Penalty for ditching war

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OzAudi

It is still a clan management issue. With a few exceptions, we all started out as new clans and we all went through similar issues during wars.

Successful long term clans have developed techniques and practices that minimize the impact of people leaving during wars. Newer clans could do far worse than adopting the techniques and practices of long term clans but first they need to recognize uncontrolled growth is a recipe for disaster in most cases.

Stop asking for SC to create special rules for circumstances easily avoided. Simple.

You are correct. Hoppers be hoppers. Now take the next step. Protect YOURSELF.

---

The point I'm trying to get across is that high level clans have the ability to enact those policies because of their station. They have an established, high end, core group of players to fall back on at all times, and hence the ability to say "no, you can't join or stay because X reason".

Their in a position where they can afford that luxury of choice.

Brand new clans don't have the luxury to be as picky as more established ones, and so even if they adopt the same policies, much of which are common sense and ones I myself already practice rigidly, they won't be able to implement them to as great an effect simply because of their precarious position.

It's only a clan management issue if it's a high level and well established clan facing these issues. Otherwise, it's as simple as a daily reality for brand new clans.

Saying things like "don't let (new) people in war" doesn't work when nearly every single person in your entire clan has the "new" badge, you have no clan history, no core group, etc. It just isn't realistic to blame the leader as if it's their fault that they just now started their clan and are trying to gain traction.

Also : I only mentioned that I would be in support of said penalties being added to the game as a shield against unwanted behavior in brand new clans. I didn't start the thread nor beg Supercell for anything. I already enact much the same policies higher level clans do. That doesn't mean I can't make the case that we should have greater protection from poorer players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwelshjr

By the way, nobody here is from SC. We dont have the ability to decide whether or not your idea can be implemented. This is not a fast channel to SC to tell them to do stuff, thats not the type of help the forum is here for. What the forum does offer is a lot of game knowledge and experience here (not speaking of any one member its to total body of members) and so the guys here, while not able to change the game, can tell you how to be successful in the game as it works today. The advice they have given you is good stuff and you should be heeding it and learning the things they are telling you.

Im sorry if they are telling you how to do the work better when you really want someone to just do it for you. Im sorry you want guys to tell you how wise and great you are and that your problems arent your fault. But if you think it through, nobody helps you by doing that. True help is what guys are doing here telling you how to succeed in the game as it works today. Since they are guys that are not having a problem doing the things you say you cant, you should listen.

---

Again, it most certainly is not a clan management issue, for reasons I've already extensively gone over in this thread. It's a general player consensus problem where the majority believe that a clan is worse because it's newer, and hop for "greener pastures". It's boils down to herd mentality at it's worst. And it makes recruiting extremely difficult for brand new clans. Adding something like this would severely cut back on said pains, so I'm entirely for it. That simple.

And I have no idea what any of this is even about. I'm not the OP. I didn't ask Supercell for anything, I never asked for advice either. Never said I was mad either. And I never even once said I couldn't do something. I'm also not wrong now and never have been in this thread.

Your either thinking I'm the OP and wrong, and or didn't read a thing I said. Both are equally bad. I already know what I'm doing far better than most, so I'll be sticking with what I'm already doing thanks. Nothing they've said is new to me, and most of it has long been enacted in my clan.

As I explained before, I'm simply expressing my opinion that such protections and penalties should be added as a form of shield against players with poor decision making habits in brand new clans that, regardless of who leads them, can do no better because their position doesn't allow for it.

Yes, there comes a day when all these issues disappear, but it doesn't happen overnight for newer clans. It takes months of dedication to get through the growing pains.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

What you seem incapable of seeing is that good management can spot someone who is likely to hop and either not accept them at all or put them in a position where any damage that they do do when they inevitably hop is minimised.

---

I reject a good 15-30 people every single day depending on how much I recruit on any given day, and I only have 2 elders and 2 Co's in my entire clan. Both Co's I knew from previous clans and had over 6 months of experience with, and the only two players who are elders in my clan are such because they donate often, speak well, are active, and are helpful.

I don't ever promote newer members, and I make people work for it. I'd never put anyone I believe to be a hopper intentionally in the clan, and I never accept people with war timers either, and I certainly never promote them. I've also taken to avoiding putting them in war.

That still doesn't stop people from leaving at random either the moment they join or without any or barely a reason later. I had one person who warred with us for 6 wars and then left when he saw he wasn't in the next war due to player count restraints and needing to give other players a chance. Some people are just selfish and have no patience or understanding of the bigger picture, and only think of themselves.

I pretty much already do everything you suggest and more, and still face the same problems, simply because of our clans level, and that 40 players in a clan looks better to a general viewer willing to give the clan a chance than 16.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

Essentially, under the proposed system, if you leave at all during the 48 hours of war, outside of being kicked and as long as you were opted in for war, you would receive a penalty. Even if you used both attacks first.

This prevents people from leaving under any circumstance outside of being kicked, which removes the possibility of war deserters.

Except that the guys that travel for legitimate reasons get penaluzed too. Being unfair to the masses just to punish the guy you are mad at is no answer


It also beneits them as well, since they can just as easily not opt in for war, so that if they were put in war when marked as "opted out" they wouldn't receive a penalty for leaving. They can also simply ask to be kicked after using their attacks.

Do you think they are simply going to ask? They are going to mess with you and their clan until you cant kick them fast enough. If you dont kick them your good members will get disgusted with you and quit and darn the penalty.


In this way, there would be no way to trick the system, and players who opted in and asked to be put in war would be forced to use both attacks during said war, or face penalties.

Whatever the percentage is that needs to be dropped they would learn it and drop that amount. Probably just a swarm of barbs to make it cheap. If they cant afford it then they cant afford war either and the leader should gave noticed that before putting them in.


Second : As I explain above in clear terms, it absolutely is not a clan management issue. It's a daily reality for brand new clans. I already go over the irrefutable fact that brand new clans do not have established routines, high level players outside the scope of the leader, and for the first few months of existence practically every single person in the clan is going to have a "new" badge, meaning that suggestions such as "don't put new players in war" might work for a level 5 and up clan, they don't for a level 1-4 clan. Certain things that work for higher level clans just don't for newer clans because of the realities of their situation, which in way reflect clan leadership, and are completely outside of their control.

You just with that statement confirmed that you dont understand leadership. You are expecting it to get easy over time and start doing itself, it doesnt. To succeed at starting a clan you have to have already decided what your routines and policies are and start enforcing them from day one. The work starts on day one. There is no hump you get over where it becomes easy.


You can control who to let into the clan, you can control who stays in the clan, and you can control who wars. But you cannot force people to war if they don't want too, you can't force people to show up and guarantee they'll use both attacks, you can't force people to stay.

No, your job as leader is to make them want to. Looking for ways to force them is not making them want to. Looking for ways to force them is a sign of a bad leader.


No matter how much you donate, how active you are, how often you hold recruitment sessions, and no matter the circumstance. Hoppers will hop, and deserters will let everyone down. That in no way reflects back on whoever happens to be running said brand new clan.

That, my friend, is the reality of recruitment for brand new clans.

And that, unarguably and by extension, has absolutely nothing to do with who runs the clan.

It has everything to do with it. Everything. That you dont see that is yet another thing guys are seeing in you when they question your leadership skills. Your good members are going to quit on you if thats going on in your clan while you say how you cant stop it. Your clan will bever become that 'older established' thing you seem to picture as being any different.


Yes, many of those issues and the solutions, as I go over above, right themselves as your clan gets bigger and more established and you have entire teams of dedicated players waiting at the ready. When you can afford to be more picky with who gets to come to your clan and who gets invited, and you have more vetting options and more choice.

They do not right themselves. A successful leader has to maintain that culture every day.


Third, I very much do have the ability to run a clan.

.....if I was a betting man.....


