Rebalancing buildings

  • Thread starter Thread starter admin
  • Start date Start date
Begging your pardon. Since subs won't be nerfed, no refund should be given. Likely won't and it's not bulk as they would still give same stats/make the same ammount.
 
Making a change simply to encourage build differential makes no sense. It is change for changes sake. Build changes just occurred when devs released the new clan plunder contests. Many players changed builds to balance strength, plunder & def to what they thought would be best in the new clan wars. Further change simply to have more differential around KAW makes no sense, given the better solution is to deal w potions and ally strength.
 
Ally strength has been dealt with or did you miss that uproar ?
Potion solutions have been proposed and each have been flawed.
 
I don't belive changing the stats if buldings will encourage ppl to change builds, but I do agree that the def pots have way to much of a succes rate, for example I don't have a strong spy build (54k) but do have alot of pots and when some one with 300+k spys attempts to steal from me I kind of expect to lose at least 2-3 of 5 but I end up wining all, further more if I atk some one with 0 atk/def (pure spy) with no allies I expect to win at least if I use atk pots at least but I find my self losing if they have all 10 def pots, there's something wrong there n if that's fixed I think we would see more mixed builds
 
Corin -
For someone who is supposed to be smart and knowledgeable, you sure make some stupid comments. Diversity is not an excuse for change - look at LB -ppl have different builds. That being said, this is a war game where you earn money only by winning attacks. As such, defense builds are not as valuable and never will be. You can't win as much with a defense build - period.

The really can be no debate that those with the most gold win - so unless the devs reconfigure KAW so that players win gold for successfully defending against an attack, this change is foolish and not well thought out.
 
The success rate of the defender and the "power" of pots is most likely two different issues.

Pots provide only the stated stat bonus. But with the way defense and combat is resolved, the defender probably has a bonus to "roll".

Imagine if it was pure stats and no "random" change to win, the game would be very much in the hands of a select few of untouchables. At least now, even the most weak has a "chance" to defend against the strong.

That's to protect the overall player base and also to ensure a level of balance.

Just as people have a chance to fail on the super weak, they also have a chance to win against the super strong.

As you can see by the factors the dev's have referenced, x5, that incredible str differences in the game.

To make change would further unbalance the game.
 
If you read my 3rd post on here , you can see my opinion here. Of course my argument isn't strong. I'm just explaining actions.

On the flip side reading through it looks like towers are getting a boost
 
Re@ Death2All:
interesting idea, winning gold from failed attacks on you from def buildings... How would towers factor in? Lol would make an all tower build finally profitable! When you think about it, since attack buildings help you earn gold when you win not def buildings earn gold when your opponent loses, and balanced buildings a little of both, would make for an interesting dynamic, AND might be a strong case more making def pots as expensive as attack pots! I'd be interested to see this in a clan war setting since as it stands now war is who can farm the most in 48hrs. Why should only the attacker get the benefit of plunder!!!
 
NO. Defender does not get plunder from wins. Been argued and logic tossed back and forth and the answer was the first word I posted thus far.
 
Lol, just a suggestion, a suggestion that would discourage the ever dev hated pure spy ;) closed osf? Lose a few to em and they're open for business. Not trying to press the point further and I take that word as final, but unless both ends of the spectrum are balanced with their own equal and oposing economic benefits the outcome of any rebalncing will inevitably fail, that's game theory 101 stuff no matter what you do people will seek the path of least resistance to the gold, if you seek diversity, diversify the paths to gold, just like in the real world it's all about the money! Apply our oposing viewpoints to "Keynesian" vs "Supply Side" economics and weigh the options of the game mechanics/asset profitability potential in terms of policy changes effecting supply and demand. Would make for an awesome white paper... Hmmm gives me an idea for a doctoral thesis... If I didn't loathe school so much... Lol!
 
I always assumed the defense-oriented buildings were for questers, offensive for battlers, balanced for people who wanted to do some of each. No strong thoughts on the announced changes, but I think the best way to have increased diversity would involve making quests more profitable or easier for the other buildings.
 
Will the proposed changes be for every building owned? Or will we only receive a one time 5% bonus for owning one of the rebalanced buildings?? Because having an extra 120% plunder bonus seems a bit extreme.

EDIT: I'm referring to the summoning circles

I've gotten complaints about how this did not "balance" anything. People will switch to summoning circles now because they have a significant increase in plunder. Making this update redundant.

Please clarify this on the first post (Yes or No).

Thanks,
Kool-Aid
 
It sounds like each building will have a 5% boost to the plunder it provides. Ie: if it was 100k before it is now 105k.

I don't think summoning will be popular at first. But if you can't break through, you get no plunder. Everyone is focused on atk because that is what is rewarded.

A high level build relying on allies will be using circles. But the avg player will be doing themselves a disservice by believing that 410 + 5% plunder is better for THEIR situation
 
The reason is the additional stats from the new building will make them "bigger" compared to other builds.

So you gain LESS plunder inherently due to size unless you attack another defense/balance build. Ie: harder target.

So the changes balance themselves out. If you crystal/nob regen all day, the additional troops of the aviary will give you more atk and gold. Otherwise if you play a few times per pay and drain all troops. Good for you as well

Otherwise the loss in regen rate will even out the additional gold made by the additional atk from stats and troop cap.

They all balance themselves out a little
 
Oyeaa!! I am looking forward to it big time kaw ty man. Now just to wait for apple to get off their lazy asses n do some work.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top