The NEW one and only loot is good or bad thread

[MuSone]

It is becoming impossible to play coc, it is a full time job. Literally. You can not be a casual player for a quick few mins as you would spend 5 mins nexting. I'm a th10 and it is pointless smashing villages with a massive army composition anymore because you won't get your elixor back!! Let alone a profit.. So you barch instead right? Nope. Cant find any collectors with anything in them! All dry.. Asif xbows/infernos and AQ/BK weren't hard enough to get around now there's another mortar. And I can't find any bases, well rarely find a base with more then 110k combined loot.. ♥♥♥???!
God help farmers, if they get raided 250k it will take them a week to earn it back, but the problem there is they will get raided again every night they got to sleep! So where just going down.

[EddieWillers]

I'm about to quit as the loot is nonexistent. Playing this game is becoming a chore rather than an enjoyable hobby.

[Quarks]

Wouldn't a better solution to this issue not be to just "add loot" to the economy, as this would do, but instead make use of the Nexting cost by allowing a portion of each consecutive Next go into a fund on that base where up to all of it can be won, by either the raider or defender? Every consecutive Next would gradually make each base a more viable target, despite it still having a dismal sub 50k of each resource in the resources the players has in his storages on his own.

Check out what I thought would be an effective implementation of increasing the potential for bigger hauls on these low-loot bases, without having to artificially inject loot into the bases to hit them. I can't seem to get any feedback so I don't know if this would be a good or bad idea, but some response would at least give an alternative (or supportive) perspective to it. There are two links in this post, they address two different implementations that could curb the problems we're seeing with this loot drought when searching. The 2nd link explains this allocation of Nexting cost.

http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...=1#post3086718

i don't know, but it feels to me as if it would require an awful lot of nexting for a base to become a viable target. I'd prefer a solution which cuts down on nexting, rather than rely on hundred of thousands of them to take place to increase loot...

supercell has to artificially inject loot into the economy anyway. At the moment, they are doing this by releasing inactive bases into the system at a rate unknown (but heatedly discussed) by the forum. I'm proposing to take this loot and redistribute it in accordance with the developers long-term plans for the game (= into the storages, since storage raiding is the vision SC has for the game). Is it viable? I don't know, I don't have the data. I just know that every time I press the "attack" button I think about how stupid a system it is that supposedly encourages more interesting storage raiding - only the only loot is found in collectors... It's bizarre I'm supposed to build a strong, expensive army which actually will yield less return than barch. Or just throwing a handful of goblins at collectors.

[NoneYa]

i don't know, but it feels to me as if it would require an awful lot of nexting for a base to become a viable target. I'd prefer a solution which cuts down on nexting, rather than rely on hundred of thousands of them to take place to increase loot...

supercell has to artificially inject loot into the economy anyway. At the moment, they are doing this by releasing inactive bases into the system at a rate unknown (but heatedly discussed) by the forum. I'm proposing to take this loot and redistribute it in accordance with the developers long-term plans for the game (= into the storages, since storage raiding is the vision SC has for the game). Is it viable? I don't know, I don't have the data. I just know that every time I press the "attack" button I think about how stupid a system it is that supposedly encourages more interesting storage raiding - only the only loot is found in collectors... It's bizarre I'm supposed to build a strong, expensive army which actually will yield less return than barch. Or just throwing a handful of goblins at collectors.

The bots are more effecient at finding the Dead bases. increases the number of searchable dead bases feeds the bots not the farmers

[Goobers]

Wouldn't a better solution to this issue not be to just "add loot" to the economy, as this would do, but instead make use of the Nexting cost by allowing a portion of each consecutive Next go into a fund on that base where up to all of it can be won, by either the raider or defender? Every consecutive Next would gradually make each base a more viable target, despite it still having a dismal sub 50k of each resource in the resources the players has in his storages on his own.

Check out what I thought would be an effective implementation of increasing the potential for bigger hauls on these low-loot bases, without having to artificially inject loot into the bases to hit them. I can't seem to get any feedback so I don't know if this would be a good or bad idea, but some response would at least give an alternative (or supportive) perspective to it. There are two links in this post, they address two different implementations that could curb the problems we're seeing with this loot drought when searching. The 2nd link explains this allocation of Nexting cost.

http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...=1#post3086718

i don't know, but it feels to me as if it would require an awful lot of nexting for a base to become a viable target. I'd prefer a solution which cuts down on nexting, rather than rely on hundred of thousands of them to take place to increase loot...

supercell has to artificially inject loot into the economy anyway. At the moment, they are doing this by releasing inactive bases into the system at a rate unknown (but heatedly discussed) by the forum. I'm proposing to take this loot and redistribute it in accordance with the developers long-term plans for the game (= into the storages, since storage raiding is the vision SC has for the game). Is it viable? I don't know, I don't have the data. I just know that every time I press the "attack" button I think about how stupid a system it is that supposedly encourages more interesting storage raiding - only the only loot is found in collectors... It's bizarre I'm supposed to build a strong, expensive army which actually will yield less return than barch. Or just throwing a handful of goblins at collectors.

