Printable View
Most of people just take one star n get loot bonus. For loot bonus they search farming base where TH is outside defense.
People dont learn attacking tricks and fails in war also. Why dont you give bonus based on number of stars as we get trophies based on stars.
If bonus is based on stars, people will try to destroy base with 3 stars and will learn attacking tricks also.
Agreed, they should take that into consideration.
Read my article please it's right before yours.
thanks
agree here; i can usually foresee when a war is going to be won or lost; which can allow me to build a trash army and go for massive loss loot.
it should be further cut based on how many stars is achieved.
Its not about loot, only loot bonus , when we get one star. They should not reduce loot but loot bonus.Quote:
Originally Posted by FallenOne
Some ppl just destroy TH and get full loot bonus. loot bonus should be provided based on stars in attack.
Vote for NO nd 1000000000 NOs
the bonus helps us to upgrade our stuff, it is not an easy to 2 star all bases.i dont know why u come up with this idea??!
do u know how much it cost wall lvl 10 or 11??!
I dont know wat lvl u r or wat league u play in, but fyi A star does not come from sniping th only.
I disagree with this actually.
Why?
Because the ability to 3 star an equal TH is not the same at all halls. For TH10 often 2 stars is an excellent result. They are using 240 troops & 5 spells to get it.
While a TH7, with 200 troops & 3 spells can far more easily 3 star a fellow TH7…and they get even more loot for it with a lower cost army?
what do you think if existing bonus is multiplied by number of stars ? I am not asking for reduction but loot bonus based on stars.Quote:
Originally Posted by daz258
what do you think if existing bonus is multiplied by number of stars ? I am not asking for reduction but loot bonus based on stars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamoodi99
it's ok to collect bonus by sniping town halls, but a higher bonus for 2 or 3 stars would be great. eg. crystal II: 40k 1*, 50k 2*, 60k 3*.
No man its unfair in multiplayer 3 staring a th10 is very hard so th10 won't get high bonuses and th7-8-9 will get higher bonuses than th10
This was not for multiplayer war, but one to one attack.( Anyway, why are you unhappy if other get better bonus. Lower level guys should get bonus to upgrade n become higher level)Quote:
Originally Posted by 0jij0
When people refer to multiplayer they are talking about one on one attacks rather than war attacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by roshanmangal
This promotes a certain style of play.
That is, it encourages players to find "easier" targets than attacking bases that may be more difficult to even get 1 star.
So, you would be instituting an advantage for always attacking much weaker bases, undoing the TH loot penalty already in the game.
Right now, the reason not to attack down is less loot. With your star system, it would be MORE valuable to 3-star a TH lower than you than to 1-star a TH at your same level.
So, though your stated goal is "make players make more real attacks," the actual result of such an update would be more easy-attacks beating up on lower THs.
Yes, this game is all about Trophy. This will set equilibrium so that lower lvl people wont be there in high trophy count.Quote:
Originally Posted by Uthrac
But for th7 and 8 dragon attack may work but what about th10s lol its hard to 3 star but it encourages to 3 star and win...so this idea should be executed with some corrections:D
This selection of ideas has been argued for months and months. Some ppl love it some ppl hate it. Whilst attacking is a big part of the coc so is farming. I have always suggest making the loot that is available in the TH is much higher than 1000.Quote:
Originally Posted by roshanmangal
This is is a subject to which u will get lovers and haters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roshanmangal
Sounds like you have a clan management problem. If people are making cheap armies and attacking for one star when they shouldn't, you should make it clear that's unacceptable, and kick them out if they keep doing it.
As others have said, 1) this isn't fair to max players, who often have enough trouble getting 2 stars against others on their level, so you'd have to adjust the bonuses accordingly for that.
2) This penalizes strategy. Sometimes the best strategy for us is to send a lower player up to 1 star a high base that our higher players might be able to 2 star, but could just as easily get 1 or 0. This frees up the rest of the clan to go slightly lower, and often results in more stars.
The way to get loot in a multiplayer attack is to select a target from whom you can obtain loot and then execute a successful raid upon them. Win bonuses need not be progressive since the majority of loot available comes from the village itself as it should be. Win bonuses should not fund the economy. They should only partially offset the disparity in cost between building an army and the available loot from raiding.
I think I agree...though the reason win bonuses are higher in higher leagues is 1) to convince people to stay up there 2) you need stronger armies to execute a successful attack and 3) even with a stronger army you may not be able to get enough loot to make it worth your while without the win bonus.Quote:
Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned
When I initially read this I assumed it was about war, because in multiplayer battles, really who cares? It's not CoC's problem that your clanmates aren't practicing war style attacks at least some of the time, and they shouldn't have to create a progressive loot bonus based on stars for multiplayer to get people to do it.
The bonuses in multiplayer aren't even worth getting until you get to crystal league, so it wouldn't affect how players raiding for loot in gold and below attack in the slightest.
It's also very hard to figure out how this would achieve the desired results without breaking gameplay, especially considering the gaps need to be significant enough to make me go for 1 or 2 stars in a higher league rather than 3 in a lower one, AND make it worthwhile to go for those extra stars without giving me such a big loot bonus that the game becomes too easy. To that end, I think it would help if we had some examples.
I like to sit in Master 3, where the loot bonus is 100k. In order to make this work, the bonuses would have to look something like this:
Crystal 1, 1 star: 55k, 2 stars: 65k, 3 stars: 75k
Master 3, 1 star: 80k, 2 stars: 100k, 3 stars: 120k
Master 2, 1 star: 120k, 2 stars: 140k, 3 stars: 160k
You have to be careful...in a way you're punishing lower level players who trophy push. The biggest reason against it though is CoC likes to keep things as simple as possible, and this is the opposite of that.
I think we agree as well. What you said got me thinking, and maybe this off the wall idea would make farming a different experience.Quote:
Originally Posted by awesomness2016
New proposal: keep the gold bonus they same as it is now. However, change the Elixer and dark Elixer bonuses to refunds instead. Refund a different percentage of the troop cost that was expended for the attack based on the number of stars achieved, but also with a similar penalty (and also a boost) based on relative TH level. Let's say arbitrarily that you get 33% for one star, 66% for two, and %100 for three as long as it's the same TH level. If you attack one TH lower than you the bonus (again arbitrarily) is 23/53/93 and for two TH lower it is 15/30/45. If you attack a TH higher the bonus is 50/100/150.
Remember that this bonus only relates to the actual cost of troops expended. You will barely get any new Elixer for TH sniping. However, you will get a substantial return by deploying a powerful army and succeeding against a TH of equal strength.
What this would do would be to promote legitimate and strong attacks against TH of equal levels. If you are skilled at it the troop cost is no longer a factor. We would see more interesting attacks in multiplayer and less grinding with low cost armies of barching and gibarching. It would fundamentally change farming from what it is today which quite frankly is a boring grind, to a more skilled and varied activity where good offense and good defense both actually matter again.
completely agree. it's so irritating to have looters like that. i don't understand the logic with those people. its a game and you can actually get more loot via farming. can you say LAZY?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned
I think for a lot of people, the biggest factor isn't so much the amount of elixir, but the time it takes to make a decent army.
I disagree with this.
At higher town hall levels, it is harder to 3 star, which means that you may not be able to get an adequate war bonus, even if you got 2 stars
The problem is that today the bonus doesn't cover the cost of building a good army, nor should it since the bonus is a fixed amount that every TH sniper gets. With a new system the cost of the army used could be a factor (along with success) to partially or completely cover the cost of the attack. By doing this you neutralize the cost, but you place the emphasis of earning on the actual acquisition of Elixer by taking it from the enemy. You may not get your army costs back in bonus, but at least that 400k available in the storages of a TH10 is about profit and no longer about breaking even.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwaddle1
Quote:
Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned
...the guy you responded to, like most people, generally assume this idea is about war bonuses.
i agree ..but what i say is the loot bonus extra for second and third star should there...but it shud change with th...say for th7 second star will add 20 percent etc 3rd will give 40 percent...for th8 second will give 30 n third 60..th9 second 35 ..third 70..for th 10 second 50 and third a full 100 percent etc...the numbers i gave is just to illustrate what i think...it may be tweakedQuote:
Originally Posted by 0jij0
Hi All,I ve logged in after long time. And my suggestion already implemented.
WOW