Bigger punishment for early war quitter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reddigulous

Granted, it is an over simplification. But the fact remains, clan management is a big factor seperating good clans from bad ones. Good clans (and everyone may have slightly different definitions of what makes a clan good) put in the time to provide players with a reason to stay. That includes not allowing a bunch of knuckleheads in your clan that may....

1. Leave midwar
2. Behave so poorly the make well behaved members want to leave
3. Act in selfish ways that hurt the clan

Many clans don't face the problem with midwar deserters. You have to ask yourself why. They are playing the same game with the same rules. Yet they aren't running into problems with war deserters.

---

I'm sorry, but I disagree that there is any way to accurately predict someone's character the way you believe there is. Hindsight is 20/20 and you should feel fortunate that you don't come across more bad members.

I simply think that individuals should be accountable for their own actions. You are seemingly an apologist for the lowest form of scum the game has and instead blaming the actions of aforementioned scum on the presumptive failure of others to employ the good judgment that you seem to feel only you have access to.

Do you think people should use both attacks in war or not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned

Exactly. I've hired people before who have been through extensive screenings, in person interviews with five or more trusted people, reference checks and the whole nine yards, and even then every once in a while you find a bad apple. The thought that screening or testing is effective in clash is naive. You probably lose more good people than bad by playing screening games with them anyway.

---

I dont think anyone is saying you can eliminate it completely. But you absolutely have all the tools you need to manage your clan and minimize the impact of having accidentally allowed a turd into your clan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned

I'm sorry, but I disagree that there is any way to accurately predict someone's character the way you believe there is. Hindsight is 20/20 and you should feel fortunate that you don't come across more bad members.

I simply think that individuals should be accountable for their own actions. You are seemingly an apologist for the lowest form of scum the game has and instead blaming the actions of aforementioned scum on the presumptive failure of others to employ the good judgment that you seem to feel only you have access to.

Do you think people should use both attacks in war or not?

---

Don't misunderstand me. I run into crazy amounts of bad members. Id say 80% of people playing clash are bad members.

But two things....

1. I can usually identify them before I allow them in my clan
2. If they do slip through the cracks I have another layer. I don't take any new member to war initiay. Bad members usually leave before the war search ends.

Let me ask you...how do you recruit players? And what kind of criteria do you have for new members?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by felipebsr

So, how about the shame-quit we told? Loyal people that decided not to be once. I'm interested in your loyalty test. How do you do it? What's your criteria?

---

I'm not exactly clear what you mean by shame-quit. I believe you mean someone quits because they are embarassed by a bad attack. I will answer with that assumption.

Shame-quitters are not easy to manage. But i think some of that can be managed by expectations and clan atmosphere. Is the person e couraged before their attack to just do the best they can? Are they congratulated for a good try after they kess up? Those things help. Rage quitters are a bit different. Usually, in my experience, if you invite them back after a little while when theyve cooled down they will return. However, our policy is not to take them back. We dont want to set ourselves up for that to happen again in the future.

Heres a few things to consider for recruiting....

1. I talk a good deal to players before taking them in the clan. On the forums, in global, on kik...wherever. If a player cannot be bothered to get to know me a bit then I cant be bothered to allow them in my clan.
2. Clan atmoshpere is important. When someone leaves midwar do you litter chat with complaints? Or do you, as clan leader, tell everyone that the player in question is not welcome back and will miss out on the privelege of being a part of your clan? It may seem trivial. But its a big deal. I think understanding this is key to clan managment.
3. And this is big too....I dont accept anyone who is a higher TH level than me. That puts me in position to cover their attacks should they leave midwar.
4. I am not in a rush to get to 50 players. I never add more than 2 new players between wars. If I add one player and he leaves...no problem. If i add 10 and 5 leave....problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned

I'm sorry, but I disagree that there is any way to accurately predict someone's character the way you believe there is. Hindsight is 20/20 and you should feel fortunate that you don't come across more bad members.

I simply think that individuals should be accountable for their own actions. You are seemingly an apologist for the lowest form of scum the game has and instead blaming the actions of aforementioned scum on the presumptive failure of others to employ the good judgment that you seem to feel only you have access to.

Do you think people should use both attacks in war or not?

---

I am not apologizing for them. I think they are turds. Period. Selfish turds. I just don't need Supercell to protect me from them. I can do that myself. Also, I don't think there is anything Supercell can do which will 'fix the problem'. Turds play the game. And if you arent looking out for them they will get in your clan. And if they do get into my clan I want them out as quickly as possible. I don't want them hanging around to attack in war.

But yes, in general I think everyone should use both attacks in war. Those who do not are bad members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reddigulous

Don't misunderstand me. I run into crazy amounts of bad members. Id say 80% of people playing clash are bad members.

But two things....

1. I can usually identify them before I allow them in my clan
2. If they do slip through the cracks I have another layer. I don't take any new member to war initiay. Bad members usually leave before the war search ends.

