this is what is wrong with defense it's called neglect!

[theBobNamedDan]

This whole thread sounds like “I spent a lot of money and people are still 5 staring my base! Waaa!”

As theoneandonly said, just because you spent money does not mean your opinion is the only one that matters. The guys that are 5 staring your base are also spending money on premium TTS. Drop of of the top 100 alliances if you don’t want to be 5 stared. Join an alliance that has 16000 glory or something like that.

As an alliance with average players we still struggle to get a perfect score in wars. I don’t think there is anything wrong with the way it is. MP is hard enough without boosting defense. The ONLY suggestion above that I would not be against is another hall in the library or Uni leader that offers boosts in WAR only for research.

 

[B like Big Bug]

Finally, I saw a reasonable opinion. The problem is that some players in the top 100 want the game arbitrarily, not logically. They don't know that there is always a way to destroy the bases in the top 100. Once there was a commando, then bomber, now is heli and mortar and other forces will come in the future.
The point that I have said many times before and you also mentioned is that outside the top 100, everything is normal. Both attack and defense. Even most of the time the defense is stronger. The top 100 is different. And you can't change the game based on that. But in the end, a small change and strengthening of the defense in the Drone Age is a good option. To the extent of increasing the airdeffance range of a tile, increasing the destruction of towers and mortars by 10% and reducing the healing power of the Black Hawk a bit.
Don't forget that the museum made top 100 diffrent.its beacouse some players think deffence is very weak.
I say again:any changing must be logical.

This thread is again another legendary moment. And I really hope that BHG responsibles and devs DO NOT hear to the five or six people being always the loudest are asking for a nerf of offense PLUS a boost for defense. They don’t understand the dependencies, they are only driven by individual motivation. You did this error once by hearing to the 30 stooges, BHG, don’t do it again.

If BHG wants to reduce revenue significantly they can nerf troop tactics as recommendended, if they want to reduce crown sales they can nerf offense and if they want to loose one third of their players base they can boost defense. It is up to them to decide.

The overall situation is:

1. all alliances outside the top 100 are happy with the current status of the game

2. mostly wars outside the top 100 aren’t time wars, they are decided by stars and/or average destruction

3. wars between top 30 to 100 teams are most likely time wars, but often the top bases are a challenge for both sides (always assuming it’s not a mismatch)

4. in top 30 wars between those teams are crazy tough time wars, knowing in advance that both sides will have a perfect score at the end of war.


The loud and regularly complainers about bad defense are the defenders of top 30 alliances. I can understand they are frustrated, but the therapy can’t be done by BHG and the other players. They can either go for a group therapy with their current alliance about sense and nonsense of Defense and investing money in troop tactics, or they can move along, visit lower ranked alliances and learn a little bit more about the realities of 98% of the players.

 

[Chadwicke]

And exactly this statement is your fundamental misconception in your logic.

You are matching the top attackers of the game with Tactical. Or doesn’t your base also hold if you have a mismatch against a weak team?

Take a break and visit some lower ranked alliances, even top 70 to 120 are usually having matches much easier as Tactical has.

Realize, that the top attackers will always find a way to take your base down AND they will always pay the price it needs. With the same motivation why you are maxing your D bases as soon as possible after an upgrade. Money versus money, that results in even and then Skills are relevant.

Cause: no one single attacker in this game without skills an take your base down. It’s a hard disrespect against those players with skills if it’s always „only“ the bad defense.

you are very wrong about that anyone with 16 attack helicopter and a couple cards can take any base in sub 2 min you really don't even need much in museum I've seen this with players with 1/4 of the stats

 

[Chadwicke]

This whole thread sounds like “I spent a lot of money and people are still 5 staring my base! Waaa!”

As theoneandonly said, just because you spent money does not mean your opinion is the only one that matters. The guys that are 5 staring your base are also spending money on premium TTS. Drop of of the top 100 alliances if you don’t want to be 5 stared. Join an alliance that has 16000 glory or something like that.

