Even if I agreed with your assessment of the current beginner clan situation, these fees will only serve to kill these "fewer and better" beginner clans. Imagine this scenario, a beginning player's options are to quit growing until the clan has enough admins to run EBs, or join a feeder clan for an established clan, complete with rules, demands, and no chance for advancement for quite some time. Sounds like fun, right? There are plenty of other options for people who don't feel connected to a game. Smaller clans that die out, can do so on their own without any extra help needed. And the reason some of those beginner clans have so few people is because the players leave the failed clan for better run clans. On their own, without any "help" from others.
This is why we need to increase the cost of clans to somewhere around 250b in order to remove the worst clans. On top of that with my structure you get a few more free ranks than those given by the dev proposition. This allows clans to function with a freshly bought clan however in order to make it run better you will need to invest a little as opposed to needing to invest straight away in ranks.
A starting cost of 250 bil will not remove any clans. That would only discourage players from making new clans. If you want to remove clans, offer rewards for disbanding them. I still haven't seen any reason why increasing starting costs is necessary either. Players should be encouraged, or at least allowed, to try and play the game how they want. 25b is enough of an investment for a smaller player who wants to try an build a clan of their own. 250b puts creating a beginning clan out of reach of the exact people who would want one. Namely, the middle range players who want to create something on their own. 250b is a small amount to big players who already have an established clan. They could create clans on a whim, or more likely, create additional clans for their current clan, both of which they could do anyway. Why should we be dictating, through exorbitant costs, how players must play the game. The fewer avenues for individual opportunity, the fewer new players will stick with the game.
Support. This makes more sense. Only thing is I think there should be a few more starting admin slots. Having more admins, of varying time zones, is pretty key to running ebs b2b successfully. Other than that, this is solid.
I like this 1 alot better then the other crappy 1... So sumwhat support. Ive noticed co owner and head admin is the same thing. No need 2 have both of those
Simplicity is the key - this will actually make it easier to be owner. Support. And support to the idea with clan pm
Added assign clan ranks to the table to make the difference between Co-Owner and Head Admin clearer Hope this solves the confusion.
Comparatively speaking... Admin on your table is laughable compared to admin now. It's like a glorified recruiter :lol:
Even if people doesn't like the simple names I'm sure it can implement a little to the owner that they could change the names
If you cant afford the new clan structure, then you probably shouldnt run a clan. Beginners need to learn the game, not make clans and try to pull other newbies into a clan they dont know how to run. If a "mid range" player wants to go out on their own, they should be dedicated enough to save up the cash they need to start a clan. 25bill for a clan these days is pocket change. It should be changed to keep up with todays Kaw.
Well this certainly better than what's the devs suggested, and if given a few minor tweaks would work a lot better, any idea when the devs will bring the new clans roles out? Their has been a lot of talk about this and most clans don't want it
This proposal is a better system than ATA's the only thing I see that should be adjusted is the right to start a War and change titles,these should be only available to head admin and up,otherwise thumbs up Kez.