Add Defense Incentives

Printable View

February 11th, 2015
WarrenJames

Add Defense Incentives
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
February 12th, 2015
BattleBorn007

Getting this up since it slipped through the cracks
February 12th, 2015
dahimi

Defense is meaningless it's all about attacking.
February 12th, 2015
BattleBorn007

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

Defense is meaningless it's all about attacking.

Tell that to all the people asking for elixir walls
February 12th, 2015
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by BattleBorn007

Tell that to all the people asking for elixir walls

If I told the elixir walls crowd what I actually thought, I'd get an infraction.
February 12th, 2015
BattleBorn007

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

If I told the elixir walls crowd what I actually thought, I'd get an infraction.

Thats what would happen if I told the Lightning Rod and "Use the Water" crowd what I thought
February 12th, 2015
WarrenJames

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

Defense is meaningless it's all about attacking.

Please read and add something meaningful to the thread.

I was even nice enough to have labeled what part people can skip, if it was TL-DR. :(

If defence was meaningless, why have an exposed Town Hall, or put effort into a good base at all?

Would have thought that half the additions, to make the game more of a casual game, as intended, would get some comments.
February 12th, 2015
Ataraxia

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

If I told the elixir walls crowd what I actually thought, I'd get an infraction.

This is going in my signature.
February 12th, 2015
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

Please read and add something meaningful to the thread.

I was even nice enough to have labeled what part people can skip, if it was TL-DR. :(

The only reward for a successful defense should be the trophies you receive. Other rewards should not be granted for passive play, period.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

If defence was meaningless, why have an exposed Town Hall, or put effort into a good base at all?

Exposed THs do not help your argument. Instead they support mine. So do the TH7s that reach 4000 trophies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

Would have thought that half the additions, to make the game more of a casual game, as intended, would get some comments.

If this game were anymore casual, it'd play itself.
February 12th, 2015
WarrenJames

And here I thought I was a stubborn idealist at times.

It isn't exactly "passive play" when you are needed to log back on, and reset everything, and ask/beg for more CC troops, after a raid on your base to keep it in top form for the next possible attack. But I guess those are useless too I take it, based on your logic of how the game is played.
February 12th, 2015
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

And here I thought I was a stubborn idealist at times.

All bases by design must be beatable. Once someone attacks you whether or not you defend is up to them not you. The trophy gain you get for defending is really a punishment for the attacker's poor attack. The trophies must go somewhere for the game to function so they go to the defender.

Defense in this game is largely meaningless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

It isn't exactly "passive play" when you are needed to log back on, and reset everything, and ask/beg for more CC troops, after a raid on your base to keep it in top form for the next possible attack. But I guess those are useless too I take it, based on your logic of how the game is played.

So we're giving out bonuses for troop begging and trap reloading now? Can I screen shot me finishing my vegetables, send it to SC, and get a bonus for that too?
February 12th, 2015
WarrenJames

Also, you inferred that trophies are meaningless for thier intended purpose, given how a TH7 can get up to 4000 with cheap TH snipes.

If defence is meaningless, that means that I might as well just work on my attacking troops, ignoring defences, and focus on raiding other bases. If my base is an easy win, I get a shield, which to many is a reward, since it means no one else is going to be attacking them for half the day or more. With the loot caps, and an easy base to wreck, sure I may be down loot equal to one very good raid, but then I'd have the troops I want to raid several times in a day to more than make up for it.

Based on your logic, am I right that people playing are all tricked by Supercell, or in some mass delusiona,l with the idea that they honestly need to work on defence, when in reality, it just makes you lose loot faster from resisting an attack and not getting that very helpful shield?

Oh yeah, base building is so very passive. I 'passive' my time away making up a layout to resist the most common troops that would likely raid me, and 'passively' keep most people from attacking by making a base that looks like it is not worth the effort. But of course all that is useless, since all bases have to be breach-able to somekind of army, which of course makes the whole effort useless and not worth trying, even for the fun of it. So let's make fun useless too. Oh wait, that might make Supercell go out of business. Maybe some of this stuff isn't as useless as you may think it is.
Added Edit
And that is it with this argument with you. You have said more than enough, and it is clear how biased, close minded, and borderline rude you are. Let someone else talk about this, so I can get more than one point of view to work with.
February 12th, 2015
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

Also, you inferred that trophies are meaningless for thier intended purpose, given how a TH7 can get up to 4000 with cheap TH snipes.

Aren't they? For example what percentage of players on the forum give a ♥♥♥♥ about trophies based on most of the posts? BTW there are no cheap TH snipes near 4k trophies. Barching for 50% wins is largely how that's done.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

If defence is meaningless, that means that I might as well just work on my attacking troops, ignoring defences, and focus on raiding other bases. If my base is an easy win, I get a shield, which to many is a reward, since it means no one else is going to be attacking them for half the day or more. With the loot caps, and an easy base to wreck, sure I may be down loot equal to one very good raid, but then I'd have the troops I want to raid several times in a day to more than make up for it.

All of this is absolutely correct and is in fact what lots of people do and is the generally recommended strat for low THs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

Based on your logic, am I right that people playing are all tricked by Supercell, or in some mass delusiona,l with the idea that they honestly need to work on defence, when in reality, it just makes you lose loot faster from resisting an attack and not getting that very helpful shield?

Depends on what your game goals are. Most people enjoy leveling buildings and what not, but really if a high trophy count is your goal you're largely correct. Now you won't be number 1 this way, but it will get you over 4k trophies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

Oh yeah, base building is so very passive. I 'passive' my time away making up a layout to resist the most common troops that would likely raid me, and 'passively' keep most people from attacking by making a base my base not worth the effort. But of course all that is useless, since all bases have to be breach-able to somekind of army, which of course makes the whole effort useless and not worth trying, even for the fun of it. So let's make fun useless too. Oh wait, that might make Supercell go out of business. Maybe some of this stuff isn't as useless as you may think it is.

Just because something is fun does not make it largely necessary. Base designs are for the most part irrelevant as well as easily copied. People upgrade buildings because upgrading them is fun. If you're upgrading them for any other reason, then yes it's a waste of time as they are largely unnecessary if trophy hunting is your primary goal.

Rearranging your buildings and pretending it matters is also fun.

However, everyone knows that by far the best way to protect resources is to in fact give up defending entirely and simply stick your TH outside.
February 12th, 2015
Bockerijder

Come on, its a game where we need to attack to get stars and loot, we all need to pay attention on who, how and when we are attacked, if I dont have a shield, my TH is outside, I lower my cups and hope for the best. 95% of the time it works great, if someone decides to go for my recources instead of the TH, TOO BAD! I cant be always lucky, I deal with it and try to get back my losses, one way or the other.
Of course I dont like it when a significant portion of my recourses are stolen, But hey, Im doing the same to others.
If it hurts too much when someone takes your recources it means your emotions are too much involved. Supercell (or any other developer of a game like this) cant reckon with every persons their emotions. This is a task for the player.
If its too difficult to handle your emotions and it hurts too much, this is probably not the kind of game for you.
On the other hand there are players who like to raid and destroy and loot whatever and whoever they want, but start crying when its done to them because they dont like to lose.
They should work on themselves and not trying to change the game.
Me personally have 3 phones and 3 villages, I must work 3 times as hard and have 3 times more chance of getting attacked.
If one of my villages gets looted, of course I dont like it, but it doesnt hurt because its a game and I am doing exactly the same as those who attack me
February 12th, 2015
Bockerijder

Also, I had more than ones players attacking me and end the battle at 39% destruction. And not only 1, no 4 players in a row doing the same.
My first thoughts I cant tell that here because thats not appropiate to do, but my next step is taking revenge the same way he attacked me.
At 39% I ended my attack and let the next one loot him.
Ill bet he thinks twice before pulling s stunt like that again
February 12th, 2015
Drackos

If you want defense wins so bad go to 0 trophies and have fun.
Defenses are rather useless since no base is 100% unbeatable. You're going to lose 95% the time.
Attacking gets you loot and trophys this making attacking the main event. I disagree with your idea because a 8 hour sheild for no reason would be rather stupid because that means I can raid all day go to sleep with all my loot, wake up and do it again. If you are trying to imply this like something you buy; well we already have that.
February 12th, 2015
WarrenJames
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames

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.
With so many people complaining about needing a shield, I am surprised no one has even bothered to apparently read the original message and see that I'm suggesting more shield time to people.

