The more buildings u have, the harder to protect the 50%

I think the 50% attacks are the #1 vulnerability for maxed out bases..

Obviously the defense towers, army camps, research labs are essential. Even storages make great tanks. But those gold mines and collectors really count against u. Having 5 builder huts with very low hp hurts too.

If I started over again today, I would use
- 0 resource collectors. just raid that gold and elixirs like a real pirate.
- 3 barracks. They would still train faster than the spells and hero regen
- 3 builder huts (will require some gemming)

That's 18 less buildings to protect!! 50% win would be impossible. I would put all my defense in a close ring (like the the spartan phalanx) with TH in the middle. Then another ring of thick walls. Then the storages to tank. My base would be invincible!!

Um.... You really wouldn't. I must ask as much can be lost on the inter-web tone wise... Are you serious or joking?

Each building would also count for a greater percentage. So, less buildings would need to be destroyed to achieve 50%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rspwnr99

Each building would also count for a greater percentage. So, less buildings would need to be destroyed to achieve 50%.

---

Yeah, but it's harder to destroy a defense than a Builder's Hut.

I would love to see max TH10 with 2-3 builders and no extra collectors. Good luck!

Umm...Having no Collectors, 3 Barracks and 3 Builder Huts is a really big disadvantage in my opinion...

I dont think you understand how percentages work

I always wondered if a gemmer who never got builders huts and gemmed everything would have an advantage or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CunningLinguists

I dont think you understand how percentages work

---

i agree 10 chars

So with your idea, now we need to destroy less buildings to get 50%!

No resource collectors?

You will be using a lot of gems to rebuild and army when your attack goes awry and you've just upgraded an item that spent all remaining elixir. Same with using gold when searching for an attack.

Just a random thought if you didnt have pumps an mines that would be less loot being put into the community as a whole wouldnt:confused: it always bothers me seeing high lvl th with lvl one pumps an mines even if they are easier to destroy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragnus

I think the 50% attacks are the #1 vulnerability for maxed out bases..

Obviously the defense towers, army camps, research labs are essential. Even storages make great tanks. But those gold mines and collectors really count against u. Having 5 builder huts with very low hp hurts too.

If I started over again today, I would use
- 0 resource collectors. just raid that gold and elixirs like a real pirate.
- 3 barracks. They would still train faster than the spells and hero regen
- 3 builder huts (will require some gemming)

That's 18 less buildings to protect!! 50% win would be impossible. I would put all my defense in a close ring (like the the spartan phalanx) with TH in the middle. Then another ring of thick walls. Then the storages to tank. My base would be invincible!!

---

♥♥♥♥, good luck with that.

And as someone said, you don't know how percentage works.

Less buildings total=less buildings to destroy for 50% but what's left all have much more hp and can shoot invaders. You have a much leaner base.

If your gemming for shields to stay on top, the extra gemming u have to do with 2 fewer builders hut is really nothing. U wouldn't even have to buy shields anymore since ur base is unbeatable. And the collectors even maxed out produce a tiny fraction of resources needed to max buildings. 6 barracks are useful to farming peasants but not when u have to wait for spells/heroes to wake up.

Those buildings are nothing but deadweight a when u design a base.

People lose trophies for one of three reasons:
1. Townhall gets destroyed because their defense is too spread out to protect the deadweights from 50%
2. Deadweight got to cherry-picked by barb-archers.
3 they are th9s who really belong in kiddie leagues.

Having fewer deadweight buildings really solves this problem.

I am pretty sure the percentages are the opposite of what you are talking about

I actually saw an almost maxed th10 with 1 collector and mine. Or maybe it was two. But it has been done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragnus

Less buildings total=less buildings to destroy for 50% but what's left all have much more hp and can shoot invaders. You have a much leaner base.

If your gemming for shields to stay on top, the extra gemming u have to do with 2 fewer builders hut is really nothing. U wouldn't even have to buy shields anymore since ur base is unbeatable. And the collectors even maxed out produce a tiny fraction of resources needed to max buildings.

Those buildings are nothing but deadweight a when u design a base.

People lose trophies for one of three reasons:
1. Townhall gets destroyed because their defense is too spread out to protect the deadweights from 50%
2. Deadweight got to cherry-picked by barb-archers.
3 they are th9s who really belong in kiddie leagues.

Having fewer deadweight buildings really solves this problem.

---

No, no, and no.

People at higher trophy probably don't care about getting 1* that's why they leave the majority of their building outside the base. They don't want to get 2* or 3*, that's all.

They don't care about 1-started because they don't have a choice. You either protect the TH or the 50%

Every base with the deadweights can be 1-starred with max troops and proper execution.

