Some thoughts on potential consequences of the update from a war player perspective..

I've been trying to withhold judgement until the two weeks is up but it seems clear to me the way this is going. I believe in an attempt to kill bot farming, SC are cutting off their nose to spite their face. By attempting to eradicate barch and TH sniping, (the two main staples of bot raids), they are punishing everyone but the trophy pushing player.

I only play this game for war and use the multiplayer facet only for loot to level your base. The "multiplayer" game is irrelevant to me. I farm in high crystal/low masters, when I have a bit of spare time, I use a barrack boost session and hammer out barch raids and snipes. I hate farming and dislike mindless barch, but i do it simply because this is by far the quickest and most effective way of getting paid. Crucially, my TH is outside my base. i choose this method because i don't want to be forced to play the multiplayer part of the game every day, or even every other day. Often i don't do any farm raids for days on end and I like it that way! It is my opt-out from a section of the game i don't enjoy and therefore a big part of the reason I still am interested in playing the game after 2 years. Players being able to snipe my TH is therefore an important meta for protecting my loot, and in effect, they get paid and I keep my loot for the odd upgrade and concentrate on war...everyone is happy. Apart from SC that is, who are perhaps concerned they might be missing out on gems.

Changing the mechanics of the game in this way has imo very little to do with trying to encourage more advanced attacks and defences. If it were purely for this honourable reason SC would simply do the obvious and encourage defences by rewarding each successful defence with a loot bonus, and increase the attacking bonus for a high percentage win. Something i think virtually all players would welcome.

Ultimately you cannot make the multiplayer game like war. You will still not be able to tailor your army to a base and will still only get 30sec to plan. Meaning you will build a generic, cookie cutter attack, just at a greater cost and take much more time doing it. Which should be no more enjoyable to a war enthusiast or farmer than barch is. Because of this, and vitally, because unlike in war, there is no real penalty hitting TH one level below you, Attack skill will increase only marginally. Defence building practice will also be minor as anti 3 bases will still be no good in this format. All bases will be anti 2s which as u know are irrelevant below th10 for any war clan worth their salt. It is for these reasons that I will never be interested in the "multiplayer" format, and i will deeply resent being forced to play that part of the game twice or more a day just to retain my loot. Problem is, as you have articulated many times in your videos, the war community's opinions mean very little to SC, who have long since done their sums and concluded that we don't bring in the $$$ and are therefore expendable.

One quick point linked with all this is the new th11. As some may know, a rapidly growing number of war players are choosing to remain as career th9s. Everyone knows why. War at th9 is clash in its most pure and perfect form. I fear that instead of striving to balance th10 in the same way, they are using the new multiplayer system to coerce players to upgrade THs and lay new defence structures just to have a chance of protecting their loot. Truly max th9s wont care much, but i can imagine those with max defences and 15-15 heroes and lego/skull walls will be sweating a bit...

Anyways, I wont jump to too many conclusions about this as we have still heard almost nothing about th11 and potential tweaks to th10. If none materialise, i think its time to accept the beauty of th9 war was a wonderful accident never to be repeated. Personally I do have some small faith that SC will pull something out the bag to fix th10. Heres hoping anyway!

But whats the bottom line? What will the changes really mean for everyone apart from pushers? The so called "significant loot bonus increase" is a real term decrease for a 50% win, and a meagre 10% increase for 70%! Joke numbers! to me, it doesn't stack up. If u have no life, dont war much or seriously, of course you can make it work. Dead bases will always be there for example, and i will concede more storages will probably be available to raid, but at what cost? It is a big gamble by SC. Forcing people to play the game only one way to me seems like an obvious mistake, and one which I personally will resent. Even if they end up greatly reducing the cook time (and possibly cost) of higher level troops, my gut feeling is that they are underestimating the reasons people play this game and in the variety of different ways that they are currently able to do so.

If I were calling the shots, Id introduce big bonuses for defence wins and increase loot bonus rewards for high percentage wins. Leaving the rest of the game mechanics well alone! It may not have been how the developers originally intended but through luck or judgement it is a system that has made SC a billion dollar company with millions of long term players interested in different aspects of the game. Unlike th10 It aint broke so dont try to fix it! Naturally they are privy to a much greater wealth of data than I or anyone else is, so maybe (despite displaying a worrying lack of confidence and competence in what they are doing by making changes 3 days into the sneak peeks) they have done their calculations correctly. History however, says the track record for popular games restructuring their fundamental mechanics in such ways is not good. Time will tell.

So I guess my question boils down to this: Do you think, for the reasons i have mentioned, that what on the surface appear to be progressive changes promoting "more advanced attacking and defending", will actually in the long run harm CoC by reducing player autonomy regarding how they play the game? I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of any adult and or balanced people that may or may not exist on these forums...

From what I've read and seen so far, the game will be far too complicated for the causal player. And the 'casual player' is a very large portion of their player base.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chadamus

From what I've read and seen so far, the game will be far too complicated for the causal player. And the 'casual player' is a very large portion of their player base.

---

what's complicated about it? Attack for loot, defend to protect it.

Do you really think "casual" gamers are worried about their PBT timer and village guard, which is the only moderately complicated thing at all about the coming update? Most of them won't even know the PBT exists cause they don't raid in 3 hour sessions...

Edited to add: and to the OP, I think the "war community" will be just fine. If you're as serious of a war player as you claim, designing a solid defensive base won't be that difficult for you and therefore you're not going to get rolled for 3 stars and all your loot twice a day. By far, the overwhelming majority of players out there are not heavy hitters from OneHive, I suspect your base will hold up frequently. If you're unwilling or unmotivated to do ANY farming raids during the week, then yes, you're going to have a tough time progessing and getting lots of upgrades done. But that's currently the case NOW, it will be relatively unchanged by the update.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

what's complicated about it? Attack for loot, defend to protect it.

Do you really think "casual" gamers are worried about their PBT timer and village guard, which is the only moderately complicated thing at all about the coming update? Most of them won't even know the PBT exists cause they don't raid in 3 hour sessions...

---

Who said anything about PBT? Which yes, is stupidly complicated, but that wasn't mentioned in my post. Keep responses on topic. The OP has a well written thought and I agree with the concerns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chadamus

From what I've read and seen so far, the game will be far too complicated for the causal player. And the 'casual player' is a very large portion of their player base.

---

I agree with you that it will harm the casual player but disagree on the reason why. It will not be the complication of the new system that will harm the casual player, as I don't think in practice it will be complicated. However, what it will do is harm the casual player by dictating and enforcing how to attack and how often. Reducing the freedom of ways to play, I believe, will greatly harm the game in the long run.

Sneak peeks is even in title...move it mods,.... Come on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

what's complicated about it? Attack for loot, defend to protect it.

Do you really think "casual" gamers are worried about their PBT timer and village guard, which is the only moderately complicated thing at all about the coming update? Most of them won't even know the PBT exists cause they don't raid in 3 hour sessions...

Edited to add: and to the OP, I think the "war community" will be just fine. If you're as serious of a war player as you claim, designing a solid defensive base won't be that difficult for you and therefore you're not going to get rolled for 3 stars and all your loot twice a day. By far, the overwhelming majority of players out there are not heavy hitters from OneHive, I suspect your base will hold up frequently. If you're unwilling or unmotivated to do ANY farming raids during the week, then yes, you're going to have a tough time progessing and getting lots of upgrades done. But that's currently the case NOW, it will be relatively unchanged by the update.

---

I have to agree. These are changes that we will get used to and they will become an after thought eventually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

I agree with you that it will harm the casual player but disagree on the reason why. It will not be the complication of the new system that will harm the casual player, as I don't think in practice it will be complicated. However, what it will do is harm the casual player by dictating and enforcing how to attack and how often. Reducing the freedom of ways to play, I believe, will greatly harm the game in the long run.

---

Well, 'complicated' in line with what you described, that the game wants to limit to a small set of viable strategies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

It is a big gamble by SC. Forcing people to play the game only one way to me seems like an obvious mistake, and one which I personally will resent. Even if they end up greatly reducing the cook time (and possibly cost) of higher level troops, my gut feeling is that they are underestimating the reasons people play this game and in the variety of different ways that they are currently able to do so.

---

This happens all the time. When companies have had a great deal of success they no longer feel a need to meet consumer demand, in fact they actually believe they can dictate it. They are making a lot of money on the game as it is and the vast majority of players are obviously happy with it. I am hoping they have something else coming down the pipes to keep the casual player interested when they discover they can no longer fit the game in around their lives and still be able to progress at a timely rate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chadamus

Who said anything about PBT? Which yes, is stupidly complicated, but that wasn't mentioned in my post. Keep responses on topic. The OP has a well written thought and I agree with the concerns.

---

well if you're weren't referencing the PBT and VG, then I have no idea what you mean by "complicated." Attack for loot, defend to protect it.

And on topic, I DO think the OP has some valid concerns, but concerns that won't necessarily come to fruition post-update. I posted about this in several other threads already, but the notion that you're going to take a max-hit every 12 hours (nevermind that if you're taking a max hit you get a 14 or 16 hour shield) is for the most part absurd. Your defense log is going to show plenty of 1-2 storage hits where you get a shield and don't get wiped out, and possibly even some total fails where they get NO storages and you still get a shield (badly funneled gowipes for example, where circling pekkas wipe out all your outside trash and get you to 30% while taking virtually no loot).

The average clasher is pretty BAD at the game. The fact that people think they're going to be 3starred every time their shield rolls off essentially proves Supercell's point in that cheap/free TH-sniped shields has completely spoiled us as a community and warped our sense of reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

Edited to add: and to the OP, I think the "war community" will be just fine. If you're as serious of a war player as you claim, designing a solid defensive base won't be that difficult for you and therefore you're not going to get rolled for 3 stars and all your loot twice a day. By far, the overwhelming majority of players out there are not heavy hitters from OneHive, I suspect your base will hold up frequently. If you're unwilling or unmotivated to do ANY farming raids during the week, then yes, you're going to have a tough time progessing and getting lots of upgrades done. But that's currently the case NOW, it will be relatively unchanged by the update.

---

If you have a TH10 with inferno towers, then yes, as you say with a good anti 2 base you will be able to protect a good portion of your loot against most attacks. However, as I attempted to make clear in my OP, there is very little you can if you are a th9 trying to defend against even a half decent th10 attack, and because the loot penalty for attacking one level below you is negligible, these will be majority of your attackers, no matter what TH level you are. An increase in the loot penalty would be a welcome addition to the update which would mitigate these affects to some degree depending on the percentage of the penalty increase.

Regarding your last point, what you say is factual incorrect. I and players like me are the proof. I currently DO NOT attack for days on end because of war and time, and yet through my collectors and the odd boost session, i still am able to save for upgrades. The removal of TH snipes will absolutely change my ability to do this. My free time to raid will not increase so my base progress will slow and my incentive to continue with the game in the long run will diminish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

I agree with you that it will harm the casual player but disagree on the reason why. It will not be the complication of the new system that will harm the casual player, as I don't think in practice it will be complicated. However, what it will do is harm the casual player by dictating and enforcing how to attack and how often. Reducing the freedom of ways to play, I believe, will greatly harm the game in the long run.

---

how is the update going to "dictate how to attack?"

I used to barch in lower leagues for full collectors and the occassional storage raid (as a fresh TH9). As my farming troops upgraded, I moved over to GiBarch a bit higher up hitting max DE storages as often as possible. What is in the update that is going to make these strategies no longer viable?

Post update people will still barch, bag and bam, and gibarch for cheap/efficient farming. People will also gowipe and mass drag at higher leagues, just as they do now. Unless they nerf the healer (I don't necessarily expect this, but also wouldn't be shocked), you will still see the dreaded superqueen. None of the current farming/pushing army comps are going anywhere, and if anything they're getting easier with the addition of a donated DE spell....

