Lol! I agree. Funny. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Hettoman2
Printable View
Lol! I agree. Funny. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Hettoman2
I like the full loot. The money is generated from nowhere so what is the point of doing this if it dosent hurt anyone
The loot should be function to the difficulty, meaning that making 100% destruction on a village should not give as much loot as doing 50% on a big one.Quote:
Originally Posted by MomoZB
In fact .. if the same loot for these two, then 100% on the small should be has difficult to do than 50% on the bigger.. (can't be perfect but the matchmarking got these informations)
I'm speaking about the loot, not the stars system, stars system can stay has it it.
It hurts cause it is unfair. Look at it like that, you're working in an office, the man in front of you, who do the same job as you.. is sleeping all day. He earn as much money as you do... Now your boss ask you to do more.. you feel this is unfair.. ? What is your thought if i say to you "Well the money he pay the guy comes from his pocket, not your"..... the thing remain unfair... isn't it ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tythebarbarian
Some players do their best to earn Stars and they are not rewarded as much as others that play "The loot"... the system should not allow that.
As i've already said, i'm actually kicking players that plays exclusively "the loot"... this is the only solution actually.
Yep...i had this player once that was lvl 30, and when the war started he attacked the most overpowered guy in the other clan (lvl 110). His townhall was out, so he took the th and left the match. I was so ♥♥♥♥♥♥ off by that. I mean, I do that too sometimes, but only if we have like 5 minutes left and we already "won" the match.
I think it solve the "problem" only partialy, i really think that the loot should be a function of the destruction percentage... i would say not even linear, would be better (check first post, updated)Quote:
Originally Posted by cnascime
It's actually more like that guy in front of you who is sleeping suddenly starts making less while you make the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryAngels
The question is, why do you care?
The solution of kicking people is the correct one, because really what the boss should do is fire the dude who sleeps all day.
Looking at this from another perspective, you already have a remedy. You simply kick folks who you feel aren't pulling their weight. If your idea is implemented it screws everyone out of more loot for no good reason, and you'll still likely have to kick folks so you gain nothing.
Also basing it off damage done makes no sense, since it is the stars that matter. Why should you get more loot for destroying 90% but missing the TH and still getting one star while the other guy destroys the th and does 2% damage for one star? As far as the war is concerned both are equivalent. Even dumber is getting more loot for 90% damage and one star than for getting 50% damage and two stars. In this case the person getting two stars is actually helping your war effort more but gets less loot.
Kicking the sleeper is ok, i don't know if you ever had a company.... but, having to kick a lazy guy to recrut a new one that is also lazy ... is not a good idea (and yeah... there is enought lazy guys.. :) ). Making the RULES to attract non lazy people IS the way... i can assure you of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahimi
About the TH and stars, you're right ... as war is concerned doing two stars on TH and 50% mini destruction is better than 90 without the TH. Let's than add a bonus for the TH on top of the destruction percentage bonus.
Let's say : TH is 30% of Full loot
In my graph let's now say that we only got 70% remaining to distribute on the percentage destruction.
=> First post Edited
Does it sound better ?
Ho, i do not replied to you : "Why do you care", because i got a visceral sense of equity. Not saying this is a quality but just that ... i'm like that.
First post edited, like dahimi pointed out, there was a discontinuity between the "stars" system and the idea i exposed, idea as been reworked.
Graph added and also a spreadsheet that clearly point out how the actual system is ON/OFF and not progressive at all ... this is this lack of progressivity that makes it unfair.
I think its great the way the loot system works. Does it really matter if you only need 1 star to get all the loot? Its not like its coming out of that persons storages. In our clan we all try and three star on our first attack. Then we wait till the wars nearly over. We then go out and 1 star the highest player we can to maximize the loot we can get. Im lv 135 and have maxed defenses, my recommended opponents also are. It cost me a lot of loot i build an army to attack and its very difficult to three star them.
Try it out, go attack a th10 with maxed defenses and especially maxed infernos. Ill bet you lose misreably.
Also the current system allows lower players to get a lot of loot. If it was the way you suggested all the lower players would make dismal amounts and wars would soon stop, cos the rewards just arent there.
I already spend over 10k of dark elix during a war in donates and training my own armies.
i say leave the system as it is!
cooper2009
ausgonewild leader