I was thinking, wouldn't it be fairer if the loot penalty only affected the defender meaning they would lose less but the attacker would still receive what they worked hard for and deserved? Reply below to improve my idea please.:p
Printable View
I was thinking, wouldn't it be fairer if the loot penalty only affected the defender meaning they would lose less but the attacker would still receive what they worked hard for and deserved? Reply below to improve my idea please.:p
The loot penalty is there to prevent TH10s from wrecking a weak TH5. No.Quote:
Originally Posted by scarlet786
I think it's a great idea but unfair because I get attacked by a lot of higher leveled players and therefor if the loot is bigger for the attacker, lower leveled players like me would be take use too much for their farm.
Why should a defender be penalised when they are raided by someone who is 1 or 2 ths higher than him?
The attacker chooses who they hit, the defender doesn't choose who hits him.
wrong grammarQuote:
Originally Posted by scarlet786
I meant that the defender gets less taken away so they dont lose as much but the attacker gets what they deserve.Quote:
Originally Posted by gristy
yh i know i cant type to well so i don't bother correcting stuffQuote:
Originally Posted by wwb00
Get over it
because it will affect the economy . the current revenge system is balance. and i think the true purpose of revenge is making statement for the attacker