Jeez that's a long post. Is there a TL; DR version? :P

Great summary--completely agree. I don't think the casual player will spend gems. It's the hard core members who will probably stick around no matter what. And I'm sure SC knows that. I don't think bot farming is a bad thing. I know those who do it and they say they spend MORE money now then they did before. I'm not in favor of the changes as I understand them. Very disappointed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

However, as I attempted to make clear in my OP, there is very little you can if you are a th9 trying to defend against even a half decent th10 attack, and because the loot penalty for attacking one level below you is negligible, these will be majority of your attackers, no matter what TH level you are. An increase in the loot penalty would be a welcome addition to the update which would mitigate these affects to some degree depending on the percentage of the penalty increase.

---

the loot penalty is being increased. A lot of the high end TH10's are going to be moving up as well. And again, not all these attacks, even those by TH10's, are going to completely wipe you.

Quote:

---

Regarding your last point, what you say is factual incorrect. I and players like me are the proof. I currently DO NOT attack for days on end because of war and time, and yet through my collectors and the odd boost session, i still am able to save for upgrades. The removal of TH snipes will absolutely change my ability to do this. My free time to raid will not increase so my base progress will slow and my incentive to continue with the game in the long run will diminish.

---

if you do the odd boost session you're likely going to be fine then. But if you just rely on your collectors, you may find it slightly more difficult than before without the lootless shielding.

I think you missed the overall point of the multiplayer changes. Everything is based on two facts: 1) The game was designed and intended for the player to protect the Townhall and be rewarded a shield to recover 2) Townhalls became irrelevant and the shield system was a mess.

Of course we all want free shields, to lose next to nothing loot, to snipe to champs for gems, to gain tons of loot in high league bonuses for little cost. Who doesn't? That doesn't mean they are "ruining" the game. They are fixing a bad system and closing loopholes to direct the game to it's original design idea.

The gravy train has left. Now we have to learn how to play the game as it were intended. I'm fine with that.

Everyone is focused on the defending side. And yes, you will lose loot. But on the flip side, you can attack without breaking shield. That is a benefit.

They didn't make the change to combat bunnies. The fact that they will have a much harder time now is just a bonus consequence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

there is no real penalty hitting TH one level below you, Attack skill will increase only marginally. Defence building practice will also be minor as anti 3 bases will still be no good in this format. All bases will be anti 2s which as u know are irrelevant below th10 for any war clan worth their salt. It is for these reasons that I will never be interested in the "multiplayer" format, and i will deeply resent being forced to play that part of the game twice or more a day just to retain my loot. Problem is, as you have articulated many times in your videos, the war community's opinions mean very little to SC, who have long since done their sums and concluded that we don't bring in the $$$ and are therefore expendable.

One quick point linked with all this is the new th11. As some may know, a rapidly growing number of war players are choosing to remain as career th9s. Everyone knows why. War at th9 is clash in its most pure and perfect form. I fear that instead of striving to balance th10 in the same way, they are using the new multiplayer system to coerce players to upgrade THs and lay new defence structures just to have a chance of protecting their loot. Truly max th9s wont care much, but i can imagine those with max defences and 15-15 heroes and lego/skull walls will be sweating a bit...

Anyways, I wont jump to too many conclusions about this as we have still heard almost nothing about th11 and potential tweaks to th10. If none materialise, i think its time to accept the beauty of th9 war was a wonderful accident never to be repeated. Personally I do have some small faith that SC will pull something out the bag to fix th10. Heres hoping anyway!

---

th 9 wasnt hard. to call something like that "perfect" just because you fail at doing 3 star attacks as th 10 doesnt make th 9 oh so perfect. becfause im pretty sure the scrubs out there will still not be able to 3 star at th 9... if you dont have the objective of destroying all defences and more of just "get the th and 50%" youd be surprised at the difference that can be made. this freeze will give th 9 the edge of 2 starring weak th 10s with single target infernos (any freeze level is the best at stopping single inferno power beam, and gowipe can naturally tank the multi inferno pretty well) and this seems like a way of being able to still get 3 stars on your opposite number even if hes a town hall 10 and youre 9.

Some great points in the OP. Well said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

how is the update going to "dictate how to attack?"

I used to barch in lower leagues for full collectors and the occassional storage raid (as a fresh TH9). As my farming troops upgraded, I moved over to GiBarch a bit higher up hitting max DE storages as often as possible. What is in the update that is going to make these strategies no longer viable?

Post update people will still barch, bag and bam, and gibarch for cheap/efficient farming. People will also gowipe and mass drag at higher leagues, just as they do now. Unless they nerf the healer (I don't necessarily expect this, but also wouldn't be shocked), you will still see the dreaded superqueen. None of the current farming/pushing army comps are going anywhere, and if anything they're getting easier with the addition of a donated DE spell....

---

'How' in the sense of what aspects of the game they want to focus on (eg war or multiplayer) and how often they do so. I absolutely agree, barch, bam etc will survive post update (as i said in my OP) dead bases and poorly designed bases will always be there for example. My concern is purely my autonomy on how I play the game, which I currently believe will be impinged by this update. I do not want to play the multiplayer aspect of the game more frequently! No matter what changes they make to it, particularly ones masquerading as an attempt to encourage "advanced attacking and defending" when I think it is clear that if this even is a factor, then it is very secondary to the real one.

I agree with the OP 100%. Clash has evolved and attracted loyal customers who like the game as it is, S.cell have made a great rate of return as a consequence. We fit clash into our lifestyle, not the other way round. Certainly, 95% of the clashers in the clans I belong to will be totally bamboozled by the upcoming changes. The developers are concentrating too much on the sophisticated, experienced and skillful set of players at the top. You cannot force change on a community of game players who may feel that the time and money invested in the game so far isn't enough to keep them playing "Supercell's way". I fear for Jonas and his Team's Xmas bonuses this year.

Lol a thread full of closed minded noobs. If you honestly still don't understand the changes, and why the changes are being made u never will understand, and you should quit the game.
I on the other hand plan on pulling out my wallet and happily giving supercell $20 for their hard work and added content. I'm sure plenty of other will spend plenty more than that. And u kno why ppl will spend this? Cuz ppl like u are just plain wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jarvee

th 9 wasnt hard. to call something like that "perfect" just because you fail at doing 3 star attacks as th 10 doesnt make th 9 oh so perfect. becfause im pretty sure the scrubs out there will still not be able to 3 star at th 9... if you dont have the objective of destroying all defences and more of just "get the th and 50%" youd be surprised at the difference that can be made. this freeze will give th 9 the edge of 2 starring weak th 10s with single target infernos (any freeze level is the best at stopping single inferno power beam, and gowipe can naturally tank the multi inferno pretty well) and this seems like a way of being able to still get 3 stars on your opposite number even if hes a town hall 10 and youre 9.

---

Thumbs up! Everyone says TH9 is so pure and perfect for war. The reason being, people like to be able to 3 star in war with a moderate degree of skill. End of story. TH8 requires very little skill to 3 star and it's so common that anything less than a 3 is a failure. People hate the feeling of being expected to 3.

If anything, TH10 is perfect for war because a failed attack, 1 star, 2 star, and 3 star are all realistic possibilities.

Basically:

TH8 3 star = Wide open layup to win the game
TH9 3 star = Making both free throws to win the game
TH10 3 star = Making a deep deep 3 pointer to win the game

Which one would you rather watch?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by troydaboy420

Lol a thread full of closed minded noobs. If you honestly still don't understand the changes, and why the changes are being made u never will understand, and you should quit the game.
I on the other hand plan on pulling out my wallet and happily giving supercell $20 for their hard work and added content. I'm sure plenty of other will spend plenty more than that. And u kno why ppl will spend this? Cuz ppl like u are just plain wrong.

---

Meh... I'm pretty sure the majority of SCs income over the next few months will be because of those people's irrational desire to be the among the first/top players.

They really don't care about rewarding Supercell or supporting a gamr they love. It's all about e-bragging.

I agree with OP. Seems like the changes will be annoying to players whose main focus is clan wars.

Imagine you have very little loot, and a good base defense. Your shield is expired. (No one bothering to attack you because weaker bases, more loot elsewhere) You are in a war. The war is about to end and you are about to attack or observe a critical attack. And the PBT kicks you off of the game. For what?? These moments in the game are the most exciting.

I guess you will have to have a secondary base that gives away your resources for so you can have a shield to avoid this scenario. Tedious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adevati

Thumbs up! Everyone says TH9 is so pure and perfect for war. The reason being, people like to be able to 3 star in war with a moderate degree of skill. End of story. TH8 requires very little skill to 3 star and it's so common that anything less than a 3 is a failure. People hate the feeling of being expected to 3.

If anything, TH10 is perfect for war because a failed attack, 1 star, 2 star, and 3 star are all realistic possibilities.

Basically:

TH8 3 star = Wide open layup to win the game
TH9 3 star = Making both free throws to win the game
TH10 3 star = Making a deep deep 3 pointer to win the game

Which one would you rather watch?

---

Well i bow to your superior skill (however unproven) that you can 3 star any max anti 3 base so easily (although i will concede has become slightly easier since introduction of poison spell) and to the other poster who seems to know my abilities and track record against th10s.

Contrary to what you both attempt to assert, 2 star attacks against max th10s even with a good base design is relatively easy (provided you have the attack to match) whereas 3 staring the same max th10 is near impossible without the use of bunnies to practice. It is my opinion that this why th10 is broken and why the balance of th9 is much closer to perfect in war. If you cannot recognise this then i doubt the verity of your aforementioned war prowess. However, the imbalance of th10 in war is not really the concern of my post.

To long to read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adevati

Meh... I'm pretty sure the majority of SCs income over the next few months will be because of those people's irrational desire to be the among the first/top players.

They really don't care about rewarding Supercell or supporting a gamr they love. It's all about e-bragging.

---

Absolutely. I have no doubt SC will earn a significant, but likely temporary, boost to their coffers resulting from this update. Gems will be bought, bases will be upgraded. But wherever freedoms are reduced in any walk of life, degradation ultimately follows. I think this is a myopic move by SC desperate to do something to counter bots that will reduce the player base in the long run and therefore harm the game.

As I said in my OP, they have much more data to go on and maybe they have done their calculations and I am wrong! In a years time we will probably know the answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mysticwind

To long to read.

---

Too* long to read

Yes I have to agree, for you it probably is. Thanks for the input though :thumbsup:

*cough* Gibarch *cough*

22 mins to train (th9) and will get to cores with ease, and relatively cheap. You can still play as before

The defense part I concur with


all this money stuff and greed blah blah gets old however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

well if you're weren't referencing the PBT and VG, then I have no idea what you mean by "complicated." Attack for loot, defend to protect it.

And on topic, I DO think the OP has some valid concerns, but concerns that won't necessarily come to fruition post-update. I posted about this in several other threads already, but the notion that you're going to take a max-hit every 12 hours (nevermind that if you're taking a max hit you get a 14 or 16 hour shield) is for the most part absurd. Your defense log is going to show plenty of 1-2 storage hits where you get a shield and don't get wiped out, and possibly even some total fails where they get NO storages and you still get a shield (badly funneled gowipes for example, where circling pekkas wipe out all your outside trash and get you to 30% while taking virtually no loot).

The average clasher is pretty BAD at the game. The fact that people think they're going to be 3starred every time their shield rolls off essentially proves Supercell's point in that cheap/free TH-sniped shields has completely spoiled us as a community and warped our sense of reality.

---

When you mention pbt and vg when someone says the word complicated, it is your acknowledgement that it is in fact complicated. You can argue all you want, but the simple fact you equated those two things together just gives merit to the op.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xyz123xyz

When you mention pbt and vg when someone says the word complicated, it is your acknowledgement that it is in fact complicated. You can argue all you want, but the simple fact you equated those two things together just gives merit to the op.

---

The post I was referencing said the new update would be too complicated for CASUAL players.

I'll admit, the PBT and VG concepts could be construed as moderately complicated (and they're not rocket science by any means), but they are not something most CASUAL players are going to encounter pretty much ever. From their perspective the VG is going to be a free 15 minute shield extension (or longer in high leagues) and that's it.

So if the poster I was quoting wasn't referencing the PBT/VG stuff, what "complicated" issues for casuals was he referencing?

The original post:

Quote:

---

From what I've read and seen so far, the game will be far too complicated for the causal player

---

So I was seeking clarification as to what, exactly, the poster thought was particularly complicated about the new update for a casual player.

