Better punishments for those that leave during clan wars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frost86

Maybe a war ranking system. A player gets like a level rank of their war prestige based on performances

---

All the more reason to leave a poorly run clan. Why jeopardize your record ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OzAudi

All the more reason to leave a poorly run clan. Why jeopardize your record ?

---

The ranking system would be based off of your stars, hardness off bases you attack, penalized for leaving and not using attacks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frost86

The ranking system would be based off of your stars, hardness off bases you attack, penalized for leaving and not using attacks

---

SC can't manage to get Most Heroics even close, same with proposed target. Why do you think they can do better with "hardness" of bases ?

People will leave or attack low rather than risk a defeat in a poorly run clan in a difficult war.

There is no way to appropriately rank cumulative war attacks. It has been suggested before with no numerical backup to trust it. SC is known to avoid negative stats. It will just be another meaningless stat.

There is no reason to trap people in your clan. There is every reason to avoid trapping people in your clan.

"Hardness" lol. I guess those that use dip attacks for strategy would have "flaccidness" rankings.

Jokes aside.

Please stop with ideas aimed at keeping dying clans in life support. Not all clans deserve to survive and not all players are cut out to be a leader.

You should keep a time limit before members can do wars.(like 1 day or one war).
You need to manage your clan better.

You could down vote someone for the laughs, but the idea is that if the person is legit, they will get more pluses than minuses so trolling shouldn't really matter, unless a whole clan wants to troll someone. This system isn't a punishment, merely a credit system that identifies trolls. People who leave mid war, donate the wrong troops, or loot in war can all get down votes to show that they are not team players.

A different idea would be to have stats for war performance; missed attacks, wars participated in, etc. I get that many people want to put blame on leaders for allowing bad players in war, but really you can't always tell if someone is going to bail on you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speakers

You could down vote someone for the laughs, but the idea is that if the person is legit, they will get more pluses than minuses so trolling shouldn't really matter, unless a whole clan wants to troll someone. This system isn't a punishment, merely a credit system that identifies trolls. People who leave mid war, donate the wrong troops, or loot in war can all get down votes to show that they are not team players.

A different idea would be to have stats for war performance; missed attacks, wars participated in, etc. I get that many people want to put blame on leaders for allowing bad players in war, but really you can't always tell if someone is going to bail on you.

---

Which is why you are selective and only put as many new ppl in war as attacks that you're able to cover if they hop.

No voting, no punishments and certainly no flawed logging system required.