The NEW one and only loot is good or bad thread

[Smalls]

I'm sorry but it's comments like these that are the reason so few people take TH10 complaining about loot seriously.

1) Just because I'm a TH9 doesn't mean I can't have an opinion. There are plenty of TH9 moaning about loot in this thread.

2) Loot is not 4x better at TH9 vs TH10, how would that possibly be true? You're just exaggerating.

3) Upgrades are not 3x more expensive at TH10 vs TH9. The only upgrade that costs close to triple is the Army Camp. Everything else is only about 1.5x more. Again, you're just exaggerating.

You can have an opinion, however, the issue us th10s have is that people like you come on here and claim loot is great, and then we go look at your base and you don't even have close to full skulls as a th9.

The 3x more expensive comment is for walls. And actually he underestimated the difference for you and us. You are still paying only 500k per wall. We are looking at 3 million per lava. So it's actually 6x more.

As far as loot being 4x better at th9. That's probably about right. You have to consider that as a th9, you can farm th8s, and even well developed th9s with a fairly quick army. As a th10, th8 is out of the question because of the loot penalty, and most th10s can't be easily farmed due to defenses and ITs. So we have to use a much stronger army to get loot than most or next forever until we find a th9 to pick on.

The system is broken, no matter how you slice it.

[Ramb02]

I'm sorry but it's comments like these that are the reason so few people take TH10 complaining about loot seriously.

1) Just because I'm a TH9 doesn't mean I can't have an opinion. There are plenty of TH9 moaning about loot in this thread.

2) Loot is not 4x better at TH9 vs TH10, how would that possibly be true? You're just exaggerating.

3) Upgrades are not 3x more expensive at TH10 vs TH9. The only upgrade that costs close to triple is the Army Camp. Everything else is only about 1.5x more. Again, you're just exaggerating.

Yah, he's exaggerated a bit. Upgrades aren't 3x - as you said 1.5 -2x. Loot 4x better at TH9? Maybe not that much, but I have a TH10 and a TH9 camp, and I'd say loot is 2-3x better at TH9. Remember at TH9 can attack a loaded up TH8 with only a 10% loot penalty, but for a TH10 to attack the TH8 is a 50% penalty. So TH9s have more options out there to attack for profit. But I agree that TH9 loot is worse than it used to be when my TH10 was a TH9 in the past...

[cww007]

You can have an opinion, however, the issue us th10s have is that people like you come on here and claim loot is great, and then we go look at your base and you don't even have close to full skulls as a th9.

The 3x more expensive comment is for walls. And actually he underestimated the difference for you and us. You are still paying only 500k per wall. We are looking at 3 million per lava. So it's actually 6x more.

As far as loot being 4x better at th9. That's probably about right. You have to consider that as a th9, you can farm th8s, and even well developed th9s with a fairly quick army. As a th10, th8 is out of the question because of the loot penalty, and most th10s can't be easily farmed due to defenses and ITs. So we have to use a much stronger army to get loot than most or next forever until we find a th9 to pick on.

The system is broken, no matter how you slice it.

Not talking to you specifically, but there is another thread in General asking about nerfing Infernos. Guess who's against it? TH10's. smh... everyone wants to be able to steal loot easily but when it comes to their own base it's hands off.

IMO, TH10's need to get on the 'Nerf Infernos' bandwagon so they can attack each other - or stop whining.

[Goobers]

Well, you say this, but before SC's loot "adjustments" things were fine.


That's what no one wants to get because people just want to argue.

SC created this problem with the December loot update, which "fixed" a non existent problem, and the elixer for walls update.

Undo those updates and everything is fine again.

So people arguing about solutions is what SC wants. It keeps attention off the fact that they created this problem through updates.

Seriously, before the dec update raids were great. But SC wanted more money which you can't blame them for. Besides, it was annoying but you could still make progress. Now that the elixir is gone the game is in trouble.

If you read my other post you'll know why. They will put just a tad of elixir back into the economy so that people will grumble, but still buy gems.

You are pointing fingers at those two updates but not pointing out the fact that SC has been ramping up their removal of inactive bases from the system within the past few months. I do not have room to talk about the pre-December loot update as I didn't start until Jan '14 with the Android ad campaign launch. But what I can tell you is that from my experience as a TH9 as early as June this year, I never had an issue with not only keeping all five of my builders busy, but also nearly maxing out my gold/elixir storages between many of my builder free-ups as well. Maybe the pre-December update lowered loot per hour capabilities, but having all builders constantly going with heavy storages when they freed up POST-update doesn't seem like a terrible adjustment to me. It was actually the rapid removal of these inactives that slowed my farming down initially, and then with the introduction of elixir for walls update, that's what crippled my progression on my 2nd account, a newer TH9 who didn't have his TH9 farming offense yet.