Oh yes, I'm so emotionally fragile I just can't possibly stand being raided. What a joke. People need to stop assuming and read. Does it look like I'm the type to cry when I get raided? Look hard now... There are clues in my signature and the first part of my post.
...
...
I'll wait while you figure it out.
...
...
That's right! I usually don't give that much of a flying flip about the occasional raid on my base! To say I'm that bent out of shape by it and this isn't a game for me is just plan ignorant. I'm thinking of others here, thier damn enjoyment of the game. I see others get overly bent out of shape by getting raided, and want to help them understand what is really important.

These ideas I've posted are also to go more in-line with the casual, do almost anytime, nature of the game. The two shield suggestions are to help with that, since currently, the pressure to maintain a base with the urgency of a minor emergency just isn't right. So some grace period shield time for base recovery and sleep would be nice to help improve the enjoyment of the game. And if people enjoy it more, Supercell is happy, as more people feel like playing.

By the way, I've been around the block here a few times. I know about the easy defence wins at the bottom. And I can't just dive down there for easy lame defence wins whenever I feel like, since that could keep me from being in Clan Wars if I time it wrong.

I'd tell people to think first before making such lame suggestions, feeling like they told someone off and stroke thier own ego (yes, I know what you guys are doing, done it here too, still not right), but there is always going to be someone new or someone that can't help it doing it anyway.

That all said, can we actually get back to the main idea of the thread, or are more people going to jump in, not read what is important, and hijack the thread again to just say thier own barely topic relevant rant that most everyone here already has personal experience with?
February 12th, 2015
edomingox

I like the idea of gaining a shield after attacking. maybe after 5 successful attacks in a row? Like a winning streak reward?
February 12th, 2015
WarrenJames

Quote:

Originally Posted by edomingox

I like the idea of gaining a shield after attacking. maybe after 5 successful attacks in a row? Like a winning streak reward?

Other way around. This thread is about getting attacked, not doing attacks. Besides, you'd break your shield if you attacked after earning it :p

Unless it is a typo, and you mean 5 defence wins in a row. Hell, if you get 5 real defence wins in a row (not from trophy drops) you should frick'n get a gem for the luck and awesome base design that pulled it off!
(Note: Not a real suggestion, and is just a comment.)
February 12th, 2015
TheRealchrism

Bonus for successful defense is actually in the "considered" section.

passive...Dahimi, you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. - Princess Bride quote...

Passive - accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance.

Defense does not fall into this category. Defense actively protects your base, there is no off switch for defense.
February 12th, 2015
Bockerijder

[QUOTE=WarrenJames;3860041]With so many people complaining about needing a shield, I am surprised no one has even bothered to apparently read the original message and see that I'm suggesting more shield time to people.

Oh yes, I'm so emotionally fragile I just can't possibly stand being raided. What a joke. People need to stop assuming and read. Does it look like I'm the type to cry when I get raided? Look hard now... There are clues in my signature and the first part of my post.
...
...
I'll wait while you figure it out.
...
...
That's right! I usually don't give that much of a flying flip about the occasional raid on my base! To say I'm that bent out of shape by it and this isn't a game for me is just plan ignorant. I'm thinking of others here, thier damn enjoyment of the game. I see others get overly bent out of shape by getting raided, and want to help them understand what is really important.

Sorry but in my opinion, players that get overly bent out of shape by getting raided by others cant be helped with more shielding or whatever, that will only take away a lot fun for others, the only way to help those players is to make them understand that they shouldnt put heart and soul into it. The only reason that a raid is hurtfull is because the players allows it to be hurtfull.

It doesnt matter how much you change the game, there will always people totally bent out over a raid they got.

In a game where you need to attack eachother for their resources, its really annoying that people complain about the things they do themselves too, that is attacking others.
If they dont attack, this is the wrong game for them.
Its even more annoying that people tryng to change the game to get even less raided.
I want less shielding and more attacking, and with 3 lay outs of my village, I can more easy switch between protecting my resources, or my cups
And yes it is possible to get 5 proper attacks on your village and win them all, 121 cups in one night,
February 12th, 2015
Recruiterbob

There is already a defense incentive, you get cups and you save your loot. Anything not saving my max storage is not worth not taking the free shield and they aren't handing you 400k per defense win so end of conversation
February 12th, 2015
TheRealchrism

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recruiterbob

There is already a defense incentive, you get cups and you save your loot. Anything not saving my max storage is not worth not taking the free shield and they aren't handing you 400k per defense win so end of conversation

Defense bonus under consideration :

http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...rum-guidelines

READ BEFORE POSTING - Ideas, ruled out, subforum guidelines:

Below are ideas submitted by users for Supercell to consider. It does not imply they are being worked on. Please do a forum search before starting new feature requests, especially if they are listed below.

Zombiebender's guide to searching the forums: http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...d=1#post431518

Ideas are ranked in each section by recent forum polls. Items under - - - line are newer and have not been voted on/ranked against the others.

League Related:
* Award resource bonuses for successful defense in addition to successful attack
* Alter matchmaking to FIRST attempt to match within your league, then proceed outside if necessary
February 12th, 2015
WarrenJames

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRealchrism

Bonus for successful defense is actually in the "considered" section.

passive...Dahimi, you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. - Princess Bride quote...

Passive - accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance.

Defense does not fall into this category. Defense actively protects your base, there is no off switch for defense.

I keep forgetting about defence loot being considered.

Also, nice start off with the Princess Bride reference. lol

Thanks for the support. Done talking with Dahimi since even if you win, it is like a CoC defence win, odds are you still feel robbed or looted. Shouldn't feel like regretting making a suggestion on the Ideas forum of all places.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bockerijder

Sorry but in my opinion, players that get overly bent out of shape by getting raided by others cant be helped with more shielding or whatever, that will only take away a lot fun for others, the only way to help those players is to make them understand that they shouldnt put heart and soul into it. The only reason that a raid is hurtfull is because the players allows it to be hurtfull.

It doesnt matter how much you change the game, there will always people totally bent out over a raid they got.

In a game where you need to attack eachother for their resources, its really annoying that people complain about the things they do themselves too, that is attacking others.
If they dont attack, this is the wrong game for them.
Its even more annoying that people tryng to change the game to get even less raided.
I want less shielding and more attacking, and with 3 lay outs of my village, I can more easy switch between protecting my resources, or my cups
And yes it is possible to get 5 proper attacks on your village and win them all, 121 cups in one night,

Yes, I agree. Just was annoyed and ranting. Can't really help people getting bent out of shape without actually talking to each and every one of them, or having them read something about how things are. Was kind of a poor example.

Actually, one of my goals s to make the exposed Town Hall base layout obsolete and useless by adding better features. Rather than shove people out of using the metagaming layout, which is what many other suggestions have basicly done, I want to lure them into a better method, and better gaming experience. If defence wins are less hurtful, and shields more in-line with how people want to play, then more raids on bases maybe possible, with less shield time being desired.

Good defences would be rewarded, which will make people be more willing to work on designing a good base, and in turn allow others to attack them more often.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recruiterbob

There is already a defense incentive, you get cups and you save your loot. Anything not saving my max storage is not worth not taking the free shield and they aren't handing you 400k per defense win so end of conversation

Trophies aren't enough to statisfy most players, and more often than not, even on a defence win, a significant amount of loot is lost, only for another attack to come by and take just a little bit more again. You are hurt by making a base that is just good enough to win, but not enough to save loot, or give a shield to stem the loot loss. Building better is hard, since things are balanced in a way that there are no 'undefeatable' bases at the same TH level. That just gives people the incentive to just make a 'farming base' and be done with the whole mess, which basicly is like taking your ball and leaving the ball game.
February 12th, 2015
dahimi

Attacking is active. You select a target and drop the troops. Success or failure is completely dependent on your skill at choosing a target compatible with your army as well as ability to deploy troops successfully.

Defending is passive. If you're lucky you get to watch. That's it. You talk about your awesome layout all you want, but it makes no difference. The attacker is in the driver's seat. They choose the target and they are the ones who win or lose.

Now if they add a change to the game where you can interfere with the attack if you catch them you may have a point.
February 12th, 2015
WarrenJames

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

Attacking is active. You select a target and drop the troops. Success or failure is completely dependent on your skill at choosing a target compatible with your army as well as ability to deploy troops successfully.

Defending is passive. If you're lucky you get to watch. That's it. You talk about your awesome layout all you want, but it makes no difference. The attacker is in the driver's seat. They choose the target and they are the ones who win or lose.

Now if they add a change to the game where you can interfere with the attack if you catch them you may have a point.

