Reward for defensive win

[Phatphatty]

In short there are no bad defenders, only bad attackers.

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

I have to whole heartedly disagree with this. The player chooses how their base is laid out. Even though all players work within the same parameters, there are those who make the parameters of the game work in their favor and those who do not. This by definition is the difference between a good defender and a bad one.

Attacking is not where the skill is at. It is much more difficult to successfully defend than it is to win an attack. As you noted every base is beatable. However, players that design their bases well can win defenses against players that are much higher experience levels. This should be rewarded not penalized.

[dahimi]

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

The defender's "reward" for a poor attack is they keep the thing they care about be it resources or trophies.

[Mallan]

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.

THIS IS NOT A BAD THING! It is Clash of Clans Not FarmVille! You are supposed to be fighting other players not raiding absentee landlords!

[dahimi]

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.

So isn't this really a critique on the trophy system? If you're going to go that direction, I'll wholeheartedly agree with you. The trophy incentive system sucks. It should be much better. Your idea, however, does not address that issue.

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.

Players are penalized for poor attacks. Attacking poorly is a detriment to everything you're attempting to accomplish. It takes longer for you to build your next army and you get less loot or trophies.

I know you don't agree, but from my perspective there are no good defenses. Defending is not an action you actively take. It's all about the attacker making poor target selection whereby they use an army that sucks for the base they are raiding, inefficient use of troops, poor placement, or poor timing. None of this is within your control. Furthermore if you think attacking is too easy, defense is even easier. All you have to do is copy another base that uses best principles. Trivial.

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?

Again, I totally agree; but this is a critique on the trophy system.

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.

How can you say players don't do this already? This is silly.

Even though all players work within the same parameters, there are those who make the parameters of the game work in their favor and those who do not. This by definition is the difference between a good defender and a bad one.

This is true for any game mechanic in every game, ever. The question is how much skill does it take to apply a particular mechanic? In the case of defending in CoC, not much.

Attacking is not where the skill is at. It is much more difficult to successfully defend than it is to win an attack. As you noted every base is beatable. However, players that design their bases well can win defenses against players that are much higher experience levels. This should be rewarded not penalized.

It's more difficult to defend than to attack BECAUSE all bases are beatable. Whether or not your defense succeeds has very little to do with you. At the top tiers of play defense rarely succeeds. It's not because they are poor defenders, it's because defense is by necessity irrelevant.

Furthermore successful defenses are rewarded. You get trophies. Again, the fact that those trophies aren't valuable to players is a completely different and separate issue. At the end of the day, though, your ranking in this game is about how often you can successfully attack. Not how well you defend.

[Phatphatty]

The defender's "reward" for a poor attack is they keep the thing they care about be it resources or trophies.

If you win a defense you may have still lost a significant portion of your resources and have no shield to protect you from being attacked again, which means you will continue losing resources until someone is good enough to get a win. In fact the game penalizes you more for winning on defense then it does for losing on defense. Imagine this scenario: You are a TH8 and you have saved up your dark elixir to purchase an upgrade. You have exceeded the cap point 33k, which means a maximum of 2000 dark elixir is available to be looted. Someone comes along uses three lightning spells and drops no troops -850 de and no shield. Another person comes along and just happens to have something like all wizards. They drop their troops specifically targeting a path to your dark storage. They destroy your dark storage, but the wizards die before they cause 40% total destruction -2000 de as well as loss of gold and elixir. Finally a third player comes along who is a much higher experience level and gets one, two, or maybe even three stars. Again you lose 2000 de and a good portion of your gold and elixir. How does this make any sense? By diligently upgrading your defenses and putting thought into your layout you are actually penalized for having a good defense. You have lost nearly 5000 dark and possibly 500k gold and elixir, not because you lacked the skill to design a good defense, but because the attacker lacked the skill to earn 40% destruction.

[Aljaz978]

You get free shield if they get to 40% not happy with that?

[Phatphatty]

You get free shield if they get to 40% not happy with that?

No I am not. The shield comes at a cost: losing some of your resources and having to pay to re-arm your traps. Furthermore if they fail to get to 40% you are doubly screwed you have lost some of your resources and can in turn be attacked again to lose more resources. Why should the defender pay more for an attackers weak performance than they would if an attacker performed adequately? That makes no sense.

[dahimi]

If you win a defense you may have still lost a significant portion of your resources and have no shield to protect you from being attacked again, which means you will continue losing resources until someone is good enough to get a win. In fact the game penalizes you more for winning on defense then it does for losing on defense. Imagine this scenario: You are a TH8 and you have saved up your dark elixir to purchase an upgrade. You have exceeded the cap point 33k, which means a maximum of 2000 dark elixir is available to be looted. Someone comes along uses three lightning spells and drops no troops -850 de and no shield. Another person comes along and just happens to have something like all wizards. They drop their troops specifically targeting a path to your dark storage. They destroy your dark storage, but the wizards die before they cause 40% total destruction -2000 de as well as loss of gold and elixir. Finally a third player comes along who is a much higher experience level and gets one, two, or maybe even three stars. Again you lose 2000 de and a good portion of your gold and elixir. How does this make any sense? By diligently upgrading your defenses and putting thought into your layout you are actually penalized for having a good defense. You have lost nearly 5000 dark and possibly 500k gold and elixir, not because you lacked the skill to design a good defense, but because the attacker lacked the skill to earn 40% destruction.

This is, again, a critique on the trophy system. Gathering and keeping trophies should be so rewarding that repeated defensive wins are worth the resource loss.

[neB1133]

If you win a defense you may have still lost a significant portion of your resources and have no shield to protect you from being attacked again, which means you will continue losing resources until someone is good enough to get a win. In fact the game penalizes you more for winning on defense then it does for losing on defense. Imagine this scenario: You are a TH8 and you have saved up your dark elixir to purchase an upgrade. You have exceeded the cap point 33k, which means a maximum of 2000 dark elixir is available to be looted. Someone comes along uses three lightning spells and drops no troops -850 de and no shield. Another person comes along and just happens to have something like all wizards. They drop their troops specifically targeting a path to your dark storage. They destroy your dark storage, but the wizards die before they cause 40% total destruction -2000 de as well as loss of gold and elixir. Finally a third player comes along who is a much higher experience level and gets one, two, or maybe even three stars. Again you lose 2000 de and a good portion of your gold and elixir. How does this make any sense? By diligently upgrading your defenses and putting thought into your layout you are actually penalized for having a good defense. You have lost nearly 5000 dark and possibly 500k gold and elixir, not because you lacked the skill to design a good defense, but because the attacker lacked the skill to earn 40% destruction.

That is exactly how I feel. Excellent post!!!!

[Phatphatty]

This is, again, a critique on the trophy system. Gathering and keeping trophies should be so rewarding that repeated defensive wins are worth the resource loss.

Agree the trophy system is broken. I think by offering some sort of defensive reward or increasing the consequences for losing would provide more significance to trophies. As it is now I could personally care less if I was in gold leagues, crystal leagues or maybe even masters league. In fact I see no incentive to push for masters league other than to earn the 1000 gems given by the achievement. As a fresh TH9 (as of today woot woot) I know that I am not adequately prepared to reasonably be in Masters or even Crystal leagues for that matter. It is much easier for me to loot in gold leagues while I improve my defenses and research higher level troops. I have never pushed to be in higher league because there is no reason to be in a higher league. I made it to crystal using my raiding army and will probably do the same to reach masters. Once I was in crystal I realized that the difficulty of raiding with barch or bam or whatever was too difficult so I dropped back into the gold leagues.

I am just lobbying for a small reward given to the defender or some sort of 'winning' 'losing' that makes sense. I think this could offer some kind of improvement to the trophy ranking system as you would see less people placing their TH outside their walls for a free shield, which in turn would lead to fewer players TH sniping their way into a league that is not appropriate for them.