It would increase the activity in CW (everyone from TSFH and other big clans can participate now) allowing Fizzer to decrease the CD between slots, further improving activity. It would lower the advantage of bigger clans without removing it (having a lot of good players in your clan will still be relevant). Probably wouldn't change the ranking of MASTER and MH, but it would hurt clans that currently have lots of participants and help clans with little, but good participants.

^Going off that, perhaps advancement to the next territory can be based on an experience bar, rather than a set # of wins.

The experience bar can have a formula similar to what he proposed, but it should give diminishing returns for each additional win in the day (e.g., the 7th win gives less experience than the 6th win, and the 39th win gives less experience than the 38th win). If the diminution factor is high, there may not be a need for a wins cap at all.

This would allow smaller clans to compete, as well as giving larger clans a slight edge over them. This is not all that different from how pretty much everyone can reach level 50, but it takes a ton of additional experience to get to level 55, or level 60.

Capping wins/day is stupid; especially if you let people play several slots a day as knyte proposed, as you'd simply end up with a bunch of clans all in an unbreakable tie for first. Namely the clans that reach the win cap. Only if you set it ridiculously high would it have any effect, and then still clans with a lot of members would have the most to benefit from this idea, as they could simply have 60 players all play two wins, differences would only get bigger. That also defeats the purpose of a cap, but otherwise a cap just causes ties, not useful at all.

The original idea isn't bad in my opinion, though I'd agree with kallistei that just taking the best 20 for the scoring makes more sense than only allowing 20 to play.

I have to agree with Meldarion. While I did reluctantly agree with the wins cap before (since my original idea seemed to have less support), having thought about it more now, it's a stupid idea.

The goal is to allow every clan an equal opportunity to compete and win. The wins cap over-remediates the problem - not only does every clan have an equal opportunity to compete, but the top clans are directly penalized. And it also defeats the entire purpose of the competition. That's far beyond what I was asking for.

Counting only the top 20 players of each team for scoring purposes sounds like a happy medium. Small clans with 20 good players can compete (so long as they play every day), large clans won't have to internally restrict who can play, and there is also less pressure on each individual of a large clan to play every day.

One practical problem with the top 20 players is I'm not sure how it'll fit in the current system. The 21st best player might suddenly break into the top 20 players on day 30. But the way territories are awarded now, they are awarded daily based on wins given before. Would the system go back and delete the wins that the former 20th best player contributed and replace them with the 21st best player? That might be confusing, so the system would have to be changed to accomodate it.

If the "top 20 players" is judged daily, that wouldn't work. That's basically a wins cap. As long as a clan got at least 20 wins a day, their top 20 daily would be all wins.

To implement top 20 performers, I think it'd be something like this:

- Sort the clan playing roster by # of wins.
- Total # of wins for that clan are the sum of the wins of the top 20 players.
- The clan rank list is the list of clans with # of wins as per the above sorting algorithm.

There's never a need to invalidate a game played. You never need to actively choose who the 20 players are. It's just a matter of who is in the top 20 games per clan or not. A clan's win score will never go down if someone starts outperforming another player, it'll always only ever increase, so no need to change results, etc.

I think this would need to rework how "Territory Rewards" operate though. Currently wins directly determine both # territories which directly affects Territory Rewards & rank and thus Rank Rewards. They should be broken, so even games of clan members not in the top 20 can contribute to their clan's "Territory Rewards" (b/c they're not competing with other clans for these other than getting wins in games). This would mean that everyone's games count towards something, everyone playing contributes, even if they aren't in the top 20.

someone send this forum to fizzer.

the community has spoken

Edited 6/27/2021 17:42:06

He's probably reading it. He's just selective on when he responds vs when he doesn't.

One more final comment - since it seems we are coming to a consensus on the "top 20 performers limitation" rather than the "40 players per team" limitaton.

Clan Wars team elo should ONLY be based off of the top 20 performers. I don't want to create some new meta where the dominant strategy is to have 20-25 players who play "seriously" and then the rest of the clan purposely loses to lower the team elo to get easier matchups for the top 20-25.

But if the team elo is based off of only the top 20, that solves the problem.

CW is ment for casuals, yet the vast majority of players are strategic players. Lowering player limit won't help.
CW will still be a strategical competition, like CL.

How to get out? Do something to make idle players want to play it. I strongly suggest adding some activity rewards, as well, as more pretty, flashing effects. Make advertisments about it on idle. For that you need to rework clan system so it can handle a sudden influx of players. Implement [clan creation ticket] as a reward in idle battles. Or rise clan cap (for new clans AND recruiting).


Edit: 2nd paragraph added in the same time as krinid posted his post

Edited 6/28/2021 04:43:46

The real question is ... does the "top 20 performers" methodology create a system where more players will play more often?

It will definitely create a system where if everyone who plays now keeps on playing, clans ranked 7-20 will have a better shot at taking spot #3-6, but likely still not #1 or #2, but will it actually garner enough attention to get more players playing? If not, then it hasn't actually changed anything.

To actually be effective, it can't just cater to the regulars who will play WZC/WZI/CW/etc anyhow, it has to be effective enough to get additional players playing. And ideally, because of the WZI rewards, it should be funneling people into WZI, to get enough attention to get implemented.

I believe it would definitely help encourage activity. I know that we might be pretty insulated in our larger clans Krinid (M'Hunters, and TSFH), but my original clan (and the clan I'm on on my alt) - The Republic of Korea - is on the small side. I've talked to many many small clans, mostly through my quickmatch games. I can't tell you how many of them said they wanted to do Clan Wars, but that their clan was too small to compete.