As an alliance with average players we still struggle to get a perfect score in wars. I don’t think there is anything wrong with the way it is. MP is hard enough without boosting defense. The ONLY suggestion above that I would not be against is another hall in the library or Uni leader that offers boosts in WAR only for research.

it's not even about being 5* it's about a battle time of 330 and attacks in the 1:40s meaning only half alotted time needed and my changes suggested were for drone age not all ages and I know that not all nor the total amount I mentioned would be done it was about making defense relivent again, why should the game be simple it's not challenging and it's not a defense point of view, I see top level attackers taking breaks because they don't even need to plan anymore just drop and wait . the defense should be good enough to need to plan and run the time near max, plus what's the difference if defense is harder at any level war when the end result is what wins... so a base gets 4* on it and lower ranked teams win say 74-50 in a 15 war vs getting 1 star and winning 71-47 it's still a win;

 

[King Crimson]

The loud and regularly complainers about bad defense are the defenders of top 30 alliances.

Sounds like a recipe to get all casual players to quit as it prevents them from both raiding and getting more than 2 stars in war attacks.

Fact is, the majority of players are casual players

Exactly this.
People need to remember this is an attacking game first and foremost - and the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

 

[Chadwicke]

Exactly this.
People need to remember this is an attacking game first and foremost - and the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

do you have defenders In your alliance? do you tell them it's an attackers game? how would no defender game be?

 

[Chadwicke]

what I'm seeing is some simply want to play for free get 5 stars on every attack at half the time allowed , and most probably haven't played long enough to remember when defense held Stars and a 4 star attack could win a war with seconds left when war score war 92-91 in the top 100. I see some say I only see my experience or my teammates but what I'm reading is exactly the same thing from most who posted how it effects them and not wanting a challenge like a participant trophy.. this is why many defender quit over the last year and their accounts sold and are used by multiple people simply as speed bumps in their alliances. also I didn't expect all the changes or the level of changes but I was hoping for something to save the experience for many people, in alliances at war out of 20 7-9 are defender so not really a minority

 

[SomeRandomPlayer]

what I'm seeing is some simply want to play for free get 5 stars on every attack at half the time allowed , and most probably haven't played long enough to remember when defense held Stars and a 4 star attack could win a war with seconds left when war score war 92-91 in the top 100. I see some say I only see my experience or my teammates but what I'm reading is exactly the same thing from most who posted how it effects them and not wanting a challenge like a participant trophy.. this is why many defender quit over the last year and their accounts sold and are used by multiple people simply as speed bumps in their alliances. also I didn't expect all the changes or the level of changes but I was hoping for something to save the experience for many people, in alliances at war out of 20 7-9 are defender so not really a minority

The Troop Tactic game has changed since then; the Museum has too... a lot. Combine both and there's no way for a base to defend against every possible attack style given the all the Museum and TT options. Long ago only Elephant Archers mattered, and there wasn't a Museum, or the Museum was weak before Space Age, and legendaries were different... Those old days are over, for better or worse.

I'm moderately certain that no amount of defensive building upgrades can overcome all that without killing the game. People have provided other ideas though, like ways to improve Defensive war museum (e.g., more invading barrack troops options) but it's a difficult journey. Outside the box ideas are needed rather than assume there's a simple 'buff all the defensive things!' fix.

Also it's an oversimplification and a disingenuous take to claim those disagreeing with buffing all of the defensive things simply want easy 5 stars and time wars. I for one think time wars are lame but am simply pointing out flaws (including reasons) with the proposal.

 

[Chadwicke]

The Troop Tactic game has changed since then; the Museum has too... a lot. Combine both and there's no way for a base to defend against every possible attack style given the all the Museum and TT options. Long ago only Elephant Archers mattered, and there wasn't a Museum, or the Museum was weak before Space Age, and legendaries were different... Those old days are over, for better or worse.

I'm moderately certain that no amount of defensive building upgrades can overcome all that without killing the game. People have provided other ideas though, like ways to improve Defensive war museum (e.g., more invading barrack troops options) but it's a difficult journey. Outside the box ideas are needed rather than assume there's a simple 'buff all the defensive things!' fix.

Also it's an oversimplification and a disingenuous take to claim those disagreeing with buffing all of the defensive things simply want easy 5 stars and time wars. I for one think time wars are lame but am simply pointing out flaws (including reasons) with the proposal.

yeah i saw alot of good ideas

 

[Theoneandonly]

you are very wrong about that anyone with 16 attack helicopter and a couple cards can take any base in sub 2 min you really don't even need much in museum I've seen this with players with 1/4 of the stats

Legend legend legend, and again you are talking about a small number of players able to do this. I am playing several accounts, using helis with two of them. My drone age account has maxed offense, maxed AEDTD and AEDTHP, maxed universit, 100plus EDST, 153 heli damage and 71 heli hp. Bases like yours are down between 90 and 120 seconds, usually depending on SH filling and layout.

