Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Limited individual rewards for Clan Games - like SCCWL

  1.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Whateverman View Post
    Do you have a link to the ruled-out idea?
    https://forum.supercell.com/showthre...rum-guidelines

    And the relevant part of that post:


    Clan Related:
    *Add other clan requirements to apply besides trophies, ex: Specific troop lvl, TH lvl, lab lvl, game lvl
    *Customizable clan flag
    *Add ability to send short message to rejected applicants similar to when expelling
    *A large text area for clan rules that just the clan can see (separate from public clan description)
    *Leader (and co-leaders) ability to delete messages in chat
    *Modify clan msg of player joining with who invited player: xx joined clan, invited by xx
    *Add clan rank to Clan Info Screen – Quicker to reference than scrolling to end of top 200 list
    *Increase clan size: 75 or 100 are most common requests
    * Separate Elder+ chat tab in-game
    *Ability to set points threshold required in order to gain rewards from clan games or to vary the tier received according to individual contribution.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grill View Post
    But when something like an update is to be expected all stupid breaks loose and it just becomes an idiot storm of catastrophic proportion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Maverick View Post
    Any more balance to th10 will make th10 broken...
    My stats (main account)

  2.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Whateverman View Post
    This one? "*Ability to set points threshold required in order to gain rewards from clan games or to vary the tier received according to individual contribution."

    My idea is quite different - it's taking the mechanism that SC developed for SCCWL (individual rewards based on clan performance) and applying it to Clan Games as well. The clan could choose to award all 50 point getters with additional rewards if they felt so inclined - nobody is being penalized like the ruled-out suggestion.
    No, your idea is only a bit different. You are still allowing leaders to vary the rewards.

    It is just different enough that the thread is not being removed.

    But it is similar enough that I think it extremely unlikely SC will consider it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grill View Post
    But when something like an update is to be expected all stupid breaks loose and it just becomes an idiot storm of catastrophic proportion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Maverick View Post
    Any more balance to th10 will make th10 broken...
    My stats (main account)

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajax View Post
    No, your idea is only a bit different. You are still allowing leaders to vary the rewards.
    The huge difference being that nobody is being penalized by my suggestion (I can see why SC would never do that).

    Again, SC has already set the precedent with SCCWL rewards at the end and distributed by leaders to whomever they like.

  4. #14
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Great White North
    Posts
    1,697
    Quote Originally Posted by Whateverman View Post
    I don't understand your feedback. I'm not proposing any restrictions.

    I'm suggesting that the clan leadership can provide extra rewards for members at the end of a games, just like in SCCWL. They could choose members who contribute more points - they're the reason the clan benefited from the rewards, not the 50-point getters - or any other metric. Again, just like SCCWL.
    Sorry, I have to disagree with your take on who provided the benefit. The 50 point getters ALSO were part of the reason the clan benefitted. Are they the biggest reason? No. Are they part of the reason? Yes.

    Iím actually not averse to your suggestion, I simply dislike the thought process that someone who contributes little is mistakenly viewed as not contributing at all.

  5. #15
    rowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    On a lenghty sabbatical
    Posts
    9,905
    Quote Originally Posted by Whateverman View Post
    The huge difference being that nobody is being penalized by my suggestion (I can see why SC would never do that).

    Again, SC has already set the precedent with SCCWL rewards at the end and distributed by leaders to whomever they like.
    Those "bonus packets" in CWL have reportedly created grief and strife within some clans. At the end of CWL, you can have only 5 bonus packets to distribute, yet 14 players feel that they are worthy. And no, establishing some metric does not negate conflict. Just because CWL has Bonus Packets, that does not then make it "the model to follow".

  6. #16
    Forum Contender Piper139's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    4,636
    Quote Originally Posted by Whateverman View Post
    The huge difference being that nobody is being penalized by my suggestion (I can see why SC would never do that).

    Again, SC has already set the precedent with SCCWL rewards at the end and distributed by leaders to whomever they like.
    It's not a bad idea in my opinion. However, the devil is in the details. CWL rewards lend themselves to this. You have a currency bucket so to speak and as a leader you ad medals to each player's bucket. There is no such currency in clan games. The simplest I suppose would be to allow the leaders to give people gems or resources.

  7. #17
    Forum Veteran
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by rowman View Post
    Those "bonus packets" in CWL have reportedly created grief and strife within some clans. At the end of CWL, you can have only 5 bonus packets to distribute, yet 14 players feel that they are worthy. And no, establishing some metric does not negate conflict. Just because CWL has Bonus Packets, that does not then make it "the model to follow".
    Agreed.

    Distributing rewards is, by some distance, the most difficult part of Clash for me. To extend that to games would mean three agonies a month instead of one.

  8. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Tosti111 View Post
    Sorry, I have to disagree with your take on who provided the benefit. The 50 point getters ALSO were part of the reason the clan benefitted. Are they the biggest reason? No. Are they part of the reason? Yes.


    I’m actually not averse to your suggestion, I simply dislike the thought process that someone who contributes little is mistakenly viewed as not contributing at all.

    Someone who got 50 points did not do it for the good of the clan - they did it for selfish reasons and might as well not have contributed at all.


    Quote Originally Posted by Piper139 View Post
    It's not a bad idea in my opinion. However, the devil is in the details. CWL rewards lend themselves to this. You have a currency bucket so to speak and as a leader you ad medals to each player's bucket. There is no such currency in clan games. The simplest I suppose would be to allow the leaders to give people gems or resources.

    Yes exactly, some sort of bonus tier that would get unlocked for N people in the clan & would contain some gems and resources (no books or runes - too unfair).


    Quote Originally Posted by Kaledonian View Post
    Agreed.


    Distributing rewards is, by some distance, the most difficult part of Clash for me. To extend that to games would mean three agonies a month instead of one.

    Also agreed. This SCCWL, we are going to distribute the extra rewards for those people who regularly war with us but aren't in the top 15 bases. I think it's better for the clan overall than people hoarding; the point of extra rewards, and why I think it would work well here, is _we_ can choose what works best for _our_ clan - others might disagree.

  9. #19
    stevo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Down the road, over the hill, across the lake, through the forest, under da sea, in a Whirlpool ^_^
    Posts
    1,928
    How about if you get max points in Clan Games, you also get 100 CWL medals?
    Stalk me on Instagram @Clash.With.Realm (100k+ followers)

    level 300 - 31m dark - 45k unbreakable - 13
    k infernos - 26k xbows
    7k eagles - 101/102 achievements - 1.4b spoils - 3.5k stars - Full Stats
    Ľ

  10.   This is the last staff post in this thread.   #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Whateverman View Post
    The huge difference being that nobody is being penalized by my suggestion (I can see why SC would never do that).
    So the ones who don't get any of these bonus awards will feel they have had just as much as those who do get them?

    Of course those who don't get them are being penalised.

    Again, SC has already set the precedent with SCCWL rewards at the end and distributed by leaders to whomever they like.
    I'm not sure why you think that is relevant. CWL is different to CG. It has an entirely different mechanism, is played in an entirely different way, with limits on how many can take fully active part.
    Last edited by Ajax; February 8th, 2019 at 11:15 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grill View Post
    But when something like an update is to be expected all stupid breaks loose and it just becomes an idiot storm of catastrophic proportion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Maverick View Post
    Any more balance to th10 will make th10 broken...
    My stats (main account)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •