Printable View
Come on, don't be so stubborn. If you are a troll (which I doubt) you are doing a bad job. WarrenJames is correct in that it would change the fundamental concept of the game too much and would thus create lots of problems. You're just not listening to his argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by esnobueno
And it isn't that easy to 3 star bases with spam lavaloon - it needs to be a base that is weak to spam lavaloon. Otherwise, you will need to use other strategies which require more skill.
In all honesty, I partly tuned things out when army types were brought up. :smirk: Notice I just referred to things in a general manner, and never once argued over if those guys were over powered or under powered XD. I knew someone else would come in and fill in that detail for the OP, because right now my mind is a bit shot with a med related headache to figure out the finer points of lavaloons with some... lunatic (?) (OK bad pun). Also I have no personal experience with them to give a good informed opinion on the army type.Quote:
Originally Posted by X7386
All I know is they wanted to add a feature that had no hope of being added by Supercell, and all they wanted from it is to fix a minor thing they didn't like about an attack choice, and to hell with how it affects the rest of the game. :rolleyes:
To no small extent, I am amused, maybe too much, that they said I might have been a Mod or Staff. ;)
Warren, I'll ask you to take exception as this is my first time on this forum so I'm not exactly forum savvy. I could have quoted your entire quote with simple press of a button as it showed, but the important parts I re-quoted were what was needed to make my point. Consider it a paraphrase...
X7 and Warren... Thank you both for responding, this was an idea only. If either of you have anything to do with construction/keep up of the game... well done, it's a fun game. If idea doesn't work then doesn't work.
Signed,
You're correct: Not a troll, just thoughtful idea to improve the game.
Giddy up. Errr.. Clash on.
Everyone was a newbie at one point, and I keep that in mind. :)
You can modify quotes after using the automated quote feature. Technically, you can modify a quote to be a horrific misquote, since all the automated thing does is grab text, grab the name, and slap on two (Quote) tags at either end. There is no system verification for modified quotes. Some even make replies inside a quoted box, which makes quoting them impossible without copying and pasting stuff. :rolleyes:
A neat thing you might like is the multiple quote button, just to the right of 'reply with quote'. It will check mark what posts you want in your reply, and put them all into your reply (in the order you clicked! So keep that in mind). It can work for quoting from another thread too! You just need to click on the message warning you that you have quote selected from outside the thread you are replying to.
...
...
And I'm rambling :facepalm:. And yes, I did say I have a headache too, and is getting worse :(. Which goes to prove it takes very little brain power to spill out a bunch of text. :smirk:
HAHA.... I know. I'm lazy and copy pasting feels easiest.. I don't know if mentioned but I'm still working on breaking into the 21st century. HA.(I'd like to think I'm joking but I'm not... rotary phones were so much easier)
Thank you for the discussion. I'd like the idea to be considered/thrown around, but understand if isn't. Ideas are sometimes not up to par, but can make others think.
Might be my last time here as forums not really my gig but... maybe a few other annoying appearances here and there... No worries.. I'm limited on my ideas.
Talk at another time,
Neb
Good luck.
Sad thing is, the internet in general isn't too friendly. :( Less so than me. At least at first. You have to give people something to work with so they are less prone to just spitting out insults with an assumed stereotype. It is easy for people to just not think and bash on strangers when all they have to work with is a stranger's self given name.
Oh! by the way...
The http://supercell-forum-content.s3.am...post-right.png next to my name takes you to the source of the quote, if you want to know what topic I totaly forgot about.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
Last line on 'need more barbarians' is also a reference to a hog ridder running gag.
I'm fine with the net for what I use it for. Forums not really one of them.
Nice last quote of yours though. Worked well to end out this post....
I prefer to let archers die off over barbs though. They just deserve it more..(don't see a devil emoticon so use your imagination)
this idea is so bad, no one would use air troops and they are called AIR troops to go over walls not get stopped by them.
nope.. this is a bad idea..
Just put all 4 air defenses under this thing that will make air troops don't target them and CoC will lost any kind of Air troops. Even 1 unattackable Air defense is enough dps to make air attack useless
Ground troops never have any defenses that attacks for 200++ DPS
Thank you for the feed back Clash and Fre..
Not suggesting a full blockade of air using a 'FOW' that totally disables air troops. A scatter/partial block that last for seconds.... similar to a trap/bomb that can be upgraded upon TH UG to gain seconds of scatter/non attack.
Clash you were completely correct, walls blocking air = dumb. That part of idea is walls do partial damage passing over not block air troops.
In short(not so short after I typed out);
Ground troops are hindered by walls, giant bombs - bulk damage(Double damage to Hogs), Tes(Double damage to PEK), traps, skeleton traps if put to ground, and lastly all defense less AD.
Air troops, if used in bulk(which often are when used) are witness to no resistance entering base besides air bombs/seeker AB(possible equivalent to giant bomb but if 1 troop target then not so much)....... Walls are meant to be flown over, but unlike ground, air troops avoid 2 defensive positions(mort & cannon)[TH9/10 ground only xbow other exception] vs 1 def position that ground troops avoid(AD). Balance isn't there.
I know there are arguments against that I could have pointed out but figured I'd leave to those who want to respond.