And saying I don't just shows immaturity in that your comfortable harassing and lying about others without knowing them at all. Maybe try doing a bit of research or understanding the game and the reality of recruitment and player retention for brand new clans just a little bit before making snide comments about people you so clearly misjudge. Just a suggestion.

You show no sign of knowing how to run a clan. No we dont know you personally but in your self righteous lack of ability to see yourself you dont grasp how obvious you are. You posts reek of inability. You are saying you cant do things everybody here has done easilty. Keep in mind that eny older established clan was once a start up. Those guys did figure out what you cant. So rather than berating them perhaps you should try learning from them. You very arrogance, refusal to learn, and inability to listen is how all these guys are knowing you are a bad leader no matter what you say or what font you use to say it.


Oh, and further proof you didn't even read my post. Had you actually read my post.

yes I read it. I commented all the way through it. Reading your posts has been a combination of hilarious and painful.

---

Chuckt is only 6 chars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

The point I'm trying to get across is that high level clans have the ability to enact those policies because of their station. They have an established, high end, core group of players to fall back on at all times, and hence the ability to say "no, you can't join or stay because X reason".

Their in a position where they can afford that luxury of choice.

Brand new clans don't have the luxury to be as picky as more established ones, and so even if they adopt the same policies, much of which are common sense and ones I myself already practice rigidly, they won't be able to implement them to as great an effect simply because of their precarious position.

It's only a clan management issue if it's a high level and well established clan facing these issues. Otherwise, it's as simple as a daily reality for brand new clans.


Saying things like "don't let "new" people in war" doesn't work when every single person in your entire clan has the "new" badge, you have no clan history, no core group, etc. It just isn't realistic to blame the leader as if it's their fault that they just now started their clan and are trying to gain traction.

Also : I only mentioned that I would be in support of said penalties being added to the game as a shield against unwanted behavior in brand new clans. I didn't start the thread nor beg Supercell for anything. I already enact much the same policies higher level clans do. That doesn't mean I can't make the case that we should have greater protection from poorer players.

---

The point I'm making, is EVERY clan can use the same rules.

Run your clan using the premise that people will leave during war, by growing slowly (not like topsy) and cover deserters with known entities. It is not impossible to start new clans and if you have always been selective, it's no more difficult than in the past.

Stop trying to grow so fast that you jeopardize your war winning potential. On the other hand, if you want xp so much, accept the outcome of large numbers of unknowns. My main clan is level 7, has never passed 35 members, currently sits at 25, one member recruited a few weeks ago and has 2 "new" members who will be in our next war.

Stop going to war if you don't have enough regulars. Sometimes it's better to stand down rather than fail when ill-prepared.

Start reminding regulars they ALL have a role in making the clan successful. The only way to build that core of solid people is to give them ownership of any success.

It's not the leader's job to make a clan great. It's the leader's job to create an environment where regular members work to.make the clan great.

This nonsense of war deserters should be punished is counter-productive. Minimize thier impact and forget about them. Spend your time and energy on clan members that benefit your clan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwelshjr

Chuckt is only 6 chars

---

1. No it doesn't. They can simply wait out the war, opt out of the war, or ask to be kicked after using their attacks so they can travel unhindered. This wouldn't effect anyone traveling at all.

2. Yes. Obviously I believe that under such a proposed system, players would ask to be kicked after using both attacks to avoid the penalty if they absolutely could not wait less than 24 hours to travel between clans on war day.

3. It would require an entire army camp. Not a percentage. In such a proposed system, (and I have no delusions about such a system becoming a reality, it won't and never will be in-game, sadly) Supercell would have to work out the details, but it would be able to tell a legitimate try from a purposed fail, possibly by whether certain troops where taken and in what quantities. And yes, players would learn. But regardless, they still wouldn't be able to leave during war day anyway unless kicked, as they would then face the same penalty as had they not attacked at all. And they can always simply "opt out" so that if included in a war they wanted no part of, they can simply leave, even if they were included in the war, without any penalty.

4. I understand leadership fine. The reason I state many of the issues that plague lower level clans go away as time goes on is because clans eventually get more members, eventually grow into a core group of reliable players, eventually gain more players who can reliably donate well instead of only requesting, and eventually get to a place where things do in fact, nearly run themselves. Yes, a good leader is required to steer the clan in said direction, and keep it on track. But things do by and large get easier as time goes on, for numerous reasons that I already explained in greater detail than I'm willing to do again.

5. Yes, by donating heavily. By talking in the clan. By including them in clan activities. I already do literally every faucet of the game available to share with someone. If someone is intent on leaving, they will. Regardless of who the leader is. Nothing the leader does outside the scope of the above is going to change their minds.

6. Wrong. Who you are as a player has nothing to do with the quality of players you attract to your clan. Many players never look beyond player count, and finding a proactive, loyal, stable minded, english speaking, and helpful player (especially in global) is like trying to find a needle in a haystack. It's an extreme rarity. Whether or not a player stays or leaves has a lot more to do with the clan itself than the leader, especially for the vast majority of hoppers who leave in first few seconds of joining, and who never look beyond player count. It's all just a numbers game, and as your numbers get larger, you eventually get better and more reliable players. Whether or not you want to admit it, clan level (and player count) holds vast influence over the quality of players you'll bring in. And a higher level clan will always have an easier time recruiting than a brand new one. And infinitely fewer problems with hoppers and poor clan activity.

7. I show every sign of being an amazing leader. I'm extremely intelligent, see the bigger picture, am honest, already enact strict policies in my clan, know what I want out of and for my clan, am extremely active, and have over 7,000 donations this season so far, proving that I'm extremely helpful. I also help people with their raids, give advice, and do everything else possible to help grow my clan.

8. Obviously not. I literally proved you didn't read my post at least the first time around in the post right before this one. You completely misconstrued the situation and believed I was begging for things to change from Supercell, among other things. If anything you only half read it this time to make snide insults and wisecracks against someone trying to express how they feel on a certain topic, and that fall flat when you realize they don't apply to me at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

Completely wrong on each and every level.

First, you obviously didn't read my post.

---

As you demonstrably cannot understand a post that was based upon both reading and comprehending your post then this is pointless.

That you then accuse me of not having read your post, when that is your failing, not mine, makes this ironically, laughably pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

My system would make it completely impossible to "drop a barb and leave".

---

Where did I say that the person would leave after doing the two one-barb drops? If you're going to take the time to type out such a long response at least make some small effort at comprehending the plain language that you are responding to. Had you done so you would have seen that I was talking about people staying in the clan and being disruptive so as to get kicked and avoid the penalties that you are proposing. Do try to keep up.

Now you are saying that your suggestion would make it "completely impossible" for someone to leave and yet in an earlier post you said "people can still leave anytime they want" - which is it? Are you now saying that the leave button does not work or will be removed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

Essentially, under the proposed system, if you leave at all during the 48 hours of war, outside of being kicked and as long as you were opted in for war, you would receive a penalty. Even if you used both attacks first.

---

So people can leave? It is not "completely impossible" for them to do so? Phew, what a relief.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

This prevents people from leaving under any circumstance outside of being kicked, which removes the possibility of war deserters.

---

Hold on, you just said people could leave, now you're saying that the only way out is to be kicked. Which is it? Consistency, dammit!

But seriously, all mocking aside, this does not remove the possibility of war deserters. It would still be possible to desert, ergo the possibility was not removed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

It also beneits them as well, since they can just as easily not opt in for war, so that if they were put in war when marked as "opted out" they wouldn't receive a penalty for leaving. They can also simply ask to be kicked after using their attacks.

Everyone benefits from this type of system. Clan heads get security and protection from deserters, players can't be held hostage since they have the ability to opt out pre-war which allows them to leave penalty free if put in a war they wanted no part of, and no one can just "drop a barb and leave." The system would also penalize you for waiting and using neither attack but not leaving, and would be smart enough to tell a full army attack from a barb attack, so that someone couldn't just drop a barbarian on both attacks, then wait out the war.