Everything I'm pushing for would benefit a more overall active playerbase, but like iceageg pointed out, it would still eventually all fall to ruin without ways of injecting loot into the macro economy for it to be taken, i.e. inactive bases, league bonuses, and personal collector output.

- I have no idea what will happen with undoing the Dec '13 update, but I assume TH9/10s will start crushing TH6/7/8s for 200k/200k constantly and those levels will get frustrated and stop playing. Welcome to your largest playerbase leaving the economy, so that within weeks they are all out of the matchmaking system with SC's inactive removal.
- Undo the elixir update, and you at least allow new THs to be able to progress their offense enough to compete at established THs' levels. But then you still have that gold drought issue, and it stems from not having bases that aren't using resources available to attack anymore. This is, at its core, stemming from a lack of "producers" available to hit given the amount of active "consumers" trying to raid them. And it's not because our active to inactive ratio in this game has skewed positively. It's because the active numerator is growing, while SC manipulates the inactive denominator so much that what we see available to us appears that way.

I don't know why I keep trying, but here I go. No, things were not fine. The economy had plenty of resources in it because of an unnaturally high amount of tourist dollars (inactive bases). Raids were not great, they were profitable because you could barch your way to wealth. Unless you were trophy pushing nobody really raided at all. Just boring repetitive collector raids but we didn't care because it was lucrative. It should be more of a challenge to get the resources and still be lucrative but it wasn't. So they made a change and removed the inactive bases leaving us with only TH7 collectors manufacturing resources.

The problem is that they removed too much of the available resources too fast with no new source to replace some or all of it and sent the economy into a radically over budgeted tailspin. Putting back the old problem is a terrible idea as a solution. The game truly should encourage attacking active players to get resources as the primary battle dynamic. Using the old problem as a way to subtly introduce more or less loot into various trophy ranges has some fantastic possibilities but putting it back the way it used to be is just short sighted and foolish.

EDIT: I didn't scroll to the next page before posting this, but iceageg's follow-up essentially explains the situation. I don't like pointing fingers and saying "you're wrong," but that update back then and this elixir for walls update did not not break the economy. Sure, they added to the struggle but ultimately combining it with the removal of all these inactives are what did it.

Supercell wants to send this game towards a more active-based style of play, but they didn't implement a viable way to make it work (a flat league bonus % increase is a pathetic, watery band-aid solution--there needs to be some actual friggin' thought put in requiring a total overhaul to the system). Instead, they have been aggressively removing inactives, which is the LAST step they should have done, AFTER developing a successful system that benefits the active playerbase.

[Smalls]

Not talking to you specifically, but there is another thread in General asking about nerfing Infernos. Guess who's against it? TH10's. smh... everyone wants to be able to steal loot easily but when it comes to their own base it's hands off.

IMO, TH10's need to get on the 'Nerf Infernos' bandwagon so they can attack each other - or stop whining.

Nerfing anything isn't going to help. You are stuck in the "raiding active players" mode which caused this whole mess in the first place. As has been previously stated in this thread, raiding an active player without adding additional loot into the system does absolutely nothing to infuse loot into the economy. Raiding active players simply moves resources from one place to another to be spent and disappear.

They have to figure out a way to infuse new loot, not just so we can send it on a merry-go-round between active players.

edit: Also, have you seen how well ITs perform in clan wars? It's already almost a guaranteed 2 star with 2 heroes, 5 spells, and a GoWi army. If they nerf the ITs it would really throw off the dynamics of CW and trophy pushing.

edit 2: By the way, I'm not against a system that actually works for raiding active players only. But the reality is that the game SuperCell built doesn't work when it's only active players raiding active players.

[Trancetravis]

Not talking to you specifically, but there is another thread in General asking about nerfing Infernos. Guess who's against it? TH10's. smh... everyone wants to be able to steal loot easily but when it comes to their own base it's hands off.

IMO, TH10's need to get on the 'Nerf Infernos' bandwagon so they can attack each other - or stop whining.

I am a th10 and I have called many times for a nerf on the Multi-Ray option of the inferno tower.

[Jcman]

I'm sorry but it's comments like these that are the reason so few people take TH10 complaining about loot seriously.

1) Just because I'm a TH9 doesn't mean I can't have an opinion. There are plenty of TH9 moaning about loot in this thread.

2) Loot is not 4x better at TH9 vs TH10, how would that possibly be true? You're just exaggerating.

3) Upgrades are not 3x more expensive at TH10 vs TH9. The only upgrade that costs close to triple is the Army Camp. Everything else is only about 1.5x more. Again, you're just exaggerating.

I was not insulting to you, have all the opinions you want, you still know little about the transition to th10. My gold grab since turning th10 has slowed much more then 4 times what I was making at th9. This is a fact... My gaming drive did not slow, my ability to win attacks has only increased. The availability of loot has drastically decreased, causing me to change my playstyle to suit the reality of th10 farming.

No, literally speaking the exact same bases do not offer four times less loot... That is not what I said... i said th10s gold taking decreases by four times. This is for many reasons. You are purposefully misinterpreting what I said.

In two months i maxed my th9 defenses, built all lego walls and 80 lava walls with barrack and spell boosting, And only gem purchasing my spell factory.. Got my billion gg... Nearly 4 months into th10 i have almost 1.2 billion gg.. That is more than 4 times less then my th9 grab in loot per period of time. That is a fact. The latest update slowed my slow gain to a crawl compared to th9. That is a fact. Even with my comparably slow attacking as th10 in my opinion i still get 100-200 attacks a season.

[Coathanger]

Ugh . . . it is narrow sighted blindness like this that spawns all of the bad ideas, then lambastes SC for not implementing them. I know it is a lot of reading but go back to page 640 and it is explained. I will try one more time with short words, then this thread is dead to me.

Talking about narrow sighted blindness? You stepped into this thread claiming Inactives are removed and needed to be brought back, show me a removed inactive in higher leagues, they 'removal' happens in lower leagues, also removal is contrary to everything SC has stated. You used this false assumption as the bulk of your arguments.

You then went on about how th7 has level 11 collectors and based your numbers around that "fact". Th7 has level 11 collectors for th9-10s benifit, they were introduced with TH9. Therefore all these numbers asserted afterwards are wrong, the game was built around level 10 collectors for th7-8 and level 11 for the benifit of the higher townhalls once they were introduced.

You topped it off with claiming an average expenditure of 2,000,000 lix per war was normal, another "fact" yeah right.

What about Bob? Bob has a farm and can visit neighboring towns who let thier fields produce without harvesting. So no it is not a closed system like you assert there is a constant influx of resources. Exchange between active players is vital in the system if Bob is taking more than his fair share.

Enjoy camping out in bronze league living off of collectors as a th9-10,that'll go far, gl with that.

Dueces[/QUOTE]

[Goobers]

Goobers, Perseverance, GCB, a few others who understand basic economics and SC . . . I wish you good luck.

Likewise, my friend. Take care.

Same buddy.

I too am finding myself growing distant from the playing of the actual game itself, and spending far too much time here when SC should be acting on this input instead of letting us personally attack each other for weeks. Enough that I'm seriously considering quitting/leaving the clan I started, with people I've known for 9+ months now. Because while we experienced some *insert Borat soundclip* great success over the past several months, wins are still only enough to not quite break even, and a recent .500 stretch is making me realize that I cannot recover enough to keep these going. Similar to your point with the overall loot situation, it will only be a matter of time before I too have run dry. It's a shame, because it truly was a great aspect of the game that kept our group very active, social, and organized. For the past 2 months it was the only aspect of the game I still enjoyed and kept me playing, but SC has done a marvelous job of ruining that aspect to continue because of this loot problem.

[Jcman]

Talking about narrow sighted blindness? You stepped into this thread claiming Inactives are removed and needed to be brought back, show me a removed inactive in higher leagues, they 'removal' happens in lower leagues, also removal is contrary to everything SC has stated. You used this false assumption as the bulk of your arguments.

You then went on about how th7 has level 11 collectors and based your numbers around that "fact". Th7 has level 11 collectors for th9-10s benifit, they were introduced with TH9. Therefore all these numbers asserted afterwards are wrong, the game was built around level 10 collectors for th7-8 and level 11 for the benifit of the higher townhalls once they were introduced.

You topped it off with claiming an average expenditure of 2,000,000 lix per war was normal, another "fact" yeah right.

What about Bob? Bob has a farm and can visit neighboring towns who let thier fields produce without harvesting. So no it is not a closed system like you assert there is a constant influx of resources. Exchange between active players is vital in the system if Bob is taking more than his fair share.

Enjoy camping out in bronze league living off of collectors as a th9-10,that'll go far, gl with that.

Dueces

[/QUOTE]

First of All, Thank You Coathanger for adding my quote to your profile! It is truly an honor to have your recognition...

Secondly, you purposefully play semantics with every persons post. Everyone knows that SC came out and said multiple times that inactive bases slowly get pushed to the back of the queue. This is demonstrated over and over with people's second accounts how attacks disappear for months. Then magically, after logging on, they are attacked again minutes after logging out... They effectively remove them via their software. Yes we know they dont actively push a button that says no you cant have inactives anymore... They did add the code that pushes them back...

Lastly, thanks again, it really is an honor to have such a productive forum user acknowledging the fact that th10s earning capacity drops dramatically.