+1 worthy
I think this idea is mostly good really. Something along the lines of offensive great buildings add 5%/level to attack value of troops, whether attacking or defending. Defensive great buildings add 5%/level to defense of all troops, whether attacking or defending. Watchfires would remain unchanged.
Implementing this would mean that with fully maxed out combat GB's (all 5), your troops would have a 150% attack bonus, and a 100% defense bonus, regardless of attacking or defending. Watch towers would continue to add 4% defense, but only for defending troops.
I agree that regardless of some of the "extreme" examples with the existing system, if both attacker and defender are "maxed" out (attacker has all offensive GB's at level 10, and defender has both defense buildings at level 10), the attacker generally has little to worry about. The defenders are a little tough to hurt, but their unboosted attack value doesn't really hurt the attackers either (who have their own defense boosted as well as their attack). Add to that a reduced attack value after they are injured, and the defenders are virtually unable to even damage the attacking force.
Of course this would probably cause attackers to lose more troops. I attack my whole 'hood everyday, and this would definitely make it tougher. However, it was also suggested to help "balance" out this change, military buildings would provide more troops. I believe it was suggested that a military building provide 4 times the current amount (meaning 8 slots immediately, and 4 additional slots per upgrade). This is a good idea, and players interested in annihilating their whole 'hood everyday should be able to do so, because the losses would be easier to deal with. The main problem with this would be that the training times would have to change to reflect how many troops a barracks can hold under the new system. In other words, either able to train multiple troops at once, or shorter times per troop.
Game balance isn't affected much by this proposed change - all players have the same advantages available after all. Diamond players neither gain nor lose any advantage they don't already possess. What it DOES accomplish is make battles and combat bonuses a bit more "realistic". If I have a Castel del Monte that improves the attack value of my cannons, why is it only when I am out attacking and not when they are home defending? I suppose it can be explained away to improved troop morale, magical boosting, or the whim of the gods, but if something provides an attack bonus, it seems reasonable that it would always offer that, whether the troops are home or away.
So, in a nutshell, the current offensive GB's would give 5%/level to attack ONLY (not both attack and defense), but would be active whether troops are in defense or on the attack. The current defensive GB's would give a 5%/level boost to defense of all troops, whether attacking or defending.
Wow, this post was long. LOL
You see, this is what makes me mad! You're basicly saying that it's not a problem that the defender has a way too low attack value. Oh yeah, right! Let's set the defensive bonus to boost +20% defense per level, and then also apply a -20% attack per level, that will work even better, won't it??
