I agree MC, as a SoS Hansel with 7 more lands to go, I was earning 38m 1st hit. I heard a Guild Hansel earned even more close to 40m 1st hit. But my friend was with 10 lands left in HL was hitting me at 20m 1st hit with zero allies and he was all CF. Meaning if he packed on allies, he'd be getting at least 40-50m 1st hit. Just an observation.
Actually small players do not need to use all pots to burn 11 def pots or 9 spy def pots. I usually use just one pot, either or these 3: 1m, 2.5m or 7.5m to pot burn 11 def pots or 9 spy def pots. Just saying especially with BFA (Bonus From Allies) support. WowWee!
I'm assuming with a smaller alt? Because your spy attack is pretty big. And just one of those is enough from full troops to pin? When i've played around with this (small account, 1 SOS) it didn't quite work out that way for me. At least from what i remember. But ya, BFA and towers will be a factor.
The 4 new pots, gives rise to the use of the least used building also The infamous Titan's Lair with huge Def Stats. The best Attack Build for the ASW'11 was OS_Romeo's build: 28 CoEs 10 Titans 10 Lookout Fortresses 1 SoS But with the new 4 Attack Pots, this build might change into: 5 Defence Fortresses 33 Titans 10 Lookout Fortresses 1 SoS Just a thought....
Defense fortresses are the biggest waste of money in the game. Sdt's are fine since an infinite number of spies can hit you. After 50 hits though your troops are pinned. Why do you need a fortress to protect for that? Get BFA and a building which makes money instead. Way better investment is something which makes more capital. No one is going to strip 50b off you then attack you to take it. If they do count yourself lucky because you just saved yourself from a bad strip.
Def fortresses aren't a waste of money until you have enough BFA to do the same job... Provide a static bonus. They reduce the number of hits on you, actually. SDF are sort of the same. Def Forts, if you sacrtifice enough plunder (so figure you build at least 6), will reduce the number of hits an opponent can drop on you. At one point, this build had 25 of them, and a full unload from HLBC was something like 11 hits. At which poin the minimal troops I had were STILL at 75%. So if the goal is to make sure smaller accounts can't do anything in system war, there is definitely a point to DF IMHO.
This really should be stickied, this is almost like a very short, incredibly helpful guideline to wars and OSW. This has pounds of weight in war need to know information in a little thread. I vote for sticky on this one.
There is definite value in being a tough pin and that's what def forts help accomplish. Fails mean greater troop losses for the attacker, in turn making them an easy pin for someone else in your clan to pick up. Smaller players have a tough time finishing your pin. Needing multiple large builds to pin one player not only weakens their clan as a whole but is psychologically demoralizing after a while. I couldn't care less about the plunder thing but that's just my personal opinion. Others will. I suspect these new attack pots from eb's counter the def fortresses pretty well (haven't looked at the numbers yet) and that might be a valid argument against them but those pots will run out real fast in a 2 month OSW.
In fact your pots are low in quantity if not many are active in the EB, with 20 actives I'm getting only 10-20 MindScream n LocustSwarm. If an EB has about 80 actives you get 100 MindScream n LocustSwarm. It's really player activity dependent.
The loss in money making ability of a defense fortress does not outweigh the money saved in losses. Getting pinned is only temporary. Not making full gold or getting money destroyed from attacks or steals is the only permanent loss If your argument is that you'd give up millions a hit per win to make it so your harder to pin (if and when) you get attacked in an age where the new pots make the buildings practically obsolete and where you're guarding against a financial loss of 20m ( pots) a hit then again I say your math is flawed, dumb, and you're missing the whole picture. BFA could be built and ally trading would increase your income sources and you'd far outstrip your current growth plateau. Whatever though. Have your non money making def fortresses. I BFA through most of my enemies because of my size range anyhow. My Sdf keep the second half of most spy bars from landing on me which takes my strips down to 1/2 the regular wins.
The only towers to get are sdt. 5 is a minimum. As the ultimate farmer said activity is key, mix up your sleeping patterns and set alarm for no more than two hours in a row. Load up on pos cheap allies or vollie in crap up to 5 bil each to make nice gold on strip attempt. Your best weapon is your brain so plan on out thinking your opponents. I've a few more tips but I'll hold those for advanced lessons.
Swab I feel like you're missing the point of my post. Obviously you sacrifice plunder. It's about the position it puts the other side in when they need multiple people to keep you pinned - they make THEMSELVES easy to pin. Multiply this over numerous bigger accounts and you all of a sudden have a strategic advantage. And you should know better than anyone that winning a war is about taking away the other sides desire to fight. Being pinned day in and day out is a serious demoralizer. And you can ask my sweethearts from our last few wars if their pins from me were "temporary". The plunder sacrifice is negligible considering how much I make in ally trading. I concede that these new pots change the game a little. My Forts were built before they came out. But I don't really buy the BFA argument. For one, relying on BFA isn't cost effective. I get 145,000,000 attack bonus from using all pots at a cost of $23.9m per hit. Now how many trillions would I need to invest in allies (which is a non-permanent stat that came be stripped away mind you) to get a bonus of 145m? With just 1T in allies, which would probably net a modest BFA of 15m, you could perform around 40,000 full pot attacks and still have an extra 130m bonus on top of that. Cost/Benefit of BFA? Complete crap. Is there an argument here that pots are too powerful? Ya, and towers don't fair much better. Also BFA doesn't always seem to translate to a real world results but thats an entirely different topic.
Good post. The .002% is incorrect(test it yourself) but all else looks like good data. I'll just add, if you doubt towers, I doubt you understand the war dynamics of kaw.