Make inactive bases inactive in cwl also.

Anyone else tired of playing Zombie clans in CWL? I have been doing 30v30 cwl for months and every month there are clans with only a few active players using 20 or more dead bases to get to 30. Visit the home base and you see dead EA and infernos.
I think it would be more fair if war bases in cwl to reflect the inactive home base. Make the EA and infernos inactive on these war bases also.

I wouldn't like that. Our clan needs to put inactive bases in our lineup just to get up to 15. We're getting penalized enough not having the full number of attackers, we shouldn't be penalized on defense too.

No way. In all wars, all defenses should be active, same as they always have been.

They are already not attacking, it is already a advantage. I think extra advantage is unnecessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadow199172

They are already not attacking, it is already a advantage. I think extra advantage is unnecessary.

---

That's an excellent point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeb2

Anyone else tired of playing Zombie clans in CWL? I have been doing 30v30 cwl for months and every month there are clans with only a few active players using 20 or more dead bases to get to 30. Visit the home base and you see dead EA and infernos.
I think it would be more fair if war bases in cwl to reflect the inactive home base. Make the EA and infernos inactive on these war bases also.

---

I cannot imagine why you think doing this totally unfair thing would somehow make it "more fair".

Why on earth is it "more fair" to artificially handicap opponents who are already struggling?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax

I cannot imagine why you think doing this totally unfair thing would somehow make it "more fair".

Why on earth is it "more fair" to artificially handicap opponents who are already struggling?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadow199172

They are already not attacking, it is already a advantage. I think extra advantage is unnecessary.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SharkyFinn

No way. In all wars, all defenses should be active, same as they always have been.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnnyPC

I wouldn't like that. Our clan needs to put inactive bases in our lineup just to get up to 15. We're getting penalized enough not having the full number of attackers, we shouldn't be penalized on defense too.

---

I will add to the list of people who agree with you. This idea is the CWL equivalent of breaking someone's arms when they are already forced to use a wheelchair by themselves.

I understand that clans that can’t attract enough active players want to use dead bases to make up their lack of success. Use the dead bases to get to 15 or 30 is fine. But they should remain dead bases and not be a crutch for failing clans to gain an advantage over active clans with members who have lower TH levels. At least with a dead TH12 you can get a 2 star with a TH9. Now you are lucky to get a 1 Star even though the account you attack has no player using it. I think the account with a person using it should get priority over an account that is no longer being played just used by a clan to get an advantage on defense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax

I cannot imagine why you think doing this totally unfair thing would somehow make it "more fair".

Why on earth is it "more fair" to artificially handicap opponents who are already struggling?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeb2

I understand that clans that can’t attract enough active players want to use dead bases to make up their lack of success. Use the dead bases to get to 15 or 30 is fine. But they should remain dead bases and not be a crutch for failing clans to gain an advantage over active clans with members who have lower TH levels. At least with a dead TH12 you can get a 2 star with a TH9. Now you are lucky to get a 1 Star even though the account you attack has no player using it. I think the account with a person using it should get priority over an account that is no longer being played just used by a clan to get an advantage on defense.

---

What exactly is the "advantage on defense"? They put in a lower, but active base that you can squeeze an extra star out of; but it bites back & takes a star, maybe two and percentage. You'd be worse off in the long run.

Anything, anything you get from a dead base is a bonus. They're guaranteed to get zip, you get stars & percentage.

Any how would your idea work in practice. What would be the definition of a "dead base"? Would you be barred from loading the CC? What happens when a base is designated "dead" during prep or war day?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zeb2

I understand that clans that can’t attract enough active players want to use dead bases to make up their lack of success. Use the dead bases to get to 15 or 30 is fine. But they should remain dead bases and not be a crutch for failing clans to gain an advantage over active clans with members who have lower TH levels. At least with a dead TH12 you can get a 2 star with a TH9. Now you are lucky to get a 1 Star even though the account you attack has no player using it. I think the account with a person using it should get priority over an account that is no longer being played just used by a clan to get an advantage on defense.

---

Is the issue that it’s hard to beat these clans, or you find it inconvenient to have to attack higher townhalls?