What's the purpose behind 70% damage percentage league bonus??

[Rampantarmadillo]

Can some enlightened minds kindly explain the reasoning or logic behind the "you must damage 70% of the base to take the full loot bonus"? Of all the new features from the update, that one makes the least sense for me.

For PBT and town snipe removal, I can kinda understand Supercell's reasoning for implenting them (tho the methods and executions are questionably terrible). But the 70% rule for 100% league bonus, this feature does not accomplish any positive outcome. If you can obtain the full war loot just from one star victory regardless of damage percentage, why is league bonus suddenly become an exception?

From a perspective of a Th10 vs Th10 in champion league, it is already difficult for an average player to consistently damage 60+% (2 star) against a well upgraded base even with an expensive army. This means that you will always miss out 20%-10% of the league bonus even in a relatively successfully attack. When you crunch in all the numbers from the army cost and etc, the missed out loot quickly adds up, and it gets a lot worse the higher league you go.

TLDR :If Supercell wants players to not TH snipe and push higher in league, why did they implent this counterproductive feature that brings nothing good to the game? It limits army diversity and creates unnecessary loot loss.

Devs explained, or maybe some youtuber communicated the Dev's thought, that top bonus in each league is broadly similar to base bonus in the league above. Given that, it follows that their intent is to give feedback and impetus for folk to push up when they're regularly hitting max bonus.

[Genos1213]

Out of the whole update this is the one that bothers me the most. Bad enough trying to find bases with enough loot, the added punch to the gonads if you hit 55% sucks.

The bonus was increased by 10%. Getting 55% would get you around 95% of what you would have got pre-update. So what on earth are you complaining about exactly?


Anyways scaled league bonus is a good idea. It rewards doing more damage on a base. Not a whole lot, but still.

[Rykan]

Can some enlightened minds kindly explain the reasoning or logic behind the "you must damage 70% of the base to take the full loot bonus"? Of all the new features from the update, that one makes the least sense for me.

For PBT and town snipe removal, I can kinda understand Supercell's reasoning for implenting them (tho the methods and executions are questionably terrible). But the 70% rule for 100% league bonus, this feature does not accomplish any positive outcome. If you can obtain the full war loot just from one star victory regardless of damage percentage, why is league bonus suddenly become an exception?

From a perspective of a Th10 vs Th10 in champion league, it is already difficult for an average player to consistently damage 60+% (2 star) against a well upgraded base even with an expensive army. This means that you will always miss out 20%-10% of the league bonus even in a relatively successfully attack. When you crunch in all the numbers from the army cost and etc, the missed out loot quickly adds up, and it gets a lot worse the higher league you go.

TLDR :If Supercell wants players to not TH snipe and push higher in league, why did they implent this counterproductive feature that brings nothing good to the game? It limits army diversity and creates unnecessary loot loss.

TH sniping removal and the death of farming by removing dead bases from MM was deemed inadequate in SC's quest to reduce progression to a snail's pace.

So, they added a destruction-based loot bonus system to ensure that players either gem their way to max or endure this injustice and remain fodder for the update-lovers by staying active and collecting.

[samsneed]

My theory is that there is more profit in pushing the next button.

Let's say every page load on the server costs SC $0.01 (in reality much less than that, but for example)

Now, each time a battle starts that's $0.03 and then each time a battle lasts over a minute or whatever $0.05

Well, obviously, less battles and server time can be a big revenue boost. I don't know if they manage costs like that.

If they're not, they're throwing money away, I mean if you saved half a penny on one billion page loads a month, it adds up. I imagine they have page loads in excess of that too.

[AletX]

To discourage th sniping from migrating to putting 30% of your buildings in a corner.

The 1/3 attack army requirement sorta counters it, the fact that your townhall also count as a storage bank already lowers defender's incentive to put TH outside.

The 70% rule on the otherhand impacts all players from snipers, farmers, and pushers....

[Rampantarmadillo]

TH sniping removal and the death of farming by removing dead bases from MM was deemed inadequate in SC's quest to reduce progression to a snail's pace.

So, they added a destruction-based loot bonus system to ensure that players either gem their way to max or endure this injustice and remain fodder for the update-lovers by staying active and collecting.

Dead bases are not removed from the queue. The Dev's have made that clear in the past, and they have not announced any change to that since.

More FUD from a lovelorn sniper.

[zombielore]

Who gems their army, just wait for it and attack 3x through shield. Simple!

What happens if I have other stuff to do in life. Not as Simple!

[Scooter71]

In other words, train huge armies and GEM them so that SC PROFITS from it.

Why do you gem armies? Attacking 3-4 times under shield with "huge armies" does not require gumming and is profitable.

[Ekisman]

Why are people so convinced that SC's every decision is just for us to spend gems needlessly? It's like listening to conspiracy theorists!

[Scooter71]

What happens if I have other stuff to do in life. Not as Simple!

Umm, then do the other stuff. An army training under shield does not require your time chief. The only people who I see upset about this new system is the old bot users who used auto pilot for 6 hours at a time.