the next button before actually attacking?
Yes we pressed it alot of times. But we will settle down for one of those bases because we don't want to spend so much gold to search for more troops. And this is not abusing please.
I used to snipe town halls to earn gold. Ended up it cost me too much gold to snipe them so I stopped. Imagine what will happen if the cost is gone? Everyone will keep searching endlessly because they refuse to settle on a base with lower loot.

Okay, let's forget other things and focus on the issue of the system abuse. What exactly will happen if the match cost is scrapped? How will the system be abused? And how big will the problem be?
Simple. More snipers, more looters endlessly searching to find more loot.
HOW WILL YOU FEEL IF YOU ARE ATTACKED INSTANTLY EVERY SINGLE TIME WHEN YOU GO OFFLINE WITHOUT SHIELD?
Without searching cost people will just keep searching and searching for a higher loot meaning there will be a time where everyone will stop storing resources.. And BAM! another problem rises.

I don't think there is much of a different to the system if the match cost is scrapped. Different level player will see different amount of loot available. Also, different players will have different preferences, e.g. some might be impatient and don't care much about the loots.
What do you want the game to end up as? A game where players camp and camp at the attack page looking for one perfect silly base with ton of money or a game where people search bases and attack them accordingly to their ability?

---

Replies in bold
This is what I think overall.

Cost to search = people will think before attacking. = rise in standards of attack.

No cost to search = people will camp around searching for a good base as there's really no downside in searching for a base anymore = people will just attack base with very weak layout challenge in the game will be gone.

And seriously. What's the argument about no to the search cost? All I heard from you is you see no point and there's no difference with or without the cost.
Then why will you want the cost gone if it won't affect the gameplay?
If the cost affects gameplay how is it affecting?
Will players be quitting because the cost is too high?

Quote:

---

But the fact is, people are already "abusing" the system. Ask yourself a question: How many times do you click the next button before actually attacking?
Yes we pressed it alot of times. But we will settle down for one of those bases because we don't want to spend so much gold to search for more troops. And this is not abusing please.
I used to snipe town halls to earn gold. Ended up it cost me too much gold to snipe them so I stopped. Imagine what will happen if the cost is gone? Everyone will keep searching endlessly because they refuse to settle on a base with lower loot.

Okay, let's forget other things and focus on the issue of the system abuse. What exactly will happen if the match cost is scrapped? How will the system be abused? And how big will the problem be?
Simple. More snipers, more looters endlessly searching to find more loot.
HOW WILL YOU FEEL IF YOU ARE ATTACKED INSTANTLY EVERY SINGLE TIME WHEN YOU GO OFFLINE WITHOUT SHIELD?
Without searching cost people will just keep searching and searching for a higher loot meaning there will be a time where everyone will stop storing resources.. And BAM! another problem rises.

I don't think there is much of a different to the system if the match cost is scrapped. Different level player will see different amount of loot available. Also, different players will have different preferences, e.g. some might be impatient and don't care much about the loots.
What do you want the game to end up as? A game where players camp and camp at the attack page looking for one perfect silly base with ton of money or a game where people search bases and attack them accordingly to their ability?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RawFodog

Replies in bold
This is what I think overall.

Cost to search = people will think before attacking. = rise in standards of attack.

No cost to search = people will camp around searching for a good base as there's really no downside in searching for a base anymore = people will just attack base with very weak layout challenge in the game will be gone.

And seriously. What's the argument about no to the search cost? All I heard from you is you see no point and there's no difference with or without the cost.
Then why will you want the cost gone if it won't affect the gameplay?
If the cost affects gameplay how is it affecting?
Will players be quitting because the cost is too high?

---

Wow wow, pipe down, dude!

First, I don't think people will keep searching endlessly. This is because people will eventually find a base they want to attack. Also, time itself is a cost. Besides, spending too much time in searching for a "perfect" village will cause boredom and no one wants that.

How will I feel if I got attacked instantly every time when I go offline? Nothing. This happens all the time. If the attacker manage to take down my town hall or get 40% or more, then I get a shield. I'm happy with that.

