Why are inactive bases blocked from getting attacked?

[JustElisha]

"We've never removed them, you just never see them". Uhu. Like I said. My base went 35 days without being attacked, and as soon as I got online it was wiped.

A couple months ago, I didn't launched the game for like 2 months or something and I was getting "This player attacked you!" notifications everyday.

[AxionXD]

My opinion is if you rely heavy on farming inactives, you've lost the spirit of the game. Thats why supercell drops their priority, youre suppose to be raiding other active players. It is great to find that base with no xbow ammo and 400k of each? Absolutely! But i treat that as a gift not as a necessity. Once you make that a necessity, youre gonna have long term problems.

[Lloopy14]

sorry I have taken so long to respond... kinda needed the laptop for this. It's a nightmare on a mobile.

Yes my full collectors and 1 million each in storage weren't attacked for 35 days. Of course I can't remember the loot I had over a month ago haha.

And as far as I know you get 20% of available loot in the defender's storage and 50% of collectors if the TH level >= yours. If it's 1 level lower than yours you get 90% of that (and all that is some. So you mean when you're inactive your base gives away less than that?

Sorry, I have been trying not make lots of assumptions and I may have still made a few...

No inactive bases don't give away less resources. My point, maybe made badly, is that most players will empty their collectors at the end of a session. The loot available would have only been based on that in your storages initially. If it wasn't attacked then the resources in your collectors would have started stockpiling - giving the extra loot.

around a month ago puts you in the christmas 1 gem boost period. Weird things happened. Inactives appeared everwhere and people were being matched with other players far outside the normal match making range. It may have been that you weren't offering as much loot as other inactive players. Higher leveled players could have been matched with you - you weren't profitable, and those who were TH7's could have decided to keep nexting for a higher base with more resources eg maxed TH9 or TH10 falling through the leagues.

If your collectors weren't easy targets ( covered by your defenses, behind walls etc) then people may be less inclined to raid you.

And I'm not a TH7 complaining about whatever. It's a secondary account that I obviously don't play. But I would like to see more inactives even as a TH10, I don't see how my TH level makes a difference. I don't think this block is a good idea. Like I suggested, they could just give 5 day shields to inactive bases that get >0% damage on them. And I do believe after some time of inactivity it is forever, until you come online again, just like the other guy whom I quoted said, that makes total sense.

Around 1 year -9 months ago I used to find dead TH10 bases in Gold 1. Every lunch time I seemed to come across a base with 3 maxed or nearly maxed DE collectors. I loved it. When I reached TH9 and had TH8 troops / not upgraded my army camps I used to attack these bases ( often with maxed defenses) and whilst I may get most of the loot I didn't always shield them. This left them open to other attackers - but offering less loot... if they didn't 40% a base then this would mean it would be in the queue for a 3rd time.. with far less resources.

There are too many variables since last year to be able to go into - but assuming that the way inactives drop out of sight hasn't changed - other factors have to be taken into. From my experience most of my clan members start dropping out at TH8. I am assuming that there are less TH10 bases, than TH9 ... less in TH9 than TH8 etc. so there are less TH10 inactives than TH7 inactives to start off with. Over the last year the TH8's in my clan have started farming in Gold2. Previously they were lower in trophies. The reason for moving up is that they are after DE- since clan wars upgrading DE troops and the King have become priorities. There is a larger group of players looking out for these TH10 inactive players. I'm open to the criticism that I was a bad attacker ... but if they are anything like me the lower THs may not shield the base and loot will be leeched from these bases.

I think it would be very intersting to find out how far a TH10 with maxed storages and full collectors with unarmed traps, empty infernos and empty x-bows would drop before attacks on the base ceased. I suppose it depends on how high it started off....

btw.. has your TH7 been attacked yet?

The idea that the game is based on attacking active players is completely ridiculous. First of all, they designed the game so you have to be offline (in other words - inactive) in order to be attacked. If they wanted true PVP why would they make the game like that?
.

I think that the point about active and online people has been explained in this thread so no need for me to respond. I started the game with the sole purpose of destroying another persons village. It was only at TH9 when I was saving for my archers lvl 6 (7.5 mil) that I started barching. Prior to that I used giant healer to destroy storages and I made a profit. The reason I changed is that I went through a really dry spell on elixir as one of my lab upgrades finished. I introduced a few giants eventually and found a bit more sucess in raiding. I cannot think of the point of a game where you just raid a few dead bases and just collect it and, as everyone else is doing the same, do not have to defend it. Maybe that is just my point of view. (and yes I have my Th ouside so I'm open to criticism here but people still have the opportunity to attack me)

Reason number 2. An active player uses WAY more resources than they can ever hope to produce from our mines. If all of the inactives were removed and all that was left was active players collecting from their mines then the entire game economy would completely crash.
.

I don't understand if your above comment was aimed at me. I do not believe that I have said that inactives were not important as stated below. I do not disagree with you. I have a feeling that there's a misunderstanding here somewhere.

Inactive players arent blocked ... They are moved to the back of the queue. They are important for the economy - I agree there. And it is always nice to come across an inactive.
.

[Smalls]

I don't understand if your above comment was aimed at me. I do not believe that I have said that inactives were not important as stated below. I do not disagree with you. I have a feeling that there's a misunderstanding here somewhere.

The first comment was directed at your active vs active statement (not at you personally! ). The second comment about inactives was not, as I've read your posts and we agree on that point.

I still stand by my belief that this is not an active vs active game - except for Clan Wars. Even when you attack an active your looking for a poorly designed base or a premie to farm. The game is not about challenging yourself to attack the toughest base - again, the exception being clan wars - its about finding loot or an easy base to gain trophys.

No one can argue that the game economy wouldn't completely crash and burn without inactives.

I believe 100% that if SuperCell created fresh new content and let the loot flow they'd make even more money. The casual player would then have a reason to drop $50 per month where as now for me, it makes no sense to buy gems.

[Lloopy14]

The first comment was directed at your active vs active statement (not at you personally! ). The second comment about inactives was not, as I've read your posts and we agree on that point.

I still stand by my belief that this is not an active vs active game - except for Clan Wars. Even when you attack an active your looking for a poorly designed base or a premie to farm. The game is not about challenging yourself to attack the toughest base - again, the exception being clan wars - its about finding loot or an easy base to gain trophys.

No one can argue that the game economy wouldn't completely crash and burn without inactives.

I believe 100% that if SuperCell created fresh new content and let the loot flow they'd make even more money. The casual player would then have a reason to drop $50 per month where as now for me, it makes no sense to buy gems.

I didn't take it personally - I was just very confused and kept re reading what I wrote lol. In truth, would rather someone correct me if I am wrong (or should that be when?) and I do like reading what other people say. I don't think that this issue is simple at all.

I think that people would be more likely to gem the barracks etc to farm if the loot was more consistent. You can boost at one point in the day and loot, whether in storages or inactive collector bases, is everywhere... others (sunday mornings for example) I could next until I get cramp in my finger before finding a base with 100K gold or elixir. Fortunately I get bored easily and give up playing or settle.

Unfortunately yes - the only time I get to actually attack a base properly is clan wars. It's the main reason I like it. I've had to set myself little challenges to make farming interesting. And yes, I'm currenlty picking on premmies, partly full collector bases. Good base designs aren't exactly hog friendly but if I can get to the centre with my queen to get the loot I will give it a try!