Dropping the deadweights let's u put all ur def in one place around the TH. The damage density and the close-range fire rate would be incredible. They protect the TH and each other

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragnus

I think the 50% attacks are the #1 vulnerability for maxed out bases..

Obviously the defense towers, army camps, research labs are essential. Even storages make great tanks. But those gold mines and collectors really count against u. Having 5 builder huts with very low hp hurts too.

If I started over again today, I would use
- 0 resource collectors. just raid that gold and elixirs like a real pirate.
- 3 barracks. They would still train faster than the spells and hero regen
- 3 builder huts (will require some gemming)

That's 18 less buildings to protect!! 50% win would be impossible. I would put all my defense in a close ring (like the the spartan phalanx) with TH in the middle. Then another ring of thick walls. Then the storages to tank. My base would be invincible!!

---

Got to be honest if i could start over i wouldnt use mines either.

- Doesn't gem
- Builds defence that capsout storages
- No gold left to search for raids
- Quits

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CunningLinguists

I dont think you understand how percentages work

---

I'm not sure if this strategy would be better, but insulting his understanding of percentages is ridiculous. Here are the two scenarios:

1) Say you only have 10 defensive buildings. The attacker would have to take out 5 of them.

2) Now, you add 10 non-defensive buildings. The attacker would have to take out 10 buildings, but none of them have to be defensive buildings.

I have no idea which is more difficult to do, but it's a reasonable question to ask: is it easier to take out say 5 defensive buildings or 10 non-defensive ones?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JSpong

- Doesn't gem
- Builds defence that capsout storages
- No gold left to search for raids
- Quits

---

Heh I didn't think of that.. U need one gold mine I guess.. Also one elixir to make that one goblin that's gonna let u bootstrap to more troops

OP, I get what your saying, but it doesn't really work in game. Say I had 50 buildings total. And according to your logic, you'd not build the "unnecessary" ones (18) and be left with 32. Now, statistically speaking, would it be easier for me to destroy 16 buildings or 25?

Just have no defenses like Code Red! Speaking of him does anyone know what clan hes in now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jont828

OP, I get what your saying, but it doesn't really work in game. Say I had 50 buildings total. And according to your logic, you'd not build the "unnecessary" ones (18) and be left with 32. Now, statistically speaking, would it be easier for me to destroy 16 buildings or 25?

---

I think according to OP's logic, your question should be, is it easier to destroy 16 guarded buildings, or 25 unguarded buildings? In theory, destroying 16 is obviously easier than destroying 25, but... What if the 16 are harder to destroy? Which is what OP is getting at.

I disagree on this one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jont828

OP, I get what your saying, but it doesn't really work in game. Say I had 50 buildings total. And according to your logic, you'd not build the "unnecessary" ones (18) and be left with 32. Now, statistically speaking, would it be easier for me to destroy 16 buildings or 25?

---

It will be easier to pick off the 25 buildings because they have much lower hp and can't shoot.

Also with less area to protect u have much more firepower density. One archer tower next to a collector is much easier to pick off than an archer tower behind a cannon flanked by air defense and backed up by a wiz tower. The invaders get less shots off before they die.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragnus

It will be easier to pick off the 25 buildings because they have much lower hp and can't shoot.

Also with less area to protect u have much more firepower density. One archer tower next to a collector is much easier to pick off than an archer tower behind a cannon flanked by air defense and backed up by a wiz tower. The invaders get less shots off before they die.

---

but don't forget that those mines and pump and other buildings act as distractions for defenses to pic of attackers... without those attackers would go straight for defenses. a 240 unit army would easily get 50% all the time IMO

It's a small advantage I guess. The guns would still be tanked by storages and camps, and more importantly other guns.

The best tank for your inferno towers is an xbow, which at level 3 has 2600hp. The hogs can jump over walls but they take a while to kill an xbow while they get fried by the discos

I heard that back when you could sell buildings, someone in champ sold some of them, and won a whole bunch because no one could get 50%.

The spartan phalanx was a line of men who locked shields and stuck spears out while another line behind them helped push back while a 3rd line pointed spears in the air to deflect projectiles... I fail to see how you can replicate this. Maybe you mean the circular schiltron which is just a circle of walls & spears.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fros

The spartan phalanx was a line of men who locked shields and stuck spears out while another line behind them helped push back while a 3rd line pointed spears in the air to deflect projectiles... I fail to see how you can replicate this. Maybe you mean the circular schiltron which is just a circle of walls & spears.