I don't think people will stop storing resources just because the match cost is scrapped. In fact, I don't think we can ever do that cos the mines and pumps are continuously producing resources lol.

I didn't just keep saying there is no point. I did provide explanations - did you read them too?

The match cost might not be a huge problem to the overall gameplay but it creates frustration and the original purpose is not as effective as you think.

I don't know if players are gonna quit because the cost is too high. I never think about that and I am not interested in that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saltin

I make a thread exactly like this not so long ago, I do agree that this cost is pointless
So I support +1
And almost every single response I got made fun of my idea!!:mad:
I got replies like this
"While your at it, why not remove the cost of upgrades"
I hate these replies I get!

---

Thank you! :) They think they are funny but they are not, not in the slightest!

And there is a LOOT BONUS at the end which evens it out, if that doesn't even it out you must be VERY PICKY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Thank you! :) They think they are funny but they are not, not in the slightest!

---

They make fun of the idea because it is a bad idea, case closed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaykhim

They make fun of the idea because it is a bad idea, case closed

---

Not necessarily bad, but easily exploitable. Now, I can go on and make a big long post about this and how people would use it to their advantage, and that's exactly what I'll do. The thing is, with the whole, elixir is offense and gold is defense controversy in the forums, and the spell costing elixir, people have been starting to find out that finding elixir to cover your army, spells, and search cost (if elixir) is just chance. What I mean is that, sure, you can train up a giant mass drag or GoWiPe or hog army to steamroll any base and take their resources, but if it's not enough to profit, then what's the point? Then with so much you can dump your gold into, people complain that they waste so much gold on searching for decent loot, and they can't even profit. So we have two sides. One saying the cost should be elixir because elixir is offense and they can't profit with gold because they have enough gold upgrades on their hands, and the other saying that, even with elixir being less useful in the later stages of any given town hall level, it becomes to costly to pay for everything on offense with elixir. Especially non gemming trophy pushers. Now if the cost were to be scrapped like the OP said, there is when some problems start. There go the snipers and farmers searching endlessly for something that suits them without having to pay. Then just revenge them and take their not so had earned money! It's a free for all with this. Everyone can take anyone's loot without having to pay anything except a cheap BAM army? Of course people will find a way to complain about its (usually minor, like the loot system after 2 days) flaws. They always do, especially with something people can use to their advantage and win all day with.

Search cost helps me press the next button a little less times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThatoneguyIknow

Not necessarily bad, but easily exploitable. Now, I can go on and make a big long post about this and how people would use it to their advantage, and that's exactly what I'll do. The thing is, with the whole, elixir is offense and gold is defense controversy in the forums, and the spell costing elixir, people have been starting to find out that finding elixir to cover your army, spells, and search cost (if elixir) is just chance. What I mean is that, sure, you can train up a giant mass drag or GoWiPe or hog army to steamroll any base and take their resources, but if it's not enough to profit, then what's the point? Then with so much you can dump your gold into, people complain that they waste so much gold on searching for decent loot, and they can't even profit. So we have two sides. One saying the cost should be elixir because elixir is offense and they can't profit with gold because they have enough gold upgrades on their hands, and the other saying that, even with elixir being less useful in the later stages of any given town hall level, it becomes to costly to pay for everything on offense with elixir. Especially non gemming trophy pushers. Now if the cost were to be scrapped like the OP said, there is when some problems start. There go the snipers and farmers searching endlessly for something that suits them without having to pay. Then just revenge them and take their not so had earned money! It's a free for all with this. Everyone can take anyone's loot without having to pay anything except a cheap BAM army? Of course people will find a way to complain about its (usually minor, like the loot system after 2 days) flaws. They always do, especially with something people can use to their advantage and win all day with.

---

Lol i see the big long post. All Valid points in that post to :).

A lot of you are saying there's no such cost in real life but this is a fictional animated game I don't think its reality like some of you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zombieslayer9823

A lot of you are saying there's no such cost in real life but this is a fictional animated game I don't think its reality like some of you

---

Actually I'am reality thanks :rolleyes:.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaykhim

And there is a LOOT BONUS at the end which evens it out, if that doesn't even it out you must be VERY PICKY

---

The loot bonus, as the name suggests, is meant to be a bonus for victory. It is NOT a compensation for the match-searching cost.

