Intro/Explanation/Rant (Those that already know the issue and don't want to hear my point of view rant, you can skip to the Main Point)
Says right there, at least for me, that a strong base defense is just as important as a strong offensive attack in the loading screen hints.
Well, it's a lie. Half lie, half true. True in the fact you do need something good to protect your loot, but false in the fact that it can set you up to be robbed blind of resources. Granted, loot isn't everything, but it is a key thing for growth and base development.
As someone that has purposefully allowed attacks to be done on his base, for the defence win, I can safely say, it is expensive. Most times, I lose a significant amount of loot, even when I do win, and a shield to stop more attacks doesn't always happen, even after the loot loss. Plus, CC troops are killed and traps are tripped, weakening the base very noticeably for the next attack. I have log on right after an attack and fix this before feeling comfortable logging back off again. If I don't, I can get attacked again, lose even more loot, and the whole thing keeps going, until one succees at giving a shield, or too poor to be worth attacking.
The only reasons why I do it is for the achievement, and just seeing an idea I make for a base layout work. In every other respect, I'm wasting time and (game) money. When on a winning streak, I had to stop, raid, and refill my base with loot because I was 'winning' so much (ha, 'winning'.. nice joke, right?) I'm active enough to pay for this expensive habit, but not everyone is that dedicated or willing to work so hard just for that, and let alone just to tolerate seeing loot to go to someone else. For awhile, some defense wins was as costly as a simple raid, as I just sit there, with my planned base, CC full from donations from clan mates, only to see someone fail both in stars and in loot grabbing. Those are always enjoyable to watch.
Right now, my joy in base defense wins is likely in the distant future, as now I have a higher TH base, and now a target of stronger bases who want loot. I lose often because I haven't had time to upgrade defences enough to fight them off, and for a substantial amount of loot at a time from attempting to try to hold extra loot for later upgrades. The player made fix to this, 'farming base' aka, make a base with an exposed Town Hall to metagame and get that shield so your hard earned loot is safe. Doesn't always work, but it has a better loot retention than any other base concept out there. Only issue with it, is that it totaly goes contrary to what the game tells you to do. And still people complain about loses. So something is doubly very wrong here.
Yes, I'm kind of a purist in this respect, wanting such things fixed, even though it is a common occurrence.
Psychologically, getting your base raided is very harsh. Many people easily get caught up with the graphics of how the fight goes, and just seeing part or all of thier base get razed to the ground. People do usually get mostly used to it, but the other harsh shock, after realizing that things cartoonishly pop back up just fine moments later of logging on, is that some of your loot is gone. Realistically, it is minor, and thankfully this game isn't realistic. But in respect for the fun aspect, it hurts. Even though the amount is small, this game is supposed to be fun in general, despite the bitter loses. Losing progress in your goal is to be expected, but constantly losing so much progress, to be put back to where you started loot wise is the most painful a thing to have for a game. Some games are built like that (see rougelike games for example), but Clash of Clans (I'm really hoping) isn't supposed to be like that in respect to loot. Sure you can get a total loss in loot, but if Supercell wants to keep players playing, losing that much loot, for experienced players, shouldn't be that easy and that common a thing to happen if played as originally intended, ever.
Main Point (Can wake up now.)
We need a way to make attacks on our bases less 'painful'. No this isn't a personal whine about how I somehow fail at defence and just need to 'own up' and do whatever obvious solution any one with half a brain should do, which is the typical response to such complaints. No, this is a systemic issue (aka issue with game mechanics) that has been around since the game started, and not an issue with player behavior.
Players metagame the shield because defence satisfaction is extremely disproportionate to attack satisfaction. Attacks are greatly rewarded, and defending is highly discouraged. Except for rare times, even defence successes feel like a failure to most people. Sure, this game is meant to be attacking and raiding others, but something needs to be done for defence, or these issues will always be with us for years to come.
Some possible solutions are... (which are not all original)
- Defence loot reward of somekind for holding off an attack, to counter the loot loss from the raid and make wining feel like a real win.
- Gain percentage of enemy unit cost for each killed unit. Gain something from a well built base that is able to hold off a strong attack, win or lose.
- Mini shield of 30-60 minute (or more) after any attack that expends some of your resources (like tripped traps, CC troops killed, or 'significant loot loss), so a casual player has time to rearm and refill thier base with much less stress than we have now.
- Nighttime shield option, where after hitting a threshold, even after winning, you get a 8-12 hour sheild for your base, keeping with the casual form of play people want to have, and actually sleep! Nighttime shield has a cool down to prevent abuse.
There have been more ideas to help solve some of these issues, but those are the ones that were off the top off my head. I'm not going to touch on ideas to make a farming base less appealing, like adding extra penalties for it being wrecked, until we have positive incentives, like above, agreed on first. Let's give reasons to move towards something else that's positive, before giving negative reasons to move away from what most of us are currently doing.
Yes, there is an argument that if you make defence 'too good' there is little reason to attack. That would be a good argument, of only defence satisfaction currently wasn't so hellaciously abysmal, that people bend the rules JUST to attempt to have fun.
Will add other good ideas and features that come up later from replys