---

Yes I meant the circular version of the phalanx line. since in CoC you can get attacked from all 4 directions.

smaller-area = much shorter line of defense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JSpong

- Doesn't gem
- Builds defence that capsout storages
- No gold left to search for raids
- Quits

---

Nope. Goblin raids. You will just have to save them for way later on. I'd really like to see if this works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragnus

I think the 50% attacks are the #1 vulnerability for maxed out bases..

Obviously the defense towers, army camps, research labs are essential. Even storages make great tanks. But those gold mines and collectors really count against u. Having 5 builder huts with very low hp hurts too.

If I started over again today, I would use
- 0 resource collectors. just raid that gold and elixirs like a real pirate.
- 3 barracks. They would still train faster than the spells and hero regen
- 3 builder huts (will require some gemming)

That's 18 less buildings to protect!! 50% win would be impossible. I would put all my defense in a close ring (like the the spartan phalanx) with TH in the middle. Then another ring of thick walls. Then the storages to tank. My base would be invincible!!

---

Haha, actually, no it would not.

The lesser buildings you have, the greater percentage one gets when destroying that building. Say I have all buildings acquired, if someone took it down, they get 1-2%. Now in this case, I would get 3-4% for taking down that building. That is why when you were growing up in the game, if you destroyed the town hall it gave you almost 30-40%!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fros

The spartan phalanx was a line of men who locked shields and stuck spears out while another line behind them helped push back while a 3rd line pointed spears in the air to deflect projectiles... I fail to see how you can replicate this. Maybe you mean the circular schiltron which is just a circle of walls & spears.

---

Shouldn't the third line have pointed SHIELDS in the air? Not spears? I think that's what your intention was, no?

you know how percents and fractions and decimals work, right?

lets say you have 10 buildings. each building is worth 10% since 10*10=100. but if you have 50 buildings, each building is worth 2% because 100/50=2. so the more buildings you have, the easier it is to protect against 50%, assuming you have enough defense.

Unless youre looking to spend $3000 thats not really a good idea......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacksonian

Shouldn't the third line have pointed SHIELDS in the air? Not spears? I think that's what your intention was, no?

---

No if shields were in the air that would be the roman testudo (turtle) formation

Let's see it from another point of view. Having more buildings means attacker has to clear non-defensive buildings first while being under fire (advantage of defender). If non-defensive buildings are never there, every attacker would go straight to defenses instead of having to clear non-defensive buildings first. For instance, dragons, pekka, or other strong units would rule. No need of having giants, hogs, balloons, or other units that target defenses. The whole system would change.

It isn't only about percentage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fros

No if shields were in the air that would be the roman testudo (turtle) formation

---

I highly doubt a spear would be of any use in deflecting projectiles.

~ Strider

Not sure how that gonna work for you, when I started playing, have idea somekind like this, so I built the non-tower buildings last.

Didn't work so well for me. For one, things that got load of dps and HPs like PEKKAs, wizards and dragons have certain disadvantage that their ai seeks target almost randomly, so you can count on them not heading straight to your towers. When you got nothing but towers, you give their ai the same advantage of the ones of giant or hogs.

What happened when 3 PEKKAs trashing your towers one by one, since those were all you had, was not a pretty replay.

I see where both sides are coming from. One side says more buildings=more buildings needed to destroy for a 50%, where the OP says less non-defensive buildings=harder to destroy each individual building. What the OP suggests is a bit unorthodox, but I think it's worth a try. Provided you have some money to spend, of course.:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smalls

Nope. Goblin raids. You will just have to save them for way later on. I'd really like to see if this works.

---

You would run out of goblin raids very quickly if you had to rely on them for loot when u had none

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragnus

I think the 50% attacks are the #1 vulnerability for maxed out bases..

Obviously the defense towers, army camps, research labs are essential. Even storages make great tanks. But those gold mines and collectors really count against u. Having 5 builder huts with very low hp hurts too.

If I started over again today, I would use
- 0 resource collectors. just raid that gold and elixirs like a real pirate.
- 3 barracks. They would still train faster than the spells and hero regen
- 3 builder huts (will require some gemming)

That's 18 less buildings to protect!! 50% win would be impossible. I would put all my defense in a close ring (like the the spartan phalanx) with TH in the middle. Then another ring of thick walls. Then the storages to tank. My base would be invincible!!

---

Don't you realize that the less buildings you have the easier it is to 50% you too... If you have like for example 20 buildings each building will give more percentage to your overall progress rather than a base with 40 buildings.

Lets do a simple experiment:
train 150 archers then find and attack the first ten Th7 bases using all 150 archers each time, note down how many you 50%
Then train 150 archers and repeat this again ten times, but this time attack the first ten Th10's that you find.