And they were all good players too. They just weren't connected to 2/3 clans on top. Imo, that's the real problem. But yes, I 1000% think that the top 20 performers limitation would drastically increase participation. Pretty much no one competes now because they know that, no matter how good they are, they simply cannot compete with the top 2/3 (due to size alone).

Also, I think it's ok if the top performing clans do so for "strategic" reasons. My goal was to reduce the barrier to entry for all players, including casual players. And the game is already balanced to match high elo clans against each other. If a clan has a slight edge for being good (we're really talkig about a couple more wins a day if you do the math), they deserve it. At least the other clans will be able to do well enough that they will actually want to play/ devise strategy to become #1.

Edited 6/28/2021 08:40:06

LOL @ 1000%. You have the assuredness of 10 people. (;

Then you can cover my lack of confidence that this would actually stimulate activity. I think it would boost results for clans that are already making a run for the top but aren't quite there like Excel (only 25 members), TLA, Polish Eagles, Saber Rattlers, Nestlings (interesting, they are faaaaar ahead of Hawks in CW, lol). Maybe even make Python a force again, they were competitive in S1 but then dropped off.

But even in this new system, they still have to get 20 players actually playing every day to be competitive.

Tbh, if the goal is make it more accessible for more players/clans to play, it needs to be less demanding. Having 40 or even 20 players play every day to be competitive in rankings is just too demanding for most clans. This is a casual event, but 20+ players playing every day is not a casual level of activity.

Someone wrote it earlier, but clans have been here since a while, and the reason for joining one were not CWs. Most people won't join a clan just to play CW, and most clans do not recruit people just to be more competitive in CW.

Are there clans with idle and CW as main purpose? If yes, I believe now they have better chances to win (assuming they are aggressive with recruiting or merging), limiting the number of players does not help them, rather makes it more difficult to reach high rank.

Maybe "top 20 performers limitation" would increase the participation on short term, but once the ranking adjust, and become stable again, would it change much? Wouldn't it actually become even harder to surpass the clan ahead of your clan?


Bottom line is, regardless of what changes you make to the cap / score counting, some clans will not have a chance to win, or reach top 3, or even top 10. If this is enough to discourage the members from playing, then you do not improve the participation.


I believe the main reason why we don't have more people playing, is because the incentives are too small, given how long one season takes. I think best way to improve the situation is simply more rewards, maybe even daily ones - for example some temporary boost / cache in idle even for playing a CW game, better one for winning it, and for the whole clan at the end of the day, depending on participation, win-rate, current rank or sth. Include very very tiny coin rewards in those, to also somewhat encourage non-idle players.

Edited 7/4/2021 00:05:41

Include very very tiny coin rewards in those, to also somewhat encourage non-idle players.

Yeah, the rewards for a non-idle player is quite low :/ (<20 coins for me at least iirc)

Would also be nice if we could trade in the clan war idle rewards for like 50% of their coin value (or some other percentage), so it could incentivize the non-idle folks more.

re: Melda's proposal - seems to me that that would avoid the tie (good point) but make CW a competition dominated by top-heavy clans (i.e., MASTERs) who're able to get 20 players with high win rates.

I think Widzisz's redirect makes sense- this is really about motivating players to play. But instead of focusing on rewards, what about somehow making CW intrinsically fun to play (the way QM and ladder games are)? Not sure how, but hoping maybe you all could throw ideas for that.

Excellent points from Widzisz & l4v. Make it less of a battle for the top ranks (that can still happen in parallel) but more of a "hey I'm glad I made time to play CW today" affair.

@Ocean, I think I got 17 coins for our 3rd place ranking last season. So ~1.5 coins for each, of <1 coin for each game I played. LOL ... so yea, it's not about the coin winnings.

I personally find CW fun, but I think the timeslots make it difficult for most to reliably play, and thus less fun for most players. It forces players to really be serious about CW to make a difference in season rankings, despite claiming to cater to the casual crowd.

But l4v's point is perhaps the best ... it needs a draw to make people want to intrinsically play CW. People are here b/c they like WZ, but what's the draw to make them choose CW over other regular games? Or to make them play more WZ (CW games) in addition to whatever other WZ games they already play. It can't just be about the rankings, else only 5-6 clans will only ever truly care. Some material draw to play CW over other types of games even if you're not a top ranked clan.

I'm new to the game and CW, but in my opinion, CW is intimidating to casual and newer players as they almost certainly will face more experienced/skilled players in every game. Having divisions or leagues (based on previous season rankings with smaller territory maps) will help encourage people to at least try to play games rather than play a few and then quit because they feel like they can't compete on the individual level which reduces overall clan activity.

More active clans with less skilled players could still win long term against less active clans with high skilled players with the current settings.

Also as someone who doesn't really play the Idle game, the rewards are pointless. Perhaps an alternating reward system for each territory would be more of an incentive.

Yep, at very least during the start of the season, I ran into very good players on both, SE and MME. Coin tournaments/ games have worse players than CW - by at least one class! I leant my lesson and I stay on FB and MME MA.
You need some personal ranking system, first few games by 1v1 winrate, then by CW ELO. Then match people with similar rankings.
All in all, you need more slots (so players don't have to plan when to join CW), more players/ slot (so you get matched with players of your level) and more settings/ slot (so if I don't like some settings, I can still join a slot). And we are back to the original question: how to make causals join CW? Wouldn't be better to use QM (the only working RT game generator) and implement CW in it?

Edited 7/12/2021 21:39:14

Sent the thread to Fizzer to see what he says

rewards for playing CW games is dope.

rewards for winning CW games is sick.

rewards for earning a territory would be big incentive if you are close to earning it, to win and to play.

sounds like brilliant idea