Player War Ratings

It would be helpful if all players had summarized stats of their war history / participation. Each player would then have a "War Rating" calculated by their generated stats. Having this feature available would be helpful in determining what new clan members would be good candidates for war. It also holds players accountable for opting into war then being inactive or leaving a clan during an active war without using attacks.

Stats could include:

• Average stars per war
• Average number of attacks per war
• Wars abandon - (Clans left during active war, I would be good with this stat alone. So annoying when people decide to leave and not use their attacks)
• Average range player attacks either up or down from mirror.

So many people ask for this, and it's really a clan management issue. If you don't let players into war unless you're sure they're loyal and reliable and are preferably decent attackers, you won't need any of this.


Wars abandoned is a negative stat, and SC has a policy against that. Plus I've been in situations before where I joined a clan to be nice and donate some troops, and some idiot leader immediately threw me into a war that not only did I have no intention of being in, but prevented me from going to war with my clan. Should I be punished with a negative stat for that? Number of attacks per war is also basically a negative stat...if it's anything less than 2 it shows you missed battles.

Attack Range doesn't tell you anything either...some people gem troops or focus on walls before defenses, and are capable of attacking higher. Sometimes people are asked to go high or low as part of a strategy a leader lays out, especially if they are cleaning up bases at the end of a war (which is also why stars per war isn't a good stat either). And this would also be highly dependent on the size and the range of bases in your clan...if you're the top player in a clan you can never attack up, if you're the bottom player you can't attack down, and if you have a war between 2 clans of nothing but completely max d TH10s, it wouldn't be any easier to attack the bottom base than it would the top base, but you'd still get penalized in the stats for going low. Not to mention that base design isn't factored into difficulty, and there are plenty of instances where a base that is several spots higher on the map is actually significantly easier because it is poorly designed. So this really just doesn't make any sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awesomness2016

Wars abandoned is a negative stat, and SC has a policy against that. Plus I've been in situations before where I joined a clan to be nice and donate some troops, and some idiot leader immediately threw me into a war that not only did I have no intention of being in, but prevented me from going to war with my clan. Should I be punished with a negative stat for that? Number of attacks per war is also basically a negative stat...if it's anything less than 2 it shows you missed battles.

---

Just because it's a current policy doesn't mean it can't be revisited. Change it to War % successfully completed. Sound better?

To address you being thrown into a war immediately - They could have the stat record only if you are "opted in" to war. If you are "opted out" and still put in a war and leave, nothing happens.

I think it's silly that players are free to mess up wars with no repercussions. I spend a lot of resources training and donating troops which can turn out to be a complete waste if someone decides to leave or never uses their attacks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awesomness2016

Attack Range doesn't tell you anything either...some people gem troops or focus on walls before defenses, and are capable of attacking higher. Sometimes people are asked to go high or low as part of a strategy a leader lays out, especially if they are cleaning up bases at the end of a war (which is also why stars per war isn't a good stat either). And this would also be highly dependent on the size and the range of bases in your clan...if you're the top player in a clan you can never attack up, if you're the bottom player you can't attack down, and if you have a war between 2 clans of nothing but completely max d TH10s, it wouldn't be any easier to attack the bottom base than it would the top base, but you'd still get penalized in the stats for going low. Not to mention that base design isn't factored into difficulty, and there are plenty of instances where a base that is several spots higher on the map is actually significantly easier because it is poorly designed. So this really just doesn't make any sense.

---

Agreed, this is not the best idea for a stat. Plus a lot of upper players will do clean up on their second attack and go lower than they normally would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raidingisfun

Just because it's a current policy doesn't mean it can't be revisited. Change it to War % successfully completed. Sound better?

---

I don't see it happening.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raidingisfun

I think it's silly that players are free to mess up wars with no repercussions. I spend a lot of resources training and donating troops which can turn out to be a complete waste if someone decides to leave or never uses their attacks.

---

Except players aren't free to mess up wars with no repercussions because leaders have the option of sitting new members out until they're confident the member is going to be reliable and show up for their battles.

Some players may leave right away if you force them to sit out the first war or the first week, but they are the players that you don't really want anyway...they're the ones likely to not show or leave as soon as they don't think you'll win, and will probably hop to another clan in a few days or a few weeks regardless. The ones who are wiling to wait, or who are willing to post several practice attacks so you can see their skills are the ones who will develop a loyalty and that you'll be able to rely on.

So it's really a clan management issue...you can go to war with members you aren't really sure about, but that's your decision, and should be aware of the risk you are taking by doing so.

And incidentally, players aren't more likely to stay if you throw them into a war immediately, at least not in the long term...setting the bar low like that and not really requiring anything of your members for the privilege of warring with you won't engender loyalty. So the only time it can actually be a benefit is if you're willing to reduce your chances of winning in order to gain more XP by having a larger war that includes players you're not really sure about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awesomness2016

Except players aren't free to mess up wars with no repercussions because leaders have the option of sitting new members out until they're confident the member is going to be reliable and show up for their battles.

Some players may leave right away if you force them to sit out the first war or the first week, but they are the players that you don't really want anyway...they're the ones likely to not show or leave as soon as they don't think you'll win, and will probably hop to another clan in a few days or a few weeks regardless. The ones who are wiling to wait, or who are willing to post several practice attacks so you can see their skills are the ones who will develop a loyalty and that you'll be able to rely on.

So it's really a clan management issue...you can go to war with members you aren't really sure about, but that's your decision, and should be aware of the risk you are taking by doing so.

And incidentally, players aren't more likely to stay if you throw them into a war immediately, at least not in the long term...setting the bar low like that and not really requiring anything of your members for the privilege of warring with you won't engender loyalty. So the only time it can actually be a benefit is if you're willing to reduce your chances of winning in order to gain more XP by having a larger war that includes players you're not really sure about.

---

That is one scenario, but clan management is also limiting. You can follow the best practices and still have people mess you up. Us humans can be fickle and unpredictable. I have been in clans where long time members decide to up and leave for whatever reason. They may think twice if it has an effect on their war rating.

You make solid points but my question for you is if their was a simple war rating system in place that promoted team play, how would that take away from the game?

I'm not sure that anyone who doesn't care enough about your clan to at least do their attacks before they leave is going to care enough about whatever stat you introduce for it to make a difference. It seems to me that clans with good management rarely if ever have an issue.

Would the rating system take away from the game? Maybe not, but it also doesn't seem necessary.

This could be held as a negative stat, which SC doesn't want.