---

You say that "players can't be held hostage" whilst proposing a system whereby players are held hostage by a clan and are not free to leave unless they are penalised. That is not an "everyone benefits" situation. At all.

It also still does not "prevent" a one-time barb drop as you continually assert. They will still be possible. So we'd be left with an unfair, constrictive system that doesn't resolve the problems that it was designed to do? IOW, pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

In this way, there would be no way to trick the system, and players who opted in and asked to be put in war would be forced to use both attacks during said war, or face penalties.

---

Aah, force, the bestest of good management techniques. [/sarcasm]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

Second : As I explain above in clear terms, it absolutely is not a clan management issue. It's a daily reality for brand new clans. I already go over the irrefutable fact that brand new clans do not have established routines, high level players outside the scope of the leader, and for the first few months of existence practically every single person in the clan is going to have a "new" badge, meaning that suggestions such as "don't put new players in war" might work for a level 5 and up clan, they don't for a level 1-4 clan. Certain things that work for higher level clans just don't for newer clans because of the realities of their situation, which in way reflect clan leadership, and are completely outside of their control.

---

You explained nothing in clear terms, you have used muddled and inconsistent language. Even with that drawback, your idea is clear enough to be rejected by anyone with a passing understanding of the game.

You did not mention that "brand new clans do not have established routines, high level players outside the scope of the leader...." above, and that is most certainly not a fact, let alone an irrefutable one. Take a brand new level 1 clan that just formed due to a bunch of players leaving an established clan. They will bring best practices with them. There, your "fact" is refuted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

You can control who to let into the clan, you can control who stays in the clan, and you can control who wars. But you cannot force people to war if they don't want too, you can't force people to show up and guarantee they'll use both attacks, you can't force people to stay.

No matter how much you donate, how active you are, how often you hold recruitment sessions, and no matter the circumstance. Hoppers will hop, and deserters will let everyone down. That in no way reflects back on whoever happens to be running said brand new clan.

That, my friend, is the reality of recruitment for brand new clans.

---

Covered in my previous post, the one you appear not to have read or understood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

And that, unarguably and by extension, has absolutely nothing to do with who runs the clan.

---

A clan with good management practices will flourish, one without won't. What could cause that? As you say it's nothing to do with who runs the clan it must be one of life's mysteries.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

Yes, many of those issues and the solutions, as I go over above, right themselves as your clan gets bigger and more established and you have entire teams of dedicated players waiting at the ready. When you can afford to be more picky with who gets to come to your clan and who gets invited, and you have more vetting options and more choice.

Newer clans do not have that luxury, and hence for them, it absolutely in no war has anything to do with clan management.

---

If clan management has nothing to do with newer clans what do you call the act of setting up and running a clan? Clan management has nothing to do with the age of a clan, it is something that applies to every single clan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

Third, I very much do have the ability to run a clan. And saying I don't just shows immaturity in that your comfortable harassing and lying about others without knowing them at all. Maybe try doing a bit of research or understanding the game and the reality of recruitment and player retention for brand new clans just a little bit before making snide comments about people you so clearly misjudge. Just a suggestion.

---

And we're back to your inability to comprehend the written word. Where did I say that you do not have the ability to run a clan? Speaking about clan management issues in the abstract does not mean people are talking about you, harassing you or lying about you. I would hazard a guess that most were blissfully unaware of your existence until you decided to post and say that everyone else was lying or wrong. The dispassionate observer will be well aware of where the immaturity resides.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

Oh, and further proof you didn't even read my post. Had you actually read my post, you'd be well aware that I already noted that if your a high level clans having the same issues as a low level one, then it becomes a clan management issue. But only for high level clans. So yes, boiling it down to "bad clan management" is wrong and offensive to new clans, especially when it so clearly isn't the case. You can be the best clan leader in the entire world and still face the same problems.

---

Me rejecting your peculiar notion that clan management only applies to established clans is in no way proof that I did not read your post.

