I don't doubt at all that RCA wants to war. I knows my of them and they love war. It could be any clan name to me, it's a good example to ask what ATa considers "exploiting" their system. I hate telling people they can't war and then picking and choosing which ones can just so we get a matchup. Yet I'm positive if 46 signed up for every war this week with Max participants we'd get no matches and something would be said about exploiting the system to get free mith. Even though we are operating under their set guidelines for Rancor wars. It's shouldn't be the players responsibility when ATA sets the perimeters of sign ups. IMO the fault lies on them.
@dark warlor I'm not suggesting RCA ( on closer look were screwed may also fit in here) are necessarily looking for a no match for free mith. I just feel that 6 times a week no match up is too excessive, and that some clan with losing records should at least be given the chance to earn the same 60 mith a week they did. I'm my own case I'm 1-8 in EE wars or about 45 mith worse off than when I started. However I DID fight. They got 60 plus mith from the devs without having to lift a finger. I'm not saying RCA or were screwed did anything wrong. Then again they didn't do anything much to improve their chances for a match up either. You think the fourth time they were told "too high bfa" or "too many members" they would do setting about it. I would solve this by letting the losers do the red paladin EB after the war. If the devs are unwilling for this, how about a "3 strikes and your out" rule? No more than 3 no match EBs in a week.
When you win... And the EB has no risk and is easy to get. Just get 35 builds to sign up and free mith for all no risk.
I like the 3 strikes rule, and I agree that the losers of war should get the EB. To fight and lose is nobler than to not fight at all.
We're screwed usually wars rising hawks and perkutut army, but due to the bigs sometimes significant amounts of BFA can differ ending up with a no match or odd man out, although we do war other clans as well.
If the devs can't find you a match, well there is nothing they can do about that. I just think clans that war and lose should be shown the same courtesy they give to clans who don't war, especially if they get a large amount of no matches.
That's correct frog, that makes no sense at all. But why put in a loser reward system that's open to abuse in the first place? Award losers mith according to their successful actions in war. Just don't award clans for losing, keep the rewards for winners as it is. That way more clans will come out to war, and no one gets free miths for not doing anything.
@ booty: the options provided by that poll made so little sense to anyone that it's results should be completely discounted.
I don't see why your gripping @ the poll. they never asked what we wanted prior to now nor do they need to. you should be ecstatic they're "allowing" your input now.
@handy cuffs Why can't we gripe at a flawed poll? Either way it makes more sense to aim for a no matchup because you're guarantee mith after doing a short EB and save 2 hrs of your life.
Maybe DEVS should consider a drop Allie 100% refund period for clans that have this constant issue, as obviously this could be easily abused, they could only allow a 100% refund to allies over say 15-30 days old and only for a given period say during the no match EB, this is just an idea don't shoot me lol
These clans say they wanna war, but they don't want it bad enough to change their clan make up. They would rather just take the free mith. That's why I say 3 strikes and your out. No more than 3 mith EBs per clan per week.