We all know if a defender has defense pots and loses an incoming attack , that they pay more plunder to the attacker than if they had no pots . I assume this is to prevent the farming of inactives , although I guess it may just be based on the defender having more worth . Whatever the case may be the the pot rule is now being used as a strategy in ee wars. Clans are stacking hansel builds, they pay nothing to attacks and can steal the hell out of anyone with gold. This is not an exploit and is completely within the rules of the game , so kudos to whoever figured it out first. That being said , just because something is within the current rules/mechanics does not exactly mean that there is complete balance in it. The problem with earlier seasons as we all know was the sh mechanics, they could generate a ton of plunder and would give up none. I almost quit the game during that time and we can still see the effects of this dark period in the current state/amount of war clans. Now we are essentially seeing the same thing just on the other end of the spectrum. Fictional scenario : I see a hansel get a ko in war cc: I attack that hansel and make 20 mil, hansel reports me In cc , before I get to market place and scroll to bank I get 2 inc steals. Net 100 mil for hansels. Even if I do bank and have 5 gold out it would still be a 30 mil net gain for mr hansel. This makes no sense to me as I HAVE to attack as the war is based on plunder but I cannot zero my own gold. It will always be a net loss for each attack I make. Especially with the no pot payout mechanics. So I don't want to rag on the ps1 stacked clans, they figured out the new "formula" good for them. But what I also really really really don't want to see is next war season be 85% hansels on each roster. This would get old fast and really it already is. Just watch world chat for people looking for war mercs , all "ps1 needed" . It's a copycat league and when people lose a few wars first instinct is to copy the winning formula . I get it. So anyway in closing , I feel removing the no pot payout mechanic from ee wars would force clans to start using more mixed build rosters. That's my hope anyway. Thoughts comments suggestions all welcome and thank you for the time .
I don't know if that will have an effect on primal wars. I may be incorrect but with or without pots, attacks still will pay less then steals in primals
For "ps1" payout in primal is also based on your cs and theres. Also troops level. First hit on a bc han (that has no adp) i make 45 to 50m. Thats why silver,bg and other clans load up on hybrid at the start they unload on han making around 500m or so. If your are below 70% troops or they are a small ps1 hitting them makes little profit.
This is nothing new. I lobbied for a minimum attack value per target for over a year ( that would have balanced out all builds and eliminated gh exploit day one. But Devs wouldn't change it back then. The system is being used less due to having to have specific builds and limitations preventing most bothering. Add that with stacked clans and an unfair payout system that hasn't been changed appropriately. You aren't getting anywhere soon asking for change.
I have one question why we're you not koed before you tried to bank gold that is your fault for leaking all your plunder
SKO is not always wise, turtle wars were days of old. Bad war builds in EE hurt clans if must turtle. Q for u...Why do ppl build for war? Q: r war builds to be meatshields only?
Well said, Spil. While I agree, I see it slightly different. Attack/hybrids lose their ally bonus for attacks in primal, hansels lose nothing for stealing a potted build of any sort. Which sadly leaves round wars to massive bfa SH and primal wars to PS1 (ugh, hate that silly term). Question remains the same: How do we fix a broken system without everyone abusing it?
Support. Ive always disliked how pots affect plunder in ee war. Outside of ee war, i get why it affects plunder, but in ee war it should have no effect.
I often dont agree with spill but yes at times when you hit han in PRIMAL war the payout will be small. But again this is based on cs of both builds and the troop level of the att build.
precisely... and yeah, as someone else said this is nothing new spil. The same Exact mechanic was in play during the gh/sh with no adp/sdp era. Hansels, especially small cs, pay crap to att builds. Get some hybs and dump on em like everyone else
Lol. But yes I am also in agreement and yes it depends on troop levels. I think my plunder range on an hfbc hansel from 100%-50% is prob 37-19mil or so