Army Camps and Defense

I already have a feeling this a bad idea but I'll just put it out there anyways.
im sure it's been requested before but I'm unsure if it was structured in what I may present.

To me personally it just doesn't make sense that your troops garrisoned at the Army Camp don't defend at all but it would be horrendous to have them defend your base like CC troops do.What I was thinking why not restrict them.

Army Camps are 5x5 in size. Have the range they defend be one tile bigger than 5x5. So the range would be 6 tiles. That way they don't have such a large range and they don't follow you like CC troops. They won't follow you outside of the camp.

Plus you must consider you can lose these troops if you so happen to get attacked.

so I also suggest that you can make it where you can either have your troops defending or not that way if you do get attacked and you don't want to lose troops you don't have to.

Once those troops die you have to remake that entire army you had in it and that takes time and resources and plus you consider you may not always use that army to raid.

Considering profits having an army defending your camp would prove bad in the long run which is why you can have the option to have them defend or not.


Thats really my take on the idea of your troops defending.
its can be OP but that ends up being costly.

if you feel it's too OP I wouldn't disagree. I just wanted to get this off my mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JibuRiRu

I already have a feeling this a bad idea but I'll just put it out there anyways.
im sure it's been requested before but I'm unsure if it was structured in what I may present.

To me personally it just doesn't make sense that your troops garrisoned at the Army Camp don't defend at all but it would be horrendous to have them defend your base like CC troops do.What I was thinking why not restrict them.

Army Camps are 5x5 in size. Have the range they defend be one tile bigger than 5x5. So the range would be 6 tiles. That way they don't have such a large range and they don't follow you like CC troops. They won't follow you outside of the camp.

Plus you must consider you can lose these troops if you so happen to get attacked.

so I also suggest that you can make it where you can either have your troops defending or not that way if you do get attacked and you don't want to lose troops you don't have to.

Once those troops die you have to remake that entire army you had in it and that takes time and resources and plus you consider you may not always use that army to raid.

Considering profits having an army defending your camp would prove bad in the long run which is why you can have the option to have them defend or not.


Thats really my take on the idea of your troops defending.
its can be OP but that ends up being costly.

if you feel it's too OP I wouldn't disagree. I just wanted to get this off my mind.

---

While I can't find this in the ruled-out thread, I don't think this is needed. Imagine having a PEKKA or Golem in your army camp, and those get destroyed. It is just elixir down the drain. Also, this in kinda like the old rule that if an army camp got destroyed, you lost your troops. It is just not a god idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buttermink

While I can't find this in the ruled-out thread, I don't think this is needed. Imagine having a PEKKA or Golem in your army camp, and those get destroyed. It is just elixir down the drain. Also, this in kinda like the old rule that if an army camp got destroyed, you lost your troops. It is just not a god idea.

---

I know but you also consider that those troops take quite a bit of time to make as well not just resources. It's like having a very expensive trap with a rearm cost that's costs an arm and a leg or less of one depending on the army.

i recalled the the old rule as well and I thought it was stupid you'd lose them without them defending or anything.

So I refer back to the option to have them defending or not. It would kinda be like the Heroes where they can be asleep or guarding your base in that specific area

this idea would helpful for a trophy pusher but not a farmer.

With all that you also have to keep in mind how offense is better than defense right now in the game. Especially when you have higher THs attacking lower ones

Imagine having to take out 240 additional units space of high level troops and a well developed base. This would kill offense almost completely.

Offense has has to be more powerful than defense. The game is based on attacking. Implementing defensive army camps, would be the death nail in COC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LukeNQ

Imagine having to take out 240 additional units space of high level troops and a well developed base. This would kill offense almost completely.

Offense has has to be more powerful than defense. The game is based on attacking. Implementing defensive army camps, would be the death nail in COC.

---

I did imagine taking out that many troops but that's why the range is one tile bigger than the army camp. And what's more is that you could use lightning spells on the troops inside to take most out. Ive been thinking how I could go about attacking them and that is certainly one way.

True, you could lightning tier 1 troops. But imagine valkyries, pekka, golems, wizards, etc. All at or near max level. You seriously wanna have to clear all that in addition to a maxed out base? I completely follow your thought process as to why they don't defend. But in a practical setting implementation of this would completely kïll offense. And if you kill offense, you kill Clash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LukeNQ

True, you could lightning tier 1 troops. But imagine valkyries, pekka, golems, wizards, etc. All at or near max level. You seriously wanna have to clear all that in addition to a maxed out base? I completely follow your thought process as to why they don't defend. But in a practical setting implementation of this would completely kïll offense. And if you kill offense, you kill Clash.

---

I know. I'm trying to see if I could really make this idea viable simply because it is such a detrimental thing. Wizards get taken out real easily with lightning btw.
And why doesn't Pekka get double damage with the Lightning spell or is that already the case? As far as the rest goes well you got me. They just seem like those types of troops you'd spend extra for defense.

Besides I was thinking you could see the army camp troops whilst raiding so you know what you are up against unlike CC troops. If that was the case you could always next. Smart players who were farming wouldn't use their troops to defend and there will still be bases to attack. Maybe not trophy pushers of course because they'd like to be well defended.

i know spells aren't attractive for active players because of time and elixir. However it may give incentive to boost the spell factory.

i was also thinking along the lines of Clan wars too. This would certainly make wars challenging. Actually refreshing because Army camps to me are just things that take up quite a lot of space to decrease a attackers spawn range.

I would like to discuss this further because of how controversial this can be.

With what your proposing. The TH of every trophy pusher will be surrounded with army camps. And a clan castle. That's 275 housing space. Imagine this in champs. Now add in 2 max lvl infernos, 3 max Xbows, lvl 40 heros. And I can go on and on from there. It would be a murderers row to breach a core. Defense would become insanely OP. Sound fun to never be able to win on offense? I know I'd most likely stop playing. What would be the point? Login collect mines and pumps/cook extremely expensive army/wait a few hours/ lose ATTACK/ rinse repeat. At the end of the day this idea just could not work. Offense ALWAYS HAS TO BE DOMINATE. ALWAYS.

At best, you could have a small number of watch guards, or standing army assigned at each camp that could attack back, like CC troops. Anything more, and it would unbalance things. Players were already thrilled by an update that allowed thier army to stay after the army camp (or rather the campfire) was destroyed. Before that, if it was destroyed, so was your army.

If the whole army was forced to be a defense garrison, that would drastically change how people make armies. I would have to train up things other than tier 1 troops, since one zap of a lightning spell on the campfire would take them all out, and would have to retrain for raiding again. Or people train up just 'defense troops' for the night, rather than raiding troops, so they can protect thier base better; which may or may not live through the first attack, and lose all that Elixir spent making them.

So yeah, OP was right, kind of a bad idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

At best, you could have a small number of watch guards, or standing army assigned at each camp that could attack back, like CC troops. Anything more, and it would unbalance things. Players were already thrilled by an update that allowed thier army to stay after the army camp (or rather the campfire) was destroyed. Before that, if it was destroyed, so was your army.

If the whole army was forced to be a defense garrison, that would drastically change how people make armies. I would have to train up things other than tier 1 troops, since one zap of a lightning spell on the campfire would take them all out, and would have to retrain for raiding again. Or people train up just 'defense troops' for the night, rather than raiding troops, so they can protect thier base better; which may or may not live through the first attack, and lose all that Elixir spent making them.

So yeah, OP was right, kind of a bad idea.

---

I would like to poing out the troops won't be forced. I mentioned you can either have them guard or not like the Heroes can be asleep or on guard so you don't lose them.

as far as the small number goes, that's reasonable. Though the number can't be too insignificant otherwise why bother?

i can see the camps upgrading in defensive troops by 5 per level

Army Camp
lvl1-5 troops
lvl2-10
lvl3-15
lvl4-20
lvl5-25
lvl6-30

and it would go on like that in increments of 5.

So so let's say you had 4 Lvl 6 army camps that's mean. You'd have 120 troops defending when normally 4 lvl 6 camps has 200 capacity. That's a little more than half in total but you have to think that it's 30 troops per lvl 6 camp meaning you won't be attacking all at the same time unless you are trying to 3 star

or if you had
2 lvl 6
and 2 lvl 5

2x25=50
2x30=60
60+50=110
troops defending

i know its a bad idea. I just want to discuss on it is all.