Please stop repeating yourself. We got your point of view the last several times. If you haven't noticed, this thread isn't about the subjective word play of passive and active. Supercell is actually considering adding somekind of defence win reward, and some of us actually want to talk about it. If you are going to derail this thread again with another harassing argument, I'm going to report you, period.
February 12th, 2015
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

Please stop repeating yourself. We got your point of view the last several times. If you haven't noticed, this thread isn't about the subjective word play of passive and active. Supercell is actually considering adding somekind of defence win reward, and some of us actually want to talk about it. If you are going to derail this thread again with another harassing argument, I'm going to report you, period.

You're going to report me for expressing my opinion within the forum rules? Knock yourself out.
February 12th, 2015
Recruiterbob

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

I keep forgetting about defence loot being considered.

Also, nice start off with the Princess Bride reference. lol

Thanks for the support. Done talking with Dahimi since even if you win, it is like a CoC defence win, odds are you still feel robbed or looted. Shouldn't feel like regretting making a suggestion on the Ideas forum of all places.

Yes, I agree. Just was annoyed and ranting. Can't really help people getting bent out of shape without actually talking to each and every one of them, or having them read something about how things are. Was kind of a poor example.

Actually, one of my goals s to make the exposed Town Hall base layout obsolete and useless by adding better features. Rather than shove people out of using the metagaming layout, which is what many other suggestions have basicly done, I want to lure them into a better method, and better gaming experience. If defence wins are less hurtful, and shields more in-line with how people want to play, then more raids on bases maybe possible, with less shield time being desired.

Good defences would be rewarded, which will make people be more willing to work on designing a good base, and in turn allow others to attack them more often.

Trophies aren't enough to statisfy most players, and more often than not, even on a defence win, a significant amount of loot is lost, only for another attack to come by and take just a little bit more again. You are hurt by making a base that is just good enough to win, but not enough to save loot, or give a shield to stem the loot loss. Building better is hard, since things are balanced in a way that there are no 'undefeatable' bases at the same TH level. That just gives people the incentive to just make a 'farming base' and be done with the whole mess, which basicly is like taking your ball and leaving the ball game.

Say all you want most people in upper leagues only out there th when they have loot and take the free shield. You gonna risk losing 400k each and de for some small bonus...yeah think not. The whole point of this is to prevent snipes and that is never gonna happen. There are two reasons to attack, push aka trophies already awarded and loot, saved due to free shield.
February 12th, 2015
WarrenJames

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recruiterbob

Say all you want most people in upper leagues only out there th when they have loot and take the free shield. You gonna risk losing 400k each and de for some small bonus...yeah think not. The whole point of this is to prevent snipes and that is never gonna happen. There are two reasons to attack, push aka trophies already awarded and loot, saved due to free shield.

You know, we haven't even established how much of a defence loot bonus a person gets. We haven't gotten close to even touch on that detail.

While you are here, and thinking about the topic, what would be a realistic bonus, given some defence win scenarios?

Also, while touching on the shield topic, had an idea I was waiting to add.

What if there is an option (option, not replace what is currently there now) to instead of getting a shield right away, you got the ability to bank some shield time? I don't know how much would be a fair max you could store or how much you earn per various degrees of defeat, but assuming you got that 30 minute or so grace period shield after an attack, assuming a fair defense win bonus is given, would a banked amount of shield time you could use (but cannot just split up however you like), at your convenience be a feature worth having? When done or tired of getting attacked and need to keep your loot, or if getting your preferred CC troops is too hard, or calling it a night, you can active it and not have to stress about attacks.

Best way to bank shield time is to log off while between raids, while your storages are low or moderately full, and let your defence fight off attacks. Any losses would bank some time, and any wins would give you that defence loot bonus (whatever the heck that amount is). And after a long bout of raiding, having filled your storages, you can call up that shield, and not get your base sacked for 400k+ of loot, using the shield time when you need it the most.

This way, you can actual log off, not have to be hyper worried about keeping yourself logged on, you get attacked while you are not full of loot, and when you are full, you can protect it for a good while with the well earned shield time.
February 13th, 2015
Recruiterbob

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarrenJames

You know, we haven't even established how much of a defence loot bonus a person gets. We haven't gotten close to even touch on that detail.

While you are here, and thinking about the topic, what would be a realistic bonus, given some defence win scenarios?

Also, while touching on the shield topic, had an idea I was waiting to add.

What if there is an option (option, not replace what is currently there now) to instead of getting a shield right away, you got the ability to bank some shield time? I don't know how much would be a fair max you could store or how much you earn per various degrees of defeat, but assuming you got that 30 minute or so grace period shield after an attack, assuming a fair defense win bonus is given, would a banked amount of shield time you could use (but cannot just split up however you like), at your convenience be a feature worth having? When done or tired of getting attacked and need to keep your loot, or if getting your preferred CC troops is too hard, or calling it a night, you can active it and not have to stress about attacks.

Best way to bank shield time is to log off while between raids, while your storages are low or moderately full, and let your defence fight off attacks. Any losses would bank some time, and any wins would give you that defence loot bonus (whatever the heck that amount is). And after a long bout of raiding, having filled your storages, you can call up that shield, and not get your base sacked for 400k+ of loot, using the shield time when you need it the most.

This way, you can actual log off, not have to be hyper worried about keeping yourself logged on, you get attacked while you are not full of loot, and when you are full, you can protect it for a good while with the well earned shield time.

What ever the bonus is it isn't going to be as high as what your storages filled can have taken. 400+k. If it was we would sit in some lower league like c2 and let the th8 zap us for huge loot. KKnowing they can't star us.
February 13th, 2015
WarrenJames

Quote:

Originally Posted by Recruiterbob

What ever the bonus is it isn't going to be as high as what your storages filled can have taken. 400+k. If it was we would sit in some lower league like c2 and let the th8 zap us for huge loot. KKnowing they can't star us.

To a good degree, I need the point of view of people like you on this to help hammer out details. While coming up with ideas, I need to know what wrong direction people will be going with a given idea.

Sounds like the defence bonus would have to correspond with what league you are in, and.. I don't know, damage taken, or amount of enemy troops kill? Would be amusing that defence win bonus loot would turn DE zapping on it's head, with people wanting to be zapped. lol

Damn, suddenly this defence loot bonus thing is sounding like some home insurance fraud scheme.

I still have a hard time figuring out how getting loot from being attacked and partly looted makes any intuitive sense. Only thing that makes sense is the Elixir from defeated enemy units, since you salvage it from the troops, which is already done to a minor degree with tombstones. Not sure how gold could factor into that.

If loot isn't going to be enough, what other things can be awarded (no not gems) for a defence win that makes sense? Got Shield time banking...

Hmm.. what about a bonus to troop training times, or a reward of X seconds worth of training time discounts? The village was attacked, people are eager to attack back, so training times are reduced.

Along the same lines, maybe a troop cost discount to some degree.

Note: they may not be great ideas. Just throwing out possiblies and seeing what sticks. Better here in one thread than in bunch of spam my threads.
February 13th, 2015
sirGrimlyTheMad

I agree - I posted a rant earlier today myself

The original poster and I agree. I think something needs to be done!

http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...conomic-Tweaks

Adding a defense bonus to the nix fits in nicely with the tweaks I suggest.
February 13th, 2015
TheRealchrism

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

Attacking is active. You select a target and drop the troops. Success or failure is completely dependent on your skill at choosing a target compatible with your army as well as ability to deploy troops successfully.

Defending is passive. If you're lucky you get to watch. That's it. You talk about your awesome layout all you want, but it makes no difference. The attacker is in the driver's seat. They choose the target and they are the ones who win or lose.

Now if they add a change to the game where you can interfere with the attack if you catch them you may have a point.

Since you chose not to read this I will reply directly to you.

passive...Dahimi, you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. - Princess Bride quote...

Passive - accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance.

Defense does not fall into this category. Defense actively protects your base, there is no off switch for defense.

Hero's can become passive, if you put them in the sleep mode.
February 13th, 2015
rwelshjr

After reading this whole thing, even the combative parts, I have to agree it has merit.

I did look at the counter arguments, (I.E. Attacking is active, defending is passive) and did not agree with that. Speaking for myself I put a lot of work into my defense so I can't really call it passive. Even though one not present at the time it is still the fruits of their labors. Also there is the point that was made that a good defense requires constant checking in to replenish CC and reset traps 9which costs) so that that is activity.

It also might add a little edge to the game if you are risking something attacking a guy, a percentage of our expense goes to the other. (but what if the person doesn't have it? so there are details to be figured out).

Its hard to volunteer SC to foot the bill. (just not our call to make, and also a lot of suggestions are doomed by the posters assumption that SC would not mind paying out extra) so I am not sure about having a defensive bonus similar to the loot bonus. And having the winner bonus go to the defenders is having SC foot the bill since currently in that situation they pay nothing.

So I am not sure where the money could come from I think that is the sticking point, but the overall principle that a good defender deserves something, does have merit.
February 13th, 2015
Bockerijder

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

Attacking is active. You select a target and drop the troops. Success or failure is completely dependent on your skill at choosing a target compatible with your army as well as ability to deploy troops successfully.

Defending is passive. If you're lucky you get to watch. That's it. You talk about your awesome layout all you want, but it makes no difference. The attacker is in the driver's seat. They choose the target and they are the ones who win or lose.

Now if they add a change to the game where you can interfere with the attack if you catch them you may have a point.

I had the idea to use spells as a defensive tool, like lightning, if lightningspell could be used to defend your village during an attack it would give the defender a bigger chance to defend his village. Since you need to be offline to be attacked its a small chance that someone actually get back in the game in time. But if you get in game in time and you throw that lightning on your attackers troops, It will be very funny to watch
February 13th, 2015
WarrenJames

More I think about it, the more it feels like some kind of insurance fraud getting gold from defence wins. At lest with Elixir and Dark Elixir, there is already presidence for getting it after a battle... granted it is chump change, but it could be expanded on.

In that regard, still trying to think of something that would be an incentive for subjecting your base to attack.

Actually got attacked 3 times last night for being offline for just a few minutes at the wrong time, even though I was offline other times for much longer with no problem. I was posting here while raiding for loot. Had over ⅔ of a million Elixir looted, and 3,400 Dark Elixir taken as well, and was needing Elixir for a lvl 3 drill upgrade. And of course could have uses the DE for a King upgrade by now. But.. well.. Can revenge attack later when the time is right, and thier base is full. I barely have half full Elixir storages, and I already hit the lootable cap, so any attempt to get the minimum amount of loot to pay for something at this TH level sets you up for getting the max amount taken from you. That said, I'm so glad there IS a cap, or I'd be losing more per raid than 250k Elixir per attack. I lost 2 attacks, and 'won' one attack from a well planned loot gutting attack on my centralized storages with goblins as a kind of wall breaking path maker. They looted everything just barely in time before my AoE defences killed the grouped up goblins (damn lvl 5-6 buggers are fast!!1!!1!)

A TH8, looted horribly (for my level), got a useless shield twice, because I had to break it to keep raiding, and raid more to catchup from the loss. And knowing full well I'd be attacked again, I made sure I had enough spare loot to cover the loss of yet another raid, that I hoped was strong enough to give a shield for the night. Which thankfully, did happen, and predicably took that last 250k of Elixir.

I'm just damn glad I can loot faster than I can lose, it I'd be sunk.

Anyone see a problem or two with that common situation? For example, I got a defence win, but lost all my loot? How the hell is that a win? lol, oh sure, the arbitrary 50% damage threshold didn't get met, and 'lucked out' and didn't have my Town all wrecked, but did get a shield from them making the arbitrary threshold of 40%... which I had to waste because I still needed to raid enough loot for my soon to be freed up Builder.

So, yeah.. what kind of reward is worth up to 250k gold and elixir, and 1300 dark elixir if your base still (jokingly) wins? And odds are you will loss attacks, because no one attacks bases for the loss, unless doing trophy drops. Sure some raids just fail, but experienced players will attack a base they think they have a good chance of winning. Which is why, with my strong base, I usually only get hit by TH9s, with the occasionally TH10. Well prepared TH8s still attack, but not that often.

Now if I could have banked even half that shield time from those raid loses (and joking win) while raiding, I wouldn't have to have required to raid more than needed, just to cover losses for when I did want a shield! Farm layout or not, I still would have needed to make that buffer of loot, just in case someone came with an army that could break the base before some cheap trophy huning sniper came and saved my loot for me.

Talk about all sorts of wrong and @#$%ed up. If defence doesn't seem worth it, and there is an easy way to get a shield, people just hide behind the shield, which takes them out of the loop of possible bases to attack, which I can understand wholy, but it basicly makes the other half of the game, attacking, harder, and less fun.

So ♥♥♥ is a good defence reward or defence incentive? Both attack and defence are connected. If defence isn't that painful, more people will be available for attack, and less feeling the need to go 'turtle' behind a min-maxed metagamed shield giving base. Suggestions to make it better are already posted, and I'm open to more ideas to help fix this.
February 13th, 2015
TheRealchrism

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwelshjr

After reading this whole thing, even the combative parts, I have to agree it has merit.

I did look at the counter arguments, (I.E. Attacking is active, defending is passive) and did not agree with that. Speaking for myself I put a lot of work into my defense so I can't really call it passive. Even though one not present at the time it is still the fruits of their labors. Also there is the point that was made that a good defense requires constant checking in to replenish CC and reset traps 9which costs) so that that is activity.

It also might add a little edge to the game if you are risking something attacking a guy, a percentage of our expense goes to the other. (but what if the person doesn't have it? so there are details to be figured out).

Its hard to volunteer SC to foot the bill. (just not our call to make, and also a lot of suggestions are doomed by the posters assumption that SC would not mind paying out extra) so I am not sure about having a defensive bonus similar to the loot bonus. And having the winner bonus go to the defenders is having SC foot the bill since currently in that situation they pay nothing.

So I am not sure where the money could come from I think that is the sticking point, but the overall principle that a good defender deserves something, does have merit.

SC already foots the bill for successful attack, where do you think the league win bonus come from? why not for defense. It's not like it would kill them, it would help the economy.
February 13th, 2015
rwelshjr

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRealchrism

SC already foots the bill for successful attack, where do you think the league win bonus come from? why not for defense..

I think you skimmed my post and did not catch all that was said.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRealchrism

It's not like it would kill them, it would help the economy.

I think when its someone else's wallet its for them to decide what level of loss should and should not trouble them.

If you still disagree then I ask - If its such a trifling amount why don't we take the payouts from your base? Are you ok with that?
February 13th, 2015
TheRealchrism

Quote:

Originally Posted by rwelshjr

I think you skimmed my post and did not catch all that was said.

I think when its someone else's wallet its for them to decide what level of loss should and should not trouble them.

If you still disagree then I ask - If its such a trifling amount why don't we take the payouts from your base? Are you ok with that?

meh, everyone would be in bronze:D
February 13th, 2015
rwelshjr
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames

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.
Please forgive that I changed your quote from bullets to numbers. Regarding 1&2 I like them but the prinicle of asking SC to foot any bill is a deal breaker. Regarding 3&4 (paying with shield instead of loot) I think you are onto more of a path there.

You make a good point that a base with really good defense can go several raids without getting beaten and so it would be nice to earn it a respite like a base with weaker defenses gets for being beaten.

I am concerned about what this does to available bases to attack though too. With more bases under shield the nexting becomes heavier. Should a shield given on successful defense be less long? Maybe a variable time calculated by the amount of loot stolen plus trap cost? In fact maybe that would be good for unsuccessful defenses too? If you got razed but there was only 1k available in your base how much have you suffered really.
February 13th, 2015
WarrenJames

No problem on numbering them. It helps in referencing.

More I think about it, more I feel as though rewards of gold, elixir, and dark elixir for those able, is just awkward for defence wins. Not saying there shouldn't be something, but gaining loot, while getting looted just makes the 'magically materializing/multiplying money' issue even worse. "I got attacked and looted for 100k! :( and... made 35k profit?! Wait ♥♥♥! How?!:confused:" Salvaging Elixir and Dark Elixir makes sense, and can help with an idea I have in mind.

Loot Loss Rage (working name for now)
You get troop taining bonus effects based on what was robbed from you, with the max bonus given if looted up to the storage loot cap for your Town Hall level.

For Elixir and Dark Elixir theift, you get something like either a reduction of troop training time for the respective normal and dark elixir troops (like ½, stackable with gem boosting somehow) or maybe X amount of banked trianing time you can use for instantly trainable troops. I would suggest that maybe instead there is a cost reduction, but I don't know how unbalanced that would make things.

Getting your gold looted could give bankable shield time (instead of the current shield system), or a boosting in defence for a time, since logically the base would be more alart on future attacks, and would incress the chance of a win from another person attacking shortly after being attacked before.

'Worth Fighting For' Bonus (working title)
Something else that came to mind, if basing things on some degree of common sense logic, is a base would be more on 'high alart' if storages are full, than if empty. There could be a preemptive bonus on defence, to help equalize the cost/reward ratio for bases that are loaded with loot verse ones that aren't. Say for example the lootable about is 50% of storage cap. then there is no bonus, but no penalty in defence. People have something to defend, but aren't going to put extraordinary effort into guarding.

