Printable View
If my village stands up to an attack and yields no stars (most notably with a completely exposed TH) then I think my reward should be that the price to re-arm my traps comes out of the loser's storage. It doesn't happen often but it is kind of a slap in the face to pitch a shut out and then get hit with a penalty on top of the loot that was lost in the raid.
The expense to rearm is hardly that high, and this is unfair. I think it's ruled out aswell. Sorry bruh :/
What if they have no room? Comes out of their bank account and they go negative them into debt and then they can't pay the builders who go hungry then kill other builders for the quest for food then eat each other and ultimately kill clash itself. You can't do this or it's pure chaos.Quote:
Originally Posted by conradlovejoy
This would mean you lose loot when you lose a raid. This would make the loot economy even worse than it already is. I don't think this would be a good fit for the game IMO :D
It's a game...and production constantly produces gold. The player will not be in the red for long. I think having to pay 10s of thousands of gold is silly even if it isn't THAT much. I beat you...I shouldn't be hampered with a fine because of it.
all the more reason to try to avoid losing, I suppose. It really isn't that much of a cost..as the other member mentioned above. Just don't think I should deal with the nuisance after a satisfying win.Quote:
Originally Posted by HeatWave
Then don't re-arm your traps. Stop complaining about the small things, and look at the bigger picture ;)
Really doesn't make sense to have a failed attacker pay for your traps, you can revenge them to recoup the costs.
However, I do think the re-arm costs are too high.
I think having ideas and requesting additional features is the point of the "ideas and feature request" forum...Quote:
Originally Posted by EliteBanana
terrible idea, imoQuote:
Originally Posted by conradlovejoy
also, near-impossible to code ;)