Let me ask you...how do you recruit players? And what kind of criteria do you have for new members?

---

First, let me say that the most common thing people say when they do join our clan is "wow, you guys really have your act together." And they are right. We are a well run clan and a great place for people to grow in the game.

We have data based criteria for each TH level we recruit. Most applicants are rejected based on profile data alone. There is enough data in a profile to figure out if someone's been around the block or not. We don't keep people long enough for war if they don't present themselves in chat in a positive light. Players earn trust by being positive and showing they know how to fit into a clan, follow basic clan etiquette, and contribute in a helpful way.

But the biggest factor that contradicts your premise is that it's not a players first few wars where players desert. It is far more common for a player to get past the honeymoon stage, settle in and get comfortable with the clan before their true colors come out. These are players who would have passed any screening you might has put in place. But somewhere along the way ego, politics, religion, or some other factor becomes an issue. Personally I really like having a drama-free zone.

In any case, my view is that someone who is level 95+ and has 500+ war stars (for example) has been in the game long enough to know that you simply don't abandon a clan during war, and furthermore you should always, always give your best two attacks in accordance with clan procedures even if you decide you can't stand the clan and can't quit soon enough. If your clan turns out to be a bag full of weiners you can simply leave chat closed, take care of business, and then leave.

I am am not saying these players are running rampant through our clan all the time. I'm saying the few we've come across deserve a penalty commensurate with taking an endeavor that 25 or more people have invested the past 48 hours in and subverting it.

At the end of the war add 1 day to each person's war cool down timer for each unused attack.

If the player was kicked, no penalty

Also along these lines, I was hopping around on my mini yesterday and dumping some troops. In the meantime some dude threw me in a war. I'd gladly go attack, but I can't find what clan I'm warring for. Nothing I can do, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stephenwolf

At the end of the war add 1 day to each person's war cool down timer for each unused attack.

---

No way. We often have cases where we have already mathemarically won a war and as a result some members choose not to use their second attack for one reason or another. Reasons include running out of time to cook troops and they dont want to use gems for an inconsequential war attack, something has come up with work or home and they want to make that their priority instead of a war we have already won, and sometimes people just want a break from an intense war.

We allow that in our clan. And I dont want to have valuable members unable to war for doing something we allow. If you choose to run your clan differently, I completely respect that. But I don't think Supercell should force other clans to abide by it. Just like I don't think they should implement a rule requiring members to sit out a first war or two. That is our policy but shouldn't be forced on other clans who choose not to follow it.

Not everyone plays the game with the same clan policies. I dont want anyone else's 'rules' forced on me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reddigulous

No way. We often have cases where we have already mathemarically won a war and as a result some members choose not to use their second attack for one reason or another. Reasons include running out of time to cook troops and they dont want to use gems for an inconsequential war attack, something has come up with work or home and they want to make that their priority instead of a war we have already won, and sometimes people just want a break from an intense war.

We allow that in our clan. And I dont want to have valuable members unable to war for doing something we allow. If you choose to run your clan differently, I completely respect that. But I don't think Supercell should force other clans to abide by it. Just like I don't think they should implement a rule requiring members to sit out a first war or two. That is our policy but shouldn't be forced on other clans who choose not to follow it.

Not everyone plays the game with the same clan policies. I dont want anyone else's 'rules' forced on me.

---

Acredito que todos que postam nesse tópico querem de alguma maneira, ajudar com idéias construtivas a melhorar um jogo que gostamos. Não acredito ser totalmente culpa dos líderes, existem vários casos e em cada caso uma situação diferente. Percebo aqui e sem ofender a nenhum dos participantes, que querem fazer da exceção a regra! Casos citados de humilhação dentro do chat do clã, casos de guerras vencidas aonde não se fazia questão dos dois ataques pois matematicamente estaria ganha...etc..etc. Acredito que o tópico é uma sugestão para punir ou nos alertar como lideres, contra jogadores tóxicos. Não há necessidade de explicar o que é um jogador tóxico para vcs que possuem vasto conhecimento. Jogos sérios previnem e combatem esses jogadores, pois os mesmos retiram o direito de todos de uma guerra justa e de um jogo limpo. A supercell deve sim resolver isso como criadora e arrecaradora de nosso dinheiro e de nosso tempo. Sou a favor de que o lider marque o jogador que não efetuar seus ataques na guerra sem motivo. Sou a favor que o lider marque o jogador toxico que abandona seu time na guerra assim como a supercell o deixa de escudo escuro. SE VC como lider permitiu que seu jogador não fizesse seus 2 ataques basta não marcar. SE VC como lider entendeu que seu membro tinha algo mais instrutivo a fazer e liberou ele de seus ataques, não o marque também. SE VC abandonou seu time por ser humilhado por 49 membros do clã que estava tire prints e denuncie ao suporte. Em minha humilde opinião é UTOPIA dizer que se sabe a integridade de alguem que esta no jogo pois lidamos com fator humano. Jogar a culpa da falta de espirito de equipe e de jogabilidade em conjunto em cima do lider é o mesmo que dar um tiro no pé. Infelizmente nunca saberemos com certeza sobre a outra pessoa que está do outro lado da tela. Nem olhando nos olhos sabemos. Sou muito a favor de permitir aos lideres adicionar um sinal de menos no perfil dos jogadores tóxicos e os mesmos colham as provas, de ambos os lados. Se o jogador fizer seus 2 ataques, fica desabilitado a tecla negativar por parte do lider.
Caso o jogador tenha em seu perfil um negativo, deverá fazer 4 guerras com seus 8 ataques normais, para seu perfil voltar a ficar normal. Peco desculpa por escrever no meu idioma mas caso alguem se ofenda tenho certeza que algum cavalheiro irá me ajudar. ATT Kimba