I don't buy in to the "doomsday predication" stuff, especially when considering most of the people up in arms about it are heavily invested, ravenous players who in my opinion WILL be the ones harmed the most by the update.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NioTheDreamer

The defense part I concur with


all this money stuff and greed blah blah gets old however.

---

Mate I agree, If I had to define a set of opinions I hold, I would say i'm a free market libertarian. I do not begrudge SC or any company the goal of making money, far from it. In fact, to look at it from SC point of view, my argument is that they are risking their long term revenues with what seems to me a short term goal of reducing their perceived losses from farm bots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chadamus

From what I've read and seen so far, the game will be far too complicated for the causal player. And the 'casual player' is a very large portion of their player base.

---

Casual players are a big portion but not a profitable one

Forumer: Casual player on the forums?! What are you wearing "casual player"?
Casual player: Uhh, khakis
Forumer: He sounds like he's going quit because of this update.

Lord but Im tired of hearing about the miracle of th9 war and how absolutely everybody that isn't a th9 sucks. And, ironically, I am a lifetime th9 weight myself, and for the same reason I guess.

But its typically a thought thrown out by people with 30/30 heroes, the bunnies have already established that 20/20 can 3s any th9, and 25s or 30s makes it a bit of a bully attack, but still challenging.

So in essence the incredible "balance" alluded to is the relative ease of 3sing a base due to the hero advantage enjoyed by an extremely small, game-wide, number of players, who have dubbed themselves the "war community".

Playing for high percentage 2s on th10s hasn't yet crossed their minds, and they lose alot of clan wars over this ... in fact... They mock th10 2s as "a monkey can do it", I mean I guess, you drop a couple golem and the bases just 2 star themselves, right? Nobody ever fails. Except... you can see elite clans failing at this on live streams, so I guess it must have to be a pretty high level monkey, like a chimpanzee, not just a simple gorilla.

And of course th8 is not legitimate, because if you drop 4 hogs and a bk th8s automatically 3 star themselves, and we know that every th8 attack is a 3s on the first try, except when elite th8 clans have live attacks shown I guess...

But as long as I have an advantage over other th9s and a reasonably easy go of things, then its "balanced".

Well TH9 just got pretty unbalanced with the extra dark spell... I think supercell heard the "War community" and decided they wanted us to move up to th10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Humbob

Lord but Im tired of hearing about the miracle of th9 war and how absolutely everybody that isn't a th9 sucks. And, ironically, I am a lifetime th9 weight myself, and for the same reason I guess.

But its typically a thought thrown out by people with 30/30 heroes, the bunnies have already established that 20/20 can 3s any th9, and 25s or 30s makes it a bit of a bully attack, but still challenging.

So in essence the incredible "balance" alluded to is the relative ease of 3sing a base due to the hero advantage enjoyed by an extremely small, game-wide, number of players, who have dubbed themselves the "war community".

Playing for high percentage 2s on th10s hasn't yet crossed their minds, and they lose alot of clan wars over this ... in fact... They mock th10 2s as "a monkey can do it", I mean I guess, you drop a couple golem and the bases just 2 star themselves, right? Nobody ever fails. Except... you can see elite clans failing at this on live streams, so I guess it must have to be a pretty high level monkey, like a chimpanzee, not just a simple gorilla.

And of course th8 is not legitimate, because if you drop 4 hogs and a bk th8s automatically 3 star themselves, and we know that every th8 attack is a 3s on the first try, except when elite th8 clans have live attacks shown I guess...

But as long as I have an advantage over other th9s and a reasonably easy go of things, then its "balanced".

Well TH9 just got pretty unbalanced with the extra dark spell... I think supercell heard the "War community" and decided they wanted us to move up to th10.

---

Did someone call O-64? Because you just got Bingo.

Agreed with everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

I've been trying to withhold judgement until the two weeks is up but it seems clear to me the way this is going. I believe in an attempt to kill bot farming, SC are cutting off their nose to spite their face. By attempting to eradicate barch and TH sniping, (the two main staples of bot raids), they are punishing everyone but the trophy pushing player.

I only play this game for war and use the multiplayer facet only for loot to level your base. The "multiplayer" game is irrelevant to me. I farm in high crystal/low masters, when I have a bit of spare time, I use a barrack boost session and hammer out barch raids and snipes. I hate farming and dislike mindless barch, but i do it simply because this is by far the quickest and most effective way of getting paid. Crucially, my TH is outside my base. i choose this method because i don't want to be forced to play the multiplayer part of the game every day, or even every other day. Often i don't do any farm raids for days on end and I like it that way! It is my opt-out from a section of the game i don't enjoy and therefore a big part of the reason I still am interested in playing the game after 2 years. Players being able to snipe my TH is therefore an important meta for protecting my loot, and in effect, they get paid and I keep my loot for the odd upgrade and concentrate on war...everyone is happy. Apart from SC that is, who are perhaps concerned they might be missing out on gems.

Changing the mechanics of the game in this way has imo very little to do with trying to encourage more advanced attacks and defences. If it were purely for this honourable reason SC would simply do the obvious and encourage defences by rewarding each successful defence with a loot bonus, and increase the attacking bonus for a high percentage win. Something i think virtually all players would welcome.

Ultimately you cannot make the multiplayer game like war. You will still not be able to tailor your army to a base and will still only get 30sec to plan. Meaning you will build a generic, cookie cutter attack, just at a greater cost and take much more time doing it. Which should be no more enjoyable to a war enthusiast or farmer than barch is. Because of this, and vitally, because unlike in war, there is no real penalty hitting TH one level below you, Attack skill will increase only marginally. Defence building practice will also be minor as anti 3 bases will still be no good in this format. All bases will be anti 2s which as u know are irrelevant below th10 for any war clan worth their salt. It is for these reasons that I will never be interested in the "multiplayer" format, and i will deeply resent being forced to play that part of the game twice or more a day just to retain my loot. Problem is, as you have articulated many times in your videos, the war community's opinions mean very little to SC, who have long since done their sums and concluded that we don't bring in the $$$ and are therefore expendable.

One quick point linked with all this is the new th11. As some may know, a rapidly growing number of war players are choosing to remain as career th9s. Everyone knows why. War at th9 is clash in its most pure and perfect form. I fear that instead of striving to balance th10 in the same way, they are using the new multiplayer system to coerce players to upgrade THs and lay new defence structures just to have a chance of protecting their loot. Truly max th9s wont care much, but i can imagine those with max defences and 15-15 heroes and lego/skull walls will be sweating a bit...

Anyways, I wont jump to too many conclusions about this as we have still heard almost nothing about th11 and potential tweaks to th10. If none materialise, i think its time to accept the beauty of th9 war was a wonderful accident never to be repeated. Personally I do have some small faith that SC will pull something out the bag to fix th10. Heres hoping anyway!

But whats the bottom line? What will the changes really mean for everyone apart from pushers? The so called "significant loot bonus increase" is a real term decrease for a 50% win, and a meagre 10% increase for 70%! Joke numbers! to me, it doesn't stack up. If u have no life, dont war much or seriously, of course you can make it work. Dead bases will always be there for example, and i will concede more storages will probably be available to raid, but at what cost? It is a big gamble by SC. Forcing people to play the game only one way to me seems like an obvious mistake, and one which I personally will resent. Even if they end up greatly reducing the cook time (and possibly cost) of higher level troops, my gut feeling is that they are underestimating the reasons people play this game and in the variety of different ways that they are currently able to do so.

If I were calling the shots, Id introduce big bonuses for defence wins and increase loot bonus rewards for high percentage wins. Leaving the rest of the game mechanics well alone! It may not have been how the developers originally intended but through luck or judgement it is a system that has made SC a billion dollar company with millions of long term players interested in different aspects of the game. Unlike th10 It aint broke so dont try to fix it! Naturally they are privy to a much greater wealth of data than I or anyone else is, so maybe (despite displaying a worrying lack of confidence and competence in what they are doing by making changes 3 days into the sneak peeks) they have done their calculations correctly. History however, says the track record for popular games restructuring their fundamental mechanics in such ways is not good. Time will tell.

So I guess my question boils down to this: Do you think, for the reasons i have mentioned, that what on the surface appear to be progressive changes promoting "more advanced attacking and defending", will actually in the long run harm CoC by reducing player autonomy regarding how they play the game? I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of any adult and or balanced people that may or may not exist on these forums...

---

I think supercell could fix alot of the problems they have created by giving the league bonus to a defender if they defend. That is a great idea and would actually encourage people to defend their base instead of throwing a sacrificial elixer holder out with a bunch of junk buildings and traps to get a cheaper than would otherwise have been shield.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Humbob

Lord but Im tired of hearing about the miracle of th9 war and how absolutely everybody that isn't a th9 sucks. And, ironically, I am a lifetime th9 weight myself, and for the same reason I guess.

But its typically a thought thrown out by people with 30/30 heroes, the bunnies have already established that 20/20 can 3s any th9, and 25s or 30s makes it a bit of a bully attack, but still challenging.

So in essence the incredible "balance" alluded to is the relative ease of 3sing a base due to the hero advantage enjoyed by an extremely small, game-wide, number of players, who have dubbed themselves the "war community".

Playing for high percentage 2s on th10s hasn't yet crossed their minds, and they lose alot of clan wars over this ... in fact... They mock th10 2s as "a monkey can do it", I mean I guess, you drop a couple golem and the bases just 2 star themselves, right? Nobody ever fails. Except... you can see elite clans failing at this on live streams, so I guess it must have to be a pretty high level monkey, like a chimpanzee, not just a simple gorilla.

And of course th8 is not legitimate, because if you drop 4 hogs and a bk th8s automatically 3 star themselves, and we know that every th8 attack is a 3s on the first try, except when elite th8 clans have live attacks shown I guess...

But as long as I have an advantage over other th9s and a reasonably easy go of things, then its "balanced".

Well TH9 just got pretty unbalanced with the extra dark spell... I think supercell heard the "War community" and decided they wanted us to move up to th10.

---

Good post and i tend to agree, up to a point, with a lot of it. For example, I think the extra dark spell will definitely push the balance for th9 war way too far in the attackers favor. This of course will also have a knock on effect at th10. Although i do not think this essential leveling down by further disrupting th9 balance will be a good thing for the game.

However, Id like to point out again, the balance of th9 and th10 and the arguments on either side, was not the intention of my OP! My war-centric point of view was merely a backdrop for my concern that the update will narrow ways to play the game and the effects this might have on the player base in the long run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

well if you're weren't referencing the PBT and VG, then I have no idea what you mean by "complicated." Attack for loot, defend to protect it.

And on topic, I DO think the OP has some valid concerns, but concerns that won't necessarily come to fruition post-update. I posted about this in several other threads already, but the notion that you're going to take a max-hit every 12 hours (nevermind that if you're taking a max hit you get a 14 or 16 hour shield) is for the most part absurd. Your defense log is going to show plenty of 1-2 storage hits where you get a shield and don't get wiped out, and possibly even some total fails where they get NO storages and you still get a shield (badly funneled gowipes for example, where circling pekkas wipe out all your outside trash and get you to 30% while taking virtually no loot).

The average clasher is pretty BAD at the game. The fact that people think they're going to be 3starred every time their shield rolls off essentially proves Supercell's point in that cheap/free TH-sniped shields has completely spoiled us as a community and warped our sense of reality.

---

I have mostly disagreed with you on most thing, but that's something i completely agree with you on. The free shield has completely spoiled me. All i can think of is how i can keep other people from getting any of my loot. I'd rather throw half of one loot type away than let anyone get my gold or DE. SC should have done this sooner. They put it off because they knew people would be mad and they would need other things in the update to calm people down.

This is the most well written, well thought out response I have read on these forums since the first sneak peek came out. Whether or not you agree with the OP's opinions you shouldn't deny that.

I share the OP's concerns that this new update removes some of the player's options on how to play, and for players that enjoyed that playstyle it alienates and devalues them. It would be akin to a playing card manufacturer removing the suits from cards because they never intended for people to play spades or hearts.

