New idea for zapping defense (this is different, trust me)

[ColonelAwesome]

Please read the whole thread before starting a flame war. My goal is to create a trade off to a zapping defense, and I think I found a solution.

This first part you've probably heard before, it's the lightning rod idea. This ros absorbs any lightning spell in a 5 tile radius of the building.

So how is this idea different? The lightning rod can only be placed on the TH. Think about what that would mean. If the TH had to be placed next to the DE tank, you'd need to choose between getting an easy free shield (your best defense against bigger bases), or portecting your DE tank (your best defense against smaller bases).

Consider someone putting their TH inside the base next to the DE tank. Yes they will be safe from zappers, but they will sit there with full storages and NO shield for hours on end. Eventually someone with a scary army will come along and steamroll them, making them loose not just their DE (more then zapping too), but potentially 300k gold and elixr too.

And if they only get 39%, that could happen a few times. Whereas if they leave their TH outside, they run the risk of getting zapped but get a shield out of it.

I feel that this idea is fair since it provides a potential defense against zapping (currently the only attack in the entire game with no defense), but comes at a cost that not everyone will pay. So zapping will remain in the game, while at the same time giving players an option to actually defend it.

It could even have a limit. TH7's rod can only absorb 1 hit, TH8 2 hits, TH9 3, and TH10 4.

I LOVE IT

[Bulldog241]

@ iceageg: Reported for personal attack.

As to the spell trap, fine sounds great. Don't know why you all are ok with that but not with my idea, other then that you personally don't like me. I suspect that to be the case, which shows what kind of a person you are when you are unable to be objective. (Just for the record, you can't imagine how little I care what anonymous people on the internet think of me. Lol)

I feel that my idea would actually be better for the zapping community, since you'd know if a base is safe to zap and it forces the defender to give up something big (no free shield) to defend his DE.

But given the current situation ANY idea would be better then what we currently have. So if you want me to be able to defend zappers and get free shields too, awesome. I certainly won't argue with that!

[TheConfuzed1]

@ iceageg: Reported for personal attack.

Oh good! You will get the attention of a mod now, who will hopefully lock this thread.

As to the spell trap, fine sounds great. Don't know why you all are ok with that but not with my idea, other then that you personally don't like me. I suspect that to be the case, which shows what kind of a person you are when you are unable to be objective. (Just for the record, you can't imagine how little I care what anonymous people on the internet think of me. Lol)

Geez kid, you're soooo needy! We don't dislike you personally... We didn't like your idea, and we posted why, as has already been done a thousand times before.

Then, you acted as if anyone who disagreed with you was attacking you, and you ignored everything we said to you. The idea has been ruled out. Period. No one cares about your twisted view of the interpretations of the actual words used to articulate that sentiment.

It's the whining and juvenile attitude that we don't like. Get over yourself. I don't have the time to care what random strangers over the internet think of me, let alone concern myself with whether or not they think I dislike them... Which, you obviously do care about, or you wouldn't have even brought it up.

[Bulldog241]

Oh good! You will get the attention of a mod now, who will hopefully lock this thread.

And yet the thread remains open. You guys have been calling for this thread to be closed for days now, acting as though it would be child's play to close it. Even going so far as to make up infractions I've made in a pathetic attempt to close it, and yet here it is. Still open despite your best efforts to close it.

Did you ever bother to ask yourself why? If what you say is even remotely true then your correct, this thread should be closed. The only conclusion anyone can draw is that you are laughably wrong about everything you've said.

The idea has been ruled out.

No, it hasn't. Here is yet another example of you blatantly lying about what Steve said.

And 90% of the posts here have been lies about that or comments on zapping in general, NOT about this thread. If I've missed posts containing legitimate criticism it's only because you lot have highjacked my thread. Please point these out and I'll happily respond.

Oh yeah, and this thread is still not closed. Ready to stop lying about this idea being ruled out?

[iceageg]

. . . No, it hasn't. Here is yet another example of you blatantly lying about what Steve said.

And 90% of the posts here have been lies about that or comments on zapping in general, NOT about this thread. If I've missed posts containing legitimate criticism it's only because you lot have highjacked my thread. Please point these out and I'll happily respond. . .

. . . And I was so happy seeing this thread lost in the later pages. Oh well.

Even if you do accept the hardline "she never actually said no" translation of Steve's message any sane, thinking human can see that the translation that the rest of the community accepts is not "blatantly lying".

If you are unwilling to accept the reality of the first 90% then at least re-read the other 10% which also clearly explain why zapping is a non-issue, that your attempt at fixing something that is not a problem with a tired old idea will make it worse, and that your instance that something be done about it simply proves that it is working correctly.

[Bulldog241]

. . . And I was so happy seeing this thread lost in the later pages. Oh well.

Even if you do accept the hardline "she never actually said no" translation of Steve's message any sane, thinking human can see that the translation that the rest of the community accepts is not "blatantly lying".

If you are unwilling to accept the reality of the first 90% then at least re-read the other 10% which also clearly explain why zapping is a non-issue, that your attempt at fixing something that is not a problem with a tired old idea will make it worse, and that your instance that something be done about it simply proves that it is working correctly.

Lol. How is it a " hardline translation"? It isn't a translation at ALL, it's what he actually said. You are the one trying to translate what he said into something else.

There are a TON of things that they don't currently have plans to do, and yet in the future will do. Please point to one thing that puts zapping in a special catagory where we aren't allowed to talk about it? Because several people have flat out said this thread should be closed BECAUSE it's ruled out, and have pointed to Steve's quote as evidence.

Well guess what, the thread is still open, we are still allowed to talk about it, the idea is still NOT ruled out, and you've spent 10 pages looking like a fool for claiming something that is obviously not true. And I'll bet you $5 that your next post you will still make the same crazy claim that is disproved everyday this thread stays open. Yeesh.