But: this works usually only using Paratroopers and recon. No chance without recon, not mentioning the TT needed.

On my CWA account I have very low Museum stats and use fighters and no recon. NO CHANCE against tough museums even of the same age in wars. Point.

Your view is always end game driven, always from a top 30 perspective, not looking on the overall players community. You are not alone, Dradis and a few others are arguing like you, but you are not the majority.

 

[Theoneandonly]

it's not even about being 5* it's about a battle time of 330 and attacks in the 1:40s meaning only half alotted time needed and my changes suggested were for drone age not all ages and I know that not all nor the total amount I mentioned would be done it was about making defense relivent again, why should the game be simple it's not challenging and it's not a defense point of view, I see top level attackers taking breaks because they don't even need to plan anymore just drop and wait . the defense should be good enough to need to plan and run the time near max, plus what's the difference if defense is harder at any level war when the end result is what wins... so a base gets 4* on it and lower ranked teams win say 74-50 in a 15 war vs getting 1 star and winning 71-47 it's still a win;

YOur suggestions are for the top 30 probably 50 alliances in the game. I have a D museum as well on m drone age account, with similar stats as your, 120plus DST. Many wars I am holding one star at least and even if five starred it’s above two minutes, significantly.

You definitely need a top 30 break and some time to travel around at lower ranked teams. You are far away from the war reality of most alliances.

 

[Theoneandonly]

but being constructive now … are there ways to deal with? Yes.

The idea of war specific books in the library is the most realistic one short term. Difficult is what should be in those books, that need some more discussion imho, to fit high and low ranked alliances needs.

Simple and complex at one time are agreements between warring alliances, like XSH other TT can be excluded as well.

The solution is not to nerf TT, exclude them from museum boosts, to nerf offense. IMHO some buffs to D can work, especially for AD and towers.

 

[TTPranto]

I still don't think that anything right now needs nerfing or buffing. If you care about defence that much, do you adapt and try finding weakness in your base? Placement, tactical layouts still matters more than stats. outwitting the attacker still exists in this game. Ask alliance members to try donating different kinds of troops in your defence base, not just always HTS, zooks or AH. These 3 arent the only troops avaialble for defence. Ask them to donate different kinds of TTs, experiment around. The solution is already in the game. You will never be invincible in this game, the game is designed in such a way so that for every buff and nerf, upgrade and boost defence gets, there will always be a way to destroy your base even at the highest cost. Thats the whole point. And besides as I said before, defence isn't neglected, Fighting equal footing defences are very hard (majority of the players miss the final star or the quick star, even our drone age players fail sometimes against their defence, only getting 1 star or 2 even with good attack museums). The museum you have is almost unattainable, it means its very hard for a free to play player to attain those results. Yet without those, Normal maxed defences are hard to beat, in MP and war. Not even including the university and council boosts. Youre, in the top level, everyone there has premium defence or offence. If for your sake, the buff all def towers it will be a disaster for the lower ages.

 

[TTPranto]

but being constructive now … are there ways to deal with? Yes.

The idea of war specific books in the library is the most realistic one short term. Difficult is what should be in those books, that need some more discussion imho, to fit high and low ranked alliances needs.

Simple and complex at one time are agreements between warring alliances, like XSH other TT can be excluded as well.

The solution is not to nerf TT, exclude them from museum boosts, to nerf offense. IMHO some buffs to D can work, especially for AD and towers.

the best solutions are in adding different kinds of defenders or unique abilities to towers, there are ground units, hover units and airstrip units. Theres direct counter for ground and airstrip units but no specific counter for hover troops. Maybe have a troop who does bonus damage to hover units. Simply buffing and nerfing things can do trouble in the scale of balance. Giving towers or troops passive buffs and temporary one-time abilities could be solution. Simply increasing or decreasing numbers wont solve anything.

 

[SomeRandomPlayer]

In some ways they are laying the groundwork to address this with the initial individual Triumph stuff, and now with Alliance Triumph stuff. These give players a reason to play outside of War. An alliance can do a 'long war', sort of speak, by competing for Alliance Triumph. This requires no TT nor great museum either; nor a need to attack top 3D bases.

That said, if BHG moves to add war-only defensive buffs then alliances can still focus on the triumph (multiplayer) stuff and be fine. Players can still attack in multiplayer without giving up in frustration. But for those still doing war (most will) it'd become more frustrating but that's fine, in theory their opponents will also suffer (assuming matchmaking matches similar enough alliances).

