@TPPPP Good call. Absolutely right. A T5 HCBC Hansel would put up 25 Arboreal Forests and be DTS to all attack builds. Bravo!
Lol of course with 25 extra lands the game mechanics would change as well. A build with 25 def towers would not be dtw to a hitter with 75 attack builds. Also, who says the new lands have to be 25? 16 or 9 could also be a possibility.
I see your point OP, you bring a lot of points to the table. I have been a spy since as far back as I can remember. However I still think the issue has more to do with attack builds not wanting to sacrifice buildings for towers, so their numbers look nice and their rank in the clan is high. IMO it seems that the percentage of dedicated players per build is higher with spies. If you line them up I feel more spies understand the game than attack builds. Because more casual players just hit eb and upgrade then get into the game after they are already a big attack build. As if people choose to go spy because they already know game mechanics and how use their spies. I know I didn't have time to put as much into my ideas as you but it is a clear point that I think needs considered some, if only a little.
A possibility, yes, but the defense towers will be able to beat most of those attack builds regardless. 9 or 16 defense towers Hell Lands Hansel (implying they didn't make any other defense towers) against the 9 or 16 attack builds built on the Hell Lands.
You do know how the Def Building Works right Phil...... One Def Building has static stats and is equivalent to 2 Attack buildings with full troops. So lets say a Attack build with 74 Attack buildings LL > 24 T4 HL > 25 Hatchery HH > 25 Hatchery Attacks a T5 Hansel LL > 24 SoS HL > 24 Volary, 1 Colony HH > 25 Arboreal Forests Now the 25 Arboreal Forests Cancel out the 50 Attack Buildings, what are you left with? The 24 Attack Buildings on LL can't go through a T5 Attack Building on HL. >>>> Conclusion <<<< Attack Build nullified by a Hansel. *Hears a Collective Groan
@malestone You do realize that the devs have adjusted the stats of def buildings in the past. What would stop them to readjust them again in light of the new lands? Your thinking is too static. Of course adjustments will be made to the mechanics. Kaw is, as it always is, a work in progress.
Imbullen had a nice idea Raid - soldiers can attack spies (as with Assassination, spies attack soldiers)
hahahaha think before i post, learn the game mechanics and get back to me when you have a clue noob. also put some practice in reading as your post bears nothing todo with what i said.
Forgive me if this was asked already, I didn't have time to read EVERY post on the thread. But Phil, you are supporting more attack builds but are Hansel yourself. And if memory serves, you were PS like a week ago?! Doesn't seem like you support the build?!
Don't support Genuine spy's are effective support roles in war ... They are most effective working in tandem with attack builds to soften up other big attack , or to reduce the impact of other big spies For all the strengths of spies their weaknesses are unique and great players know how to handle the build The problem lies in most players ( myself included - I'm still learning) not working to a) their own builds strengths b) working in isolation and not as a collective team or in sub teams- wars aren't won on lost on one build type They are won by great leadership / great coordination / and resolve and mostly team work - all members with the mix of builds working as a unit . The old pwar issue is irrelevant - that game mechanic is defunct .
You have spys, to take out spys, scouting bypasses the sdp's. The current builds, equipment and pots mean that a spy has to use sap's to be able to steal from someone with a 700 thous plus spy def anyway. The builds are different, and that creates interest. No more tinkering with the builds is required in my opinion. :mrgreen: