Mmmmmm. I see my post as balancing the lead post of this thread who only spoke about the attack perspective. Any comment on play affects defenders as well. As you say there are two types of players. For one side to say " pay attention to my concerns" is a bit frustrating as eliminating the 50% will clearly impact the other set of players who, denied of a surprise power defense, will loose troops and resources. And the 50% can be attack advantage as well so I should be agreeing with the request to eliminate it, but I am not.
This thread assumes there are no attack coiners. The only way to defend or make attack coiners hesitate is to offer greater defense ( and attack)options to players. This also levels the playing field for new players who face long term players that would dominate the land as well as leagues who would attack solo players who have no league.
I also have trouble with the whole going in and getting burned thing.
Even if there were no mods/buffers you could still walk in on someone who had been hiding in their catacombs for a million years then trotted everyone out for your tenth raid ( but not for the first 9) or who had played night and day for a month while you actually took time to eat and sleep and they would beat you.
At the end of the day, this game always had innate inequities that will never be reconciled. There is no way to know if someone has a bunch of allies padding their castle with high level beasts that weren't there before.
And on the other side there is the problem of even sending defensive troops. If I see my ally has really bad castle defence, why would I send them help when it means certain loss? If they are super low and have the 50% then I would send help. Or, if they were using buffers and artifacts I would. The result , however, would look to an attacker like the person I was helpingwas a coiner.
You have SO many variables now. ( and I see that as good)Leagues attacking solo, high level leagues attacking low level leagues, high level solo players attacking low level solo players. New players leaving because there are no options for them for defense until they grow big enough to attack.
Many options means more risk means you have to play smarter. You never knew before what you might get going in just like you don't know when you are preparing to defend. That scenario remains the same now.
What I hear is money is an unfair advantage. People who put in ALOT of time over a short period or some time over years have huge advantage over players signing on today. Nobody talks about that unfairness. Yes, you can join a league but they are so far away usually, you still get raided before help arrives. So money is a third kind of unfairness but there were already two others everyone is OK with ( unless you are new, I, by the way, am not)
More options for attack AND defense means more risk, more thrill and forces better strategy so I think the 50% is fine. I don't have it, I may face it one day, but I have other options to combat it, buffers/allies/league help/waiting and building up/not engaging/coining a little. I think players are to ready to blame everything on coiners. It may be but it probably is a variation on what I have mentioned instead. And even if it is, so what? War is not fair, deal with it.:)
Oops, one more thing. I think I read if you activate the 50% spell none of the other buffers can be added. You have to choose a combination of buffers OR the 50%, not both.
Maybe plarium could clarify this point???