Leeches.... Leeches everywhere!

[Moria1]

I get the same concept you talk about except for the fact that a th6 sniping a th11 will result in a failed attack 99% of the time resulting in no bonus. It would only work when the th is sitting outside. Removing 5 obstacles for 50 medals and getting all the rewards is far simpler.

I'm glad you focused on the example rather than coming up with a legitimate rebuttal. By the way, if you're failing at sniping a townhall (anti 3-star base, just to completely transparent with you) then you should really consider quitting. I'm not sure what type of townhouse sniping you thought I was referring to because there is no other... Lastly, the level of difficulty in removing 5 obstacles and sniping a townhall is relatively equivalent to one another. Either way, "maximum rewards" and if the leadership does not like it then it can be solved by kicking that person. Problem solved.

[TheConfuzed1]

I said this long time ago and will say it again.
Without any personal tier goals the Clan Games will forever attract freeloaders.

Players who feel they only want to skim the bare minimal should only get the Tier 1 benefits(or whatever Tier level their points qualify for) while those who do more will get the top Books and Potions predicted on their performance input.

Currently there is NO INCENTIVE for freeloaders to want to do more if they get the top rewards each and every Games

If you do it right, the incentive is being in your clan.

[zank44]

Can someone help me understand the situation where "leechers" are an issue? I've been trying to think of different scenarios that would involve leeching, but so far I'm not putting it together.

TLDR; Sorry this got a little long winded, so I'm adding this. Basically what I'm looking for is what is the picture of a clan where "leeching" is a problem. How easily did that clan reach the max tier (if they did) and how many people maxed out their individual points. Also, at what point do you feel a clan mate is no longer leaching (200 points, 1000 points, needs to be set by leader)?

Situation 1: Clan easily reached the top tier for clan rewards.
In the last clan games you would need at least 17 accounts to get the 50K needed for all the rewards. To "easily" reach the end, you'd probably have more accounts involved. By easily I mean that no individual felt stressed to max out their own score or struggled at the end to get to that level. People who didn't contribute as much could have seen that the clan already maxed out, so there was no need for them to individually max their score. The points created by the "leechers" would have just been extra, and them receiving the rewards only helps the clan by allowing them to progress faster/more efficiently. Anyone in this situation concerned about "leeching" would be able to scale back on their personal effort. If too many people scale back you'll end up in situation #2 though.

Situation 2: Clan barely made it to the top tier/next tier available.
In this situation you needed every single point you could get to make it to the top/next tier for better rewards. If you're a person in this clan that maxed out your individual points, wouldn't you be grateful X number of members contributed 50 to 200 points (or whatever is seen as "leeching") since that allowed the clan (and you personally) to reach the top tier? This is the closest situation I can think of where "leechers" would become a problem. But if you created a minimum score to get rewards, many of the "leechers" would end up not participating. This in turn would cause the clan (and you personally) to miss out on the best rewards. Clans finding themselves in this situation should be evaluating the contribution of each clan member and those not contributing enough across all facets of the game should be on the short list for replacement.

Situation 3: Clan has 50 members but is not reaching the highest tiers.
With 50 members it took only 1k per member to reach the highest tier in this last clan game. If the majority of the clan is not worried about playing the clan games but you are, then isn't it time to find a different clan? If they're more concerned with a different aspect of the game and are only grabbing a challenge or 2 when they feel like it, I can see how that would get frustrating. Everyone needs to find a clan that has similar goals to their own. Similarly, if you're the leader and you set your clan goals, you need to recruit and keep members that have the same mind set. This situation seems to boil down to the clan management issue.

Situation 4: Clan has less than 50 members and is not reaching the top tier rewards.
If you're in this situation, then I'd say you need to recruit. This is where my clan currently is. The more members you have, the easier it is to reach the higher tiers of rewards. If you have room in your clan, then fill those spots. You may find that once you have more members you'll be in one of the other 3 situations already discussed. But until then why worry about "leechers"? If they're active in the clan, kicking them would only make it harder to recruit new members. Once you get 50 members you can evaluate which members aren't providing the value to the clan you expect and can start replacing them.