What we currently have is a system that requires an awful amount of Nexting to find a base that more than often ends up not even being worth it anyway, with all that Nexting cost vanishing from the economy. This would actually cut down on the amount of Nexting. True, for a base with little loot in storages (sub 50k/50k) to become attractive to hit, it would require lots of people to have Nexted it, but that doesn't necessarily mean YOU will have had to Next a lot.

Let's say they start it at 100% of the Next cost going into the base, diminishing at just 1% per respective resource used for each consecutive Next before being hit (this might be too high but it's just to show the example). So there is hardly any loot in the storage of this base, it's not a base people want to hit. Again, for simplicity's sake in terms of math, let's say all TH10s are the bases Nexting over it (1k each). 100 people who are frustrated with Nexting skip over it, half use Gold and half use Elixir for that particular base. That's 50k/50k that would normally vanish from the economy. Applying a 1% diminshing return for each consecutive Next, now 38,505 of each resource are placed into a "bubble loot" that is available to be taken, depending on how many storages/TH they destroy and if they win the battle. It doesn't seem like a lot, but factor in the league bonus, the loot that--albeit small--is actually in the storages, along with this method of allowing some of the cost to search bases go into a potential pool for the victor of the battle to win (again, not all of this is guaranteed, it's based on getting the victory AND how many storages/TH you can destroy/protect), and now every time somebody comes across this base, it becomes harder and harder to pass up. Whereas in the current system this base would be Nexted thousands upon thousands of times because it would forever just have that dismal amount of loot in storages.

The problem people are facing now is with loot (mainly elixir) being almost nonexistent due to active, offensively-established THs now being able to dump all their storage elixir into walls. Responsible, active farmers are keeping their storages low so they can't lose it. But they have to spend gold (and in this scenario, the option of elixir) to hunt for bases. Think of this portion allocated per Next as a "storage"--a storage that these active players cannot dump into walls b/c the loot hasn't been realized yet. It's being gradually accumulated as a "potential to earn" that is funded through other active farmers that pay to search for each base. It doesn't break the economy because it's using loot naturally generated to fund it. Hell, set the first Next allocation at 50% if they want, so that every Next beyond the first one is still taking more gold/elixir out of the system than is retaining to be potentially earned. What happens is you now have driven a market on farming that is correlated with activity. The more active their overall playerbase is, the higher opportunities there are to farm more effectively. I would absolutely continue to boost my barracks with expensive loonion troops if I knew that there would be a base that, in one form of another, would have the potential to reward my efforts. With the current system we have, it is utterly insane to use anything other than BArch/BAM to raid if you hope to make any progress on elixir.

SuperCell is not "injecting loot" by "releasing inactives" into the system. If this ran as a free market, without interference, these inactives would be showing up at the same rate as active bases. SuperCell is REMOVING these bases from the matchmaking system; they are artificially manipulating the economy to not allow inactives to be the main source of farming. Hitting inactive bases that generate loot genuinely from collectors is not injecting loot into the economy, and is much different than what you suggested of setting a "minimum loot bonus" on low storage bases. That is the definition of artificially injecting loot. League bonuses artificially inject (or artificially offer, rather) loot into the economy. SuperCell is not releasing inactives to be hit, they are removing them.

Allowing loot spent searching through active bases to accumulate and be earned by these same active bases, be it the attacker or defender, is just encouraging the direction SC wants this game to head--towards active players who will spend gems and generate revenue for the company, not towards hitting inactive players who have quit the game and therefore will obviously not be purchasing gems either.

[MickWarwick]

Well played supercell. In the last 3 days we have had 3 players decide to quit due to no loot. All th10's level 142, 128 and 118. You need to do something before the game implodes. I hope youre happy.

[S3an]

Still finding loot terrible. The increase of League bonus and War win is a step in the right direction but it falls far from being a solution to the current loot crisis.

Please SC, pull your finger out before it is too late. A lot of longterm players are getting disappointed with the lack of loot and variation to this game. The games economics and gameplay drastically needs fixing.

[ARCHIEF]

SC playing coc is not a job we are not supposed to be stuck for hours nexting and saying wth ill take this idiotic 200 k base ,COC is supposed to be a game that you can play in your FREE time ,free meaning after ,we have gave quality time to our family ,jobs and all that regular stuff that people that dont live in their mom's basement do.So please focus your time where it should be ,like getting the means(LOOT) to players who support your company.I have gemmed some important upgrades times and barracks/ spells but I will NEVER gem resources. Thanks for listening if you guys actually read this.

[cww007]

Where's coathanger and daddy to refute all of these loot is bad posts.

[Yogismith]

Well played supercell. In the last 3 days we have had 3 players decide to quit due to no loot. All th10's level 142, 128 and 118. You need to do something before the game implodes. I hope youre happy.

Three players out of several hundred thousand if not more. Yeah they don't care.