Removing inactive coalitions from scoreboard?

Plain and simple: apply same rule to coalitions that is applied to inactive players - after 30 days of your last match you are out of the scoreboard. Playing one again puts you back in the competition.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

But more than 30 days IMO.

If they didn't play last season.

I also suggested this before. Read: http://www.afterwind.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=3641. However, if you allow me; i'm posing the complete idea about the coalition ranking again:


Here is my proposal, take your time to read it (its simulair to existing league systems):
1. Remove competence and restore the old 'CP' system
2. Inactive coalitions needs to be removed from the coalitionlist and need to be placed in 'Hybernate'. When a coalition did not play a CW for 30days, it will automaticly be moved to the Hybernate mode and will not be shown in the coalition rankings.
3. Add a new feature "challanges" with the following options:
a. Coalition leaders and officers are allowed to arrange new challanges, or to accept/decline incomming challanges
b. When challanging a other coalition, all the 'gamerules' must be stated in the challange. Also there must be a date and time.
c. If someone is challanged, then there are 3 options: Accept, Change (date or rules) or Decline. Here is how it works:
- Accept: If you accept a challange, then everything is set. If one of the opponents doesn't show up on the scheduled date/time, the opponent wins by forfeit.
- Change: Challanges can be 'rechallanged' (changed):
- To propose a new date/time
- To propose a new rule/map
- Decline:
Rejecting a challange should only be possible in one of the following cases:
- The coalition war is scheduled within 5days from the challange date
- The opponent coalition has 100CP more or less then yours. You don't have to play against opponents that are far better or worse then your coalition
- If you already played against this opponent in the last 60days
- You are currently in Hybernate mode
- If you or your opponent proposed new rules or a date time for the 5th time and still doesn't have any agree with the opponent, then both side's can cancel the match. Canceling with this option should be limited though, so it can't be abused.
- If you decline a challange when you do not meet any of the requirements above, then you will be placed in Hybernate automaticly.
d. Once a match is accepted, its not possible to undo/reschedule this. Except when moving to hybernate mode.
4. Not responding to a challange within 7days, will automaticly result in a hybernate mode.
5. Going into Hybernate mode will cost the coalition -50CP. So activity is rewarded and you can't abuse the hybernate mode to decline incomming challanges.
6. Coalitions in hybernate mode can't respond on incomming challanges and can only challange themselves.
7. New coalitions will start in Hybernate mode without the CP loss, so they don't have to play directly when created.

Then also i have 2 points that would be nice to add, but not directly necessary for a good coalition league:
8. Show all the played matches on the league page, so everyone can see what coalitions played recently and what the result was. So i don't have to click on a coalition to see the last results. (I already proposed this before). Also (if my idea's are implemented), show 'upcomming matches' with all the agreed matches that are comming up. This way everyone can see what matches will be played and can maybe spectate them.
9. The CP you earn on winning or losing a CW, depens on the ranks of the players in the game (not on the CP of the coalition). This gives a opportunity for higher ranked coalitions to get more points.

Whait little i make coalition for my friends not for cw,why to remove my coalition i spend 10000sp
if i have time i will meybe play cw i decide for that no one other.why to put me in Hybernate mode to have -50cp.
what will happand with 1.2.3 place coalition if they all be inactive they will be remove from coalition list is stupid really
what motivation will have new coalition to play cw?

i think all is ok with coalition just need new cw sp system so coalition who will have most wins to be 1 place


2. Inactive coalitions needs to be removed from the coalitionlist and need to be placed in 'Hybernate'. When a coalition did not play a CW for 30days, it will automaticly be moved to the Hybernate mode and will not be shown in the coalition rankings.

i will never agree with this



panta rei

I already agreed with Hugo's proposal.
@avatar - if you created a cln for your friends, then I guess coalition wars and competitiveness aren't important to you so I don't see why would it bug you?

~@Caulepra@~ i also agreed with ***Hugosch*** idea but dont agreed only with this number 2.other proposals are good

:''''''',
: 0
:
-------------
C . . . . . . . . . . . E
ajde da igrame besilka heheeh

2. Inactive coalitions needs to be removed from the coalitionlist and need to be placed in 'Hybernate'. When a coalition did not play a CW for 30days, it will automaticly be moved to the Hybernate mode and will not be shown in the coalition rankings.

Hmm, so if the coalition goes to Hybernate, it can come back to thecoalition ranking if they play a match, I presume?

Exactly. They go out the ranking when inactive, and go back in when played a CW. However; going into hybernate mode costs you 50CP. This is made so the hybernate mode cannot be abused to decline incomming challanges.