One can find many ways to make up for the cost. But the cost still exists and is pointless (read my other posts for further explanations) - so why not just scrap it?

Not scrap but a search reduction is needed. 1000 gold is alot. In a day I lose up to 200k+ ...though is compensated by my gold mines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThatoneguyIknow

Not necessarily bad, but easily exploitable. Now, I can go on and make a big long post about this and how people would use it to their advantage, and that's exactly what I'll do. The thing is, with the whole, elixir is offense and gold is defense controversy in the forums, and the spell costing elixir, people have been starting to find out that finding elixir to cover your army, spells, and search cost (if elixir) is just chance. What I mean is that, sure, you can train up a giant mass drag or GoWiPe or hog army to steamroll any base and take their resources, but if it's not enough to profit, then what's the point? Then with so much you can dump your gold into, people complain that they waste so much gold on searching for decent loot, and they can't even profit. So we have two sides. One saying the cost should be elixir because elixir is offense and they can't profit with gold because they have enough gold upgrades on their hands, and the other saying that, even with elixir being less useful in the later stages of any given town hall level, it becomes to costly to pay for everything on offense with elixir. Especially non gemming trophy pushers. Now if the cost were to be scrapped like the OP said, there is when some problems start. There go the snipers and farmers searching endlessly for something that suits them without having to pay. Then just revenge them and take their not so had earned money! It's a free for all with this. Everyone can take anyone's loot without having to pay anything except a cheap BAM army? Of course people will find a way to complain about its (usually minor, like the loot system after 2 days) flaws. They always do, especially with something people can use to their advantage and win all day with.

---

Thanks for such a detailed explanation. I like forumers like you who say constructive things and explain everything clearly.

Theoretically, it may seem to be an obvious consequence that people will search endlessly. But, in practice, people will eventually find a base which is worth attacking; people will get bored if they spend too much time searching.

If the match cost is acting as a disincentive to abusing the "Next" button, then why is it imposed on us even for the first battle? Moreover, all the villages are randomly generated by the system. It is unfair to have to pay a cost in order to skip a village which is too difficult to attack or too little loot available - the player did not choose to visit it at the first place! We should not be penalised for not wanting something which is given.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nongemer

Not scrap but a search reduction is needed. 1000 gold is alot. In a day I lose up to 200k+ ...though is compensated by my gold mines.

---

Your gold mines are not built for compensating the match cost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahimi

It so happens that SC agrees with you on this point.
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...ew-Loot-System



Gonna have to disagree with you here. Clearly there are a lot more bases with tiny amounts of loot than ones with huge amounts or you wouldn't be complaining. You're taking this to far to an extreme. Sure there will always be bases, but my point is that their availability will drop to near zero. Because everyone would be hunting endlessly for them, the frequency that you personally would see them would drop.



If the search cost were removed, the only cost people would experience for searching would be time based. Since troops build while you search, the cost of searching for the entire build time would be zero. So let's say you queue up an army that takes an hour to build. That means you can search for an entire hour if need be to try and find a base that offers 500k gold.



Agreed. The solution here is to use league bonuses based on th level to make it so every match is potentially a good one.

With the boosts in action I have been farming at masters league for well over a week. The bonus of 75k is huge. It makes any base with 6 figures available to loot a good raid provided you win. Better yet 400k bases that I can take two storages with balloonions are also pretty common. I know once the boosts are over this will change because balloonions will take 60m instead of 15, but right now at masters nearly every match that comes up is quite profitable and it comes down to whether or not i believe an attack will be successful.

IMO this is how the whole game should be.

---

Dahimi, I still don't understand your "balloonist" example... (T_T)

If I want to attack a base, I will make sure all my troops are ready to fight. I won't go searching while training my troops.. Is that what you mean? I'm really not sure what you were saying sorry...

There is absolutely no need to explain why the match cost should stay...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bakhoumgeorge

There is absolutely no need to explain why the match cost should stay...

---

hahahaha :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

hahahaha :D

---

um... other way around. Match cost SHOULD stay... you misunderstood me. It's really obvious why it SHOULD stay and you do not need explanation for this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bakhoumgeorge

um... other way around. Match cost SHOULD stay... you misunderstood me. It's really obvious why it SHOULD stay and you do not need explanation for this.

---

Well, it is obvious to me that the match cost should be scrapped and I have provided a lot of explanations. What are your explanations? What is it you are trying to say? And please do not repeat things that have been discussed before. I suggest you to read my other posts first.

P.S. I did not misunderstand you. You should be more careful about what exactly you are trying to say lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Well, it is obvious to me that the match cost should be scrapped and I provided a lot of explanations. What are your explanations? What is it you are trying to say? And please do not repeat things that have been discussed before. I suggest you to read my other posts first.

P.S. I did not misunderstand you. You should pay more attention when you are typing lol.

---

You have been countered a lot. I don't know why you are not paying attention? It is not like you go to war free. You still need to pay. Transportation cost money too, so consider that too. Imagine if you found a 500k base and it was free? You will get an easy 500k. It would be more fair if you spent some gold to find that battle. It's all about balance, and fairness. Not easiness and superiority. Decreasing the cost would be OK, but not taking it off. It would be so much easier to overflow with gold which you don't want it to be an easy task. Why should it be easy? Instead of trying to find a perfect base, you have to try to manage your loot and gains. If you don't, it's your problem. Why do you have to pay money to cross through borders? SCRAP IT!!! That's what you are pretty much saying... There are reasons for this. I would not like to see a guy searching millions of time trying to find a million resource base for free. It should cost gold, and it's his loss that he runs out of gold. So what if the total cost or whatever is large? You have to MANAGE with that. Just like you are managing it with real life money. Now... you are going to try to counter this. Even though you can't and you know that. You will still try to counter it hopelessly and helplessly, knowing that there is no way to counter this...

So let me go here...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nathannathan1232

Lol.............

---

LUL

Ideas:

Let's make it cost elixir.
Make it cost DE (evil)
Make it have a 1hr cooldown (evil)
SCRAP IT!
Have no search button, forced to attack that base (evil)
Make you pay so much gold to have the next button for so long.
Have waffles.

Just thinking :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jensenthejao

Everybody pays the search cost. Nobody complains about it. They will never remove it.
Have a fantastic 2014

---

Amen
10chars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bakhoumgeorge

You have been countered a lot. I don't know why you are not paying attention? It is not like you go to war free. You still need to pay. Transportation cost money too, so consider that too. Imagine if you found a 500k base and it was free? You will get an easy 500k. It would be more fair if you spent some gold to find that battle. It's all about balance, and fairness. Not easiness and superiority. Decreasing the cost would be OK, but not taking it off. It would be so much easier to overflow with gold which you don't want it to be an easy task. Why should it be easy? Instead of trying to find a perfect base, you have to try to manage your loot and gains. If you don't, it's your problem. Why do you have to pay money to cross through borders? SCRAP IT!!! That's what you are pretty much saying... There are reasons for this. I would not like to see a guy searching millions of time trying to find a million resource base for free. It should cost gold, and it's his loss that he runs out of gold. So what if the total cost or whatever is large? You have to MANAGE with that. Just like you are managing it with real life money. Now... you are going to try to counter this. Even though you can't and you know that. You will still try to counter it hopelessly and helplessly, knowing that there is no way to counter this...

So let me go here...

LUL

---

The match selection is completely random. Even with the match cost, some people can find a 500k just with one click, but some have to search for ages to find one. How fair is this then?


And you keep saying that raiding will become easier if the cost is scrapped. Well, I disagree entirely. One obvious point is that you forgot about how tough the defences and how tricky the traps can be!


Please do not say I only say SCRAP IT...It's misleading. I explain my points clearly. You should spent some time reading them before countering me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahimi

the match cost is necessary to keep people from searching endlessly for the perfect base.

---

this!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spacecake

this!!!!!!

---

and this...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

...If the purpose of the match cost is to keep us from skipping villages, then why is it imposed on us right at the beginning?