 

[oddin]

In a perfect gaming environment, dominations SHOULD be balanced for all levels of play.
It wouldn't matter if it was a casual war between alliances in 2500 rank or a top 100 war.
Defenders do not mind having their bases five starred but they do mind if that happens in 1:30 because Black Hawk Medics are extremely strong and unbalanced and by using 2 recons, no matter how high ADTH you may have, everything melts in 1 hit! This obviously is NOT a balanced environment.

BHG should monitor and take feedback from players from all over the leaderboard and make tweaks in key areas.

 

[Theoneandonly]

In a perfect gaming environment, dominations SHOULD be balanced for all levels of play.
It wouldn't matter if it was a casual war between alliances in 2500 rank or a top 100 war.
Defenders do not mind having their bases five starred but they do mind if that happens in 1:30 because Black Hawk Medics are extremely strong and unbalanced and by using 2 recons, no matter how high ADTH you may have, everything melts in 1 hit! This obviously is NOT a balanced environment.

BHG should monitor and take feedback from players from all over the leaderboard and make tweaks in key areas.

No mate,

and I will explain very simple why not. look at your own foot node here at the forum. You are asking for „hardcore ww players only, Info age only„.

Doing this you have to war hardcore and not with kindergarten mode. You ask for,it, you get it. You can’t block your alliance for all ages below info and then complain about no defense base is holding.

We are including ages down to industrial in our wars, we get mostly good matches. You want hardcore as reading your foot node - then go hardcore.

 

[Ravenstyx]

Well I also think that they really screwed up when big huge Games took away A certain level required to advance to the next age. I think by doing that it kept the game a little more balanced especially in war between opponents. Now people just rush up the ages and it is counterintuitive to the strategy that I most liked about the game when I first began seven years ago. It made you think about how you built much more so than nowadays.

 

[Armitage]

I guess I'll toss a couple of wooden nickels on this one

What I think is wrong with defense is combination of too much of the same things and not enough individual creativity in crafting defenses.

Defense for me is 50% museum, 20% coalitions, 20% layout, 10% building levels.

Everything builds off the museum, and of course you want some of the usual ADTD/HP and defender buffs, but what really makes a solid defense is dedication to an idea. If it flies it dies, angry beehive, firing blanks turns into; minus fighter/Bomber HP and AD damage up, defender spawn time down, HT damage/Fighter damage down.

I believe that this adherence to sole defensive line and taking it to the max is what makes a good defense. Once the line is maxed, then the rest of the defense is crafted around it to maximize the potential. That's how a defensive base is built.

Will it work against everything? No, and I don't want it to. There shouldn't be a catchall defense, because where would the variety be? You have to remember that the point of a defense isn't to outlast the whole enemy alliance, it's to soak a few attacks that can better spent elsewhere while the players that can take down your base hopefully spend  their attacks before they can take you down.

One member of my alliance uses the "If it flies, it dies" defense, does very well in War's. Another uses Filipinos to neuter fighters, then buffed his defenders to next Sunday in his museum, hilarious to watch attack after attack from players who can't figure it out. I'm currently working a fighter graveyard angle to mine as a side project on my offensive artifacts, driving fighter HP down as low as it will go. Already seeing results from it. Do we all get 5 starred? Yes, consistently and more than a few times on the first hit. But we also take a few hits to go down a lot of the time.

Still trying to get someone to go Angry Beehive with defender spawn, but no one taking that so far.

 

[oddin]

No mate,

and I will explain very simple why not. look at your own foot node here at the forum. You are asking for „hardcore ww players only, Info age only„.

Doing this you have to war hardcore and not with kindergarten mode. You ask for,it, you get it. You can’t block your alliance for all ages below info and then complain about no defense base is holding.

We are including ages down to industrial in our wars, we get mostly good matches. You want hardcore as reading your foot node - then go hardcore.

hahahaha ok you got a point...
But I am not backing down in what i said and I still strongly believe the game must be tweaked in certain areas (i mentioned some earlier - it doesnt have to be all anyway). And why am I insisting?

Because with Oddin (a pure defender with nothing to help my offence), I equipped 2 stallion + 2 Black Hawk medics and was able to kill our best defender with 100+ adtd/adth / 140+ dst!!!!! This should have never happened no matter the leaderboard rank we are playing at. Never! I do believe you see the folly of this.... You know this is insane and clearly shows that BHG must act.