Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: An Interesting Thought on Defense

  1. #1
    Trainee
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    24

    An Interesting Thought on Defense

    Since Clash of Clans was released in 2012, attacking was the name of the game. Different strategies came and went, some made their way back into the spotlight, and some seem to have died for good. Offense is constantly changing, but defense is staying more or less the same.
    Introductions of the X-Bow and Inferno Tower have shaken up how the game is played quite a bit. You can choose whether you want your X-Bow to shoot at ground targets only, or at air targets only. Inferno towers can attack a single target, dealing massive damage, or up to five at once, with low damage but it being dealed upon multiple targets. This gives us the opportunity to choose how we want to set up these defenses, but it' for these defenses only.

    I'm sure many of us have played tower defense games in which you can choose what opposing enemy your defensive buildings can attack; for example, closest, furthest, strongest, and weakest. This led me to think, what if this same idea was implemented into Clash? For some buildings, like the mortar and wizard tower, choices could be quite obvious; as you would want them to attack weaker targets such as archers rather than golems. Other buildings, though, like cannons and archer towers, would be a lot more tricky to figure out. They could be set to attack the strongest target in their range, but now they're stuck on that enemy, while being shot down by a group of wizards. If they're set to attack the weakest targets, giants, pekkas, and other high-health troops would become advantageous.

    Inferno towers would become a lot more useful, as almost everyone uses them on multi-target, at least in lower leagues. If they're on single shot, and want them to attack golems, pekkas, etc. like they're supposed to,now you can. Instead of you multi-target focusing on the enemy's king, golems, and lava hounds, they'll attack wizards and skeltors like they should.

    I suppose that this could go in the "New Ideas" thread, but I think that this applies to the entirety of Clash, and that it should be viewed by a greater audience. Feedback is greatly appreciated, but let's keep it positive, because we all know that negativity in this community will get us nowhere.
    TH10 | Level 117 | 430M GG

  2. #2
    LachNessMeownster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Creator Code: Lach
    Posts
    5,977
    A very very interesting concept. Thanks for a good read.

  3. #3
    Forum Elder Jomarx3me's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    2,007
    interesting...

    but kinda clunky...

    if this goes through, balance would depend on the options we will be given

    as this could potentially make golems useless
    maxed out TH9, minus the heroes
    kinda quit, Lurker mode: on

  4. #4
    Voracious Messenger Cheeserman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    1,072
    Quote Originally Posted by TheGreatLach View Post
    A very very interesting concept. Thanks for a good read.
    truth ^^^^^

    PART OF THE FE IV AND V ORGANIZATION TEAM
    Thanks for the sig Raw
    [QUOTE=brandonpj21;8815691]This is cute[/QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by Holps View Post
    Cheese won't leave as long as there are crackers

  5. #5
    Forum Superstar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    3,875
    You could say the game is almost completely focused on offense and that defending is simply the counterpart to support it. I completely agree that defense just needs more customizable options- this only goes late game as you have said with X-Bows and Infernoes. I've played Bloons Tower Defense which allows this customization of troop targeting and it certainly adds a new level of strategem. There's strategy of course in defending, but having the option to actually modify each defense would bring base building to another level. A good idea would be to have a distinctive mark on each modification, e.g. targeting strongest troops would have an S mark on it, etc.

    Anyway, pretty supportive of this idea and I'm sure us base designers would love to have this implemented. Of course this would add a new level of difficulty for the players, but then again they could just stick with the the regular targeting
    Retired

  6. #6
    Forum Veteran victort's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Sulking in a corner,
    Posts
    1,739
    Interesting idea, but a no from me....

    I like raiding and smashing bases, and find that side of the game fun, I have played other games, where you can constantly tweak defences in similar ways to the op suggestion, but have never stuck with them... just personal preference.
    Supercell neutered my beloved Zaps.... Oh well, adapt and survive... Now BAMing in a league near you, with max rage...
    Bring on the BAMfury! !!!!

  7. #7
    Pro Member ZenCoC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Singapore 31SCE
    Posts
    611
    Isn't the whole point of having troops like golems is to tank while smaller troops behind can safely deal dps?
    if every tower is now able to choose their targets, their tank troops would become useless.
    IGN: ZeNeLLiE | BK: 25| AQ: 27 | Walls: Pathetic | Status: Pushing | Record: 4555
    Valkyrie user in Titan league -
    Watch my YouTube Channel here - 5000+ subscribers!


  8. #8
    Senior Member JohnnyBravo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    319
    Interesting... A pretty kool concept, but it would change the entire COC landscape. Tanking (which is the main attack strategy, regardless of TH level) would become pretty much redundant if i could set my Archer Towers to pick off weaker troops...
    CURRENT LEVEL - 121
    TOWN HALL - LEVEL 9
    BARBARIAN KING - LEVEL 30
    ARCHER QUEEN - LEVEL 27
    LAVA WALLS - 238/250


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •