The flaw with the above suggestion is that you effectively create a way to bank your resources and safeguard them from being looted in normal multi-player, this will be exploited. This will also cause internal clan issues where player Y wants to bank their resources but has slightly inferior troops to the player X. With the ability of dumping troops you them further compound this issue where some players more loyal to player Y may dump player X's troops then you would then have other issues to resolve like:
- Are dumped troops going to be compensated as well?
- If contributing to War Clan Castles can be compensated then will donations to Clan castles used for the clan wars attack going to be compensated too?
- Then people that donate in normal multi-player will then beg the question why not get compensated for troops that are donated in normal multi-player? (you could argue that experience and FIN is compensation enough, but what if the FIN achievement is already completed? no free gems only meaningless xp...)
Note: the above scenarios are by no means exhaustive but gives you an idea of the pandora's box you basically unleash when an idea like that is implemented, in fact I am sure there are a multitude of other issues that this would create.
No one said wars can't be a source of loot, in fact there is loot in it, the fact is it's free loot which is not generated by other players, which means it by itself has created a false economy, and like I said earlier, if you make the loot attractive enough then farming is going to be dead, and the newest complaint will be why can't we war more than once every 2 days? Essentially if you compensate everyone for their armies used for you term a "hassle" then what is the risk? Why would you spend gold and time pressing next trying to find a base which you think you have a reasonable chance to take loot from?
From a gaming perspective, the developers have to find a balance to ensure all facets of the game remain relevant and so far I think they have good job. If they increased the loot then no one would be bothered trying to use armies that aren't as powerful/expensive to take down bases and going down alternate strategies, the mindset would always be, lets use the most powerful army all the time with no cost or consequence. Hence why would you go farming when all you need to do is 1 star a base to gain the bonus rather than dismantle bases to gain the loot?
Furthermore you failed to address my earlier point on how the system compensates expensive armies being used without overcompensating the use of cheaper armies?
If you say the system should calculate the amount you spend on the army and then refund you your cost as part of a bonus then again, you are creating another bank and the issues related to banking. This would only further compound the current perceived issue that there isn't enough loot in normal multi-player games.
Consider this as well, in addition to your war loot bonus you also have spoils of war achievement which gives you up to 1125 gems/5600 xp that you haven't factored into what you term a hassle. You also have 1250 gems/1550 exp for the war hero achievement, have you factored those achievements and rewards when arriving at clan wars is a hassle? Or have you just looked at the simple calculations of (war loot bonus) - (value of army) = a negative figure and think that's ♥♥♥♥?
To close off, it seems that a lot of players seems to have an entitlement mindset, to have a mindset of having the cake and eating it without any thought of the potential issues of what their requests may cause. If you constantly strive to earn loot from every facet of the game then that means you are trying to farm at every interval... Which means you are better off farming than doing clan wars.