Reward for defensive win

[Phatphatty]

The game provides no incentive for winning on defense besides an achievement and trophies. In fact it is more costly to have a defensive win than it is to simply place your town hall outside the walls for a free shield. How does this make any sense? A few ideas to solve this problem.
- Attackers only get loot if they have earned a star, otherwise they leave with nothing (similar to Boom Beach)
- Attackers get a percentage of stolen loot based on their performance. This could be based on stars earned or percentage of base destroyed. If a player fails to reach a certain threshold say 35% then they get no loot.
- If an attacker loses they must cover the cost to re-arm the defender's traps.
- Getting a defensive win gives you the trophies (who cares) as well as the win bonus for your current league
I am sure there are plenty of other possibilities.

[ltllamaIV]

Well then if attackers dont get a star then they dont get any loot and that defeats the purpose of farming. when people farm, then they look for bases with loot to attack and gain loot. the suggestion you made forces the attacker to earn at least one star, which is not easy to earn, since most bases with good loot are higher level than the attacker, so the attacker has a greater chance of losing than earning one star (besides sniping th's on the outside). the attacker then wastes troops and valuable (dark) elixir because at least in boom beach the attacker keeps his/her troops. plus the ATTACKER re-arming the traps triggered? no way. than the attacker would waste gold, too, if he-she loses, which is likely since as i stated before, good loot is in higher level bases, which will most likely have high level defenses, which will in turn cause the attacker to lose and gain nothing, which defeats the purpose of farmers' raiding for resources. overall, this causes too much loss for the attacker if he/she loses.
Maybe a gem reward like boom beach for troops destroyed, but that is as far as it can go while still being reasonable towards the attacker.

[AA88x]

At least give me a portion of the attackers gold and elixir when my defenses win! Make it a formula, the longer I hold out and don't drop a star the more I get.

Or I still like the idea of a small bonus every time someone "nexts" my village cause they don't wanna fight :-)

[Phatphatty]

At least give me a portion of the attackers gold and elixir when my defenses win! Make it a formula, the longer I hold out and don't drop a star the more I get.

Or I still like the idea of a small bonus every time someone "nexts" my village cause they don't wanna fight :-)

Yes I love that idea of the "nexting" bonus. The number of times your base gets next is a better indicator of strength of defense than actual defensive wins.

[Torres126]

I like the idea of a loot bonus for a defensive win. The "no loot for no win" idea for me does not work. I target loot, not a win. Loss of trophies is enough.

[Bulldog241]

I like every single one of those ideas. The people complaining about "But it's too hard to wiiiin!!!!! Waaaaaaa!!!!" are sadly in the majority here so don't be surprised if your idea gets shot down. But something certainly needs to be done about the current situation of winning on defense being a BAD thing for the defender.

[dahimi]

Defensive rewards should not happen. It may seem counter intuitive but it's the attacker that matters not the defender.

Why? Because if you assume that all base layouts can be defeated (which is necessary for the game to work), then your skill as a defender is moot. There is no skill. Defending amounts to applying, or copying really, a subset of guiding principles (you by design cannot apply them all) in order to make your base strong against certain attacks and weak against others. In short there are no bad defenders, only bad attackers.

Attacking is where the skill is. That's also where the rewards should be.

[lirineu]

The game provides no incentive for winning on defense besides an achievement and trophies. In fact it is more costly to have a defensive win than it is to simply place your town hall outside the walls for a free shield. How does this make any sense? A few ideas to solve this problem.
- Attackers only get loot if they have earned a star, otherwise they leave with nothing (similar to Boom Beach)
- Attackers get a percentage of stolen loot based on their performance. This could be based on stars earned or percentage of base destroyed. If a player fails to reach a certain threshold say 35% then they get no loot.
- If an attacker loses they must cover the cost to re-arm the defender's traps.
- Getting a defensive win gives you the trophies (who cares) as well as the win bonus for your current league
I am sure there are plenty of other possibilities.

who is in pushing cares to trophies!!!!!These are the people who have TH inside, so it makes sense. I think the change they could make is that you will get a league bonus throphies for winning defences, and that would be good because you usually win defences whilepushing, so you're in a higher league, so you receive higher loot per win, so youcan get paid for x'bows and inferno towers sometimes when winning defs, so you think that worth to push, so there will be less farmers, so there wont be snipers (they freak me out) and you won't get raided by lvl 6 troops while TH 7 with frequence when you're trying to get an expensinve upgrade.
Who thinks nexting is a good idea, it shouldnt be much more then the money the attacker spended.

[neB1133]

Defensive rewards should not happen. It may seem counter intuitive but it's the attacker that matters not the defender.

Why? Because if you assume that all base layouts can be defeated (which is necessary for the game to work), then your skill as a defender is moot. There is no skill. Defending amounts to applying, or copying really, a subset of guiding principles (you by design cannot apply them all) in order to make your base strong against certain attacks and weak against others. In short there are no bad defenders, only bad attackers.

Attacking is where the skill is. That's also where the rewards should be.

All the more reason to reward a defender for poor attacking.

[Phatphatty]

Currently there is no consequence for losing an attack. Ok you lose trophies, but this is really inconsequential. There is absolutely no reward for winning a defense besides the trophies, which again are not really significant in the grand scheme of things. Rewarding players for good defense and penalizing players for poor attack would encourage players to develop skill. Currently the game is way too easy for attackers. I can easily make 2 million gold and elixir a day with barch ... and I am still earning 50% on most attacks. I am aware that there is a large portion of the user base that is just horrible at the game. Why should a game be designed to promote play styles that require little skill? Reward good defense and you will end up with a more intelligent user base because you are forcing players to think more carefully about how they attack, what bases they attack, what troops they use, how they design their own layout, etc.