The title says it all....
I often see players ending the attack at 29%, attacking with some giants, wallbreakers but mostly cobolds.
They try to get to 1 or 2 resource tanks and easily gain 100k.
As a defender, you need to reset traps and ask cc troops.
Please SC stop this nonsence!! No 30% damage is no loot!!
Originally Posted by ErwinB
Good thinking. I'd love to see this idea implemented. We definitely need a more reliable and fairer shield system as announced by SC. The current system doesn't provide that. No loot and bonus should be awarded for attacks failing to give a shield.
Have a look at these threads:
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...age-on-Attacks
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...e-em-shield%21
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...eld-no-loot%21
This is only a good idea if the cost of building the army is refunded if you don't reach 30%. Sometimes you attack and don't reach 30% due to nothing more than bad luck.
would be a lot easier if they gave 12 hours shield at 10% damage..
Then everyone wins, even SC
Wasn't it the same issue before with 40% shields, I remember getting attacked hundreds of times and people ending their attack early at 35% - 39%. This issue is not new on this update, you are just seeing it more as you now have to defend. This really is the mentality of the people doing these attacks and not SC, so you really are directing this at the wrong people.
I somewhat agree. Everyone has been caught by cc or traps or misplaced spells that end an attack.
But really, I see this just leading to more 100% destruction events.
A better idea is to design a 30% base.
True... But SC has the power to punish that mentality...
As for attacking and not gaining 30%... I never failed at getting 30% on any attack I did. I have 3 accounts, combined over 10000 attacks. I sure lost attacks but always well within the 40% area.
nah just be a ♥♥♥♥ like everyone else. Stop attack once you hit 29%. That way everyone gets a go at a base to take some DE or gold / elixir
No need for a refund - there shouldn't be any reward at all for a bad attack. If it's bad luck it shouldn't happen that often, so no issue. If it happens all the time it's poor skill. In that case the player should attack easier targets.
OK so how does SC tell the difference between a bad attack and someone ending it at 29% without having to spend thousands / tens of thousands on implementing a system to analyse every attack that is done, which would still not be accurate due to not being able to predict human nature?
You may not be a bad attacker, but I can tell you from my defence logs there are a lot (and I do mean a lot) of people out there who are especially when you only get a few seconds to size up a base before attacking it.
Posting Permissions