OP: Great post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

how is the update going to "dictate how to attack?"

I used to barch in lower leagues for full collectors and the occassional storage raid (as a fresh TH9). As my farming troops upgraded, I moved over to GiBarch a bit higher up hitting max DE storages as often as possible. What is in the update that is going to make these strategies no longer viable?

Post update people will still barch, bag and bam, and gibarch for cheap/efficient farming. People will also gowipe and mass drag at higher leagues, just as they do now. Unless they nerf the healer (I don't necessarily expect this, but also wouldn't be shocked), you will still see the dreaded superqueen. None of the current farming/pushing army comps are going anywhere, and if anything they're getting easier with the addition of a donated DE spell....

---

The staggered league bonus will encourage may to use a war army to get the 70%. The new wix tower and xtra xbow will push people to use a war type army. People defending their town hall will force people to use a war type style attack to get the league bonus. After th7 Barch has been useless to my accounts anyway, but the changes will make it worse.

Yes the update puts a bit of a leash on the hardcore players, but lets be honest we needed one. The separation between the haves and the have nots in this game has only been growing steadily out of control with each progressive update. I mean you had guys aq/walking plus sniping 70-100K DE per day because they could basically play and unlimited amount of time. They were upgrading heroes like mad and dumping loot into walls which separated themselves from the rest of the pack in a hurry.

PBT was needed, though it probably could be much less contrived and complicated than what they are rolling out. VG was needed at least for certain situations like accidental disconnects and the like, but certainly not as a means to get in another boost session if you're willing to spend the gems. Much of the player base has benefited from sniping, but this is a loophole that should have been closed long ago and probably in a different way, say a 3 or 4 hour shield for a TH snipe and no bonus awarded, make it a real risk/reward with a more severe penalty for surrendering the fight before it begins by handing out a free shield to both parties.

The biggest changes incoming right now for the war player are the potential ease of 3 starring th9s even by total accident. The additional 30 seconds plus the additional de spell donation to the CC all but wraps up even the most robust max th9s with a pretty little bow topped with an easy button. This might push a lot of players to TH10 which consequently they aren't adding that much to at all. Force the players up the ladder to play the near impossible game or stay down in junior varsity and pad your stats by ROFL stomping the competition. The players that get bored will move up, the players that like to bully, bully, bully will stay TH9 fo life yo!

As for the 10s that move up to 11, good luck with that! Even another level on all the dark troops isn't going to help you up there. 3rd hero will likely be negligible too once they add that e.a.g.l.e defense into the mix. But then again it's the endgame and your base should defend whether you've spent 3 years grinding it to max or you've spent $35,000 up front for it. Its supposed to be hard!

Well said OP. Have a thumb on me! :thumbsup:

The complex multi-stage attacks that evolved out of clan wars was a result of having the time to scout bases, assess weaknesses, and attacking the same layout multiple times with different troop comps. It was about making the army and the attack fit the base where cost is no object as opposed to regular matchmaking where a) your looking for the right base to fit your army not the other way around and b) cost is very much a factor in the design of the troop comp. Also, you are effectively doing the same attack over and over because there isn't the opportunity to actually assess a base and make changes.

This update will do a lot of things but encouraging the types of attacks SC was espousing at clashcon is not one of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chadamus

From what I've read and seen so far, the game will be far too complicated for the causal player. And the 'casual player' is a very large portion of their player base.

---

Fairly new on this forum, but started COC playing the moment the game was launched in august 2012.

I stopped for a while, but picked it up a few months ago, and cannot agree more with the concerns

And, most important, wel debated and fundamented opinion, lots of the guys here can learn from that :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

If you're as serious of a war player as you claim, designing a solid defensive base won't be that difficult for you and therefore you're not going to get rolled for 3 stars and all your loot twice a day.

---

Isn't this exactly the problem?

Now you're getting attacked for 0 starts for medium loot 10x a day....

You totally summed up how I have been feeling about this update. I think it will be very hard on my full time war clan, to remain a full time war clan. I started losing faith in supercell when I spent a full day watching the underwhelming clash con. They totally dropped the ball on that. Now it just seems like they are making stuff up on the fly as they roll toward the cliff that is this self imposed two week deadline. It sounds to me like the original developers aren't calling the shots anymore, its the stock holders who are in charge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smashville

The staggered league bonus will encourage may to use a war army to get the 70%. The new wix tower and xtra xbow will push people to use a war type army. People defending their town hall will force people to use a war type style attack to get the league bonus. After th7 Barch has been useless to my accounts anyway, but the changes will make it worse.

---

barch and gibarch aren't going anywhere. I've farmed a max TH9 with those two army comps, I will NOT be converting to "war armies" post update. Why would I? I can already core and empty 2500 DE from fellow TH9s with a cheap gibarch army, would why I stop?

Sure, the new league bonuses may "encourage" folks to move up in league and use bigger armies for bigger one-time loot gains. But it won't "force" anyone to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aifail

Isn't this exactly the problem?

Now you're getting attacked for 0 starts for medium loot 10x a day....

---

If your storages get hit they're also likely to get 30% and you'll get a shield.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeneralMayhem

Yes the update puts a bit of a leash on the hardcore players, but lets be honest we needed one. The separation between the haves and the have nots in this game has only been growing steadily out of control with each progressive update. I mean you had guys aq/walking plus sniping 70-100K DE per day because they could basically play and unlimited amount of time. They were upgrading heroes like mad and dumping loot into walls which separated themselves from the rest of the pack in a hurry.

---

^this entirely.

Quote:

---

PBT was needed, though it probably could be much less contrived and complicated than what they are rolling out.

---

I think the PBT, with the 6off-15on repeated up to 3 times mechanic, etc., is almost entirely designed to upset/break an "automated players" ability to simply restart after a 9 minute break (after 6 hours of play). In my opinion, it's PURPOSEFULLY contrived and complicated to make "automated playing" more difficult.

This is just my opinion of course, time will tell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adevati

I think you missed the overall point of the multiplayer changes. Everything is based on two facts: 1) The game was designed and intended for the player to protect the Townhall and be rewarded a shield to recover 2) Townhalls became irrelevant and the shield system was a mess.

Of course we all want free shields, to lose next to nothing loot, to snipe to champs for gems, to gain tons of loot in high league bonuses for little cost. Who doesn't? That doesn't mean they are "ruining" the game. They are fixing a bad system and closing loopholes to direct the game to it's original design idea.

The gravy train has left. Now we have to learn how to play the game as it were intended. I'm fine with that.

Everyone is focused on the defending side. And yes, you will lose loot. But on the flip side, you can attack without breaking shield. That is a benefit.

They didn't make the change to combat bunnies. The fact that they will have a much harder time now is just a bonus consequence.

---

But why makes changes if virtually everyone is satisfied, including Supercell? Who cares how Supercell intended the game to be played? Players change the game in their favor, it's inevitable. Games like Call of Duty never intended for there to be camping, yet, here it is, and they do nothing to change it. And although people rage, most still buy and play their games.

In the case of free shielding, no one is being hurt. Farmers get free shield, snipers get loot bonus, and Supercell is getting paid. There is no reason to discourage an evolution in the game. Or, give people a way into legit defending through defense bonuses. No need to revamp such a basic system that ​works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

If I were calling the shots, Id introduce big bonuses for defence wins and increase loot bonus rewards for high percentage wins.

---

I like the idea of a defense reward however people would just put their TH out when offering good loot and then put the TH back in when offering nothing. I think a lot of people do this already so I don't think it would change much.

I also play this game for the sole purpose of war. However I am looking forward to the changes as they seem logical to how the game is intended to be played. You'll adjust fine I'm sure.

As a minor note this might help the revenge feature work its way back in to the game in crystal to masters. I don't think it will help at champs+ though.

Agree with almost everything in the original post. I find multiplayer raiding to be boring at best. I play for war. I don't pretend to be that good at it, but I like the strategic element at the clan level, and the tactical planning involved in trying to hit a well designed base. If that didn't exist, I would be gone. And I think that, in the game's current form, town hall nine attacks are the most well balanced, and offer the greatest tactical variety.

(For what its worth, I am a clan co-leader who acts as a general for most wars, and a TH nine with max troops, 75 lavas, and all defenses done except splash, and the last levels of bows. My success rate on TH nines is about 50%, and when I hit TH10s, I get twos about 2/3rds of the time, but I typically only hit tens with single infernos).

The current changes do not make me any more excited to play multi-player. Four changes have made three starring at town hall nine easier: 30 more seconds to attack, a donated DE spell, new TH11 troops in Clan Castle, and now freeze1. With these, and whatever is to come, its clear that SC has altered the balance. My fear is that TH9 will become too easy to three. And at the same time, I haven't seen anything that indicates that TH10 now has a reasonable shot at threes, though twos will undoubtedly be easier.

As a result, my guess is that many more wars are going to get decided by total destruction. And total destruction is really just a question of destruction on TH10s, since the TH9s will all be wiped. It does not strike me as a good development for war, at least based on what we know now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Humbob

Lord but Im tired of hearing about the miracle of th9 war and how absolutely everybody that isn't a th9 sucks. And, ironically, I am a lifetime th9 weight myself, and for the same reason I guess.

But its typically a thought thrown out by people with 30/30 heroes, the bunnies have already established that 20/20 can 3s any th9, and 25s or 30s makes it a bit of a bully attack, but still challenging.

So in essence the incredible "balance" alluded to is the relative ease of 3sing a base due to the hero advantage enjoyed by an extremely small, game-wide, number of players, who have dubbed themselves the "war community".

Playing for high percentage 2s on th10s hasn't yet crossed their minds, and they lose alot of clan wars over this ... in fact... They mock th10 2s as "a monkey can do it", I mean I guess, you drop a couple golem and the bases just 2 star themselves, right? Nobody ever fails. Except... you can see elite clans failing at this on live streams, so I guess it must have to be a pretty high level monkey, like a chimpanzee, not just a simple gorilla.

And of course th8 is not legitimate, because if you drop 4 hogs and a bk th8s automatically 3 star themselves, and we know that every th8 attack is a 3s on the first try, except when elite th8 clans have live attacks shown I guess...

But as long as I have an advantage over other th9s and a reasonably easy go of things, then its "balanced".

Well TH9 just got pretty unbalanced with the extra dark spell... I think supercell heard the "War community" and decided they wanted us to move up to th10.

---

One thing to add only:

I'm sure that it's probably just my clan, but our max troop th10's will choose -- every time -- on the caller to go for a 2 star on a max th10 instead of having to try to 3 star a max th9.

Must be because it's so much harder to pull a 2 on the th10 and they just want the challenge. Either that or..........

Never mind. I'm sure it's just the clans I've been in :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

I've been trying to withhold judgement until the two weeks is up but it seems clear to me the way this is going. I believe in an attempt to kill bot farming, SC are cutting off their nose to spite their face. By attempting to eradicate barch and TH sniping, (the two main staples of bot raids), they are punishing everyone but the trophy pushing player.

I only play this game for war and use the multiplayer facet only for loot to level your base. The "multiplayer" game is irrelevant to me. I farm in high crystal/low masters, when I have a bit of spare time, I use a barrack boost session and hammer out barch raids and snipes. I hate farming and dislike mindless barch, but i do it simply because this is by far the quickest and most effective way of getting paid. Crucially, my TH is outside my base. i choose this method because i don't want to be forced to play the multiplayer part of the game every day, or even every other day. Often i don't do any farm raids for days on end and I like it that way! It is my opt-out from a section of the game i don't enjoy and therefore a big part of the reason I still am interested in playing the game after 2 years. Players being able to snipe my TH is therefore an important meta for protecting my loot, and in effect, they get paid and I keep my loot for the odd upgrade and concentrate on war...everyone is happy. Apart from SC that is, who are perhaps concerned they might be missing out on gems.

Changing the mechanics of the game in this way has imo very little to do with trying to encourage more advanced attacks and defences. If it were purely for this honourable reason SC would simply do the obvious and encourage defences by rewarding each successful defence with a loot bonus, and increase the attacking bonus for a high percentage win. Something i think virtually all players would welcome.

