Idea for DISCOURAGING clan hoppers, while keeping the integrity of the game intact

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayyyyyema

Anyone who is immature who is mad over the fact you left their clan FOR ANY REASON YOU HAVE, will have the ability to troll you. Thats bullying bud! And sc will NEVER fly with that.

---

Supercell is perfectly OK with Revenge attacks, aren't they? So what's the difference between that and what I'm proposing? Because it's the same exact thing.

Either you didn't/don't understand what I'm proposing, which will be made abundantly clear below, or you're just mad at the idea that you might get some payback for all the hopping that you do personally. But you should go back and re-read the *RESTRICTIONS* section of my original post. It clearly states that any post-hopping attack would be limited by the discretion of the Supercell developers. And I have made clear that I think any retribution attacks should be limited, even if only to one attack.

I am NOT saying clans should be able to wage an all out war against someone's village for hopping in and out. I agree that it would be bullying and abusive. All that I am saying is that if a person is going to hop then they should have to face at least ONE of the clan's members in a one-on-one fight for doing so. If the hopper wins the one-on-one then so be it and that's the end of it. If the clan member wins then so be it and that's the end of it. It's honestly no different than a random raid except that the randomness is taken out of it that one fight... the same as a "Revenge" attack. And it would be at the discretion of the clan leader. Some leaders may not choose to exercise that option if he and the clan didn't care... but I honestly doubt that many wouldn't, even if they say they don't care on this forum.

Another idea I like, offered in the earlier post by Street3, is that if someone hops then they lose donated troops. The clan members who donated keep their XP and maybe get back the elixir it cost them to make those troops. That may actually be an easier feature to implement for the developers because they'd need a way to keep track of someone who actually did hop and not someone who just wanted to move on. But then again if someone wanted to leave a clan they could be made to donate troops or pay in resources, the way anyone has to pay in gold if they want to start up their own clan, in addition to losing any donated troops they may have in their clan castles.

Some here may not think hopping is such a big deal because they like it and the clan members who donate get XP anyway. But it's not just about XP. People use their valuable time, and sometimes even pay money, to play this game. It ticks them off to see their generosity in the clan, or to see resources from their real-life wallet, go to a waste because some people get off on trolling. If people want to hop then fine. But IMO, they should be made to pay a penalty for it. Plain and simple.

I think best way to stop the hopping is charging 50k gold to join a clan or something like that

How do you keep this from being abused to transfer trophies and resources?

Also the loss of donated troops is non sense. They'll just use them before dropping, making it an inconvenience for everyone else without providing any deterrent whatsoever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sgtxzombie

I think best way to stop the hopping is charging 50k gold to join a clan or something like that

---

That's sort of Street3's idea (post 4), but the better way is to charge 50k, or even 100k, to leave a clan. Also, they don't keep any donated troops. So there goes the incentive to just join a clan to leave it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahimi

How do you keep this from being abused to transfer trophies and resources?

---

You would only be allowed one revenge attack from only one clan member. And it doesn't even have to include trophies, although the clan member should be able to loot the hopper.

The same thing would apply here. Only one person from the clan, assigned by the clan leader (within the same level that the hopper is), would be allowed to attack the hopper. And they'd only be able to attack once, the same as with a revenge attack.

Hey, I'm not married to my idea. If there's a better one, and Street3's may be better, I'm all for that. I understand that the clan leader could make the clan invite only, but that still wouldn't prevent people from hopping. It just adds one more step to the process. I'd just like to see the hopping cut to a minimum, but maybe that's just me.

Hoppers are not a problem and therefor SC should not waste their time trying to stop them. Setting your clan to invite only stops 90% of hoppers because they don't want to wait to be accepted. Problem solved. At worst they are a minor annoyance and fun to boot out as soon as they introduce themselves with a troop request.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceageg

Hoppers are not a problem and therefor SC should not waste their time trying to stop them. Setting your clan to invite only stops 90% of hoppers because they don't want to wait to be accepted. Problem solved. At worst they are a minor annoyance and fun to boot out as soon as they introduce themselves with a troop request.

---

This is probably going to be my last post in this thread about this, unless a forum mod/admin responds, because I think I've said all I can say about it and I don't want to keep repeating myself and spamming the forum. The idea is what it is.

But re: your post, why even have an "Anyone Can Join" option for clans? What's the point if it just renders the clan a swinging door? Isn't the idea of being in a clan to actually BE in a clan? *shrug*

Anyway, I agree it's a minor annoyance. Minor enough not to make me quit playing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnonyJoe

Supercell is perfectly OK with Revenge attacks, aren't they? So what's the difference between that and what I'm proposing? Because it's the same exact thing.

---

Revenge is attacking someone that attacked you.

What you are proposing is attacking someone because, for one reason or another, did not want to be in your clan.

If you can't see the difference between those two....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnonyJoe

You would only be allowed one revenge attack from only one clan member. And it doesn't even have to include trophies, although the clan member should be able to loot the hopper.

The same thing would apply here. Only one person from the clan, assigned by the clan leader (within the same level that the hopper is), would be allowed to attack the hopper. And they'd only be able to attack once, the same as with a revenge attack.

---

This doesn't solve the exploitation.


The only way to solve the exploitation of this idea is to not implement this idea....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnonyJoe

That's sort of Street3's idea (post 4), but the better way is to charge 50k, or even 100k, to leave a clan. Also, they don't keep any donated troops. So there goes the incentive to just join a clan to leave it.




You would only be allowed one revenge attack from only one clan member. And it doesn't even have to include trophies, although the clan member should be able to loot the hopper.

The same thing would apply here. Only one person from the clan, assigned by the clan leader (within the same level that the hopper is), would be allowed to attack the hopper. And they'd only be able to attack once, the same as with a revenge attack.

Hey, I'm not married to my idea. If there's a better one, and Street3's may be better, I'm all for that. I understand that the clan leader could make the clan invite only, but that still wouldn't prevent people from hopping. It just adds one more step to the process. I'd just like to see the hopping cut to a minimum, but maybe that's just me.

---

So how about the people that donated the troop has 24 hrs to take revenge! And it might be a good idea to charge for leaving a clan, you could do that instead of revenge and the money would go to those who donated the troops! Pretty much you would get the same amount back that you spent on their troops! If they don't have enough, then they lose the.troops or a revenge button option becomes available to those who donated to them in the 3 to 12 hr before they left! And a check box could be added to clan edit allowing each clan to decide to allow hoppers or not! If they choose not to then they get these options! And it would be visible in clan description whether it's marked or not!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Street3

So how about the people that donated the troop has 24 hrs to take revenge! And it might be a good idea to charge for leaving a clan, you could do that instead of revenge and the money would go to those who donated the troops! Pretty much you would get the same amount back that you spent on their troops! If they don't have enough, then they lose the.troops or a revenge button option becomes available to those who donated to them in the 3 to 12 hr before they left! And a check box could be added to clan edit allowing each clan to decide to allow hoppers or not! If they choose not to then they get these options! And it would be visible in clan description whether it's marked or not!

---

Punishing anyone for leaving a clan they don't want to be in is a bad idea. Almost as bad as forcing them to stay in a clan they don't want to be in.

I think an easier way would just have the last 5 clans available and how long you were in those clans in your profile. If you think you have found a clan hopper then just kick them out immediately or decline their request.