A new paradigm for base design

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Superhal

1. Hmm, not sure what you mean here. I meant within the walls, the storages should be separated, not placed outside the walls.

2. In my experience, if they can reach your core, your defenses are already outmatched.

3. Not quite what I had in mind. What I meant by "smart design" was what target would a goblin pick? A giant? Would they pick the target in front or to the left? It's not about throwing other buildings in the way, it's purposefully taking advantage of the AI to force troops to go in the wrong direction.

---

1. I see so often bases with the storages near the edges behind the walls. I make multiple shallow breaches and can take easily half or more with cheap army. You don't have enough walls to separate the storages enough and keep them well enough protected.

2. Depends on the style of base and type of breach. You got huge giant horde to core... Gratz, they are going to leave, looking for the remaining defences. Seen it happen in the past, 20 giants left, core breached but over half defences left :D

3. Check my base (pic on sig link) to understand what I ment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Superhal

Hm. I'm not suggesting leaving the mortars outside the walls. But, I've had the opposite experience really. By putting my mortars in the 1st or 2nd layer, I've been bothered less by archers than ever before.

The past two weeks or so (since lvl 5 mortars) the only attack that's been getting 2 stars or more (I leave my th outside) has only been when flying units make up more than half the attacking force.

---

I wasn't referring to bases with them left outside. If they can be sniped with archers, and they can be when they are in the 1st layer, a skilled attacker will cripple your defenses with the majority of their army left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Superhal

1. No, by spreading out storages, you actually protect more of them mainly because of the time limit on battles. When I say "winning" and "losing," to a farmer that means protecting resources.

2. If they use all their archers to take out my mortar on the outside, then I've won. If their main force of archers can penetrate the middle, I've lost.

3. What I'm saying is that facing their force head on is not efficient. Outsmarting them is more effective than trying to overpower them, because as you know your example only worked because it was barbs, not giant/healer. I just had a replay where 1 mortar destroyed 140 barbs because the barbs were moving sideways.

4. No I mean triangulation for the sake of triangulation doesn't work. Equal ineffective coverage is still ineffective.

---

Find "Clan Hawthorne" and look at my base (acf99oc). My point defenses are in tight groups around the splash so I can still handle giant/healer. My base uses a lot of the "old paradigms", but still works fine. I'm not saying the new paradigms aren't good, but the old paradigms are still paradigms for a reason- they work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baconman

A skilled attacker wouldn't need all their archers to pick off your splash towers. I love nothing more than seeing mortars on the outside perimeter. Snipe them with a handful of archers, which cripples their defense, and on to the storages I go.

---

So fun esp when its level 7 mortars because some guys just throw them outside/close to undefended

Another thing I see in base threads are people are creating their base as if it's completed. Nobody ever accounts for what would happen if something was upgrading defensive wise.