A variable time limit

[Apoc65]

The time limit in Clash of Clans has a flawed, one-sided design. I'd suggest a time limit that increases with the opponent's Town Hall level.

Think back to when you were a Town Hall 2. The time limit most likely never bothered you - you could drop your army, destroy the cannon, and plow through 10 or 11 buildings within 3 minutes, and if not, your opponent was using an extremely spread-out base.

Now, think about Town Hall 5. You had higher-level troops, and bigger camps, but consequently, you had about 40 buildings to destroy (if I'm wrong, correct me; this is an estimate and isn't essential to this topic). If you're fooling around and/or hesitating to drop your high-damage troops, the time limit will catch up to you; and you'll be left with only a few seconds to spare when you finish up that last builder's hut. But the limit isn't regularly a problem.

If you've reached Town Hall 7, you know about the time limit - Stay hustled, but not hasty, and you'll be able to destroy all the buildings with about 30 seconds to a minute to spare. If your opponent has his huts at the corner, you better have a plan, or else you're timing out. At Town hall 7, there is a lot more to destroy, and the Time limit becomes a problem.

Above Town Hall 7, the Time limit is atrocious - it's difficult to end up with more than about 10 seconds remaining on a base with an O.K.-ish design, Witches that must be baited out of the clan castle, and buildings in the corner. There are simply too many buildings and not enough space in the camps. So I'm not suggesting that there be additional levels or troop space or something redonkulus like that that's going to overthrow the balance of Clash of Clans, but a time limit that increases with the opponent's Town Hall level. Are you a whale? Hmmmmmm?

Here's what my idea would do:

1) Players at "low" Town Hall levels would have to accommodate the lower time limit into their strategy; no longer is it feasible to destroy a base with 2 and a half minutes to spare.

2) Players at "high" Town Hall levels would have the opposite - a well-planned and hustled attack would optimally give the attacker a long time to spare before time-out.

Examples here assume you're attacking someone of your TH level.

Tell me your thoughts, people. Feedback is always appreciated.:)

[mewmew]

What town hall are you at? I'm almost a maxed TH10 and I've learned to cope with the time limit just fine. If you're looking to be able to have more time to strategize during the actual raid, I don't really think that's gonna matter. From what I've noticed at TH10, the slower you place your troops during the raid, the more likely they're gonna get wiped out because the prior troops didn't have the backup they needed because the backup was placed too long after they were. In that sense, a longer time limit wouldn't really do anything in my opinion.

If you are posting this because you honestly miss out on the third star because of the time running out more often then not, then that might actually merit your suggestion. But then again as I said before, I've gotten used to it and so have thousands of others, you might just have to suck it up :/

[George1971]

I have agreed with this for a long time, and suggest something like an extra 10 seconds for every TH level above 6.

Longer time allows for more complicated strategies, and this is a good thing for players who like complicated strategies. But it is optional, others can still launch everything at once.

Giving the attacker the option of using more time is not necessarily giving them an advantage. As noted by the post above, a poorly strung out attack gives the defences less targets per unit time; an obvious and common strategy is to overwhelm defences by a large number of troops all at once.

The real benefit I feel is seeing a clever, finely balanced balanced battle play out. Like chess, a really good game is ruined if brought to a premature end by the clock. This is not to say that battles should be unlimited.

This change would only affect close matched battles. Most losing attacks are killed by the defences before time runs out.

On the side, this may give the unused healer a bit of benefit, although I doubt it would be enough.

[OzAudi]

I think people who want more time for battles need to read the many other threads that ask for extensions too.


There is no need to any change to battle times in CW or multiplayer. As th, building numbers and their levels increase, so too do camp sizes, troops types and levels, cc size, spell types, number and level.

SC tweak aspects of both offense and defense because they want keep battle time constant.

The suggestion that army and attack types become more complicated conveniently ignores the fact that more advanced offensive strategies are devastatingly quick.

[George1971]

I think people who want more time for battles need to read the many other threads that ask for extensions too.


There is no need to any change to battle times in CW or multiplayer. As th, building numbers and their levels increase, so too do camp sizes, troops types and levels, cc size, spell types, number and level.

SC tweak aspects of both offense and defense because they want keep battle time constant.

The suggestion that army and attack types become more complicated conveniently ignores the fact that more advanced offensive strategies are devastatingly quick.

OzAudi, there doesn't need to be a need for a change to be a good change.


SC tweak aspects? Then why did they abandon the healer?


they want to keep battle time constant? Says who? Instead, it is a simple fact that battle time is limited.


Of course good offensive strategies are fast, that is required by the short battle time limit.


what would be the downside of 3.5 minutes battle at TH9? The devastatingly quick advanced offensive strategies couldn't be hurt by the change.

[OzAudi]

OzAudi, there doesn't need to be a need for a change to be a good change.

If a change isn’t needed, why change ? This good change is only your view. But the system isn’t broken now in my view.. An increase in time favours the attacker and *will* shift the balance.

SC tweak aspects? Then why did they abandon the healer?
Abandon healer ? Not to my knowledge, They made healer invisible to air bombs. Then they introduced the Air Sweeper. That *isn’t* tweaking offense and defense ?


they want to keep battle time constant? Says who? Instead, it is a simple fact that battle time is limited
Battle time is limited 3 min. Constant. If battle time limits are changed per th they are not constant but variable.

Of course good offensive strategies are fast, that is required by the short battle time limit.
Some offensive types are slow but effective, some are fast but effective. Not all simple offense types are fast. Not all complex offense types are slow. The mere fact that there are successful offense strategies that succeed within 3 mins at all makes the request for battle times to change absurd.

what would be the downside of 3.5 minutes battle at TH9? The devastatingly quick advanced offensive strategies couldn't be hurt by the change.
Again, why ? Downside or not, the current 3 min battle time works.

My responses in red.

[ashdungeon]

At higher th lvls yes this time may need to be slightly increased, maybe with th11. But I still believe that time is another variable that needs to put in place while playing clash of clans whether you like it or not.

[OzAudi]

At higher th lvls yes this time may need to be slightly increased, maybe with th11. But I still believe that time is another variable that needs to put in place while playing clash of clans whether you like it or not.

If you want to take a stance and openly disagree, put your arguments up for others to consider.

[George1971]

My responses in red.

You say three minutes is long enough, and you say an increase in time favours the attacker. These two things contradict each other.


I don't think it will change any balance very much, but will allow more variables in attacks. Probably, they will not be advantageous much, but they will be interesting to try.


I would like this because the best attacks are fast and complex, and I would like try other possibilities.

[OzAudi]

You say three minutes is long enough, and you say an increase in time favours the attacker. These two things contradict each other.


I don't think it will change any balance very much, but will allow more variables in attacks. Probably, they will not be advantageous much, but they will be interesting to try.


I would like this because the best attacks are fast and complex, and I would like try other possibilities.

Not contradictory really but not explained sufficiently either.

Three minutes is long enough for a competent attacker.
Increasing battle time gives an advantage to a less than competent attacker.