If there is nothing, they aren't going to worry at all about an attack, since who raids an empty base?! (lets get drunk and play games! maybe that one archer chick will go out with me, than with that pompous wizard with the big hair?) Then the base defence are sub par, and easier to defeat with the same attacking army, but you get little loot as a result.

If the lootable cap is max, base is on high alart, and for good reason. They know they have something worth taking, and need to be ready when that loot hungery raid comes and attacks. With the same army, you may actually lose, but if balanced right, you would get a out the same amount of loot, on average... depends on the base, your army, and how you attack. You maybe lucky to get a 50% win, but could get that loot and really be victorious. Could even get an attack reward bonus for beating such a primed for defence base!
February 15th, 2015
WarrenJames

I hate how fast threads can sink here.

Really! Want some feedback on these ideas! I'm trying not to spam the forum with new idea after new idea thread for this tough issue.

If loot bonuses for defense isn't the answer, what about some other bonus?

I really should add some of these ideas on the original post, like I promised... But I don't know what is worth putting up. :(
February 16th, 2015
k2aries

Indignant Agreement

I have verbally sparred with you in the past about the exposed TH issues. I will never, NEVER, consider it an exploit of the game and still consider it a strategic decision **stomps feet and gestures wildly with hands**

However.......

.......

.......

wait for it

.......

.......

I think that your idea has merit. I have to admit that my mind is complete mush after reading page after page of lengthy arguments and counter-arguments for this idea, so I don't feel capable of a witty and in-depth contribution. But I do think that the costs of defending your base are astronomical.

Case in point, last night I used my war base as my main base to see how she held up (yes, my village is a she and she is quite feisty and fierce:cool:). I was attacked four times in a row, and I won all four defenses (yay me!). As a TH 10 I have a lot of pricey bombs and traps. Two of the attackers took about 120k each loot from me, the other two only about 50k each, average. When I logged on and had to reset my base it cost over 100k gold, 300 de and maybe 70k lix (not sure of exact numbers). So for those few pretty, pretty trophies it easily cost me over 300k each in loot, plus some de. Now, as someone who is not on 24/7, I also got attacked several times during the day. This is really starting to add up!!!

So I don't know if the answer is a loot reward for defensive wins, grace periods, or one of your other suggestions. But I agree that this is a subject that deserves more contemplation and, hopefully, consideration by SC.

P.S. The guy who used the Princess Bride quote, *fistbump*. Pure awesomeness
P.P.S. To the guy who thinks defenses are pointless and 'passive'. Playa please. So ridiculous that it doesn't deserve an actual response.
February 16th, 2015
WarrenJames

Quote:

Originally Posted by k2aries

I have verbally sparred with you in the past about the exposed TH issues. I will never, NEVER, consider it an exploit of the game and still consider it a strategic decision **stomps feet and gestures wildly with hands**

As another person that gets stubborn and sticks to thier ideals, but otherwise is open minded, I cannot find fault with your determination to stick with what you believe. Even if I believe I'm correct on the issue :p

Quote:

Originally Posted by k2aries

I think that your idea has merit. I have to admit that my mind is complete mush after reading page after page of lengthy arguments and counter-arguments for this idea, so I don't feel capable of a witty and in-depth contribution. But I do think that the costs of defending your base are astronomical.

Tell me about it :eek: http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...=1#post3674634 In a different post, I got screen shots of my Defense log, and have some sizeable loot losses, even for a 'win'. Only reason I tolerate it is because it is fun to see my defenses work. As you can imagine, Tower Defense games are another thing I like :p

Can totaly understand the 'mushy headed' feeling from long posts. One reason why the first argument ticked me off was so much work was being put into arguing about a tangent issue, that it totaly delayed and wasted time on what the real topic was about. People can only read so much before they shut down (had that issue often in school :() and having that as the first thing people see is a real turn off and thread killer.

So anyone else starting up stuff like that, I will report. I just don't have the time for that kind of argument, valid or otherwise. It does not belong here, and I'll keeping my thread on topic, damn it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by k2aries

So I don't know if the answer is a loot reward for defensive wins, grace periods, or one of your other suggestions. But I agree that this is a subject that deserves more contemplation and, hopefully, consideration by SC.

P.S. The guy who used the Princess Bride quote, *fistbump*. Pure awesomeness
P.P.S. To the guy who thinks defenses are pointless and 'passive'. Playa please. So ridiculous that it doesn't deserve an actual response.

More I thought about it, the more I feel loot from a defence win is just awkward. Salvaging Elixir and Dark Elixir from troops would be great, but Gold rewards seem odd. Salvaging Elixirs, along with the two recent ideas of boosting things would encourage more attacking, and mean faster recovery of loot from other bases. With the recent suggestions I seem to be coming up with, it puts an odd twist on the phrase 'violence begets violence', and 'more violence' in this game (as in more fun attacks) is good. :cool:

On a note about the shield ideas (30 min grace period & night shield): Those will likely be a sperate idea thread later on, given how they are more meant to make the game in-line with the casual, low time pressure, feel that other aspects like raiding and Clan Wars have, with a given period of time to do them while one has real life things to do as well. Even a battle is at most 3 minutes, which one can do on a lunch break at work.
February 19th, 2015
BinBender

I haven't read the entire thread (a lot of useless rambling and arguing...) but I really agree with the original post!
February 19th, 2015
NF2335

I like the defence bonus idea.
I made an idea about how the defence can be award.
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...he-pot-of-gold
February 19th, 2015
Lueseto

The only counter-argument in the posts of this thread seems to be "defense is meaningless because that's the way the game is"

Now that's not a comment I'd expect from someone who enters the "ideas and feature requests" subforum!! The whole point of the OP is that defense is meaningless AS THE GAME IS RIGHT NOW, so you are just agreeing on him and saying he should shut up.

The main point of discussion should be, IMO, if the way the game is designed right now (regarding defense) is what all the users want, not the trivilaity of saying "the game is designed the way it's designed"

Based on the amount of base designers out there, and the new game feature that allows you to have 6 designs at hand, I'd say most people enjoy the base designing aspect of the game a lot. So having it be a little more relevant in your overall game progress would be excellent for most of the community.

I agree that the game is poorly designed regarding defense: once you just started playing you are counseled to center your townhall because it is the most important building in your village. Now, it doesn't pass a lot of time until you realize that having your townhall outside aids you with a more probable "cheap" shield, as you start becoming concious about the ephimerous nature of trophies, and how the best way to push up is just attacking a ton. Hell, I'd go far enough to say that once you are at a league where players have a lot of game expirience, you are just getting skipped by the ones who can't win and if you center your TH you are most likely to be 2-stared while leaving it out in the cold you'd have a decent chance to just get 1-stared and lose just half that trophies.

This whole point about leaving your TH outside seems to me more like "abusing" the game design to farm better, and that shouldn't be the point of the building, just sacrificing it to gain a shiel (rolewise everyone should be protecting the townhall of his or her village!!)

Now please don't reply with "in fact you SHOULD leave your TH out if you are farming" because everyone interested in a change of the defense system knows it better than any other. The whole point of it just feels like it doesn't go well with the concept of building and protecting your village and the people that live there.
February 19th, 2015
MrRobito

Small shield between attacks

I'd recommend a mini shield between successful defenses, and keep the 12-16 hour shield for losses. Or maybe a defense-win bonus that builds up with every consecutive defensive victory and is broken once you are defeated.
February 19th, 2015
BinBender

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrRobito

I'd recommend a mini shield between successful defenses, and keep the 12-16 hour shield for losses. Or maybe a defense-win bonus that builds up with every consecutive defensive victory and is broken once you are defeated.

It would need to be a serious defense bonus to compensate for the lost loot from consecutive attacks.
February 19th, 2015
WarrenJames

Woo! Support! Thanks! :D

Yeah, the first argument on defense being useless just derailed things, and knew it was getting me nowhere. I just eventually said stop or get reported, and I rarely just threaten that. On top of that, it can be a thread killer, since you have the original message, and then a sea of TL-DR posts, and then at that point the view can easily say 'to hell with it' and move on. So yeah.. not very please with them on that for a number of reasons.

That aside, I plan on editing the first post with updated ideas and clean things up. I may actually post on that post as to where the real discussion starts, and at what part of the thread the first post got changed and updated. That way people don't get confused by posts referring to things that changed or not there anymore.

I want to have this thread hold several ideas on how to fix this issue than be separated into several threads, that way things are in one spot and easy to get to. I'm more than willing to manage this thread so to keep things organized.

As BinBender said, "It would need to be a serious defense bonus to compensate for the lost loot from consecutive attacks." and that's what I'm wanting to hammer out here. Just making the exposed Town Hall layout less appealing (aka use 'negative reinforcement' as said in psychology. Not 'negative' as in bad or poor idea) will just drive people way from the game as a whole, since there is nothing viable to look forward to currently. So something new to defence to attract people to a new method (aka 'positive reinforcement') needs to be done first before anything else.

This is hard, since finding a logical incentive for defence (not real-life logical, but gameplay logical) is rather awkward when you start looking at the effects of ideas closely. What seems good at first glance can turn out to be a poor idea once you've done the logic work on it to figure out how people will react to it.

In short, expect ideas to not pan out and see a lot of failed ideas.

Good news is that we just need a few good ones and the issue is closer to being solved! Cost for failure: wasted some casual time and words on an idea. Reward for success: A much MUCH improved game. So let's keep at it and take our best shots at the goal. One or two of those shots are bound to do it. And each failed idea means it is one direction we know were not to go, which is still progress if we learn from it.
March 18th, 2015
iceageg

Alright Warren, here's one for you. Just a little something that popped into my mind in an attempt to make the TH your most honored possession . . . while at the same time giving out the much needed shields . . . and adding MORE villages to be attacked in the nexting queue!!!

Lets start with an example and run it a couple ways. In the example we will say you have 200,000 available when you log off. TH safe and sound in the middle (because it is your most valuable building now with no free shield).
_________________________________________

The first player attacks you and sees 200,000 available. Your defense holds them to 30% but they manage to take 100,000. However, since they did not kill your TH that loot comes from thin air instead of your loot. You loose nothing.

A second player attacks you and still sees 200,000 available loot. They manage to core your base and kill the TH, but only get 50,000 of your resources and 30%. However, because they killed your TH the loot comes out of YOUR resources, not thin air.

A third player attacks you and sees 200,000 available loot. They manage to kill 85% of your base but the TH survives in the middle. They get 200,000 loot but all of it comes from thin air instead of your resources (because they didn't destroy your TH).

A fourth player attacks you and sees 200,000 available loot. They wipe the map with you 100% and receive 200,000 loot (150,000 from your loot and 50,000 out of thin air). Now you receive a shield.
______________________________________

Effectively, your TH is a shield for your loot, and your available loot is your shield from attack. You had 200,000 available to be taken until you log into the game again. Your base is available to be attacked until all 200,000 of that is gone divided up by however many players can get to your TH. People can repeatedly attack you for the full value but the loot is only taken from your storages if your TH falls. Once all of it is taken you get your shield. Effectively you could be attacked 80 times and people could get 200,000 every attack but you would loose nothing as long as your TH survived.

No free shield, but you would also never again experience 4 39% raids in 30 minutes that set you back 7 hours of constant game play. Also, (and to many more importantly) it would add many more worthwhile villages to the queue to be attacked. I think this would require a separate revenge shield system that was decoupled from the traditional shield.

I admit that I have not thought this all the way through so there may still be unintended flaws that may make this a non-starter, but at least it is a fresh idea. Hammer away folks!
March 18th, 2015
Xitra

Quote:

Originally Posted by iceageg

Alright Warren, here's one for you. Just a little something that popped into my mind in an attempt to make the TH your most honored possession . . . while at the same time giving out the much needed shields . . . and adding MORE villages to be attacked in the nexting queue!!!

Lets start with an example and run it a couple ways. In the example we will say you have 200,000 available when you log off. TH safe and sound in the middle (because it is your most valuable building now with no free shield).
_________________________________________

The first player attacks you and sees 200,000 available. Your defense holds them to 30% but they manage to take 100,000. However, since they did not kill your TH that loot comes from thin air instead of your loot. You loose nothing.

A second player attacks you and still sees 200,000 available loot. They manage to core your base and kill the TH, but only get 50,000 of your resources and 30%. However, because they killed your TH the loot comes out of YOUR resources, not thin air.

A third player attacks you and sees 200,000 available loot. They manage to kill 85% of your base but the TH survives in the middle. They get 200,000 loot but all of it comes from thin air instead of your resources (because they didn't destroy your TH).

A fourth player attacks you and sees 200,000 available loot. They wipe the map with you 100% and receive 200,000 loot (150,000 from your loot and 50,000 out of thin air). Now you receive a shield.
______________________________________

Effectively, your TH is a shield for your loot, and your available loot is your shield from attack. You had 200,000 available to be taken until you log into the game again. Your base is available to be attacked until all 200,000 of that is gone divided up by however many players can get to your TH. People can repeatedly attack you for the full value but the loot is only taken from your storages if your TH falls. Once all of it is taken you get your shield. Effectively you could be attacked 80 times and people could get 200,000 every attack but you would loose nothing as long as your TH survived.

No free shield, but you would also never again experience 4 39% raids in 30 minutes that set you back 7 hours of constant game play. Also, (and to many more importantly) it would add many more worthwhile villages to the queue to be attacked. I think this would require a separate revenge shield system that was decoupled from the traditional shield.

I admit that I have not thought this all the way through so there may still be unintended flaws that may make this a non-starter, but at least it is a fresh idea. Hammer away folks!

Hmm, an interesting twist... Not sure I agree with letting people attack you over and over without at least some of the loot coming from you. Otherwise we could put our storages and the economy would have endless resources.

How about this though: if your TH isn't destroyed, only xx% of the resources come from you, with the rest created out of thin air? Like 50% as a basic starting point for discussion. As a TH8 offering 300k resources (the cap), you'd only lose 150k per raid if you can protect your TH.
March 18th, 2015
Monto6

in addition

i like the idea but id like to add this... why only storages and extractors provides resources?... how about a part of the resources can be obtained for every building? like 49% resources are in the storages and the other 49% spread on all others buildings the other 2% is from extractors (this depends on how active is the village (of course inactive villages is 100%)).

pst: english not my fort.
March 18th, 2015
BlahBlah161616

I'm learning economics in school right now...so Im gonna say this, I don't like whatever this is because of the word incentive.:rolleyes:
March 18th, 2015
Monto6

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlahBlah161616

I'm learning economics in school right now...so Im gonna say this, I don't like whatever this is because of the word incentive.:rolleyes:

i don't get you.
March 18th, 2015
WarrenJames

Wow! Nice twist on things, iceageg! Even if it doesn't work quite the way you have it, just the concept of the TH as a loot shield is something to think about using in some form or another.

Will need some time to think about it, but Xitra said, there are some problems with it as-is. Will have to think about it some myself, but that is a new angle to take things. I can already think of several permutations that such a TH loot shield could be based on, so it's nice to have another tool to possibly helping gameplay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlahBlah161616

I'm learning economics in school right now...so Im gonna say this, I don't like whatever this is because of the word incentive.:rolleyes:

That sounds a bit bias. And what level are you learning econ, In highschool or college?

If you want an economic angle on this, my 'incentive' is to allow people to be raided, lose loot, but gain something in return that can be just as valuable or more so than what they lost, or risked possibly losing. Right now, when you win, you get Trophy points, but to many that is near worthless. So people block the loss of more valuable commodities via staying online constantly and using the 'farming base' to tempt people that do want trophies to giving the player a shield. Selfishly, a TH sniper doesn't care that they block others from looting the person they sniped, they just want the trophies, which to the person with the farming base finds near useless.

Ugh, going to stop there. I'm making it sound like people that use a farming base are ♥♥♥♥♥ing SC out bought shield time.
March 18th, 2015
dahimi

Quote:

Originally Posted by iceageg

Alright Warren, here's one for you. Just a little something that popped into my mind in an attempt to make the TH your most honored possession . . . while at the same time giving out the much needed shields . . . and adding MORE villages to be attacked in the nexting queue!!!

Lets start with an example and run it a couple ways. In the example we will say you have 200,000 available when you log off. TH safe and sound in the middle (because it is your most valuable building now with no free shield).
_________________________________________

The first player attacks you and sees 200,000 available. Your defense holds them to 30% but they manage to take 100,000. However, since they did not kill your TH that loot comes from thin air instead of your loot. You loose nothing.

A second player attacks you and still sees 200,000 available loot. They manage to core your base and kill the TH, but only get 50,000 of your resources and 30%. However, because they killed your TH the loot comes out of YOUR resources, not thin air.

A third player attacks you and sees 200,000 available loot. They manage to kill 85% of your base but the TH survives in the middle. They get 200,000 loot but all of it comes from thin air instead of your resources (because they didn't destroy your TH).

