Is it time to get rid of the 20% damage bonus for defenses?

Would it help vs the Telluria tanks?
Would it help vs the DoT stacking defenses?
Is a raid too reliant on a lucky board?
Has the time to kill gotten too fast?

The mana speed meta is getting faster.
Troop levels are getting higher.
Emblems are raising attack power.
More abilities and specials are being fired.

It’s time to ask… is the +20% damage bonus for defenses contributing to some of the balance problems we are seeing? Has it outlived it’s usefulness?


All this works for attacking teams too.

It looks like a topic about a field aid in alliance wars. It makes harder to win, so let’s remove it. Why not just keep it in mind when you fight?


I think that would disrupt the game balance tremendously… even more than Telly did.

Just imagine spelling a defdowner on the first round of a battle. I think, Telluria and maybe Ursena and Kunchen would be the only tanks that could raise the winrate in raids above 0%. Maybe other few teams would be lucky enough to stand against really awful bad boards but still their winrate would be a single-digit number.

As for emblems I think time now will start to work in favour of the attacking team. At least for some of us. The defending tems I’m facing are getting close to be fully emblemed which is far from the case with my attack teams.

I have been prioritizing many “titan” hereos for emblems and with color stacking on attack I’m behind on emblems and a long way to go before all hero’s on an attack setup have emblems. But will soon start to catch up as defending teams are soon maxed.

Reducing passiv buff is definetely the way to go if no telluria nerf is on plan.

By the way a fully emblemed sniper is also ridiculous, no way you can recover from a 1k2 hit.

1 Like

No, because not everyone has Telly or a good defense team in general and they rely on the defense bonuses to help them out.


I don’t see any reason for this, i win 90% of the raids anyway and i don’t really have a killer roster so let’s not make this game easier than it already is.

BUT and i don’t know if this is a thing, but if the same bonuses apply in very fast tournaments they could be taken down a little because if you get a bad starting board against a good team in them it’s pretty much an instant loss with no chance at all.


In my opinion, yes…


Interesting question…

I’m sure some kind of code could be written so that defenses over xxxx tp didn’t qualify for the 20% bonus.


That’s actually a great idea, because some specific heroes already have too much defense as is, adding 20% def to these behemoths is nonsensical imo. Adding a curve to defenses based on relative TP would be an interesting feature that could help with the imbalance issue because firing four strong tiles against most Tellurias, Kunchens and (to an extent) Guineveres while running 4/1 and having them all live is frustrating as balls.


You have it backwards. Heroes other than DOT are more effective on defense due to the +20% swords/shields bonus.


I agree.

We need to keep in mind that at the end of the day emblems as a whole heavily favor the defence over the offence. It is much easier to max emblem 5 heroes for a defence team than to max all the different heroes that you use when attacking.

Add to that that a single maxed troop in every color is much easier to achieve than several maxed troops in each color for stacking.

Finally this 20% is a muliplier that is applied on top of all these things so their effect is magnified. a +20 hero on defence gains a much bigger boost than a +0 hero would.

All things considered I don’t think the 20% is still relevant.


Changing the rules of the game due to one hero seems like your sidestepping the problem?

Wont say the name before the thread gets merged with the nerf thread. Lol

1 Like

Not necessarily about that hero.

That rule is 3 years old and the game has changed a ton since then.

We didn’t have emblems when it was introduced. Couldn’t level troops. And i don’t think we even had 4* troops. And the normal defense stat for a maxed 5 was ~700

So in all reality it probly should have been rethought a long time ago

You can’t introduce a silent boost then over time introduce more and more boosts while also increasing the starting stats for each new batch of heros and not expect to have to take a look back at the original silent boost

Common principle in numbers in general


I really like the idea of a tiered bonus for defenses. It could be based on either TP or team defense (or durability) and favor weaker defenses over stronger.
Perhaps leave something in for stronger and break it down to 4-5 levels?


Thanks for quick redponse.

Just feel that raiding against fully emblemed defenses was still very well balanced until recently. In fact we needed the emblems to actually improve the general defenses otherwise it would be leaning to heavily to the attacking side.

That changed big time in last few months.


Well part of the discussion goin on elsewhere is the concern that if remove it altogether then the game is too easy for early game players and gives a false representation of how the game is later on and could lead to riding easy street then a sudden brick wall once facing emblemed defenses

So the thinking is use teampower which is influenced by emblems in order to try and keep the game the same as it’s always been early on while adjusting it for later game players where the boost is over the top when topped onto max defenses and emblems


Sorta. Kinda.

Many players adjusted to the emblems. But they weren’t easy adjustments and for some not even cheap adjustments.

Some went from 3-2 to mono, some invested in multiple sets of troops, some just dropped to lower alliances

I noticed the difference once guin reached her peak in stats and got topped off with high troops. Then we even figured out that a lvl 19 crit troop could make it even harder to kill her with just tiles. And all of this was topped off by the +20% boost.

So yea it’s been an issue for awhile. Just now with current synergies people are running out of ideas and ways to adjust to it.

Not to mention that “hero who won’t be named” hits ~900 defense halfway through emblems and the previous best tank in the game hit like 876 max embs. Pretty substantial difference.


So kinda what I said? Lol


Sure. I was thinking with a tiered approach, the weakest defenses get the 20% but at the upper levels, rather then hitting 0%, they might still get 4-5% bonus.

If going to 0% might unbalance the game By moving too much in the other direction, I think it might be better to leave some meat on the bone. Adjustments could still be made under the “Various minor adjustments” label if it’s too difficult to gage what is best. Changes of even 2% per tier could be made for a gradual approach and reduce the impact of min/maxing.


Cookie Settings