Though, I understand your point. However, I can't see how the match cost can keep people from abusing the "Next" button. You won't attack a village if you have no chance to win, will you? Besides, I don't see how it will become a problem if everyone is trying to find their "perfect" bases, since everyone has a different preference and different attack strategies.

All the villages we encounter are randomly generated by the system - it is out of our control. It is unfair to force us to attack a village, or to "penalise" us, if there's no point in attacking.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

and this...

---

Uhm.. No.

You clearly have no understanding of balance. The match costs is not to "keep you from skipping battles", but simply to give you a very small penalty for doing so. Which is entirely fair. If the match cost is to be scrapped then the "skip" button should see similar treatment. But that would just make you cry even louder, I am sure.

As everyone else has already told you; you are wrong.

DWI.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

The match selection is completely random. Even with the match cost, some people can find a 500k just with one click, but some have to search for ages to find one. How fair is this then?


And you keep saying that raiding will become easier if the cost is scrapped. Well, I disagree entirely. One obvious point is that you forgot about how tough the defences and how tricky the traps can be!


Please do not say I only say SCRAP IT...It's misleading. I explain my points clearly. You should spent some time reading them before countering me.

---

Are you serious... You are just repeating the same thing over. This thread needs to be closed because you proved nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bakhoumgeorge

Are you serious... You are just repeating the same thing over. This thread needs to be closed because you proved nothing.

---

Agreed....!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bakhoumgeorge

Are you serious... You are just repeating the same thing over. This thread needs to be closed because you proved nothing.

---

In your case, no, I did not repeat the same thing to you over and over again. I think it is ridiculous to make such an accusation, especially when every single conversation is visible to everyone!

I even suggested you to read my previous posts so as not to repeat the same thing over and over....

But in the case where you raise a point that have been raised before, I will have to repeat the same things just for you.

Quote:

---

...This thread needs to be closed because you proved nothing.

---

Also, I am not proving anything. I am here to present my idea and discuss with the others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

In your case, no, I did not repeat the same thing to you over and over again. I think it is ridiculous to make such an accusation, especially when every single conversation is visible to everyone!

I even suggested you to read my previous posts so as not to repeat the same thing over and over....

But in the case where you raise a point that have been raised before, I will have to repeat the same things just for you.



Also, I am not proving anything. I am here to present my idea and discuss with the others.

---

I DARE you to make a poll... I DARE you, and see the results.

Match cost needs to stay,although i think it could be slightly reduced and maybe even instead of disappearing it should go to the persons base u skipped.the reason i want it to stay is that it promotes fairness in that people dont just sit there as long as they want just to find the perfect base.If there was no match cost then why would u settle for a small amount of gold?You wouldnt cause it cost you nothing,However WITH the match cost you are willing to go for a smaller amount of loot after searching a while because it starts costing you too much.Really what the match cost does is it increases the chances that a base with a relatively small amount of loot will be raided

Where's the poll? We are waiting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Dahimi, I still don't understand your "balloonist" example... (T_T)

If I want to attack a base, I will make sure all my troops are ready to fight. I won't go searching while training my troops.. Is that what you mean? I'm really not sure what you were saying sorry...

---

I don't understand what you're not getting here. You do understand that troops train while you look for an attack right?

Step 1. Your camps become full.
Step 2. You queue up another army that takes 1 hr to train (24 balloons and 60 minions in my example)
Step 3. Your search and attack takes 15m.
Step 4. After the attack, 15m worth of troops are in your camps leaving 45m of wait time for the rest to build before you attack again.

Without a search cost there is absolutely no financial reason within game to not search for an entire hour if need be to find the perfect base. If you search for 50m in the above example you only have to wait 10m for your army to be finished. If your search takes an hour or more, you will come back to full camps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahimi

I don't understand what you're not getting here. You do understand that troops train while you look for an attack right?

Step 1. Your camps become full.
Step 2. You queue up another army that takes 1 hr to train (24 balloons and 60 minions in my example)
Step 3. Your search and attack takes 15m.
Step 4. After the attack, 15m worth of troops are in your camps leaving 45m of wait time for the rest to build before you attack again.