A fourth player attacks you and sees 200,000 available loot. They wipe the map with you 100% and receive 200,000 loot (150,000 from your loot and 50,000 out of thin air). Now you receive a shield.
______________________________________

Effectively, your TH is a shield for your loot, and your available loot is your shield from attack. You had 200,000 available to be taken until you log into the game again. Your base is available to be attacked until all 200,000 of that is gone divided up by however many players can get to your TH. People can repeatedly attack you for the full value but the loot is only taken from your storages if your TH falls. Once all of it is taken you get your shield. Effectively you could be attacked 80 times and people could get 200,000 every attack but you would loose nothing as long as your TH survived.

No free shield, but you would also never again experience 4 39% raids in 30 minutes that set you back 7 hours of constant game play. Also, (and to many more importantly) it would add many more worthwhile villages to the queue to be attacked. I think this would require a separate revenge shield system that was decoupled from the traditional shield.

I admit that I have not thought this all the way through so there may still be unintended flaws that may make this a non-starter, but at least it is a fresh idea. Hammer away folks!

Yep basically THs being put outside will be replaced with storages being put outside. Game over.
March 18th, 2015
Xitra

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xitra

Hmm, an interesting twist... Not sure I agree with letting people attack you over and over without at least some of the loot coming from you. Otherwise we could put our storages and the economy would have endless resources.

How about this though: if your TH isn't destroyed, only xx% of the resources come from you, with the rest created out of thin air? Like 50% as a basic starting point for discussion. As a TH8 offering 300k resources (the cap), you'd only lose 150k per raid if you can protect your TH.

Hmm, an interesting twist on this: right now, the incentive to take a TH is to get the star, and possibly the win. This provides trophies and league bonus.

The incentive to protect the TH is to... wait, what were we talking about again?

Seriously though, there is so little incentive to protect the TH. There's no league bonus, and protecting the TH almost guarantees you'll get 2-starred at least, since you'd have to punch through 50% to get to a well-protected TH. An exposed TH means a good chance of "only" losing a star.

But if the TH protected half your raidable loot (note: "protected", not "contained". still contained in the storages), then that would be a lot of incentive to protect it. If you think you're less than 50% likely to get a free TH snipe due to offering a ton of loot, protecting the TH could make more sense than hoping and praying someone snipes you.
March 18th, 2015
BlahBlah161616

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahimi

Yep basically THs being put outside will be replaced with storages being put outside. Game over.

NOOOOOO! I want my free shields...now I really hate this thread... Not just the word incentive.
March 18th, 2015
firestar123

Quote:

Originally Posted by iceageg

Alright Warren, here's one for you. Just a little something that popped into my mind in an attempt to make the TH your most honored possession . . . while at the same time giving out the much needed shields . . . and adding MORE villages to be attacked in the nexting queue!!!

Lets start with an example and run it a couple ways. In the example we will say you have 200,000 available when you log off. TH safe and sound in the middle (because it is your most valuable building now with no free shield).
_________________________________________

The first player attacks you and sees 200,000 available. Your defense holds them to 30% but they manage to take 100,000. However, since they did not kill your TH that loot comes from thin air instead of your loot. You loose nothing.

A second player attacks you and still sees 200,000 available loot. They manage to core your base and kill the TH, but only get 50,000 of your resources and 30%. However, because they killed your TH the loot comes out of YOUR resources, not thin air.

A third player attacks you and sees 200,000 available loot. They manage to kill 85% of your base but the TH survives in the middle. They get 200,000 loot but all of it comes from thin air instead of your resources (because they didn't destroy your TH).

A fourth player attacks you and sees 200,000 available loot. They wipe the map with you 100% and receive 200,000 loot (150,000 from your loot and 50,000 out of thin air). Now you receive a shield.
______________________________________

Effectively, your TH is a shield for your loot, and your available loot is your shield from attack. You had 200,000 available to be taken until you log into the game again. Your base is available to be attacked until all 200,000 of that is gone divided up by however many players can get to your TH. People can repeatedly attack you for the full value but the loot is only taken from your storages if your TH falls. Once all of it is taken you get your shield. Effectively you could be attacked 80 times and people could get 200,000 every attack but you would loose nothing as long as your TH survived.

No free shield, but you would also never again experience 4 39% raids in 30 minutes that set you back 7 hours of constant game play. Also, (and to many more importantly) it would add many more worthwhile villages to the queue to be attacked. I think this would require a separate revenge shield system that was decoupled from the traditional shield.

I admit that I have not thought this all the way through so there may still be unintended flaws that may make this a non-starter, but at least it is a fresh idea. Hammer away folks!

I love it. Nice idea iceberg.
March 18th, 2015
iceageg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xitra

Hmm, an interesting twist... Not sure I agree with letting people attack you over and over without at least some of the loot coming from you. Otherwise we could put our storages and the economy would have endless resources.

How about this though: if your TH isn't destroyed, only xx% of the resources come from you, with the rest created out of thin air? Like 50% as a basic starting point for discussion. As a TH8 offering 300k resources (the cap), you'd only lose 150k per raid if you can protect your TH.

Like I said, it is a fledgling idea. So in the interest of keeping the TH valued . . . if they kill the TH 100% of the loot taken comes from the victim. If the TH survives the amount taken from the victim is the inverse of the % damage done. So if they put their storages out in the corner and the attacker gets 200,000 with 10% damage, 180,000 comes from their loot and 20,000 comes out of thin air. But if they do 80% damage (and TH survives) only 40,000 is taken and the other 160,000 comes from thin air. This would incentivize making the attacker wade through your defenses to get to your loot while still taking a percentage from the victim village every attack.
March 18th, 2015
firestar123

Quote:

Originally Posted by iceageg

Like I said, it is a fledgling idea. So in the interest of keeping the TH valued . . . if they kill the TH 100% of the loot taken comes from the victim. If the TH survives the amount taken from the victim is the inverse of the % damage done. So if they put their storages out in the corner and the attacker gets 200,000 with 10% damage, 180,000 comes from their loot and 20,000 comes out of thin air. But if they do 80% damage (and TH survives) only 40,000 is taken and the other 160,000 comes from thin air. This would incentivize making the attacker wade through your defenses to get to your loot while still taking a percentage from the victim village every attack.

This is terrible, this is whats already happening with the first idea!,, I want to protect loot, See what I understood is that the attacker comes, Robs your storages, doesn't get the th but gets 200k from thin air, if they rob you and get the th they get it from you. With this the loot willl increase and there will be no bad loot so long as all puts their stores out and th in.
March 18th, 2015
ShaneHed13

I couldn't bring myself to read all of the posts in this thread but something that seemed to keep coming up was the lack of respect defense gets in this game, and people should be rewarded for good defense. Think of any sport or game that gives you bonuses for good defense? In CoC, the points (score keeping base unit) are either trophies or loot based on your preference. If you are saving loot, you probably have your TH exposed for an easy shield and less chance of a big loot attack, if you are doing trophies you probably have your town hall inside.

I digress a bit, I think in CoC (as in any sport) defense is always something that is much more intangible but just as equally important. I think if loot bonuses came into successful defenses, that would be equivalent for giving the defensive basketball team 1 point for blocking the other teams shot. The benefit is that you blocked their shot, they DIDN'T get what they would of had you not did what you did.

Defense is about what you prevent others from getting and offense is about getting from others. I cannot quantify how much loot I have not lost due to my base set up, it's boring for sure, but to say because it isn't as fun it should be buffed is against the idea of a Defense if it becomes a tangible means to gain loot. Defense in CoC is defense in any other competitive event ever invented, less flashy, just as important but harder to quantify.
March 18th, 2015
WarrenJames

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlahBlah161616

NOOOOOO! I want my free shields...now I really hate this thread... Not just the word incentive.

Before you panic too much, why is it that you need that shield? The incentive here is to actually be compensated in a way where you can be attacked and not feel like you are being unfairly punished for no other reason for having a large amount of loot.

Because it works both ways, if you don't feel like it is too bad, and can get by without a shield, others will feel the same, which means more open targets for you to attack! Granted, that is a simplification, but that's the core idea. How that comes about is what we are figuring out. If you get some attack bonus when raided, or some training time boost, or some banked shield time you can use when you want it, etc, with be added fun bonuses to the game. And making the game fun is the main reason for this entire effort.

If the incentive is not pleasing enough for people like you to use, and feel like things are better off with a shield, then there is not enough incentive. Note, I am not wanting any disincentive to stop you from using your farming base layout. I am not going to suggest something that makes your layout less helpful. But I will suggest things that should be better than what you are currently using.

