Supercell apologies if its already be spoken about...
Please can you set up the game to penalise the member who leaves during war as it then ends up being an unfair match, it is also very frustrating.
Printable View
Supercell apologies if its already be spoken about...
Please can you set up the game to penalise the member who leaves during war as it then ends up being an unfair match, it is also very frustrating.
Maybe penalise them 100,000 gold/elixer or 50 gems, to deter them from leaving , a simple cooldown is not enough. ?
Would you rather they stay and throw their attacks? If people want to leave there is only two reasons generally:
1) They're pricks you didn't want there anyways, sucks they left during war but your better off without them.
2) Your clan isn't as good as you think it is, if this happens often review your clan culture/policies to determine why
I had a guy leave this morning during war, we were probably going to kick him after the war, he was annoying and whined if he didn't get troops within like 10 minutes.
How about an apology to the rest of us ? This has been discussed to death.
The issue is clan management. Learn how to recruit people to your clan, don‘t war with them until you trust them. Don’t recruit just to get an extra person for war. Tell them your war rules. If they like your clan, like your rules, they will stay for wars.
You can‘t apply an automatic penalty because people leave clans for sorts of reasons even during CW. Sometimes it’s because they feel duped when they get to know the clan. Sometimes it‘s to join a Req and Go clan for war troops. Whatever the reason, they are all valid to the other person.
Ok, maybe the ability to replace the leaver with another member that is wanting war in the first 12 hrs or so. Of equal strength. ?.
i would be ok with that, id rather they use the attacks and lose rather than us be one star behind and have those attacks just sitting there, if they wanna leave anyway im sure they could do that and the exit would be pretty swift afterwards when they get kicked,
the not attacking thing is the biggest problem in war, and i see people get kicked for aiming down, at least they attack why kick an active player dummy?
i think there should be some kind of lockout for war, we have the opt in and out option why cant that be utilised, if you opt in war you can't leave during war, if you are opt out then it's the leaders own fault if he includes you
Disagree,
At least with unused attacks you can imagine how close you are to winning the war. Watching an unhappy clan member send a single goblin to attack a base would be infuriating.
No. This is a bad idea every time it is suggested because it will cause more, worse problems than "hoppers" already represent. Here is pretty much everything you need to know about dealing with hoppers. Both what will happen if you get your way and how everybody else has learned to deal with 99% of them quickly and easily.
First, SC has a long standing policy of not putting a negative statistic/badge/mark/rank/etc. of any kind on any players profile. They have a fairly strict no name-n-shame policy, as they should. You can accept those ideas as ruled out at face value.
Also, in an effort to not only help the OP understand the horrible repercussions of their idea, here is a list of many of the most common things successful clans do to prevent "D-bag hoppers" from being a nuisance (a nuisance, not a problem). Quoting myself from a recent thread again . . .
All of us clan leader types have experienced this and learned to preventing through our own leadership skills and clan rules. There is no need to institute a system that will punish the most social and giving players while making the lowest quality players more destructive.
In my time on the forum here I still have yet to see the answer to these simple questions. Why do you want to force somebody that you don't want in your clan, to be stuck in your clan?
Select the members of the clan that you can trust, problem solved.