Don't you think that a players attendance in wars would be really helpful? Also if you did do that I think that it shouldn't be possible to put a player in a war if their status is red.
Printable View
Don't you think that a players attendance in wars would be really helpful? Also if you did do that I think that it shouldn't be possible to put a player in a war if their status is red.
Why should it not be possible to put a player in war if their status is red? If all you need is to fill that one spot to complete a roster and you do not expect that person to attack, then clan leaders ought to be able to do that. It is better than taking out 4 people that wants to go to war.
Because you could blemish the player's record. If you decide not to war your so called clan leaders shouldn't be able to make you. Most clans I know can find enough people to war.
I've also seen players being booted for not attacking by another leader.. Go figure.
How do you blemish other people's record? There are no records. This will only be an issue if your suggestion of recording war attendance is implemented and so far I see no good reason why it should.
It is also easier to add someone who is opted out of war than it is to recruit a new person into the clan for war. A person who you do not know if they will attack or not.
It isn't about having "enough" to war, it is about multiples of 5. If we have 14 marked in, I would rather add a low level marked out base with no expectation of them attacking, than put 4 people who want to war out.
Any leader who kicked sonebody for not attacking when they had been marked out is not worth being called a leader.
I don't think this is really neccisarry war stars are displayed in your profile. Interesting idea though.
This is useful however way you want to look at it.