It is the difference between positive and negative reinforcement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement). I will use positive reinforcement to solve this, but will not use any negative reinforcement to stopping people from using the exposed Town Hall layout, ever! There are very liftle options right now to even progress in this game without using a farming base, and pushing people out of that method of play is a very very bad idea right now. I am wanting to give people options so they have more to work with than just the farming base.
March 18th, 2015
iceageg

Quote:

Originally Posted by iceageg

Like I said, it is a fledgling idea. So in the interest of keeping the TH valued . . . if they kill the TH 100% of the loot taken comes from the victim. If the TH survives the amount taken from the victim is the inverse of the % damage done. So if they put their storages out in the corner and the attacker gets 200,000 with 10% damage, 180,000 comes from their loot and 20,000 comes out of thin air. But if they do 80% damage (and TH survives) only 40,000 is taken and the other 160,000 comes from thin air. This would incentivize making the attacker wade through your defenses to get to your loot while still taking a percentage from the victim village every attack.

Thinking about it more from the possibility of adding too much loot to the system, perhaps a shield after your available loot has been taken or 3 TH survived attacks. This would reduce the flood of out of thin air resources potentially introduced but still offer 3x the number of available bases to attack, theoretically reducing the number of nexts it takes to find a worthwhile attack.
March 18th, 2015
iceageg

Quote:

Originally Posted by firestar123

This is terrible, this is whats already happening with the first idea!,, I want to protect loot, See what I understood is that the attacker comes, Robs your storages, doesn't get the th but gets 200k from thin air, if they rob you and get the th they get it from you. With this the loot willl increase and there will be no bad loot so long as all puts their stores out and th in.

You either did not read that entire paragraph or are simply blind with rage and incapable of critical thinking. It penalizes putting your storages outside by taking more directly from you. Best case scenario (added in a subsequent post) you successfully defend 3 times and get your precious shield, loose less than you potentially could have, and 3 people potentially hit next 60% less than before.
March 19th, 2015
iceageg

Update to my initial idea on the previous page compiling some of the feedback received. Again, in an effort to make the TH your most valuable building, add more people worth attacking to the queue, and rewarding defense . . .

1) When you log off your available loot at that moment becomes your shield trigger (no more shield for a TH kill). Once you have lost that amount of loot added together by all attackers you get your shield.
2) You also get a shield if you have survived 3 attacks without giving up your maximum. If 3 attackers can't take enough to add up to your limit your defense is rewarded with a shield.
3) If your TH dies 100% of the loot taken comes from your loot. Doesn't matter how much it was, it comes from your available loot cap.
4) If your TH lives the loot comes partially from you and partially "from thin air". The loot that comes from thin air is the % damage done. The loot that comes from you is the % of your base remaining.
5) Everybody sees your maximum total available loot even if you have already been attacked. If a previous attack took some of your available loot the "from thin air" loot covers the difference on subsequent attacks. You can't loose more than if you had been wiped the first attack
6) Revenge gets it's own separate shield timers.

How does it all work? Lets use the 200,000 loot available when you log off number again and work a few scenarios.

Scenario #1 (Base layout doesn't matter because 100%):
If somebody attacks you for 100% you loose it all and get a shield because you have given up all of your available loot. No change there.
Result - You loose 200,000 and get a shield. 1 attacker got 200,000

Scenario #2 (most likely you have a TH exposed village):
If 3 players in a row attack you for 50,000 each and all of them kill your TH it works like this
Player 1 sees 200,000 (your maximum available before shield), kills your TH, gets 50,000 and because they killed your TH it all comes from you. You now have 150,000 available to be taken.
Player 2 sees 200,000 (still your maximum available), kills your TH, gets 50,000 and because they killed your TH it all comes from you. You now have 100,000 available to be taken.
Player 3 sees 200,000 (Still your maximum available), kills your TH, gets 50,000 and because they killed your TH it all comes from you. Since this is the third attack and you have not had your maximum taken you are rewarded with a shield after loosing just 150,000.
Result - you loose 150,000 of 200,000 then get a shield. 3 attackers got 50,000 each.

Scenario #3 (You put your storages outside with your TH protected):
Only 2 players will likely attack you because it will take only two to get all of your loot.
Player #1 does 10% damage killing only your storages and gets all 200,000. Because he did not kill your TH only 10% of the loot comes from thin air. 180,000 comes from you, leaving 20,000 available to be taken from you and leaving you in the queue to be attacked.
Player #2 does 10% damage killing only your storages and gets all 200,000. Because he did not kill your TH he would normally take 90% of your loot. But since you only have 20,000 left from your loot cap he takes that and gets 180,000 from thin air.
Result - You loose 200,000 to two attacks then a shield. 2 players get 200,000 each.

Scenario #4 (exactly the same as scenario #3 except you protect your storages and TH):
Player #1 brings a strong army and does 80% damage to your base but the TH survives. He gets 150,000 loot but because your TH survived only 20% is taken from your loot. You loose 30,000 and 120,000 comes from thing air.
Player #2 still sees 200,000 available but is a bit weaker. They attack for 66% and manage 90,000. 30,000 comes from you and 60,000 comes from thin air.
Player #3 still sees 200.000 and storms in. They manage 95% before time runs out. Your TH survives but they still got 200,000 loot. You pay out 5% of that for 10,000 and the other 190,000 comes from thin air. Also since this is the third attack you get your shield.
Result - you loose 70,000 of 200,000 to three good attacks and get a shield for good defense. Three players got 150,000 120,000 and 200,000 respectively for good attacks.

Scenario #5 (farm attacks when collectors are empty):
Player #1 barches for 50% and only taps some of the storage loot for 50,000. You pay 25,000 and 25,000 comes from thin air.
Player #2 barches for 50% and only taps some of the storage loot for 50,000. You pay 25,000 and 25,000 comes from thin air.
Player #3 barches for 50% and only taps some of the storage loot for 50,000. You pay 25,000 and 25,000 comes from thin air.
Result - You loose 75,000 of 200,000 to three attacks and get a shield. Three players got 50,000 each.

Scenario #6 (farm attacks when collectors are full):
Player #1 barches for 50% and scores 200,000. You pay 100,000 and 100,000 comes from thin air.
Player #2 barches for 50% and scores 200,000. You pay 100,000 and 100,000 comes from thin air.
Result - You loose 200,000 to two attacks and get a shield because your loot cap was met. Two players got 200,000 each.

I am sure I'm missing something here but with the stated goals above (more bases to attack, reward defense, value TH and storages) I think it is a fairly solid alternative. Warren? This is your thread and favorite topic.
March 19th, 2015
immortalzrizing

a percentage of league bonus would be a nice defense reward. & help stimulate the economy.
March 19th, 2015
BigKid

Quote:

Originally Posted by immortalzrizing

a percentage of league bonus would be a nice defense reward. & help stimulate the economy.

This is what I was thinking but it may be abused if there were an organized help a fellow clasher by dropping a hero event. How about a percentage of the cost of the troops deployed?
March 21st, 2015
familyoftrevor

Since people are against giving something for a successful defence and having any incentive for making a strong base. How about go the other way ... make it a disadvantage for having a exposed TH.

Have the TH hold more loot say 5% ( or some %) and have it hold dark elixir as well. So if you have 2 mil gold your TH would hold 100k. If you want you can leave it exposed and lose only that amount from someone just picking up trophies or you can try and protect it.

When I started another thread about rewards for defence, in part my biggest issue is just how many people have farming bases and make no attempt at trying to win a battle (just want a shield). Revenge is almost a useless function since most players have a shield all the time since they have the farming bases.

Increasing the TH storage, doesn't reward a good defence but it would make people want to protect it a bit more.
March 21st, 2015
NF2335

I did suggest an idea that could use the nexting cost to reward players for successful defence and attack (it didn't get a lot of input, due to it being similar to a ruled out idea).
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...he-pot-of-gold
March 21st, 2015
WarrenJames

Quote:

Originally Posted by familyoftrevor

Since people are against giving something for a successful defence and having any incentive for making a strong base. How about go the other way ... make it a disadvantage for having a exposed TH.

Have the TH hold more loot say 5% ( or some %) and have it hold dark elixir as well. So if you have 2 mil gold your TH would hold 100k. If you want you can leave it exposed and lose only that amount from someone just picking up trophies or you can try and protect it.

When I started another thread about rewards for defence, in part my biggest issue is just how many people have farming bases and make no attempt at trying to win a battle (just want a shield). Revenge is almost a useless function since most players have a shield all the time since they have the farming bases.

Increasing the TH storage, doesn't reward a good defence but it would make people want to protect it a bit more.

NO NO NO NO NO! :saywhat:

Don't go there, please! It will tick people off.

There are few (if any) alternatives out there for keeping loot. Kicking people out will solve nothing. I've said time and time again that such ideas will just cause drama, and get you nowhere but miffed and insulted.

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:53 AM.