I know your idea from the previous thread. I always disliked that you get some kind of a punishment for declining cw.
Even with restrictions it is obvious that stronger CLNs get an opportunity to enforce a cw on an unwilling opponent.

Wr1tt3n by VRIL, 05.06.2012 at 19:21

I know your idea from the previous thread. I always disliked that you get some kind of a punishment for declining cw.
Even with restrictions it is obvious that stronger CLNs get an opportunity to enforce a cw on an unwilling opponent.

yeah i agree. coalitions under hybernation shouldn't be penalized CP points. Some may have a good reason to be inactive. I don't think afterwind is at that level of competition and activity just yet.

You can decline a CW (without punishment) when you opponent has 100CP more or less then you. So your argument that stronger CLNs can enforce others to play is not really valid. But there has to be a way that you cannot decline all cw's without going into inactive mode. The problem was (for Byzantia and Biteme at least) that nobody wanted to play against us. If we don't change these rules, then the top CLNs will never have a chance to play.

I guess that many faction would challenge the "Top" Clans, if there were a way to make it fair. Playing for Example 4/4/4 against 10/10/9 or something will never be fun.
So Coalitions with a minmum recruiment level of 7+ or something dont need to wonder why "normal" Coalitions dont like to challenge them.
And with the Idea of punishing a decline, factions wich are open for every Rank will be punished.

The Question for me is, why dont the socalled "Top Clans" challenge each other?

Qu0t3:

The Question for me is, why dont the socalled "Top Clans" challenge each other?

Because they dont wont to loose sp. hehe (Anyway that doesnt really matter because if this system were to be placed, then they would have to play against each other)

The good thing with this new system is that the top and every other coalitions get to play more cw's then before.

The bad thing is that some coalitions will be forced to play against coalitions. - which is bad in my opinion. This is not a problem for coalitions that have good players and are active, but for coalitions that dont have so many active players on their team and on top of that loose -50sp. And how many times can this 50- occur? Do you loose points also when you are in Hybernate mode? Cause getting a -50 penalty continuasly cause you cant play is bullshit. also it wont take you back in the coalition rankings by loosing a game do you?

Wr1tt3n by Tzeentch, 06.06.2012 at 03:04

The Question for me is, why dont the socalled "Top Clans" challenge each other?

My idea's are exactly to make the "Top Clans" have to play each other. With this system, you can refuse to play coalitions that are too high or low for you.

Wr1tt3n by Sixstars, 06.06.2012 at 04:45

The bad thing is that some coalitions will be forced to play against coalitions. - which is bad in my opinion. This is not a problem for coalitions that have good players and are active, but for coalitions that dont have so many active players on their team and on top of that loose -50sp.

I really don't understand whats wrong with 'forcing' to play. If you don't play, then why are you in the coalition rank anyway? You are only 'forced ' to play one CW in 30days. You guys are talking like its impossible.

Wr1tt3n by Sixstars, 06.06.2012 at 04:45

And how many times can this 50- occur? Do you loose points also when you are in Hybernate mode? Cause getting a -50 penalty continuasly cause you cant play is bullshit. also it wont take you back in the coalition rankings by loosing a game do you?

The -50CP is a 'one time consequence' when you are going into 'hybernate mode'. So, if you are in hybernate mode, you will not keep dropping points. Only when you come out of the hybernate mode (when you played a CW), then you could lose another -50CP when you are going AGAIN in hybernate mode. I also want to notice that the '-50CP' is just a number, we can also make it -30 for example. However, once active, we have to discourage inactivity, that is what this system will bring.

There will be no problems for coalitions that just started, because they will start in 'hybernate mode' automaticly, without a CP drop. Also, whats wrong with a small tribute for inactivity? With this system, activity is rewarded, coalitions will play more oter coalitions of their own 'kill and also the #1 coalition is forced to keep playing a CW once every 30days.

Just take one look at all the regulations applying for CW declination. In my oppinion it should be the other way round.
What we actually need is a system that encourages engagement and motivation to actively participate in the CW season.

That is also the biggest flaw of the current system. I dont care too much about CLN rankings and cp formulars to be honest but if this sytem
ever gets changed again there needs to be a major improvement of the motivational and rewarding sector. When you mainly go for a competitive
system that makes the best CLNs end up on top you have to keep in mind that most other CLNs will end up with a bad w/l ration unfair matches
and no longterm motivation.

So let me get this clear.

As long as you play one match within every 30 days, our cln wont get a penalty of cp loss?

Exactly

Okey I accept this proposal. Dont take away the medals, and top10 coalition season thang.