https://www.warzone.com/Forum/538492-καλλιστηιs-suggestions-clan-wars

The biggest barrier in CW for players in a clan is the lack of timeslots and "bad" reward. Being online 3x for half an hour gives you a ~42% chance to be online for CW. Meaning that for good participation you pretty much need to set an alarm clock. The reward for participating in CW is like 5 coins/ season for non-idlers, not worth it.

Though that is not the main problem. The main problem is, that most "casual" players aren't in a clan. That is why participation is so low. Mortality of players in WZ is so big, that level 1 players who join a clan are very likely to go inactive, closing a clan.

The solution for problem 1: more timeslots, add attackers, increase coin rewards in CW.
The solution from problem 2: level limit for open clans, increase clan limit, allows clan members to promote someone to be a manager if all managers/ clan leader are inactive for more than 1 week.

How about adding value to clan wins?

Thank you everyone, this has been an insightful discussion.

It seems, with the exception of Arrow, we all agree there should be some limitation on the # of players/games each clan should play per day. Otherwise, without a limitation, Clan Wars incentivizes brainless recruiting - literally just letting anyone onto your team without making personal connections with them. That defeats the whole purpose of building comradery within a team imo.

I'll call this limitation x. Currently x = 40 players/team. But I argue that it is too high, and that the unit (measured in players per team) is incorrect. But what is a reasonable limitation? It should be judged relative to the game itself.

Now, if this were League of Legends, maybe x = 40 players/team is a good limitation. Hell, maybe even make it 80. But this game is not league; we simply do not have comparable activity levels. I think we can all agree that a 1000 player/team limit would be an unfair barrier to enter clan wars. But, from what I've seen, 40 is too.

The M'Hunters have the highest activity of any clan; we average about 32 players per day. But we come nowhere close to this limit; just 80% of it. That's why x = 40 is unreasonable, for this game, at this moment.

But also, I argue, it's the wrong unit of measure. I agree with what Master Jz was saying - I think it should be measured in total # of GAMES per day. That way, larger clans can substitute out players. This is an advantage for large clans; Speaking as someone who plays clan wars every day, it is a pain in the butt to play it everyday. Substitutions would be so unbelievably amazing for larger clans.

What I propose is changing x. Instead of a limitation of 40 PLAYERS / day, make it 20 GAMES / day. I disagree with making it 20 wins per day. You'd just have many clans getting exactly 20 wins/day, which isn't all that interesting. 20 games per day makes an element of risk. There are consequences to playing; if you lose, that's 1 less win for your team. There should be consequences in any good, fair game, even if it's more casual.

IN CONCLUSION - I want the limit changed from 40 Players/day to 20 Games per/day. This would incentivize more people to play clan wars, and remove what I perceive to be an unfair barrier to entry. It would also allow substitutions, which would be amazing too.

Edited 6/23/2021 07:57:12

Maybe another option could be not to limit x=40, but additionally take into account the winrate.
This would allow all players inside a clan to participate in CW - on the other hand it would take into account the "quality" of the players.
To avoid preference of very small clans with very good players we need a base cap like bevor.

Base: First x=20 wins per day: each win counts 100%
Addon: Up to additional 20 wins per day according to winrate.

Example:
a. Small clan wins 15 out of 20 games => win rate = 75%
Base: 15 wins
Addon: 0 (additional) wins * 75% = 0 wins
Total: 15 wins

b. Big clan 35 wins out of 50 games => win rate 70%
Base: 20 wins
Addon: 15 (additional) wins: 15 * 70% = 11 wins
Total: 31 wins


c. Huge clan 50 wins out of 100 games => win rate 50%
Base: 20 wins
Addon: 30 (additional) wins, but max 20 are counted: 20 * 50% = 10 wins
Total: 30 wins

Indeed it is possible to fine tune the base / addon parameters.

There is no better feeling than making your clan lose points.

Edited 6/23/2021 14:34:46

Yes, indeed you can lower your clan points by losing. But if you use a function, that is steadily increasing by each win (even with a function like log(x)) then you preference huge clans - even if their quality is low.

With the combined approach you have
* base part without reduction risk
* additional part with reduction risk

Edited 6/23/2021 15:00:06

The problem with limiting to 20 games/day is that we're back to needing clans limit who plays. You're best off limiting CW activity to the strongest 20 players and just having them focus on playing every day.

Imho, this goes against the spirit of CW, which is "anyone can play". Anyone can join a clan, anyone can play a CW game each day. With a 40 player/40 game per day limit, this is pretty much true across the board.

Also having to build a schedule for who plays on which days, etc, is work. This isn't the coveted CL, this is casual CW, we shouldn't need to plan, it should just be a matter of whoever shows up plays. Many already agree that fitting into the timeslots in PITA enough, nevermind adding coordination with who plays on which days & how many games have been played on a given day. CW is already kind of a chore, and imho it needs to be made less or a chore, not more.

