Leaderboard for Top Donators

There's no reason to reward gems for donating, number one. It's not like donating makes Supercell money like trophy hunting does.

Number two, the top of the list would simply comprise of people who are in clans that don't mind being donated giants. The only other way somebody else would make the top of the list is if they continuously gemmed pekkas/dragons/golems and donated them. Either way, it'd just be another list where you'd have to spend money to be on top of it, if that's the case.

I'm not against ranking charts, by any means, but gems shouldn't be rewarded to the winner, unless supercell believes people are buying gems simply to be on the top of this list. Only supercell would know if that's the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chrisnastybro

There's no reason to reward gems for donating, number one. It's not like donating makes Supercell money like trophy hunting does.

Number two, the top of the list would simply comprise of people who are in clans that don't mind being donated giants. The only other way somebody else would make the top of the list is if they continuously gemmed pekkas/dragons/golems and donated them. Either way, it'd just be another list where you'd have to spend money to be on top of it, if that's the case.

I'm not against ranking charts, by any means, but gems shouldn't be rewarded to the winner, unless supercell believes people are buying gems simply to be on the top of this list. Only supercell would know if that's the case.

---

"Donating does not make Supercell money". "Gemming high cost troops and spending money will only get you on top" You just countered your own statement. If players gemmed their way to the leaderboards, they deserve it. It gives them a %(whatever that may be) back to them and most importantly, it gives them recognition. Quite frankly, It saddens me to see hate comments on this thread as I believe this new feature would serve as a real test to the best of the best donators in the world. If you look at the poll, it heavily favors this idea, but then again, not a single comment on why this should be implemented. And I agree, this should've been in suggestions, forgive me.

people would just go around joining random clans and donating giants

Good idea, but I could see it turning into another thing for people to get fluffy-hurt because of some guy with a bazillion donations. People can't get fluffy-hurt over what they cannot see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hb808

Good idea, but I could see it turning into another thing for people to get fluffy-hurt because of some guy with a bazillion donations. People can't get fluffy-hurt over what they cannot see.

---

I completely agree with your opinion. I believe the gemming aspect of this idea is making some people upset, but in reality, you see people spending thousands of dollars just to get on the top players leaderboards. Since gems are not distributed to the top ten players, then the idea to reward the top 10 donators with gems should be nullified.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abstrusecon

"Donating does not make Supercell money". "Gemming high cost troops and spending money will only get you on top" You just countered your own statement. If players gemmed their way to the leaderboards, they deserve it. It gives them a %(whatever that may be) back to them and most importantly, it gives them recognition. Quite frankly, It saddens me to see hate comments on this thread as I believe this new feature would serve as a real test to the best of the best donators in the world. If you look at the poll, it heavily favors this idea, but then again, not a single comment on why this should be implemented. And I agree, this should've been in suggestions, forgive me.

---

"Best Donators"? It's not like donating is a skill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BunnyBasher

people would just go around joining random clans and donating giants

---

The donation count doesn't go up any more by donating giants than it does by donating anything else, and since giants are significantly more expensive, it's doubtful that his idea (if implemented) would cause such a thing. Yes, XP points earned will go up more rapidly, but that shouldn't have a more of an impact than it does already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fast1

The donation count doesn't go up any more by donating giants than it does by donating anything else, and since giants are significantly more expensive, it's doubtful that his idea (if implemented) would cause such a thing. Yes, XP points earned will go up more rapidly, but that shouldn't have a more of an impact than it does already.

---

You are only allowed to donate 5 troops per request. Maximum donation per troop are giants because 5x5 = 25.
5 Giants are cheaper to build and take less time to build than any other troop...
Pekka, 5 Wizzies (only 20), Dragon (only 20), Healers (only 20), Golem.
So yes people who are seeking to up their donation count donate Giants...
this simple fact has been figured out by noobs everywhere every since supercell started tracking Donations...
Only a Super noob wouldn't be able to understand that fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TJwTC

You are only allowed to donate 5 troops per request. Maximum donation per troop are giants because 5x5 = 25.
5 Giants are cheaper to build and take less time to build than any other troop...
Pekka, 5 Wizzies (only 20), Dragon (only 20), Healers (only 20), Golem.
So yes people who are seeking to up their donation count donate Giants...
this simple fact has been figured out by noobs everywhere every since supercell started tracking Donations...
Only a Super noob wouldn't be able to understand that fact.

---

If I donated 5 archers, then my donation count is 5. If (instead) I donated 5 giants, then my donation count is (still) 5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fast1

If I donated 5 archers, then my donation count is 5. If (instead) I donated 5 giants, then my donation count is (still) 5.

---

The game counts donations by troop space, not by number of units donated.