It doesn't suprise me when people accept a bad idea

[ayih]

there are two ways to look at efficiency. Loot per hour as you define it or loot per raid. In the second definition, if you were a log on/log off attack every couple of hours type of player, your loot per raid has likely increased. On the other hand if you remain logged in for hours straight, training cheap and fast troops and sniping league bonus in between raids, I would imagine your efficiency has dropped dramatically.

Clearly supercell designed the changes to improve the experience for the log on/log off style of play.

I'm sure I could think of dozens of ways to look at loot efficiency. I'll try to explain it another way:

If a hungry fisherman is fishing. He keeps looking for a new spot to fish to get the biggest fish. While doing that he is ignoring the little fish. In reality 10 2lb fish give the same size meal as 1 20 lb fish.

Would you rather have 20 lbs of fish or a 20 lb fish? Why wait 45 minutes for an army to catch a big fish when you can play for 30 minute and get 10 smaller fish of the same value? Loot per hour seems to be the only efficiently way to gauge loot.

If you get a big haul of loot. My guess is you'll keep playing to get a bigger haul. Instead of focusing on the loot, you're focusing on big numbers. I feel loot per hour is the only way anyone should gauge the Clash economy.

[danielealy]

I'm sure I could think of dozens of ways to look at loot efficiency. I'll try to explain it another way:

If a hungry fisherman is fishing. He keeps looking for a new spot to fish to get the biggest fish. While doing that he is ignoring the little fish. In reality 10 2lb fish give the same size meal as 1 20 lb fish.

Would you rather have 20 lbs of fish or a 20 lb fish? Why wait 45 minutes for an army to catch a big fish when you can play for 30 minute and get 10 smaller fish of the same value? Loot per hour seems to be the only efficiently way to gauge loot.

If you get a big haul of loot. My guess is you'll keep playing to get a bigger haul. Instead of focusing on the loot, you're focusing on big numbers. I feel loot per hour is the only way anyone should gauge the Clash economy.

You really like analogies, don't you. Too bad they are so ludicrous. And here i thought you were a "facts" guy. What was i thinking?

[JakeTheGrate]

Many people are better than me. You are not. You're arguments are childish. If you ever start an argument with, "On Mythbusters...", you will likely be wrong. They don't do science, they do entertainment. They don't have the budget to actually prove things one way or the other. I've used them in conversation; I've been embarrassed in some of those situations (they are not always wrong as chance predicts). When you are wrong, admit it. Your arguments are weak. You should admit that. If I'm wrong, so be it. I asmit it and move on. Do better next time. You confuse me having an ego with me telling you that you are in a position without support. Only the strong can admit fallacies and learn from them. Be strong.

I never claimed to be better than you. If I did, please quote it and place it in bold. Also, who are you to judge what is childish and what is not. I also never claimed to be right. And who are you to judge my position? Also, you might want to proof-read your replies and check for spelling and grammar mistakes. Missed key strokes don't help.

[stoygop]

Whole reference to MythBusters was tongue-in-cheek.

Yeah that's true. My statements were off base.

[MuffinPlox]

Some things are common sense to some and complex to others. There are players who say the loot is "better". I want to know what "better" is. What did these players do before the update to make it seem better now? Putting in more effort for the same reward isn't better to me.

You can't argue against hard facts. Before the update I could get 1.1 million gold and elixir per hour without sniping and unboosted. After the update it's closer to 250k per hour. You can hand a person a lemon and say it's sweet but some are going to see it's lie faster than others.

But you keep quoting books you don't understand. If that works for you.

In my opinion I like it better now because before this game really wasn't a challenge to gain loot. And some people like a challenge as long as it's possible. For us, we still find decent enough loot that we actually worked for instead of just hiding behind free th shields or sniping people's th's.
But what makes me not understand complaints is when their reason is that they don't have enough time to play because you can't get mad at the game for that. Being mad at it for that means you're mad at every single actively played game. And if that's true then they need to find a passive game.

[danielealy]

Yeah that's true. My statements were off base.

NP. Sometimes my attempt at humor don't make a lot of sense,

And sometimes, they're downright brilliant. LOL

[NateH]

I'm sure I could think of dozens of ways to look at loot efficiency. I'll try to explain it another way:

If a hungry fisherman is fishing. He keeps looking for a new spot to fish to get the biggest fish. While doing that he is ignoring the little fish. In reality 10 2lb fish give the same size meal as 1 20 lb fish.

Would you rather have 20 lbs of fish or a 20 lb fish? Why wait 45 minutes for an army to catch a big fish when you can play for 30 minute and get 10 smaller fish of the same value? Loot per hour seems to be the only efficiently way to gauge loot.

If you get a big haul of loot. My guess is you'll keep playing to get a bigger haul. Instead of focusing on the loot, you're focusing on big numbers. I feel loot per hour is the only way anyone should gauge the Clash economy.

im not trying to say one way is better than another, clearly you have a preference. I was only trying to point out that those that like the update and are claiming better loot post update likely play the game differently and have an alternate view of efficiency. For them, 30 minutes of game time is 30 minutes of game time, wether that game time is continuous or spread out over 6 raids during the day.

[stoygop]

I never claimed to be better than you. If I did, please quote it and place it in bold. Also, who are you to judge what is childish and what is not. I also never claimed to be right. And who are you to judge my position? Also, you might want to proof-read your replies and check for spelling and grammar mistakes. Missed key strokes don't help.

I actually corrected the you're-your mistake prior, but I apologize for it. It's a pet peeve, and it should not have happened. Typos are hard to stop on smart phones. Again, I am sorry.

[stoygop]

I never claimed to be better than you. If I did, please quote it and place it in bold. Also, who are you to judge what is childish and what is not. I also never claimed to be right. And who are you to judge my position? Also, you might want to proof-read your replies and check for spelling and grammar mistakes. Missed key strokes don't help.

Looking back through, I'm not even sure what we were arguing about. Sometimes the wind blows so hard...

[stoygop]

No it isn't. Everyone knows this sort of game gets updates.

Updates yes. I think the December update went beyond nerf/buff/new whatever. If there are other examples, please cite them. This is the first mobile game I've played (and last); I bought a smart phone to play it. I'm disappointed. I'm accustomed to standard platform games that don't get drastically altered.