Clan war participation issue

My idea could take a few different forms, which I will outline later, but essentially it has stemmed from my frustration, im sure others too, from people leaving during wars. I've thought of a few different methods to solve the issue as well as some drawbacks. Let me know what you think.

1) Stop people from being able to leave a clan if they are in the war.

How it works:
○ Basically just remove the option to leave if they are in the war. They can leave omce the war is complete.

Pros:
○ Stops leavers and keeps a full team for war.

Cons:
○ Takes away peoples choice of when to leave a clan;
○ Does not actually affect participation;
○ Could actually be detremental to clan war e.g.: if people decide to use an unprotected base because they are annoyed they cant leave;
○ Clans could abuse this by starting a war immediately after one finishes.

2) Let clan leaders/cos choose who can participate in war.

How it works:
○ Leaders/cos would choose how many and who to take into war by making a selection in the clan war menu.

Pros:
○ Leaders/cos can rely on their chosen teams;
○ Presuming reliable members are chosen this would reduce the risk of unexpected leavers or non-participation.

Cons:
○ Some members might feel left out and leave the clan;
○ It would not be fair if the same people were used every time.

3) Give people the option to participate in war

How it works:
○ People have the option to set whether or not they participate in wars on their profile menu (this would be advertised too). It would automatically take people out of consideration for wars. Assuming this is a mandatory setting that you have to select when joining a clan (changeable at any time).

Pros:
○ Removes people from war selection process that do not wish to war;
○ Ensures only those that wish to participate in war are a part of it;
○ Would greatly reduce the risk of people leaving unexpectedly.

Cons:
○ People can still ignore the system.

4) Incur a penalty for leaving the war.

How it works:
○ When a player leaves during the war they are "fined" the potential loot they would gain from beating their reccomended target. Players would lose this full amount or all they can afford if they do not have the resources.

Pros:
○ Provides a disincentive for players to leave wars by adding a further penalty.

Cons:
○ Players can still leave.

Please let me know your thoughts! Perhaps a combination?

Personally I think 4 should be a given but I think 3 would really solve the issue.

1 & 4. Pointless. Think really hard about this.

2. No. If a leader doesn't want them to participate, kick them.

3. The only solution that actually makes sense. However, it doesn't solve the issue really.

The only actual solution to your problem is to alter your recruiting strategies. For example do not do this:

http://i.imgur.com/W7NX7wj.jpg

I know that 1 and 4 do nothing, I am just providing options for people to think about. That being said, 4 provides an extra disincentive and whilst not solving the problem it would reduce the likelyhood of them leaving if they value loot.

This is true. See above.

Yes, hence why I said I liked it. While not being a fail-proof solution, it does significantly help the issue.

I dont recruit that way and regardless of if you do recruit that way or not there are always people who will just leave part way through a war.

Also I presume that is your setup in the image - looks pretty good :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronEagle92

I know that 1 and 4 do nothing, I am just providing options for people to think about. That being said, 4 provides an extra disincentive and whilst not solving the problem it would reduce the likelyhood of them leaving if they value loot.

---

You're not getting it. Let's say they implement number 1 or number 4 (with a penalty so severe no one will ever leave). Now what? You've got a person of questionable moral fiber (assuming your clan doesn't suck) that will now do everything they can to get kicked. They will blow up your clan chat, ♥♥♥♥ all over your clan in global, donate goblins to war bases, choose an easy to 3 star layout, and still not attack.

In addition you've now made it impossible or at least difficult for folks with valid grievances to leave.

In short these options aren't even worth discussing as they benefit absolutely no one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronEagle92

I dont recruit that way and regardless of if you do recruit that way or not there are always people who will just leave part way through a war.

---

That's not true. No one said running a clan was easy. It's up to you to recruit wisely, create an atmosphere that encourages people to stay, and setup procedures to minimize the occurrence of folks leaving. For example have a recruitment period followed by a rest period (no one new comes in) before going to war.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronEagle92

Also I presume that is your setup in the image - looks pretty good :)

---

It is. My name and clan are in my signature if you want to copy it.

This idea have came due to behavioral issue of some hoppers leaving a clan during war this is becoming a frequent topic. Guess what? they will give you tips on how to recruite member despite the fact that its really hard to filter those annoying hoppers due to limited information on their profile.

SAD point is, most of the annoyed clans are usually new and will affect their future of becoming strong clans. SC should know what happen next if there are less and less strong clans out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buntingan

This idea have came due to behavioral issue of some hoppers leaving a clan during war this is becoming a frequent topic. Guess what? they will give you tips on how to recruite member despite the fact that its really hard to filter those annoying hoppers due to limited information on their profile.

SAD point is, most of the annoyed clans are usually new and will affect their future of becoming strong clans. SC should know what happen next if there are less and less strong clans out there.

---

Clans with strong and wise leadership will do fine. SC makes millions per day on CoC and it is the highest grossing app in the store month after month. Implying that somehow this issue, which people have dealt with forever, is somehow going to suddenly affect that is silly.

They aren't going to add negative stats to profiles nor are they going to allow clan leaders to infringe on the rights of players to move through clans at will. Everyone has to deal with hoppers. The sooner you realize that hopper issues are clan management issues, not a problem that SC should solve for you, the sooner you can get to work organizing your clan to address these issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahimi

Clans with strong and wise leadership will do fine. SC makes millions per day on CoC and it is the highest grossing app in the store month after month. Implying that somehow this issue, which people have dealt with forever, is somehow going to suddenly affect that is silly.

They aren't going to add negative stats to profiles nor are they going to allow clan leaders to infringe on the rights of players to move through clans at will. Everyone has to deal with hoppers. The sooner you realize that hopper issues are clan management issues, not a problem that SC should solve for you, the sooner you can get to work organizing your clan to address these issues.

---

Would it be negative to know the average time a player spends in a clan? This could have clans know who the hoppers were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keepo

Would it be negative to know the average time a player spends in a clan?

---

Yes because this stat would have one singular purpose and that purpose would be for use in discriminating against folks or branding them as hoppers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Keepo

This could have clans know who the hoppers were.

---

Would it? What about clan families where members routinely move between them? What about folks that try joining several clans (there are many many inactive clans out there)? What about folks in clans who make lists of people who don't want to war and kick folks out prior to the war starting and then sends invites for them to come back (this is what my clan does).

Again, people are going to do what they will do. It's up to you to deal with that reality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dahimi

Yes because this stat would have one singular purpose and that purpose would be for use in discriminating against folks or branding them as hoppers.



Would it? What about clan families where members routinely move between them? What about folks that try joining several clans (there are many many inactive clans out there)? What about folks in clans who make lists of people who don't want to war and kick folks out prior to the war starting and then sends invites for them to come back (this is what my clan does).

Again, people are going to do what they will do. It's up to you to deal with that reality.

---

Ok, I see what you mean, there are too many cons to what i suggested for it to work efficiently.
For the opt in/out suggestion for clan wars, I think it is the one that makes the most sense and one that would work the best. As you said, it wouldn't solve participation, and 50 v 50 clan wars would become scarce. However, I don't think there is a true way to 'solve' clan participation, only improve it. As for 50 v 50 wars, I don't have much of a solution im afraid.

See below.

Stop harassing me because you can't read. I said exactly what you are complaining about in the cons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IronEagle92

Cons:
○ Takes away peoples choice of when to leave a clan;
○ Does not actually affect participation;
○ Could actually be detremental to clan war e.g.: if people decide to use an unprotected base because they are annoyed they cant leave;
○ Clans could abuse this by starting a war immediately after one finishes.

---