A couple things stood out to me in your response. Maybe you will find some of this helpful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned

First, let me say that the most common thing people say when they do join our clan is "wow, you guys really have your act together." And they are right. We are a well run clan and a great place for people to grow in the game.

---

This is a little off topic, but in my experience the more a person 'gushes' about our clan after just joining, the less likely they are to be long term members. The phrase that is the biggest indicator of this is those members who say, "I'm never leaving this clan." That is the biggest kiss of death. Those members typically last less than a week (but usually attack in war before they go).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned

We have data based criteria for each TH level we recruit. Most applicants are rejected based on profile data alone. There is enough data in a profile to figure out if someone's been around the block or not. We don't keep people long enough for war if they don't present themselves in chat in a positive light. Players earn trust by being positive and showing they know how to fit into a clan, follow basic clan etiquette, and contribute in a helpful way.

---

Let me start by asking you what you do to foster loyalty? It strikes me that you automatically reject people based on profile data alone. Based on your comments it would appear that you value loyalty above all else (or most everything else). And yet you may very well be rejecting very loyal players just because they don't meet your criteria.

I agree, by looking at someones base and profile you can tell an awful lot about them. But you cannot measure the type of person they are or, and this is the important part, the type of player they will become.

So picture two players. One is a solid TH8 with a lot of war stars and very nice profile stats. The second is a TH6 that looks a bit rushed and their base is a bit of a mess. Which do you recruit? On the surface we would all want the TH8. But what if we dig deeper? If we had a tool (which doesn't exists and could never exist) that let us look deeper we find that the TH8 is a teenager who has gathered his impressive tally of war stars by constantly attacking well below his weight in war, causing his clan grief in the process. And then we find the TH6 is a middle aged woman who is intrigued by Clash but can't quite figure it out and she is looking for someone to show her the ropes. This paints a different picture. I know which one I want. And my bet is she wouldn't meet your criteria. And this is something big that you are over-looking.

If you take in a TH6 who is a friendly adult and you can provide them an atmosphere to learn the game in a supportive environment you are not only growing your clan, but you are establishing a lot of loyalty. Under the right guidance that player will blossom into a really good player AND they will help teach future members. I'm not saying they will never leave, but I will say they are a lot less likely. They will feel valued and respected. And they will pass that on to future members. It's a healthy cycle that pays huge dividends.

Also, someone who rage-quits (and I'm not sure that's what you are saying is happening) often does so because they are frustrated and can't figure out the game. Are you providing a friendly and informative atmosphere? Do you have the tools to help your members continue growing? If they feel they aren't getting the help they need or if they feel they have accomplished all they can accomplish, they are very likely to leave (but hopefully not in the middle of war).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned

In any case, my view is that someone who is level 95+ and has 500+ war stars (for example) has been in the game long enough to know that you simply don't abandon a clan during war, and furthermore you should always, always give your best two attacks in accordance with clan procedures even if you decide you can't stand the clan and can't quit soon enough. If your clan turns out to be a bag full of weiners you can simply leave chat closed, take care of business, and then leave.

---

I 100% agree with this statement. However, there is nothing Supercell can do to force players to do this. Nothing. If a player is going to be a turd, they are going to be a turd. If they don't care about your clan to the point that they leave midwar, why do you think they will care enough to put enough thought and planning into their attack? I'd rather have them out the door so I know I need to make arrangements for someone to cover their attack then to hold out hope they are going to pull in 3 stars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PvtLeeOwned

I am am not saying these players are running rampant through our clan all the time. I'm saying the few we've come across deserve a penalty commensurate with taking an endeavor that 25 or more people have invested the past 48 hours in and subverting it.

---

If you cannot overcome the loss of one player in a 25 man war you are doing something wrong. As a clan leader your job is to plan for as many eventualities as you can. This includes having a war plan that provides members with backup so if a player cannot attack someone can cover their attack. This includes missed attacks from power outages, family emergencies, turd players who leave midwar, and just plain bad attacks that accumulate 0 stars.

Clearly, you can't do this every time. If you could everyone would be undefeated. However, 1 person should not be able to ruin a war for 25 or more people. If that is the case you are doing something very wrong.