Ultimately you cannot make the multiplayer game like war. You will still not be able to tailor your army to a base and will still only get 30sec to plan. Meaning you will build a generic, cookie cutter attack, just at a greater cost and take much more time doing it. Which should be no more enjoyable to a war enthusiast or farmer than barch is. Because of this, and vitally, because unlike in war, there is no real penalty hitting TH one level below you, Attack skill will increase only marginally. Defence building practice will also be minor as anti 3 bases will still be no good in this format. All bases will be anti 2s which as u know are irrelevant below th10 for any war clan worth their salt. It is for these reasons that I will never be interested in the "multiplayer" format, and i will deeply resent being forced to play that part of the game twice or more a day just to retain my loot. Problem is, as you have articulated many times in your videos, the war community's opinions mean very little to SC, who have long since done their sums and concluded that we don't bring in the $$$ and are therefore expendable.

One quick point linked with all this is the new th11. As some may know, a rapidly growing number of war players are choosing to remain as career th9s. Everyone knows why. War at th9 is clash in its most pure and perfect form. I fear that instead of striving to balance th10 in the same way, they are using the new multiplayer system to coerce players to upgrade THs and lay new defence structures just to have a chance of protecting their loot. Truly max th9s wont care much, but i can imagine those with max defences and 15-15 heroes and lego/skull walls will be sweating a bit...

Anyways, I wont jump to too many conclusions about this as we have still heard almost nothing about th11 and potential tweaks to th10. If none materialise, i think its time to accept the beauty of th9 war was a wonderful accident never to be repeated. Personally I do have some small faith that SC will pull something out the bag to fix th10. Heres hoping anyway!

But whats the bottom line? What will the changes really mean for everyone apart from pushers? The so called "significant loot bonus increase" is a real term decrease for a 50% win, and a meagre 10% increase for 70%! Joke numbers! to me, it doesn't stack up. If u have no life, dont war much or seriously, of course you can make it work. Dead bases will always be there for example, and i will concede more storages will probably be available to raid, but at what cost? It is a big gamble by SC. Forcing people to play the game only one way to me seems like an obvious mistake, and one which I personally will resent. Even if they end up greatly reducing the cook time (and possibly cost) of higher level troops, my gut feeling is that they are underestimating the reasons people play this game and in the variety of different ways that they are currently able to do so.

If I were calling the shots, Id introduce big bonuses for defence wins and increase loot bonus rewards for high percentage wins. Leaving the rest of the game mechanics well alone! It may not have been how the developers originally intended but through luck or judgement it is a system that has made SC a billion dollar company with millions of long term players interested in different aspects of the game. Unlike th10 It aint broke so dont try to fix it! Naturally they are privy to a much greater wealth of data than I or anyone else is, so maybe (despite displaying a worrying lack of confidence and competence in what they are doing by making changes 3 days into the sneak peeks) they have done their calculations correctly. History however, says the track record for popular games restructuring their fundamental mechanics in such ways is not good. Time will tell.

So I guess my question boils down to this: Do you think, for the reasons i have mentioned, that what on the surface appear to be progressive changes promoting "more advanced attacking and defending", will actually in the long run harm CoC by reducing player autonomy regarding how they play the game? I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of any adult and or balanced people that may or may not exist on these forums...

---

My main acct is a max th9 with 30/30 royals. I will not be going th10 after this update for sure. I actually started a mini account a few months ago to have incase I never take my main acct th10.

With this update less and less people will be encouraged to upgrade a high level town hall due to the massive amount of work it take to max the next level. Super Cell will not get any more gems from my main account :)

Make things too difficult and people will stop upgrading/gemming

OP feel free to add to your OP:

"tldr; players who only participate in the war aspect of this game are getting screwed and won't be able to progress as quickly." (You can also add) Please make it so that war bases/attacks are not based on multiplayer progress.

My response:
The war aspect of the game was an after thought. You can't really separate it from the multiplayer game. And therefore, you will not get a solution to your problem. You will argue you had a solution, but then others will argue the solution was not what supercell intended and has issues worth resolving even at the cost of players like you. So I think you need to find another game that focuses on the war aspects you enjoy. I've not ran into such a game but it sounds good, so I hope someone develops it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aitgvet

But why makes changes if virtually everyone is satisfied, including Supercell? Who cares how Supercell intended the game to be played? Players change the game in their favor, it's inevitable. Games like Call of Duty never intended for there to be camping, yet, here it is, and they do nothing to change it. And although people rage, most still buy and play their games.

In the case of free shielding, no one is being hurt. Farmers get free shield, snipers get loot bonus, and Supercell is getting paid. There is no reason to discourage an evolution in the game. Or, give people a way into legit defending through defense bonuses. No need to revamp such a basic system that ​works.

---

Obviously Supercell wasn't satisified that players trivialized the multiplayer system. The change was to add a depth to the game. Easy mode is boring. Players want a challenge whether you believe it or not. A challenge means finally getting that upgrade more meaningful. It also means that the top buyers get more satisfaction by gemming as it's now harder to get there the old fashion way. Go buy a console game, turn on God mode from the first minute, and beat the game in an hour. Then tell me how much enjoyment you actually got out of it.

As for game changing updates, using a console game is a terrible example. They are completely different models. The game developers only care about your initial purchase and future game purchases. Thus, they only spend time to fix obvious bugs/glitches and potentially game breaking concepts.

Now compare this to other popular online games that invented the term 'nerf'. Which basically says decreasing the power of something that trivialized an otherwise difficult task. It's been happening since the 90's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aitgvet

But why makes changes if virtually everyone is satisfied, including Supercell?

---

obviously supercell WASN'T satisfied with it, else they wouldn't be making these changes.

Quote:

---

In the case of free shielding, no one is being hurt. Farmers get free shield, snipers get loot bonus, and Supercell is getting paid. There is no reason to discourage an evolution in the game. Or, give people a way into legit defending through defense bonuses. No need to revamp such a basic system that ​works.

---

I don't think free shielding is in any way victimless. On it's surface it appears to be a symbiotic relationship, but it also harms regular players and casual farmers because it hides all the good loot from them.

I predict that more casual, non-obsessive raiders, will be mostly aided by this update. Others predict complete and total economic collapse and doomsday. The truth will likely be in between, and we're going to have to wait and see which version of the truth pans out...

All I hear is OneHive talking. Multiplayer is the main part of the game it seems so stupid that they would focus on it right? War is just an add on to the game. In saying that war has had plenty and Jonas and the dev team have said they will be focusing on CW tournaments in the future... Now because of all these war complainers I took the time to see whats been added to wars and this is what I got: There has been 10 updates since the addition of war in which eight contained medium to major changes war is fine and Supercell sees the "war community" but this is a change that is long overdue you just need to be patient :)

I agree with a lot that has been said about this topic. I don't like the updates to the shield at all. I am a casual player who works and do most of my playing COC in the evening. I like that I can have a shield while I work to protect my loot, I do attack when I have a shield and don't mind breaking the shield when I can. I will not pay for a shield with gems. I have given this game money in the past like most people have. I won't give them more, just for a shield. I would love if they kept the shield the way it is. To me and this is my thought only, but I think the no shield update will only benefit the serious players, who spend a lot of time playing. For us casual players who play for fun and have a life outside of the game, it will hurt us. I have been in a ton of chats and have read first hand the complaints about the shield and how people will not play anymore or will not spend money on the game. I think this is a bad update and think Supercell should ask the users of the game to weigh in on it. Put up a poll and see what people think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adevati

I think you missed the overall point of the multiplayer changes. Everything is based on two facts: 1) The game was designed and intended for the player to protect the Townhall and be rewarded a shield to recover 2) Townhalls became irrelevant and the shield system was a mess.

Of course we all want free shields, to lose next to nothing loot, to snipe to champs for gems, to gain tons of loot in high league bonuses for little cost. Who doesn't? That doesn't mean they are "ruining" the game. They are fixing a bad system and closing loopholes to direct the game to it's original design idea.

The gravy train has left. Now we have to learn how to play the game as it were intended. I'm fine with that.

Everyone is focused on the defending side. And yes, you will lose loot. But on the flip side, you can attack without breaking shield. That is a benefit.

They didn't make the change to combat bunnies. The fact that they will have a much harder time now is just a bonus consequence.

---

Yes but the old way you could attack and get a free shield if you were not rushed. Now people wont want to attack because they don't want to lose shield time. If they expanded it to a 48 hour shield to start with and let you attack using the new system it would be tolerable.

Wholeheartedly agree with most of your post, OP. The only thing I think I will disagree with is that the changes have little to nothing to do with bot farmers. If anything, those bot farmers spend gems to constantly boost, they arent a threat to Supercell's profits. We can only take a look at the modded war scene to realise that little to no priority is given to attempting to eradicate all forms of bunnying. The reason for these changes is, like you said, a big pay day while taking a huge gamble on the long term future of this game.

There are different types of players, from rushers, to casuals, to war-centric, to farmers, to pushers, hardcore players, the list goes on. All were attracted to the game for some reason or another and all keep playing. They are, imo, punishing groups upon groups of different types of players to try to force them to become the "trophy-pusher". Gems are an obvious reason for the way they are absolutely trying to dictate to the player-base on how to play. Effective pushing at the highest leagues takes money. Massively reduce the influx of free loot from snipes while not replacing it, and hope people will buy more resources outright? Force players to boost more? Keep playing in sessions for fear of losing loot? 3 hour sessions max, if you want more, buy more.

Like I said in another thread, one thing I really really liked about clash is that they never forced anyone to spend to progress or to enjoy the game, they made you WANT to spend money, cause you found playing enjoyable and would like to enhance that enjoyment, no matter your style of play. I hate how this game is changing with this update, especially in the playstyle variety aspect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adevati

Thumbs up! Everyone says TH9 is so pure and perfect for war. The reason being, people like to be able to 3 star in war with a moderate degree of skill. End of story. TH8 requires very little skill to 3 star and it's so common that anything less than a 3 is a failure. People hate the feeling of being expected to 3.

If anything, TH10 is perfect for war because a failed attack, 1 star, 2 star, and 3 star are all realistic possibilities.

Basically:

TH8 3 star = Wide open layup to win the game
TH9 3 star = Making both free throws to win the game
TH10 3 star = Making a deep deep 3 pointer to win the game

Which one would you rather watch?

---

Highly disagree with the bolded part. In Fairplay war - and really the only type of war that should be considered - a three star on a well developed Th10 by a similarly developed Th10 is a very remote possibility and also requires in a lot of cases 30/30+ heroes and quite a bit of luck. Out of all those your list, I would much rather see a solid, well planned and well executed three on a TH9 by a Th9 over the rest.

Town hall 9 is also imho, the current cream of the crop in terms of war. A three star is very possible with enough skill, planning, strategy, a bit of luck and good hero levels. A bad/unlucky attack using a three star strat can get you one or even zero stars quite easily. A safe two is always an option. While at ten, its mostly zero, one and two wit the once in a blue moon three. So far in this update, I've not seen anything to encourage me to upgrade to TH10 in terms of war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aifail

Isn't this exactly the problem?

Now you're getting attacked for 0 starts for medium loot 10x a day....

---

I'm not I attack for 2 stars, and then give up a 1 star attack for zero loot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adevati

Obviously Supercell wasn't satisified that players trivialized the multiplayer system. The change was to add a depth to the game. Easy mode is boring. Players want a challenge whether you believe it or not. A challenge means finally getting that upgrade more meaningful. It also means that the top buyers get more satisfaction by gemming as it's now harder to get there the old fashion way. Go buy a console game, turn on God mode from the first minute, and beat the game in an hour. Then tell me how much enjoyment you actually got out of it.

As for game changing updates, using a console game is a terrible example. They are completely different models. The game developers only care about your initial purchase and future game purchases. Thus, they only spend time to fix obvious bugs/glitches and potentially game breaking concepts.

Now compare this to other popular online games that invented the term 'nerf'. Which basically says decreasing the power of something that trivialized an otherwise difficult task. It's been happening since the 90's.

