The NEW one and only loot is good or bad thread

[Keywal]

I think anger and irrational response to change is par for the course.

We are pretty involved in that thread. Ana has posted a few responses. The Clash team is actively reading it as well. We've had some nice discussions about how we can improve loot, but nothing that we can pass along yet.

Thanks, its all we ask... (bar some direct communication) :P

[wezel]

Maxed TH9 here, working on walls and heroes atm.

I honestly do not understand why people with TH 9's and below are complaining about loot.

I play casually, boost barracks about 3 times p/w and farm between 1600 - 2000. Army = giants / wb / barb / arch minions and costs about 100k elix. I simply look for (storage) attacks with at least 100 k elix, the rest is bonus. Obviously I will not attack 100 k elix / 20 k gold / 100 dark, that's to low. If I get 150 / 150 / xxx I'm happy.

While doing this I'm able to consistently build 1 or 2 lava's each day, thats more then enough loot for me. The elix for walls update sure made leveling walls faster for me.

On the other hand, a big chunk of my loot comes from other TH 9's, so I am not to worried to upgrade to TH 10 either as soon as my heroes are lv 20 and my inner 2 rings are lava.

What I do notice is that collecter raids are getting more and more scarce. I think that during a 2 hour boost I find 2 on avarage. I also noticed an increase in bot attacks on my village when + 200k gold and/or elix is available. Even though they take next to nothing, because the automated attack totaly s*cked, they do shield me. That's another storage raid shielded for others.

If SC added more inactives that would not solve the "loot problem". The majority of inactives would simply be attacked by a botter and shielded.

If think the solution lies in finding a way to consitently ban the botters, so SC has more control about how much loot is available in the search que.

[Keywal]

I would love to see an explanation of why elixir for walls was good for the game and how it has had positive consequences for PLAYERS..... so Steve, if it wasn't a mistake please explain....

More misinformed people pushing misguided topics.
Please do some research on the Wiki before sticking to this conclusion.

im not gonna give you figures, i'll explain it very simply so maybe you might go do the research yourself and learn something..

the need for GOLD to upgrade a base far out-weights that of ELIXIR.
Go read then come back and tell us your thoughts.

EDIT: cant be bothered waiting for a common sense reply to this....

GOLD needed to max a base:
669,901,950
ELIXIR needed to max a base:
348,222,850

Both of these figures excludes walls and are volumes needed without losing any through defense or nexting or troop training/spells.

You wish to remove the use of elixir on walls and put it solely on gold??? even when the production of both is equal to each player?
are you actually serious?

[DZTommy]

Steve, thank you for showing us your envolved. We went a long time with very little interaction. My problem is everyday I play COC and everyday it is extremly difficult to loot what I need to for upgrades, donations and wars. The longer this goes the more players you will loose. Maybe a short time fix is 1 gem boosters for a week. When you did that before it really motivated my clan and everyone was happy. That is not a long term solution though might keep players interested untill you initiate your plan. Again thank you for communicating with us.

[klem70]

I would love to see an explanation of why elixir for walls was good for the game and how it has had positive consequences for PLAYERS..... so Steve, if it wasn't a mistake please explain....

Any high player that is till raiding alright, loves this part to the update. I put over 140 mill elixir into my walls that would have been wasted.

[Onomatopoeia]

Thats a question from someone who does not understand the bigger picture.

You want a solution that will tip the balance in your favour - ok fine.
why dont you ask for the keys to Supercell's office while your at it.

They must make a decision that will benefit clash and their pockets. - period.

if they start throwing simple solutions to improve the loot into the game with no thought as to what it does then they are signing their own unemployement cheque. its not hard to understand.

the situation now is leaning too much in their direction and is choking the game of fun... (Fun to me is using a big army taking a good amount of loot and as most have already agreed is preferred to spamming tier 1 troops on quitters.)
this is the balance that needs addressing.

Please think it thorough before asking what you deemed to be a philosophical question when it was in fact self explanatory.

Perhaps you should reread his inital post to which my question was directed at before posting a clueless response.

Also, do you have any clue how many people work at SC in relation to the revenue and profit they make? Signing their own unemployment cheque...lol that doesn't even make sense... Thank you for trying to educate me in business on a kindergarten-level. I think I'll just manage with my MSC in Economics.

[Keywal]

Perhaps you should reread his inital post to which my question was directed at before posting a clueless response.

Also, do you have any clue how many people work at SC in relation to the revenue and profit they make? Signing their own unemployment cheque...lol that doesn't even make sense... Thank you for trying to educate me in business on a kindergarten-level. I think I'll just manage with my MSC in Economics.

MSC in economics!! good for you.
then perhaps you should explain to us all what 'unbalancing the unbalanced' actually means?
Obviously my kindergarden response wasnt good enough for you.

do enlighten us, oh wise one?

[Sticksman]

Keywal....gold is like capital, elixir is more like revenue, getit? Your figures on base building are irrelevant, they ignore the revenue spent on farming for capital. Get it?

[Onomatopoeia]

MSC in economics!! good for you.
then perhaps you should explain to us all what 'unbalancing the unbalanced' actually means?
Obviously my kindergarden response wasnt good enough for you.

do enlighten us, oh wise one?

So, I ask him the question and you want me to answer my own question...ok...

He is referring to the in-game economy being tight, but not wanting to unbalance the situation. The second part of the phrase implies that he considers the economy to be balanced which rather contradicts the first part of the phrase. Hence the question. Do you get it now? You answer has abosulety nothing to do with the question, ergo clueless.

[Omes]

More misinformed people pushing misguided topics.
Please do some research on the Wiki before sticking to this conclusion.

im not gonna give you figures, i'll explain it very simply so maybe you might go do the research yourself and learn something..

the need for GOLD to upgrade a base far out-weights that of ELIXIR.
Go read then come back and tell us your thoughts.

EDIT: cant be bothered waiting for a common sense reply to this....

GOLD needed to max a base:
669,901,950
ELIXIR needed to max a base:
348,222,850

Both of these figures excludes walls and are volumes needed without losing any through defense or nexting or troop training/spells.

You wish to remove the use of elixir on walls and put it solely on gold??? even when the production of both is equal to each player?
are you actually serious?

by logic, you can't really compare gold and elixir like that.
in the case of a fully maxed base, walls included, the use of gold is dead. every golden loot you get is next to useless, if not due to nexting and traps, which i dare say relatively insignificant. BUT elixir would always stay relevant. pushing trophies, wars, donations (donations means a lot to the whole gameplay. especially if you donate a lv 4 pekka to a TH7 who is farming with a giant-barch), that Gowipe with 5 spells ain't gonna pay itself. So the value of elixir is not really on upgrades alone. Gold, is another matter.

THEREFORE, saying lix-for-walls update is correct because elixir upgrade costs are half that of gold's, is incorrect.
AND, the person who did come up with that update, is presumably less than smart.
UNLESS, the purpose is $. Which would make him a genius.