Alright so I started thinking about war builds, and what towers do to plunder. Well of course towers drop plunder. Then I started to wonder, what's worse? Selling an attack building then waiting? Or instantly building a tower? Would it be different for a hansel vs an attack build? Example: Say building new builds was disabled, and an attack build HAD to sell 2 building for a tower, would it better to leave that land blank until said person needs a tower? Or is it best to just place the tower right away? Serious answers, opinions, or ON TOPIC discussion only please! Thanks! ~HM20
The point wasn't "I don't have enough gold to replace but I'm gonna sell anyways", it was a general question. What's worse? An open land, or a tower? Does it differ between attack builds vs hansels?
An open land is pointless so you shouldn't sell the attack building if you arent going to replace it, towers kill plunder, so what do you think?
I didn't mean it as literal. It was just a question, which is worse? An open land, or towers? Of course I know an open land is pointless, but that wasn't the question.
An open land does.not drop your plunder it just does not give any...a tower brings plunder down but at least shows purpose
towers do reduce plunder further than empty lands. This is because they increase your cs, but do not give any plunder at all.
Again back to the original details, I mention if I had to SELL a building, which is worse- leaving it blank or just putting up a tower?
Open land will not drop more plunder than the tower that you would building, so if you sell an attack building you lose than plunder plus the plunder loss of a tower.
A blank land and a tower are worth the same in regards to reduction in plunder. It is the land that reduces plunder, not the tower. Next time you buy a land, before putting something on it attack your usual EB. You will notice a plunder drop. What people don't realize is the plunder drop is for the land, not the tower in the land.