---

People who wanted to challenge could still do so. There are plenty of challenging bases on multi at any given time. You can also find plenty of challenges in war. What these players (aka you) didn't want was a challenge what you really wanted to do was to slow down the game for others and for them to play the same slow inefficient way you do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newupdateblowsdoublyhard

People who wanted to challenge could still do so. There are plenty of challenging bases on multi at any given time.

---

to some extent, this was false, because people like you were snipe shielding tons of good bases 24/7. Of course, you shielded some bad ones too, but those bases may have been juicy in a couple of hours if no one logged on to clear the drills...

Quote:

---

You can also find plenty of challenges in war. What these players (aka you) didn't want was a challenge what you really wanted to do was to slow down the game for others and for them to play the same slow inefficient way you do.

---

You're barking up the wrong tree. Adevati didn't want to slow your progress down, SUPERCELL DID! There is a world of difference between a "random poster on the internet" and the GAME DEVELOPER!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

obviously supercell WASN'T satisfied with it, else they wouldn't be making these changes.



I don't think free shielding is in any way victimless. On it's surface it appears to be a symbiotic relationship, but it also harms regular players and casual farmers because it hides all the good loot from them.

I predict that more casual, non-obsessive raiders, will be mostly aided by this update. Others predict complete and total economic collapse and doomsday. The truth will likely be in between, and we're going to have to wait and see which version of the truth pans out...

---

No it exposes casual farmers and regular players loot to be consumed by trophy pushers. This will hurt people who care about trophies because now everyone will be forced to defend them. The symbiotic deal was you leave my loot alone and you can have these trophies and some free loot that costs us both nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smashville

No it exposes casual farmers and regular players loot to be consumed by trophy pushers. This will hurt people who care about trophies because now everyone will be forced to defend them. The symbiotic deal was you leave my loot alone and you can have these trophies and some free loot that costs us both nothing.

---

I agree with this 100%. But like a few have said, lets wait until the update and see what happens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gw2kpro

One thing to add only:

I'm sure that it's probably just my clan, but our max troop th10's will choose -- every time -- on the caller to go for a 2 star on a max th10 instead of having to try to 3 star a max th9.

Must be because it's so much harder to pull a 2 on the th10 and they just want the challenge. Either that or..........

Never mind. I'm sure it's just the clans I've been in :)

---

As a maxed town hall 10 myself, it is indeed harder to 3 star a maxed 9 than to 2 star a maxed 10. One little mistake on the maxed 9 and it's easy to not get a 3 star.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smashville

No it exposes casual farmers and regular players loot to be consumed by trophy pushers. This will hurt people who care about trophies because now everyone will be forced to defend them.

---

Casual farmers and regulars players loot was already available to be consumed by others, and it is consumed quite frequently. When I'm maxed on loot and offer roughly 300k/300k/2500DE (cause I'm farming Lava's and 20+ heroes), people DO in fact attempt to hit me even with an exposed TH. But I can find countless instances in my defense log when I was offering max loot across the board, and a lowly TH8 sniped me for the cups and 100 DE (I'm usually farming in gold1/c3). Sure, that's good for ME, but is it good for the economy?

And it very well may hurt people who care about trophies and will now be forced to defend them. I think that's entirely intended in fact, or do you think TH3's belonged in Champs/Titans?

Quote:

---

The symbiotic deal was you leave my loot alone and you can have these trophies and some free loot that costs us both nothing.

---

true, it costs the two individuals involved nothing, but at the cost of denying loot opportunities to every other player in the game.

The people this update is going to truly hurt are the people squarely in supercell's crosshairs, that is TH-snipers and league bonus farmers. Post-update they will be entirely unable to magically generate massive amounts of free loot for themselves, and mostly ONLY for themselves (because they promptly hide behind their free shield in-turn). Note, I've done this, TH-sniped for easy loot in higher leagues, so I'm not in favor of this update because it screws you and other people who "don't want to play like me". I'm more than willing to take what will likely be a small hit in my own progression if it brings about positive change for the game as a whole. I Gibarch now in lower leagues for storages because, for me, TH-sniping was a soul-crushing crutch, and many of those up in arms may find themselves actually enjoying hitting real bases again more often than just "in between snipes while my army is cookin'." Other may totally lament the loss of their gravy train, that's their prerogative....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeneralMayhem

Yes the update puts a bit of a leash on the hardcore players, but lets be honest we needed one. The separation between the haves and the have nots in this game has only been growing steadily out of control with each progressive update. I mean you had guys aq/walking plus sniping 70-100K DE per day because they could basically play and unlimited amount of time. They were upgrading heroes like mad and dumping loot into walls which separated themselves from the rest of the pack in a hurry.

---

Why should there be a problem with being a hardcore player? Those players EARNED their "haves" through massive amounts of time and dedication to the game. They EARNED those high level Heroes and shiny walls. Just because you are unable or unwilling to do the same does not mean that should apply to everyone else. Hating them for having it? Besides, in every game that has set goals and timesinks and grinds, there will be haves and have nots. What would be the point of the game otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SolarIce

Why should there be a problem with being a hardcore player? Those players EARNED their "haves" through massive amounts of time and dedication to the game. They EARNED those high level Heroes and shiny walls. Just because you are unable or unwilling to do the same does not mean that should apply to everyone else. Hating them for having it?

---

Yep, the new American way. Hate on the next guy who has what you don't have, it just not FAIR!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SolarIce

Wholeheartedly agree with most of your post, OP. The only thing I think I will disagree with is that the changes have little to nothing to do with bot farmers. If anything, those bot farmers spend gems to constantly boost, they arent a threat to Supercell's profits. We can only take a look at the modded war scene to realise that little to no priority is given to attempting to eradicate all forms of bunnying. The reason for these changes is, like you said, a big pay day while taking a huge gamble on the long term future of this game.

There are different types of players, from rushers, to casuals, to war-centric, to farmers, to pushers, hardcore players, the list goes on. All were attracted to the game for some reason or another and all keep playing. They are, imo, punishing groups upon groups of different types of players to try to force them to become the "trophy-pusher". Gems are an obvious reason for the way they are absolutely trying to dictate to the player-base on how to play. Effective pushing at the highest leagues takes money. Massively reduce the influx of free loot from snipes while not replacing it, and hope people will buy more resources outright? Force players to boost more? Keep playing in sessions for fear of losing loot? 3 hour sessions max, if you want more, buy more.

Like I said in another thread, one thing I really really liked about clash is that they never forced anyone to spend to progress or to enjoy the game, they made you WANT to spend money, cause you found playing enjoyable and would like to enhance that enjoyment, no matter your style of play. I hate how this game is changing with this update, especially in the playstyle variety aspect.



Highly disagree with the bolded part. In Fairplay war - and really the only type of war that should be considered - a three star on a well developed Th10 by a similarly developed Th10 is a very remote possibility and also requires in a lot of cases 30/30+ heroes and quite a bit of luck. Out of all those your list, I would much rather see a solid, well planned and well executed three on a TH9 by a Th9 over the rest.

Town hall 9 is also imho, the current cream of the crop in terms of war. A three star is very possible with enough skill, planning, strategy, a bit of luck and good hero levels. A bad/unlucky attack using a three star strat can get you one or even zero stars quite easily. A safe two is always an option. While at ten, its mostly zero, one and two wit the once in a blue moon three. So far in this update, I've not seen anything to encourage me to upgrade to TH10 in terms of war.

---

Ok, but 30/30 heroes are TH9 level heroes. I don't see that as being a reason to say something is unbalanced. I think overall your thinking is correct, it isn't terribly balanced (at least offensively in terms of stratification of stars)...but I see a lot of the arguments on these forums around the idea that you need high level heroes to begin to think about 3 starring TH10s, that's exactly how it should be.

The flip side to the balance discussion though isn't just around attacking. TH10 is quite balanced defensively from a war perspective. Layout and strategy is crucial. Having an anti-2 layout opens you up to 3 stars, but can prevent some 2 star attacks. Anti 3 is an easy 2 but harder to 3 star. This is in opposition to TH9 and lower where any layout can pretty effectively be 3 starred. I think TH10 involves quite a bit more strategy in war overall when the offense and defense are both weighed. TH9 is fairly easy...go for 3*, try to defend against 3*. TH10 requires a decision...am I going to try to prevent 2 and open myself up to 3, or prevent 3 and give an easy 2. Then the same decision persists on the offensive side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

Problem is, as you have articulated many times in your videos, the war community's opinions mean very little to SC, who have long since done their sums and concluded that we don't bring in the $$$ and are therefore expendable.

---

Where do you get this from ??

The rumours are that we don't have upgrading heroes in war yet, is because it generates lots and lots of $.

So about that us being expendable, well, I'd reconsider the choice of words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

true, it costs the two individuals involved nothing, but at the cost of denying loot opportunities to every other player in the game.....

---

I see this argument again and again and I still don't understand it.

If said sniper taken the loot instead ( or as well as the th) then the base would be under at least 12hr shield anyway. What's the difference he only sniped and settled for the ( much less I suppose) free loot instead?

That free loot then adds to the players kitty when he goes offline, for someone else to peruse the fat offerings and chose to either go for it or snipe that the in the corner.

So that argument of ' denying someone else the opportunity' just doesn't make sense to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fette

I see this argument again and again and I still don't understand it.

If said sniper taken the loot instead ( or as well as the th) then the base would be under at least 12hr shield anyway. What's the difference he only sniped and settled for the ( much less I suppose) free loot instead?

That free loot then adds to the players kitty when he goes offline, for someone else to peruse the fat offerings and chose to either go for it or snipe that the in the corner.

So that argument of ' denying someone else the opportunity' just doesn't make sense to me.

---

cause you can't legitimately hit 10-15 real bases per HOUR like you can with snipes. You chomp through bases an order of magnitude faster sniping than you do with real armies and real attacks, even gibarch and bam.

So sure, the ONE base you hit gets hidden. But the 9 more you can't snipe while your next army cooks are not...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

cause you can't legitimately hit 10-15 real bases per HOUR like you can with snipes. You chomp through bases an order of magnitude faster sniping than you do with real armies and real attacks, even gibarch and bam.

So sure, the ONE base you hit gets hidden. But the 9 more you can't snipe while your next army cooks are not...

---

If you gibarch on boost, you are ready to rock and roll the minute you get back to camp. ....just saying:smirk:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JtB

As a maxed town hall 10 myself, it is indeed harder to 3 star a maxed 9 than to 2 star a maxed 10. One little mistake on the maxed 9 and it's easy to not get a 3 star.

---

Thank you. I have a lot of respect for the good TH10 attackers. Requires a lot of planning, no you can't just spam troops and pull a 2. But I took exception earlier when some other posters -- who didn't know what they were talking about -- started popping off about ease of three starring th9's vs. pulling 2's on th10's.

Best thread I've ever read on these forums, kudos OP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SolarIce

Why should there be a problem with being a hardcore player? Those players EARNED their "haves" through massive amounts of time and dedication to the game. They EARNED those high level Heroes and shiny walls. Just because you are unable or unwilling to do the same does not mean that should apply to everyone else. Hating them for having it? Besides, in every game that has set goals and timesinks and grinds, there will be haves and have nots. What would be the point of the game otherwise.

---

Also how is this update supposed to change things and bridge the gap. It makes it worse for casuals. Instead of having a cheap shield they have an expensive one this will widen the gap not shorten it.

A whole lot of misinformation and just flat out lying is happening regarding this update. Also most of us snipers already have high level royals and max or close to max DE troops. Having us do war attacks instead of giving cheap shields? How is that going to be helpful to anyone except us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hoopstime98

Ok, but 30/30 heroes are TH9 level heroes. I don't see that as being a reason to say something is unbalanced. I think overall your thinking is correct, it isn't terribly balanced (at least offensively in terms of stratification of stars)...but I see a lot of the arguments on these forums around the idea that you need high level heroes to begin to think about 3 starring TH10s, that's exactly how it should be.