Post your results in here please :)

Errrr... I don't think you're on the right track.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragnus

I think the 50% attacks are the #1 vulnerability for maxed out bases..

Obviously the defense towers, army camps, research labs are essential. Even storages make great tanks. But those gold mines and collectors really count against u. Having 5 builder huts with very low hp hurts too.

If I started over again today, I would use
- 0 resource collectors. just raid that gold and elixirs like a real pirate.
- 3 barracks. They would still train faster than the spells and hero regen
- 3 builder huts (will require some gemming)

That's 18 less buildings to protect!! 50% win would be impossible. I would put all my defense in a close ring (like the the spartan phalanx) with TH in the middle. Then another ring of thick walls. Then the storages to tank. My base would be invincible!!

---

Al you defenses???? Hog riders.

Think about it like this, if a person has less buildings, first of all you will need to kill less buildings to get 50%. You say it is better to not have as many buildings which cant shoot, this is wrong, if you have less buildings, the attacker can focus more troops on to each building. Thus making it no harder to 1 star.

It's harder for the enemies to score 50% though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geronimosemiro

Errrr... I don't think you're on the right track.

---

Errr.... yup haha

This is a very good point OP - before it became impossible to sell buildings that's exactly what people used to do - it wasn't uncommon to find bases with no collectors or mines (this was before DE drills).

The downside of course is each building is therefore worth more % so they had better be protected well

Most Base designs have enough buildings on the outside to get about 40%, bit you gotta take down some defenses to get the 50%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strider

I highly doubt a spear would be of any use in deflecting projectiles.

~ Strider

---

One simply needs to look at the Spartans accomplishments & then believe that they must've deflected them. I also find it hard to believe but hey it worked I guess.

It's an interesting idea, but I think what the OP failed to take into account is that fewer non-defensive buildings and more concentrated/compact defense buildings will also allow an attacker to concentrate all his firepower on defensive buildings whereas before defenses could take easily take out units that were busy with non-defensive items. As has been mentioned before, an attacker would be able to dedicate more units per buildings, hogs will have less distances to cover to reach defensive buildings, etc.

Similarly, with fewer non-defensive buildings there would be (on average) more defensive buildings affected by a particular thread, thereby allowing an attacker to take out those buildings more easily.

This would just make the game much slower and harder, so..... I would never even put this thought into my head

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragnus

I think the 50% attacks are the #1 vulnerability for maxed out bases..

Obviously the defense towers, army camps, research labs are essential. Even storages make great tanks. But those gold mines and collectors really count against u. Having 5 builder huts with very low hp hurts too.

If I started over again today, I would use
- 0 resource collectors. just raid that gold and elixirs like a real pirate.
- 3 barracks. They would still train faster than the spells and hero regen
- 3 builder huts (will require some gemming)

That's 18 less buildings to protect!! 50% win would be impossible. I would put all my defense in a close ring (like the the spartan phalanx) with TH in the middle. Then another ring of thick walls. Then the storages to tank. My base would be invincible!!

---

Sigh...
Let's say you had 10 buildings. That means if you destroyed 5, that would be 50%. If you had 20 buildings, it would take 10 to get 50%. So you are backwards.

Do you not understand how percentage works ok if a maxed out town hall 7 with all builder's huts each building is worth 2%
but if we do what you said each build would be worth 5-6% so it would be easier to get 50 percent

Currently I am doing this to certain extent. I have not spawned my 3 storage tanks nor my 2nd Dark Trainer. Really, I will probably do the Dark trainer soon, but the extra storage tanks are worthless to me, since they are just too difficult to protect and provide easy resources. When I need to start upgrading things over 4m I will certainly put them to use, but for now, I would rather just protect four storage tanks.

To OP: since we only have a limited of time for each raids, have you factored in the time taken for enemies to take down your buildings? e.g. more buildings means more area is occupied and thus travelling time for troops is increased, etc.

Goblin missions might have had much better defenses than average bases when I attacked them, but since they lacked any non-defensive structures to soak up damage and confuse my troops AI, they all got three-starred.

More defenses - more chance of winning, if the defenses are high level. Can be argued either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filovirus

No resource collectors?

You will be using a lot of gems to rebuild and army when your attack goes awry and you've just upgraded an item that spent all remaining elixir. Same with using gold when searching for an attack.

---

If you have no mines and next away all your gold, I guess you just gem some more.
I just can't believe you want to play that way...

you also would not have anything to make troops go away from th they would just funnel straight to the center of your base and those extra buildings also cause the attacker to have to work harder to get to your defences