Still think 20 wins/day is a better option so everyone can play, everyone can contribute, everyone has fun. We won't see several clans with 20 wins each day b/c few clans have that level of activity, and even if they achieve on a couple days, no clan will consistently sustain that throughout the entire season.

Just saw Jellybean's post. The idea of using WR is interesting & I think has merit here. Minimally, it's the first option that blends leveling the playing field without essentially just limiting/punishing the top 2-3 clans (and likely forcing the top 2 clans to break into smaller clans just to continue allowing everyone to compete). With that in mind, the ratios could even be adjusted ... 20 may not be the magic number. Maybe it's 10 @ 100%, then 10 @ 75%, then 10 @ 50% ... which could keep things competitive without an overt cap. This mechanic is similar to the territory acquisitions as well ... each one requires more wins to capture (with a max of 30? Or has it gone down?).

Edited 6/23/2021 15:34:54

@krinid, no matter what the competition is, if people care about winning it will no longer be a casual "anyone can play" competition. This is true now, and would be true about any of the proposed solutions. Right now, if clans care about winning, they shouldn’t let players play CW unless they demonstrate they can commit to paying almost every day. That seems like at least a comparable barrier to that created by the 20 games per day proposal. You might not feel that way because of the specific size of your clan.

Ultimately there is no solution to this that will satisfy everyone, because our clan ecosystem right now includes both huge clans like TSFH and small ones like SNinja.

Fizzer has to decide what he thinks clans should look like in the game and optimize CW for that. What complicates that task is that he’s not creating them from scratch - they already exist, so we all have our own opinions on what they are or should be. I think he’s already laid out what he thinks a clan should be with the format of CW as is - a medium sized group of 30-40 players who are all active daily.

We can disagree with that formulation (it isn’t what I would choose, since I hate the idea of having to kick out people who are inactive or less active), but from a game designer’s point of view there is some logic there, since daily activity is what he wants to encourage.

Edited 6/23/2021 16:27:30

Agree with you, I think Fizz will go with something that incites daily activity for the most players.

So following on with this thought: to incite more players to be active daily, then providing a system where everyone gets benefit from daily activity works best. So an inclusive not exclusive system works best. An exclusive system would be limiting the playing team either by # of players or # of games, and this would reduce daily activity b/c by default some are immediately kicked from the playing team. Instead, an inclusive system that enables all players to participate and rewards them for contributing on a regular basis will achieve this result.

+1 to proposal of capping wins/day rather than capping members or capping games. Imo this should also allow your clan members to play multiple times a day until you reach that win cap. As a side-effect, the asinine 40-cap on new clan membership can also be lifted.

Hmm, I am ok with the idea of making the limitation in terms of wins per day.

While I do obviously like the solution I proposed, my main desire is to change the current limitation - 40 players per day. That's what I believe creates an unfair barrier to entry. So, if there's more support for another way to change it, I'm all for it.

I get what Beren says - ultimately Fizzer is determining what clans should "look" like on this game. I just think the current system doesn't match up enough with practicalities. I'm curious what Fizzer's opinion on this is? Would he be willing to change the limitation of 40 players per day to say, 20 wins per day, or 20 games per day? Maybe 40 wins per day?

Edited 6/24/2021 07:27:24

I heard my name

I think you are over-complicating this. Let anyone join, count only top 20 players (win-wise) from each clan. Ideally, count 1st player with weight of 1, 2nd with weight q, n-th with weight q^(n-1), where q is given constant in (0,1). For example q=0.9 would work well.
q=0.9

With 5 members, clan would have total weight of 4.1
With 10 members, clan would have total weight of 6.5
With >=20 members, clan would have total weight of 8.8
If Fizzer wanted to count first 40 player, total weight would be 9.9
No player limit would mean total weight of 10.

Edited 6/24/2021 22:42:51

^Despite the irony of the guy claiming others over-complicated the issue, while himself, proposing the most complicated solution (lmao), I actually agree with his idea.

I think that was the joke, @sanmu

If it was a joke, it's actually kind of funny. If it wasn't a joke (I'm not sure tbh), it's still pretty funny.

Ah I see, I couldn't tell, because the solution actually seemed pretty reasonable to me.

But, it would be too "mathy" of a result, and wouldn't really fit how territories are awarded now.

Edited 6/25/2021 13:41:44

Complicated? Players in clans are already sorted by wins. You just rewrite:
clanWins = 0
for player in clan:
clanWins +=player.participating?player.wins:0

to
clanWins = 0
for player in clan:
clanWins += player.ranking <=20?player.wins*power(0.9, player.ranking -1):0



Also, unlike in certain another idea, once rewarded, the clan can't lose any territory.

Edited 6/25/2021 17:58:27

No one said it's difficult to code, we're saying it's difficult to ascertain what your contribution to the final count/ranking is.