The flip side to the balance discussion though isn't just around attacking. TH10 is quite balanced defensively from a war perspective. Layout and strategy is crucial. Having an anti-2 layout opens you up to 3 stars, but can prevent some 2 star attacks. Anti 3 is an easy 2 but harder to 3 star. This is in opposition to TH9 and lower where any layout can pretty effectively be 3 starred. I think TH10 involves quite a bit more strategy in war overall when the offense and defense are both weighed. TH9 is fairly easy...go for 3*, try to defend against 3*. TH10 requires a decision...am I going to try to prevent 2 and open myself up to 3, or prevent 3 and give an easy 2. Then the same decision persists on the offensive side.

---

I agree, nothing wrong with high heroes being needed for TH10 threes. The problem is that even with 40/40 there are lots of fails, lots of two stars (and below), and that is using solid attacks with the current three star strats like Queen Walk/X. I'm definitely not saying that there is little strategy to Th10 warring, far from it - but its different to Nine. I'm not saying it should be easy, but I think it should at least be consistently possible with good planning and execution and without the use of outside help. The problem imo, is that Ten is skewed towards defense, rather than offense. Would it be accurate to say that a three star attempt on an anti-two layout often results in three not being achieved? Nine has that balance right now (though after the update with the extra 30 seconds, it should be quite a bit easier to three, especially if you have 25/25+). Those extra seconds at ten should help as well though, with well executed hits that run out of time to clean up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newupdateblowsdoublyhard

Also how is this update supposed to change things and bridge the gap. It makes it worse for casuals. Instead of having a cheap shield they have an expensive one this will widen the gap not shorten it.

A whole lot of misinformation and just flat out lying is happening regarding this update. Also most of us snipers already have high level royals and max or close to max DE troops. Having us do war attacks instead of giving cheap shields? How is that going to be helpful to anyone except us.

---

Agreed mostly. Casuals are in for a hell of a ride once they release this update, I don't think its gonna be pretty. Not sure about the "most snipers having high royals and close to max troops", sniping was for everyone. Everyone benefited from it, they could base their play time around it, keep loot safe, play in flexible and diverse styles and most importantly, they generated a LOT of free loot that didn't come from transferring from the storage from one player to another. It's gone now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

well if you're weren't referencing the PBT and VG, then I have no idea what you mean by "complicated." Attack for loot, defend to protect it.

And on topic, I DO think the OP has some valid concerns, but concerns that won't necessarily come to fruition post-update. I posted about this in several other threads already, but the notion that you're going to take a max-hit every 12 hours (nevermind that if you're taking a max hit you get a 14 or 16 hour shield) is for the most part absurd. Your defense log is going to show plenty of 1-2 storage hits where you get a shield and don't get wiped out, and possibly even some total fails where they get NO storages and you still get a shield (badly funneled gowipes for example, where circling pekkas wipe out all your outside trash and get you to 30% while taking virtually no loot).

The average clasher is pretty BAD at the game. The fact that people think they're going to be 3starred every time their shield rolls off essentially proves Supercell's point in that cheap/free TH-sniped shields has completely spoiled us as a community and warped our sense of reality.

---

Couldn't agree more.... well said :thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SolarIce

Wholeheartedly agree with most of your post, OP. The only thing I think I will disagree with is that the changes have little to nothing to do with bot farmers. If anything, those bot farmers spend gems to constantly boost, they arent a threat to Supercell's profits. We can only take a look at the modded war scene to realise that little to no priority is given to attempting to eradicate all forms of bunnying. The reason for these changes is, like you said, a big pay day while taking a huge gamble on the long term future of this game.

There are different types of players, from rushers, to casuals, to war-centric, to farmers, to pushers, hardcore players, the list goes on. All were attracted to the game for some reason or another and all keep playing. They are, imo, punishing groups upon groups of different types of players to try to force them to become the "trophy-pusher". Gems are an obvious reason for the way they are absolutely trying to dictate to the player-base on how to play. Effective pushing at the highest leagues takes money. Massively reduce the influx of free loot from snipes while not replacing it, and hope people will buy more resources outright? Force players to boost more? Keep playing in sessions for fear of losing loot? 3 hour sessions max, if you want more, buy more.

Like I said in another thread, one thing I really really liked about clash is that they never forced anyone to spend to progress or to enjoy the game, they made you WANT to spend money, cause you found playing enjoyable and would like to enhance that enjoyment, no matter your style of play. I hate how this game is changing with this update, especially in the playstyle variety aspect.

---

We definitely sound like we are singing from the same hymn sheet. But whilst I wouldn't disagree that SC have an interest in getting people to spend more gems, (and i said earlier i don't necessarily begrudge them trying to do that) I do think that they believe bots are cutting into their profits. At the very least, they don't like that unaffiliated companies are making money off of their product. Fair enough! One might say, and indeed it is! If I were them I'd also be trying to mitigate their pervasiveness in the game. But as I said in my OP it seems like with this attempt at a solution they are cutting their nose off to spite their face.

The reason I am so convinced is that the multiplayer game changes are due to this fear is that the game has grown to its present day status with the current system in place since day one. Why would you change it now? Ive never heard anyone seriously suggesting when they farm they cant get enough loot because there isn't enough storages to raid for example. Or indeed complain that they cant do "advanced attacks or defences" should they want to. I think it is no coincidence that this game change is coming about at a time where bot use has increased dramatically over the past year.

I would also disagree with you and say that SC HAVE attempted to reduce bunnies in war, (the April update being their most significant attempt at doing so), and i expect more attempts in the future. However, there maybe fundamental physical limits on what can be done to stop reverse engineering and modifying of the game code. Botting is fundamentally different to mods, and the distinction between them is important. Firstly, bots do not modify the game program in anyway, it is merely like owning a mechanical slave who farms on your account 24/7 (albeit in a pretty basic manner) virtually eliminating a player's need to boost or gem resources (although as you mention many still do). Mods on the other hand, give you a distinct and unfair advantage by giving extra game features/modes unavailable to other players but does not have any real impact on a players potential gem spending.

It is because of this that, from SC point of view, that mods do arguably less damage to their revenue streams than bots do. Interestingly, I think you could argue that the reverse is true from the player perspective in the sense that mods used in war affect the fair players game experience more than bots will ever do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gw2kpro

Thank you. I have a lot of respect for the good TH10 attackers. Requires a lot of planning, no you can't just spam troops and pull a 2. But I took exception earlier when some other posters -- who didn't know what they were talking about -- started popping off about ease of three starring th9's vs. pulling 2's on th10's.

---

My experience, it is infinitely easier to 3 star a max TH9 than 2 star a Max TH10 (as a TH10). I'll occasionally get stupid and screw up a TH10 attack and only 1 star (almost always because I get finicky with the AQ and let her wander away from the TH). I can't remember the last time I failed to 3 star a Max TH9 either with my TH10 account. It's probably been 100 attacks on my TH10 against a TH9 since I blew one. I fail to 2 star a max TH10 at least every 20 or so (assuming I'm trying for 2, I fail to get 2 stars far more often if I'm trying risky 3* strats against a 10).

There's just not enough firepower at TH9 to stop a big tank attack with heroes in behind.

OP you raise some good points. I basically lead war in my level 6 clan but after I saw the sneak peeks so far, I immediately suspended war (we would war constant before). My rationale is simple for me, I simply cannot afford to net lose on dark elixir. I would go all out in war, donate cc troops, donate troops (golems, lavas, hogs) for both attacks, and attack with hogowiwi or goho. Even if we win I would lose on DE and break even on elixir. If life is status quo, sniping in champs 1 for DE bonus helped fuel war for me. Now I'm enjoying the few days playing the way I like playing to get my heroes to 20 before DE becomes a bigger grind.

Hopefully war will become more profitable in terms of DE but I suspect it won't change. I'm happy that our clan is level 6 and will likely stay there a long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chadamus

Who said anything about PBT? Which yes, is stupidly complicated, but that wasn't mentioned in my post. Keep responses on topic. The OP has a well written thought and I agree with the concerns.

---

The PBT is part of the changes, so therefore is very relevant and 100% on topic. It is a very important part that certainly will affect war. If you don't think so now, wait until someone gets kicked just before a last minute war attack, or guys need to request troops over and over because they have been attacked and lost their CC troops. "Can I get another max PEKKA? Someone attacked me and killed the last one".

Yep, no problem, it's 10 mins until war ends...let me just gem one for you.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hoopstime98

My experience, it is infinitely easier to 3 star a max TH9 than 2 star a Max TH10 (as a TH10). I'll occasionally get stupid and screw up a TH10 attack and only 1 star (almost always because I get finicky with the AQ and let her wander away from the TH). I can't remember the last time I failed to 3 star a Max TH9 either with my TH10 account. It's probably been 100 attacks on my TH10 against a TH9 since I blew one. I fail to 2 star a max TH10 at least every 20 or so (assuming I'm trying for 2, I fail to get 2 stars far more often if I'm trying risky 3* strats against a 10).

There's just not enough firepower at TH9 to stop a big tank attack with heroes in behind.

---

What is the point of this post? No one is going to admit to that they can't 3 star a TH level below them If they do, they are just going to be laughed at. A TH9 3 starring a TH8 is also infinitely easier than 3 starring a TH9... This proves nothing but the obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SolarIce

I agree, nothing wrong with high heroes being needed for TH10 threes. The problem is that even with 40/40 there are lots of fails, lots of two stars (and below), and that is using solid attacks with the current three star strats like Queen Walk/X. I'm definitely not saying that there is little strategy to Th10 warring, far from it - but its different to Nine. I'm not saying it should be easy, but I think it should at least be consistently possible with good planning and execution and without the use of outside help. The problem imo, is that Ten is skewed towards defense, rather than offense. Would it be accurate to say that a three star attempt on an anti-two layout often results in three not being achieved? Nine has that balance right now (though after the update with the extra 30 seconds, it should be quite a bit easier to three, especially if you have 25/25+). Those extra seconds at ten should help as well though, with well executed hits that run out of time to clean up.

---

I agree, just pointing out that "balance" tends to be almost purely predicated on an expectation of 3 stars for reasonable attacks. Attacking is only half the game (the more fun half I think to most, which is why there's the emphasis on that). What that leads to though, is a complete IMBALANCE on the defensive side. TH9 has basically no "defensive balance". There's one strategy and it mostly fails. TH9 is imbalanced just as TH10 is, it's just a switch of the offensive and defensive sides. I get that most view it through the lens of offense because it's more fun and allows more player control.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iCyclic

What is the point of this post? No one is going to admit to that they can't 3 star a TH level below them If they do, they are just going to be laughed at. A TH9 3 starring a TH8 is also infinitely easier than 3 starring a TH9... This proves nothing but the obvious.

---

Is it obvious? Because there's another post which was in my quote which said just the opposite actually. Your comparison is flawed, we aren't discussing 3 starring your own level vs 3 starring a level below, it's 2 starring yours or 3 starring below.

The point I was responding to was the idea that it was easier to 2 star a TH10 than 3 star a TH9. I disagreed. That's the point of the post.

I'm a farmer. I don't barch. I'm a storage raider, and I'll take those collectors too. I've got max defenses, heros, and walls. I'm sitting here in Champs just chilling with a TH inside base with TONS of loot.

You can't 3 star my base, but I'm hit heavily for 1 star by 3 to 4 max Golem armies with max heros by players who know what they're doing.

They don't take ALL my loot, but they take 200K to 300K + costs of arming traps. It's expensive.

I can still hit hard, but I'm ALSO HIT hard too and more often. So basically 2 steps forward, 1 step back = 1 step forward. Before it was 2 steps forward 0 steps back. Essentially my progress in the farming game will be cut by 50%.

I think they want to pro-long the time it takes to max everything out. This update will definitely do just that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

Mate I agree, If I had to define a set of opinions I hold, I would say i'm a free market libertarian. I do not begrudge SC or any company the goal of making money, far from it. In fact, to look at it from SC point of view, my argument is that they are risking their long term revenues with what seems to me a short term goal of reducing their perceived losses from farm bots.

---

Then I apologize, did not realize that was your point

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hoopstime98

Is it obvious? Because there's another post which was in my quote which said just the opposite actually. Your comparison is flawed, we aren't discussing 3 starring your own level vs 3 starring a level below, it's 2 starring yours or 3 starring below.

The point I was responding to was the idea that it was easier to 2 star a TH10 than 3 star a TH9. I disagreed. That's the point of the post.