Clan management is clan management is clan management, no matter the age/size/level, etc, of a clan. The best clan leader in the world does indeed face the same problems as every other clan leader. The best clan leader overcomes those problems due to their good clan management practices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

Just an added FYI : But "good management" is almost entirely focused on donations, a professional clan description, your attitude, and your aptness for spotting flaky players. Especially in clans like mine that are not war, but family and farming focused, and who only war out of necessity to level. So wrong again there bud. General leadership activity levels do matter.

---

Style over substance is not indicative of good management, rather the opposite.

Instead why no give free gems if caln wins war battle, 10vs10 1gem 20vs20 2gems 30vs30 3gem 40vs40 4gems and so on 5 max, only those PARTICIPATE in war no in clan member, so people will not leave during battle instead they will put an effort to WIN.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by omomsevenseven

Instead why no give free gems if caln wins war battle, 10vs10 1gem 20vs20 2gems 30vs30 3gem 40vs40 4gems and so on 5 max, only those PARTICIPATE in war no in clan member, so people will not leave during battle instead they will put an effort to WIN.

---

Please do not post your idea all over the forum and let them have their silent argue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

Again, it most certainly is not a clan management issue, for reasons I've already extensively gone over in this thread. It's a general player consensus problem where the majority believe that a clan is worse because it's newer, and hop for "greener pastures".

The color of your pasture is completely up to you. When my clan was new I rigidly enforced, at the cost of not growing faster, the good practices needed that it was a well run place. The guys that stuck around were the sort that recognized what I was up to and knew it was how they wanted things to be.


And I have no idea what any of this is even about. I'm not the OP. I didn't ask Supercell for anything, I never asked for advice either. Never said I was mad either. And I never even once said I couldn't do something. I'm also not wrong now and never have been in this thread.

if you read your posts you have in fact asked for penalties to be placed on guys that move between clans for any reason if the clan is in war. Look back. You did say that.


As I explained before, I'm simply expressing my opinion that such protections and penalties should be added

see above


Yes, there comes a day when all these issues disappear, but it doesn't happen overnight for newer clans. It takes months of dedication to get through the growing pains.

No there doesnt. Honestly. The guys telling you this have the experience to know this. You, by your own admission, do not have this experienced you have not gotten a clan to that point yet. Its amazing how you would be so sure you know ehat you havent seen so much better than those that have.


I reject a good 15-30 people every single day depending on how much I recruit on any given day, and I only have 2 elders and 2 Co's in my entire clan. Both Co's I knew from previous clans and had over 6 months of experience with, and the only two players who are elders in my clan are such because they donate often, speak well, are active, and are helpful.

cool, something I can compliment. This is a good practice. Overpromoting ruins clans. By using the ranks instead to build a management structure you are on a good path there. It will cost you members that think they should get promoted for not leaving (its like expecting a trophy just for showing up) but stay strong with this one. Elders can grow, but you number of cos is perfect and new ones should only be added to replace them. At some point someone will tell you they will leave if they cant be co. Do not respond verbally to such demands, better to kick them without further comment.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Iydris

I don't ever promote newer members, and I make people work for it. I'd never put anyone I believe to be a hopper intentionally in the clan, and I never accept people with war timers either, and I certainly never promote them. I've also taken to avoiding putting them in war.

more good practices. Kudos.


That still doesn't stop people from leaving at random either the moment they join or without any or barely a reason later.

Lol, now I am pointing out signs that you might be ok after all. If you are doing the job right most people will not make the cut. I will advise to just accept that, dont be eager for members.


I had one person who warred with us for 6 wars and then left when he saw he wasn't in the next war due to player count restraints and needing to give other players a chance.

