Preventing Hopers

[Landon9918]

I would like to see on a players profile:

How many clans a person has been in
Average length of days in a clan
how many times kicked from a clan

This idea won't work because:

1. Negative stats are ruled out.
2. would destroy req n ♥♥♥♥ clans and their common members.
3. People who get kicked a lot for being foreign or something won't be able to join a clan.
4. People who have 2 clans that war once or twice a week that are sister clans and join each at war time won't get a clan.

[ShaneHed13]

Like you, I don't care if it is implemented or not. It won't impact me one bit because of the second part of my often quoted post. SC is the one who cares. They will loose huge amounts of business if they name-n-shame their customers. I know I have shunned businesses for practices like those in the past and I certainly would again, even when the finger wasn't being pointed at me.

This is why SC has a long standing "no negative statistics" policy. This is why it will NEVER be lifted. That is why the OP's request is wasting all of our time. Any suggestion of "make a statistic so I know I don't like someone" will be flatly rejected, and rightly so.

Still though, the "No Negative Statistics" thing is what gets me! Statistics are statistics, they are facts, how they are interpreted determines if they are positive or negative. They have thousands of statistics already that can be viewed just as negative as the ones that are being presented. If I've been in 6 clans over 2 years, booted from zero, and someone else has been in 347 clans, booted from 200, those are facts. Sure, some people will look at mine and think good, some people will look at the other and think, bad, but that is what we have done thus far into the game.

Would it be okay for supercell to add some achievements that are like, "Stay with the the same clan:" Then have 2,4,6 months be the stars? Is that positive? Then it will show the green progress bar of their "progress" towards the 2 months, so half full, 1 month on and on?

I just don't know I guess, I have a personal feeling that people need to own their past, and if they are notorious clan hoppers, it wouldn't be the worst thing for others to know that they have a history of doing that. I do see that it would cause a lot of homeless hoppers, but I would suspect eventually, hoppers would realize that if they want the benefit of being in a clan they cannot be doucebags.

The whole negative statistics thing, there are lots of things we can already look at and make a educated guess as to whether or not they are a good clan member, and lots of things to think of somebody as a negative clan member. Is the negative statistics a statistic that someone could interpret as negative, or a statistic that measures something generally thought of as negative?

[romasanta]

Gullible or not, there is no 100% way to prevent people from leaving during war. It's just not possible.

I think the majority of these posts start because the OP recently got burned by the problem. The key to protecting yourself from wartime defectors is to grow your clan slowly. This provides us with a very dependable core of players who can provide cover for wartime defectors.

Consider the following:
1. We started our clan with 5 dependable friends. Between the 5 of us we can cover attacks on all bases in a 10v10 war. If we tried to push for a 50v50 war with 45 new members we would only be able to cover 1/5th of the enemy bases should all the new members prove unreliable.
2. We do not allow alt accounts in war. If you do you are doubling your potential exposure to wartime defectors. If 1 individual leaves, should be no problem. If 1 individual with 2 accounts leaves, maybe a problem.
3. If you have to entice a new member to join (or stay) with promises of promotions or troops that member is not vested in your clan, they are only vested in themselves. It's best to let those players go be a headache for a different clan.

Everyone wants to be the next Mega Empire but that doesn't happen overnight. Good clans are formed over time and with a lot of work. There are lots of good mature players out there. The way to get them is show that you run a stable clan which is not affected by poor choices mad by a single individual (like a wartime defector)

PERFECT!!
PERFECT!!

This is just like how we grew Los Preclaros!!

for quite some time we have fought 10 on 10s

now our minimum is 15 by 15 and sometimes we can do 20 on 20s

However we do HAVE 2nd accounts!

My cousins used to have second accounts, that they never used, so they entrusted those to me as a leader. I turned each and everyone of those into reliable Th7s to work on cleaning up the mid-to bottom part of the map.

[rwelshjr]

Still though, the "No Negative Statistics" thing is what gets me! Statistics are statistics, they are facts, how they are interpreted determines if they are positive or negative. They have thousands of statistics already that can be viewed just as negative as the ones that are being presented. If I've been in 6 clans over 2 years, booted from zero, and someone else has been in 347 clans, booted from 200, those are facts. Sure, some people will look at mine and think good, some people will look at the other and think, bad, but that is what we have done thus far into the game.

Would it be okay for supercell to add some achievements that are like, "Stay with the the same clan:" Then have 2,4,6 months be the stars? Is that positive? Then it will show the green progress bar of their "progress" towards the 2 months, so half full, 1 month on and on?

I just don't know I guess, I have a personal feeling that people need to own their past, and if they are notorious clan hoppers, it wouldn't be the worst thing for others to know that they have a history of doing that. I do see that it would cause a lot of homeless hoppers, but I would suspect eventually, hoppers would realize that if they want the benefit of being in a clan they cannot be doucebags.

The whole negative statistics thing, there are lots of things we can already look at and make a educated guess as to whether or not they are a good clan member, and lots of things to think of somebody as a negative clan member. Is the negative statistics a statistic that someone could interpret as negative, or a statistic that measures something generally thought of as negative?

I don't disagree with you. I have written things like what you say here to SC in the past. it was from those things that I got the info on what their point of view was that you have seen shaping my replies here.

[iceageg]

. . .I just don't know I guess, I have a personal feeling that people need to own their past . . .

I am with you 100%. I am a firm believer in "It isn't character defamation if it's true!" If each of us had an expectation that our actions would influence the way people thought of us in the future the world would be a better place. Too many folks ride by on the understanding that they will probably never encounter a given stranger again. I am certainly not arguing that. I am only arguing one point, then explaining the reality of the situation.