---

If someone claims it's easier to 2 star a well developed TH10 as a TH9 than it is to 3 star a TH9 then they are flawed. If someone goes and respond with the obvious fact that their TH10 can roll a TH9 as an objection to the previous claim, they are horribly flawed.

What I'm getting at is, if a maxed TH10 can't 3 star a maxed TH9 and think it's harder than 2 starring a maxed TH10 then maybe they shouldn't have gemmed to max and instead learn the game. No need to bring up obvious facts of the game to argue with such nonsense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SolarIce

Agreed mostly. Casuals are in for a hell of a ride once they release this update, I don't think its gonna be pretty. Not sure about the "most snipers having high royals and close to max troops", sniping was for everyone. Everyone benefited from it, they could base their play time around it, keep loot safe, play in flexible and diverse styles and most importantly, they generated a LOT of free loot that didn't come from transferring from the storage from one player to another. It's gone now.

---

I'm just basing that on my personal experience. I could farm much more raw loot using other strategies with live bases and collector farming but couldn't get near as much DE.

Probably, shouldn't have applied my personal experience to COC on the whole. I do agree that most people didn't pass up snipes but have seen a ton of people with both royals upgrading in my league.

Before I was th sniping and dead base farming. Now? It's live base th9 and dead base farming. I suspect many th10 in the high leagues looking for DE will revise their strategy similarly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nerfedname

The people this update is going to truly hurt are the people squarely in supercell's crosshairs, that is TH-snipers and league bonus farmers. Post-update they will be entirely unable to magically generate massive amounts of free loot for themselves, and mostly ONLY for themselves (because they promptly hide behind their free shield in-turn). Note, I've done this, TH-sniped for easy loot in higher leagues, so I'm not in favor of this update because it screws you and other people who "don't want to play like me". I'm more than willing to take what will likely be a small hit in my own progression if it brings about positive change for the game as a whole. I Gibarch now in lower leagues for storages because, for me, TH-sniping was a soul-crushing crutch, and many of those up in arms may find themselves actually enjoying hitting real bases again more often than just "in between snipes while my army is cookin'." Other may totally lament the loss of their gravy train, that's their prerogative....

---

So if I spend 2 hours a night sniping townhalls so I can generate enough risk free loot to progress my base and troops enough to participate in clan wars the way I want to I'm the enemy TH sniper. But if you spend 2 hours a night cooking GiBarch armies and raiding bases to progress your base/trophy push you are somehow the good guy playing the game the way it was meant to be played. Why exactly do you believe your time to be more important than mine?

I hit enough 'real' bases in war. And if someone deludes themselves into believing the process of spamming giant-wallbreaker-heal-barb-archer over and over ad nauseum is 'real' attacking then that is their prerogative too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dkaoboy

I'm a farmer. I don't barch. I'm a storage raider, and I'll take those collectors too. I've got max defenses, heros, and walls. I'm sitting here in Champs just chilling with a TH inside base with TONS of loot.

You can't 3 star my base, but I'm hit heavily for 1 star by 3 to 4 max Golem armies with max heros by players who know what they're doing.

They don't take ALL my loot, but they take 200K to 300K + costs of arming traps. It's expensive.

I can still hit hard, but I'm ALSO HIT hard too and more often. So basically 2 steps forward, 1 step back = 1 step forward. Before it was 2 steps forward 0 steps back. Essentially my progress in the farming game will be cut by 50%.

I think they want to pro-long the time it takes to max everything out. This update will definitely do just that.

---

You are totally right!

Right now as a casual player I can raid once a day and still move forward, although slowly. The weekend comes and I may do a bunch more. So I get to keep my collector loot and keep what I raid.

After the update, I won't get extra time to raid, so I will still raid once a day, but now I will be raided 3 times or more. I expect I will be going backwards with loot and probably never upgrade anything again. If that happens, it will be the end of the game for many people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iCyclic

If someone claims it's easier to 2 star a well developed TH10 as a TH9 than it is to 3 star a TH9 then they are flawed. If someone goes and respond with the obvious fact that their TH10 can roll a TH9 as an objection to the previous claim, they are horribly flawed.

What I'm getting at is, if a maxed TH10 can't 3 star a maxed TH9 and think it's harder than 2 starring a maxed TH10 then maybe they shouldn't have gemmed to max and instead learn the game. No need to bring up obvious facts of the game to argue with such nonsense.

---

You're right, rather than point out that my experience is different than someone else, I should just dismiss their opinion altogether without any hard data or anecdotal proof.

Clearly you're just trolling, since you're responding to it all, just to say that nobody should bother responding.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SicksEyeUrn

So if I spend 2 hours a night sniping townhalls so I can generate enough risk free loot to progress my base and troops enough to participate in clan wars the way I want to I'm the enemy TH sniper. But if you spend 2 hours a night cooking GiBarch armies and raiding bases to progress your base/trophy push you are somehow the good guy playing the game the way it was meant to be played. Why exactly do you believe your time to be more important than mine?

I hit enough 'real' bases in war. And if someone deludes themselves into believing the process of spamming giant-wallbreaker-heal-barb-archer over and over ad nauseum is 'real' attacking then that is their prerogative too.

---

Because there's a huge difference between actually attacking and just clicking a "give me loot" button over and over again. Time isn't the differentiating factor though. There's skilled attacking, there's easily reproducible attacking, and there's non-attacking. Sniping falls squarely into the final, gibarch primarily into the middle...though that's primarily what farming attacks should be. You have to go least-common-denominator at some point since you can't pre-plan bases that aren't revenges.

In regards to "playing the game it was meant to be played"...ummm yeah. Supercell is the one who decides how the game was meant to be played, and they've pretty much said they're squarely behind those who don't TH snipe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BolshoiToo

The current changes do not make me any more excited to play multi-player. Four changes have made three starring at town hall nine easier: 30 more seconds to attack, a donated DE spell, new TH11 troops in Clan Castle, and now freeze1. With these, and whatever is to come, its clear that SC has altered the balance. My fear is that TH9 will become too easy to three. And at the same time, I haven't seen anything that indicates that TH10 now has a reasonable shot at threes, though twos will undoubtedly be easier.

---

Call me a conspiracy theorist but I think we are seeing the beginning of the end of clan wars:

• Farmers/War Enthusiasts can be lumped into the same category when it comes to the multiplayer game and their multiplayer strategies so hitting farmers affects war ethusiasts hard as well.
• Th9 buffs (noted above) are going to make war boring as more and more players will be able to 3 star th9s
• no buff or balance coming to th10 (so far) to encourage current max th9 war enthusiasts to upgrade to th10, (being able to 2 star a th10 just isn't satisfying, being able to increase damage from 55% to 75% on an average th10 attack is equally unsatisfying)
• Jonas' comments that arranged war matchups are 'too hard' to program into the game, but hinting that shorter, smaller group matchups (similar to Clashcon and other 'tournaments' SC has run) is possible.

COC becomes more of a blunt instrument game than the strategy game we have come to know and love. The name of the game suggested that Clan Wars was the expected end game but I think that SC is rethinking that as the CW timeframe doesn't play well with streaming audiences.

RIP Clan Wars:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NoesisBiffBangPow

I've been trying to withhold judgement until the two weeks is up but it seems clear to me the way this is going. I believe in an attempt to kill bot farming, SC are cutting off their nose to spite their face. By attempting to eradicate barch and TH sniping, (the two main staples of bot raids), they are punishing everyone but the trophy pushing player.

I only play this game for war and use the multiplayer facet only for loot to level your base. The "multiplayer" game is irrelevant to me. I farm in high crystal/low masters, when I have a bit of spare time, I use a barrack boost session and hammer out barch raids and snipes. I hate farming and dislike mindless barch, but i do it simply because this is by far the quickest and most effective way of getting paid. Crucially, my TH is outside my base. i choose this method because i don't want to be forced to play the multiplayer part of the game every day, or even every other day. Often i don't do any farm raids for days on end and I like it that way! It is my opt-out from a section of the game i don't enjoy and therefore a big part of the reason I still am interested in playing the game after 2 years. Players being able to snipe my TH is therefore an important meta for protecting my loot, and in effect, they get paid and I keep my loot for the odd upgrade and concentrate on war...everyone is happy. Apart from SC that is, who are perhaps concerned they might be missing out on gems.

Changing the mechanics of the game in this way has imo very little to do with trying to encourage more advanced attacks and defences. If it were purely for this honourable reason SC would simply do the obvious and encourage defences by rewarding each successful defence with a loot bonus, and increase the attacking bonus for a high percentage win. Something i think virtually all players would welcome.

Ultimately you cannot make the multiplayer game like war. You will still not be able to tailor your army to a base and will still only get 30sec to plan. Meaning you will build a generic, cookie cutter attack, just at a greater cost and take much more time doing it. Which should be no more enjoyable to a war enthusiast or farmer than barch is. Because of this, and vitally, because unlike in war, there is no real penalty hitting TH one level below you, Attack skill will increase only marginally. Defence building practice will also be minor as anti 3 bases will still be no good in this format. All bases will be anti 2s which as u know are irrelevant below th10 for any war clan worth their salt. It is for these reasons that I will never be interested in the "multiplayer" format, and i will deeply resent being forced to play that part of the game twice or more a day just to retain my loot. Problem is, as you have articulated many times in your videos, the war community's opinions mean very little to SC, who have long since done their sums and concluded that we don't bring in the $$$ and are therefore expendable.

One quick point linked with all this is the new th11. As some may know, a rapidly growing number of war players are choosing to remain as career th9s. Everyone knows why. War at th9 is clash in its most pure and perfect form. I fear that instead of striving to balance th10 in the same way, they are using the new multiplayer system to coerce players to upgrade THs and lay new defence structures just to have a chance of protecting their loot. Truly max th9s wont care much, but i can imagine those with max defences and 15-15 heroes and lego/skull walls will be sweating a bit...

Anyways, I wont jump to too many conclusions about this as we have still heard almost nothing about th11 and potential tweaks to th10. If none materialise, i think its time to accept the beauty of th9 war was a wonderful accident never to be repeated. Personally I do have some small faith that SC will pull something out the bag to fix th10. Heres hoping anyway!

But whats the bottom line? What will the changes really mean for everyone apart from pushers? The so called "significant loot bonus increase" is a real term decrease for a 50% win, and a meagre 10% increase for 70%! Joke numbers! to me, it doesn't stack up. If u have no life, dont war much or seriously, of course you can make it work. Dead bases will always be there for example, and i will concede more storages will probably be available to raid, but at what cost? It is a big gamble by SC. Forcing people to play the game only one way to me seems like an obvious mistake, and one which I personally will resent. Even if they end up greatly reducing the cook time (and possibly cost) of higher level troops, my gut feeling is that they are underestimating the reasons people play this game and in the variety of different ways that they are currently able to do so.

If I were calling the shots, Id introduce big bonuses for defence wins and increase loot bonus rewards for high percentage wins. Leaving the rest of the game mechanics well alone! It may not have been how the developers originally intended but through luck or judgement it is a system that has made SC a billion dollar company with millions of long term players interested in different aspects of the game. Unlike th10 It aint broke so dont try to fix it! Naturally they are privy to a much greater wealth of data than I or anyone else is, so maybe (despite displaying a worrying lack of confidence and competence in what they are doing by making changes 3 days into the sneak peeks) they have done their calculations correctly. History however, says the track record for popular games restructuring their fundamental mechanics in such ways is not good. Time will tell.

So I guess my question boils down to this: Do you think, for the reasons i have mentioned, that what on the surface appear to be progressive changes promoting "more advanced attacking and defending", will actually in the long run harm CoC by reducing player autonomy regarding how they play the game? I'd be interested to hear the thoughts of any adult and or balanced people that may or may not exist on these forums...

---

supercell gave you a Lv1 freeze spell and you're complaining why...?

Kids who don't know how to attack will probably lose out.
Casuals will still progress in the lower leagues as long as they stay there.
Those who made it higher up will continue to do so.
If you only do wars, keep on winning. Losing is not an option. Like pushing.

I don't see the problem here.