Situation 5: Clan has less than 50 members, doesn't reach the top tiers, set to "anyone can join"
I considered opening up the clan to try to get more people in, but we decided to have a war as well so that was not an option. By opening up the clan, you're asking for the "hoppers" to come in, do a challenge and leave. This could end up putting you in the 50 people already participating list, not allowing new members to participate and help the clan. This situation seems to go hand in hand with #4 because if your clan was already at 50 members or reaching the top tiers, opening up the clan like this wouldn't be necessary. People in this situation should be more concerned with clan management instead of "leechers". Once the clan management/recruitment issue is resolved, you may find that "leechers" are less of an issue.

What I'm looking for is any situation I may have missed. What situation would lead to resentment of "leechers"? I've read through a few threads like this and the argument always seems to be, "Why did my clan mate get full rewards for minimal effort?". What I haven't read (and if it was posted and I missed it I apologize) was, what was the entire situation of the clan. If the entire picture could be defined better I feel we could have a better discussion about this issue.

[TheConfuzed1]

This is exactly how the Games should work. Rewards based on performance.

Look at the last EVENT that just finished 2 days ago. What was it?? Balloon/haste x 20 completions = Spell Book

This Event was not just complete 1 or 2 attacks using 10 Loons to get the Book. It was 20. The 20 was the incentive to get the Book.
You get nothing if you just do half.
The Clan Games should be just like this. How much you get is predicated on how much you put it.
This is the only way to get rid of freeloaders

You are comparing individual activities with clan activities. I get what you're saying, but I still disagree. Sorry.

[Somethingnotalreadypicked]

Can someone that wants to change the current way tell me exactly what these "freeloaders" are taking from them?
You lose nothing by them doing this. You still get the same rewards. As a matter of fact you gain the few points that they do contribute. It just seems to me that it's an ego or jealousy thing on your part.
Funny enough you guys are the ones trying to take stuff away from other players.

[prosper12]

Very good point.

[TheConfuzed1]

This is worth repeating.

...More to the point would I, as a co-leader, want him to miss out on rewards that will ultimately benefit the clan in he long run?

If they are established members of the clan, they probably aren't going anywhere, which means that their success is the clan's success.

Who do you want in your wars? Someone with higher level heroes, or lower level heroes? Clan games rewards help everyone level their heroes faster!

[xc3ss1v30n3]

Can someone that wants to change the current way tell me exactly what these "freeloaders" are taking from them?
You lose nothing by them doing this. You still get the same rewards. As a matter of fact you gain the few points that they do contribute. It just seems to me that it's an ego or jealousy thing on your part.
Funny enough you guys are the ones trying to take stuff away from other players.

Try not to bring logic into the conversation. They just get mad.

[Clark11308]

Can someone that wants to change the current way tell me exactly what these "freeloaders" are taking from them?
You lose nothing by them doing this. You still get the same rewards. As a matter of fact you gain the few points that they do contribute. It just seems to me that it's an ego or jealousy thing on your part.
Funny enough you guys are the ones trying to take stuff away from other players.

I have been in a few clans with those who have this mentality. They are usually the uber dedicated to clash who feel everyone else should be just as dedicated. They just don't see it as a game and are often angry. Honesty I question if they're really ever even having fun. Then you have the others who see this for what it is, a game. It's nothing to get to worked up over, at the end of the day all it accomplishes is souring your mood while the less dedicated continue doing what makes them happy.

[adrek]

I'm glad you focused on the example rather than coming up with a legitimate rebuttal. By the way, if you're failing at sniping a townhall (anti 3-star base, just to completely transparent with you) then you should really consider quitting. I'm not sure what type of townhouse sniping you thought I was referring to because there is no other... Lastly, the level of difficulty in removing 5 obstacles and sniping a townhall is relatively equivalent to one another. Either way, "maximum rewards" and if the leadership does not like it then it can be solved by kicking that person. Problem solved.

"Relatively equivalent" is a vague term in this example.

What are the odds of having the opponent top base's th sitting outside? That's right, really low.
What are the odds of someone having at least 5 obstacles ready to me removed?

Using probabilistic reasoning, by no means, the two actions are relatively equivalent .

I previously commented why this isn't a black or white issue, there are some situations where kicking a member is the last action you want to take. That member may not be a leecher per se.