The argument is that you DO understand the negative statistic. If for no other reason than the ONLY REASON this is being requested is so players can have a black eye. The motivation is to track negative behavior (even though it usually would not be accurate). A statistic solely for the purpose of punishing players and being negative.

The reality of the situation . . . these are SC's customers. They are smart enough not to alienate their customers by publishing a shameful list of them for public consumption. While it may be good for society and possibly badly needed, it is certainly bad business. Therefor a non-starter.

[AxionXD]

Still though, the "No Negative Statistics" thing is what gets me! Statistics are statistics, they are facts, how they are interpreted determines if they are positive or negative. They have thousands of statistics already that can be viewed just as negative as the ones that are being presented. If I've been in 6 clans over 2 years, booted from zero, and someone else has been in 347 clans, booted from 200, those are facts. Sure, some people will look at mine and think good, some people will look at the other and think, bad, but that is what we have done thus far into the game.

Would it be okay for supercell to add some achievements that are like, "Stay with the the same clan:" Then have 2,4,6 months be the stars? Is that positive? Then it will show the green progress bar of their "progress" towards the 2 months, so half full, 1 month on and on?

I just don't know I guess, I have a personal feeling that people need to own their past, and if they are notorious clan hoppers, it wouldn't be the worst thing for others to know that they have a history of doing that. I do see that it would cause a lot of homeless hoppers, but I would suspect eventually, hoppers would realize that if they want the benefit of being in a clan they cannot be doucebags.

The whole negative statistics thing, there are lots of things we can already look at and make a educated guess as to whether or not they are a good clan member, and lots of things to think of somebody as a negative clan member. Is the negative statistics a statistic that someone could interpret as negative, or a statistic that measures something generally thought of as negative?

It's not difficult to determine a statistic negative or not.

How many times you've lost a match. Negative. Intentionally left out of this game.
How many clans you've been in. Negative. What possible POSITIVE reason can this statistic be used, positive as far as the individual holding statistic?

Those are facts. Negative Facts, and Supercell has already stated a holistic policy against negative statistics.

If your clan is a good fit for people, they'll stay. Hopper may just be picky, or have a difficult time getting to know people. It's not their fault and they shouldn't be branded as such because you feel inconvenienced by their existence.

It happens to everyone, I particularly dislike those that leave during war, but it happens and you have to play through it. We lost 4 people in one war recently. We shouldn't have brought those new players in to start, but we did. We managed a decisive victory regardless, but we hate seeing it. Only thing we can control is our own clan policies and our attitudes on how to deal with it internally.

Good luck in determining your path in that regard....

[ShaneHed13]

It's not difficult to determine a statistic negative or not.

How many times you've lost a match. Negative. Intentionally left out of this game.
How many clans you've been in. Negative. What possible POSITIVE reason can this statistic be used, positive as far as the individual holding statistic?

Those are facts. Negative Facts, and Supercell has already stated a holistic policy against negative statistics.

If your clan is a good fit for people, they'll stay. Hopper may just be picky, or have a difficult time getting to know people. It's not their fault and they shouldn't be branded as such because you feel inconvenienced by their existence.

It happens to everyone, I particularly dislike those that leave during war, but it happens and you have to play through it. We lost 4 people in one war recently. We shouldn't have brought those new players in to start, but we did. We managed a decisive victory regardless, but we hate seeing it. Only thing we can control is our own clan policies and our attitudes on how to deal with it internally.

Good luck in determining your path in that regard....

Well I'm glad that you picked one of several posts on this thread to look at but I made it clear before that I am indifferent regarding whether or not this is implemented, and that I don't have this problem in my clan, and if we did, we would make use with the tools already available.

Devil's advocate though since you brought me back into the conversation. We cannot have, as you say, Negative Statistics, Statistics that no positive reason to be used in the game.

So by that reasoning you would be for a total troop donation count (it's already in the game), perhaps length of time in a clan (that could easily be a positive achievement to unlock as I stated previously), # of War's participated in, heck that is a super positive stat that could be an achievement as well, number of war attacks you've done, super positive right?

Or are these statistics banned because people could calculate negative statistics from the positive ones? As it stands, we can discriminate players already though the troops donated/troops received stats during season, the amount of war stars they have/based on level (compared to other similarly leveled people) total donated troops, amount of raid attacks they have won, their troop/defense levels compared to TH level.

Again, do I care? Not particularly, we're doing just fine as is

Just the idea that people need to be protected from their performance/behaviors eludes me

[iceageg]

. . .Just the idea that people need to be protected from their performance/behaviors eludes me

Not people, a company. Pointing out characters in your customer base is bad for business. When you make as much as SC alienating even a small % of your customers means answering to your share holders why you intentionally drove away millions of dollars. Or to phrase it another way, explaining to the shareholders why you want to be fired.

So in a way it is protecting people . . . SC's employees.

[Snivell]

Not people, a company. Pointing out characters in your customer base is bad for business. When you make as much as SC alienating even a small % of your customers means answering to your share holders why you intentionally drove away millions of dollars. Or to phrase it another way, explaining to the shareholders why you want to be fired.

So in a way it is protecting people . . . SC's employees.

but fixing that small % risks alienating or just plain pissing off anouther possibly larger % of player/customers

[rwelshjr]

but fixing that small % risks alienating or just plain pissing off anouther possibly larger % of player/customers

Its actually a small (but admittedly loud) group of guys that can't figure out how to deal with hoppers on their own to such a point that they have to pleased with SC to do it for them. You can see here that these are really the hard come cases because of how the idea of helping their own selves goes right over their heads and even to suggest the very concept brings hostility from some of them.