Without a search cost there is absolutely no financial reason within game to not search for an entire hour if need be to find the perfect base. If you search for 50m in the above example you only have to wait 10m for your army to be finished. If your search takes an hour or more, you will come back to full camps.

---

I bet you she is going to try to counter this helplessly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahimi

I don't understand what you're not getting here. You do understand that troops train while you look for an attack right?

Step 1. Your camps become full.
Step 2. You queue up another army that takes 1 hr to train (24 balloons and 60 minions in my example)
Step 3. Your search and attack takes 15m.
Step 4. After the attack, 15m worth of troops are in your camps leaving 45m of wait time for the rest to build before you attack again.

Without a search cost there is absolutely no financial reason within game to not search for an entire hour if need be to find the perfect base. If you search for 50m in the above example you only have to wait 10m for your army to be finished. If your search takes an hour or more, you will come back to full camps.

---

Okay... But if you find a "perfect" base using little time, will you still skip it just because of your "army training" strategy? Besides, in normal circumstances, I don't think it is possible to not be able to find a "perfect" base in 50 mins, or even within 20 mins. And imagine one clicks the next button for an hour! I don't think anyone would do that even if it is free.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Okay... But if you find a "perfect" base using little time, will you still skip it just because of your "army training" strategy? Besides, in normal circumstances, I don't think it is possible to not be able to find a "perfect" base in 50 mins, or even within 20 mins. And imagine one clicks the next button for an hour! I don't think anyone would do that even if it is free.

---

Honestly i think you're just disagreeing to be difficult now,I mean come on,You disagree with everything that everyone says just for the sake of arguing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Okay... But if you find a "perfect" base using little time, will you still skip it just because of your "army training" strategy? Besides, in normal circumstances, I don't think it is possible to not be able to find a "perfect" base in 50 mins, or even within 20 mins. And imagine one clicks the next button for an hour! I don't think anyone would do that even if it is free.

---

They will do it for as long as is necessary. I'm not saying they will search for an hour, I'm saying there is nothing stopping them from doing so except for the search cost. They have to wait an hour either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jazzathegreat

Honestly i think you're just disagreeing to be difficult now,I mean come on,You disagree with everything that everyone says just for the sake of arguing

---

This forum is designed for discussions. I have the right to disagree with other people's opinions. This is totally acceptable, provided I am not being rude to anyone. You too are welcome to disagree with me and I will listen to your view. But do not try to shut me down just because I am not agreeing with what you said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

This forum is designed for discussions. I have the right to disagree with other people's opinions. This is totally acceptable, provided I am not being rude to anyone. You too are welcome to disagree with me and I will listen to your view. But do not try to shut me down just because I am not agreeing with what you said.

---

Can you put up a poll? I want to see the results

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

This forum is designed for discussions. I have the right to disagree with other people's opinions. This is totally acceptable, provided I am not being rude to anyone. You too are welcome to disagree with me and I will listen to your view. But do not try to shut me down just because I am not agreeing with what you said.

---

Yeah but a constructive discussion often involves sometimes at least conceding you could be wrong on some points or at least making valid arguments not just finding a reason to disagree on everything the other person says just for the sake of it...This is not a debate or competition on who can disagree the most and keep thinking of ways to counter another persons argument.But obviously you will disagree with what I'm saying and counter it anyway so whats the use?My only point here is u cant be right all the time and shouldn't disagree with absolutely everything

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jazzathegreat

Yeah but a constructive discussion often involves sometimes at least conceding you could be wrong on some points or at least making valid arguments not just finding a reason to disagree on everything the other person says just for the sake of it...This is not a debate or competition on who can disagree the most and keep thinking of ways to counter another persons argument.But obviously you will disagree with what I'm saying and counter it anyway so whats the use?My only point here is u cant be right all the time and shouldn't disagree with absolutely everything

---

What you just said was completely right. But I did not disagree on everything the others say just for the sake of it. I was trying to explore the issue and trying to look at things from different perspectives. You cannot decide who is "right" and who is "wrong". But we may raise question or tell each other things they might have overlooked. I hope I have made this clear so that we can all return to the main topic. If anything I've said had offend you in any way then please forgive me. I never meant to offend anyone.

This thread should really be closed...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bakhoumgeorge

This thread should really be closed...

---

Why? It hasn't turned particularly ugly yet and it is still on topic.

I think they should just half the cost and change it to elixir.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pranav

I think they should just half the cost and change it to elixir.

---

I'm not quite sure about the idea of changing it to elixir. Some people like it; some don't - especially those who use a lot of high-tier troops, which cost a lot of elixir. A lot of people suggested cost reduction too, but in my opinion, there's not much room for reduction. And yet, the total cumulative cost can be burdensome. That's why I suggest scrapping it.

Another big reason why it would never be scrapped - which really is a big one.

Is jail broken devices, I do not use one; but understand what they are capable of.

A $0 search fee would make them ridiculously beneficial, far more then they are right now. That is clearly, a very; very bad thing for the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daz258

Another big reason why it would never be scrapped - which really is a big one.

Is jail broken devices, I do not use one; but understand what they are capable of.

A $0 search fee would make them ridiculously beneficial, far more then they are right now. That is clearly, a very; very bad thing for the game.

---

I'm not so familiar with those jail broken devices cos I never use one. Would you like to explain more?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 001rens001

wow you must find bases with very, very little gold xD

anyway, why should they have to scrap it? in real life wars are not free too

---

when was coc real life

There will always be people complaining no matter what sc does... If they take away the match cost people will complain just like you are doing now so they might as well keep it, less work and the same amount of complaints

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaykhim

There will always be people complaining no matter what sc does... If they take away the match cost people will complain just like you are doing now so they might as well keep it, less work and the same amount of complaints

---

Hey, that's not the right attitude. We always welcome complaints. We always listen them. And we always strive for the best :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

Hey, that's not the right attitude. We always welcome complaints. We always listen them. And we always strive for the best :)

---

I already know what will happen you change it around and the people complaining to get rid of it will want it back "ohh why did you get rid of it? I search for hours and hours now and i cant find a base to raid, i need something to force me to settle down on a base" and personally i like a hard base to raid as a challenge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaykhim

I already know what will happen you change it around and the people complaining to get rid of it will want it back "ohh why did you get rid of it? I search for hours and hours now and i cant find a base to raid, i need something to force me to settle down on a base" and personally i like a hard base to raid as a challenge

---

But right now if you search for hours and hours and can't find a base to raid you will have to pay tons of gold! Now tell me, which is better - with or without the match cost?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

But right now if you search for hours and hours and can't find a base to raid you will have to pay tons of gold! Now tell me, which is better - with or without the match cost?

---

With. If we didn't have a match search cost, I could spend hours looking for the perfect base. To Me gives challenge

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yodoloto

But right now if you search for hours and hours and can't find a base to raid you will have to pay tons of gold! Now tell me, which is better - with or without the match cost?

---

In case you don't understand the balloonian example. Ill try to elaborate more. Even if you have a full army, if you queue up troops in the barracks, they will pre-train while you search for battles. If the army you use takes an hour to make, then in that case, people that use that army could search for an hour without concern for match costs and when they finish they can immediately raid again because the troops are done training after an hour of searching. You may not notice this because if you search but end up not battling, everything reverts back and you don't notice the pre-train. Hope this made sense to you

let's end this long post for ones and forever: they are not gonna scrap the match cost, maybe they will reduce it or something,but not gonna scrap point.​

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Benson822175

In case you don't understand the balloonian example. Ill try to elaborate more. Even if you have a full army, if you queue up troops in the barracks, they will pre-train while you search for battles. If the army you use takes an hour to make, then in that case, people that use that army could search for an hour without concern for match costs and when they finish they can immediately raid again because the troops are done training after an hour of searching. You may not notice this because if you search but end up not battling, everything reverts back and you don't notice the pre-train. Hope this made sense to you

---

I got that already. But thanks for the further explanation - I fully understand it now ;)

But I don't think anyone can search for an hour and still not be able to find a suitable base to raid. And if you find a big loot village with less than 15 mins, you wouldn't skip it just because you want to "pre-train" the troops in the barrack, will you?