Happily enough he wasnt in a war then. But honestly I would not have done that. If a guy is opted in (and they arent new or still being screened) I take them. I kind of dont blame your guy fir being mad. What you can do is opt in a couple botyom guys to make your number. Being bottom guys they wont attract any matchups you cNt cover. We call them 'fillers' when guys are opted in against their selection, and for fillers atracking is optional. Ill take it if they do but I dont expect it. By taking everybody you are sending a message that as leader you are working for them. Likewise, not finding a way just holding them out says that as leader you are simply controlling. Its disrespectful in a way

as leader work toward ways to make your clan a positive experience for guys. Dont see yourself as boss, see yourself as a team mate that has some extra administrative duties. Listen listen listen. Never talk down to anyone, bee respectful. Giving respect is the way to get it.


Some people are just selfish and have no patience or understanding of the bigger picture, and only think of themselves.

Yup. Actually its all of them. Thats why you have to work on ways to make them 'want to' rather than seeking ways to force. Some guys will understand the concept of teamwork and will put the team ahead of them selves because they know thats the way to get a better experience for their own selves. Those are the ones you want to keep. The ones that dont get that you actually want to lose. No matter if they are a good attacker, no matter if they have a big base. Frankly a good team player who is still trying to figure out attacking is more valuable to you than a big base guy that three stars his equals a lot but acts for himself rather than the clan.


I pretty much already do everything you suggest and more, and still face the same problems, simply because of our clans level, and that 40 players in a clan looks better to a general viewer willing to give the clan a chance than 16.

ok, lets ignore the other signs and assume you are not a bad leader. In that case I think you are impatient to grow your clan and you are measuring your progress with headcount rather than quality. Be willing to wait for it while you put quality over quantity and it will come. Also dont get mad at all the guys that turn out no good. Most of them will so thats just going to rage you. Instead shrug them off and focus on the few good ones. They are your future.

---

10 chars.....

Ok. Since again you accuse me of not reading a post when I so clearly did, and either forget your own statements, I figure I'll post this.

First : Since again you accuse me of not reading a post when I so clearly did, and either forget your own statements, or choose to pretend they never happened, I figure I'll post this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

Where did I say that the person would leave after doing the two one-barb drops?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aspex

Your way, clans would have people whose only way out would be to be so disruptive that they get kicked, obviously after filling war CCs with WBs several times and doing two one-barb drop attacks in war.

---

:facepalm:

(Which by the way is wrong, as I disproved this above in another post).

Again, I'm under no delusion of such a system ever being implemented by Supercell. This is simply a hypothetical system I came up with because I believe it should exist, and wanted to discuss it in a thread on such a topic. Nothing more, nothing less.

My language has been entirely consistent and non-contradictory this entire time. You only believe it to be because you clearly either never read the entirety of my posts, (or even your own, as I just demonstrated with evidence) or you have an inability to understand them. Neither of which are my fault.

And the rest is invalidated by this post (along with the mountains of other contradictory statements you've made, but lets ignore that for this post). It's all just accusing me of not reading the posts (Hint : I obviously did. And better than you it would seem). And accusing someone of not reading your posts by saying they didn't read them because you never said something you actually did end up saying just speaks poorly to ones character.

I'll end this by saying I'm nothing if not an extremely competent leader, and show far more promise than you give me credit for. This is my final post in this thread. I see no more reason to discuss things with someone unwilling to listen and pay attention to even their own words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SMAEL

Aspex said they will drop 1 barb, but wont leave but will be kicked. Thats true and Aspex is right. Try to practise reading with understanding, thanks

---

He isn't right and I just proved it with a copy of him saying he didn't say something he obviously did say. And it's ironic because he's the one accusing me of not paying attention to others posts. Plus I already went over why such a thing wouldn't happen under such a proposed system as I have made in a previous post. So he isn't even right on that level. Your welcome to read back through them.

Also, for what it's worth, I've corrected him and covered every single thing he's said in my posts, something he says he's done, but hasn't. As evidenced above.

And even more proof is that he claims my system would hold people hostage when it obviously couldn't. In my system I clearly state that if you were opted out when included in war, you could simply leave without being penalized. Meaning it's impossible to be "held hostage". Simply set yourself to opted out and your done.

And that's without mentioning all of the personal attacks he feels are necessary.