War performance based clan ranking

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnnyPC

Regular wars are still plagued by things like base and roster engineering, as well as gaming the system in various ways to get long win streaks. SC has been working on those problems for years. Their primary solution was CWL which is purely a ladder. If you want a rank, then perform in CWL.

---

I agree with this. I go on to say: Classic war is great for training new players. High level players can shepherd low level players in classic war, the low level players are an important part, but they don’t suffer the pressure of making their clan lose.

if you want serious, do CWL, and push up the CWL leagues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tosti111

Not everything has meaning or at least, not everything HAS to have a meaning. If you think rank Based on regular wars is meaningful, please suggest what meaning can be derived when a clan can war with 5/10/15/20/25/30/35/40/45/50 players? is a team that plays only 5v5 a better clan than a team that plays 50v50 but has less wins? There are 10 regular war sizes you can use, which is the one that matters? Do we need a category for each one? What happens if you are full green warlog at 5v5 but decide to do a 10v10 and lose? Do you have two warlogs (one for each size soone is full green and the other is full red) or are theY combined?

---

A war point should assigned on player number like 5v5 is 1, 10v10 is 2, and for victory there should be some points. Ranking should be based on this war points. I think someday supercell will look into it.