The Official Clan Sitting Rules (Old Version)

[L M S]

Excellent responses from Bruce.

Thanks for taking the time to answer.

I agree, for what its worth.
We just need to learn work within the new rules; I don't see a problem with any of this, there is nothing outrageous. Its nice that something is written down, imo. There are clans that will need to adjust their modus operandi a bit and I for one, am glad we will all be on the same page.

[IcePack]

Thanks Bruce. Yes we did already send out mass pm's and forum posts (and will do again on monday as a reminder) and figured it would be "flexible" I just thought it might be a little early. NP

Tho only thing I really see as a bit burdensome (tho I understand your saying its opening the door for lies etc, and really only applies to the clan games) is the waiting for 1 hour.
There are times in certain fields of work (like mine) where my 8 hour shift turns into 12 or 16 pretty easily. Even if i played the night before, sometimes i am stuck texting someone to check until X hour when I can get home and its generally late, so it would be really annoying for any sitter to have to wait to the 1 hour mark each game because something happened.

That said, I'm sure there are some ways we can (try) to adjust and it shouldn't be a huge deal. Otherwise, everything else seems reasonable. I don't believe there will be much change for us at all as a clan.

IcePack

[Bruceswar]

So if I understand this right. A clan mate has an emergency (e.g. I have to take my kid to the doctor or I got called into work I won't be able to look at the site for 6 hours). Under rule 3 someone can take turns that fall in that 6 hour window at one time and doesn't have to wait within the 1 hour time limit from rule 2?

Also, I think clans should be allowed to dictate their own sitting rules for a war. Some clans that aren't in the top 5-10 may not care about as many restrictions (and probably aren't abusing sitting either).

Real life emergencies happen so it is best to take your turns as soon as you can so these things do not get in the way of turns. Now if it does come up like such then the 1 hour rule applies. Weather a clan is top 10 or last in the rankings all rules still apply. No exceptions will be made for any clans.

[Bruceswar]

I should add. Feel free to direct any hate mail to me. Thanks!

[benga]

LOL I ust feel now OSA has been violated and how convenient rules apply after the weekend

[Bruceswar]

LOL I ust feel now OSA has been violated and how convenient rules apply after the weekend

Care to fill me in? We need to give people time to look at these rules and have them soak in some.

[benga]

LOL I ust feel now OSA has been violated and how convenient rules apply after the weekend

Care to fill me in? We need to give people time to look at these rules and have them soak in some.

A bit of irony, we have hurried any games in queestion so we avoid any shit it may come out of it anyway

[grifftron]

Isn't this what the rules were already?

[Bruceswar]

Isn't this what the rules were already?

Yes and no. For the most part yes, but there are some changes. Pretty much most of the clan world has nothing to worry about.

[HardAttack]

Bruce;
I understand your points you made, thank you for giving time in it explaining here.
On the other hand, there are not more than 5 clans we have got who has real well developed watch back for a turn/player mechanisms to cover a possble turn missing scenario. The rest ? In my opinion this last hour thing, either going to be broken (since ppl are going to take these in danger turns not in last hour maybe 2 hours before the turn to miss), or the turn is going to be missed. Not well developed clans already are challenging against huge clan trusts/big monsters like kort/tofu/empire/tsm, isnt it enough big challenge to them then give them the last hour to form/set a new challenge to bare with. With all my respect, i would like to state it that, i think last hour or last two hours, is not the core of why we all are here and brain storming for a way or ways to re-set new orders/rules for abuse free sitting to take place. In other words, lets work on the core of this but just my 5 cents, no need to be this strict over last hour thing, make it last 2-3 hours, believe me man, it will look even better. Gonna ease it, lives, and boost the taste of gaming and clan exprience we all have got around here.

Thanks for the all works and study so far.

[Nicky15]

In response to punishments. We have already tried to draft a scale but this proved problematic, the main concern being that we did not know exactly what we would face. So concreting a scale seemed unrealistic at this point.

The CDs are starting a new group, CD and Friends. This will replace the CLA. We will discuss a punishment scale in more detail in there with clan reps from every clan. We will end up with something concrete. We will also look at any minor amendments if needed as well. But for now the rules will stand as they are.

[josko.ri]

Some clans (mainly speaking of low ranked clans, but not in general) uses this game not so seriously like top ranked clans. can thi rules be not followed if both clans makes mutual agreement about it before the war, in order to avoid complications and make the game simpler for them?

If answer is yes, Another example how the agreement proposal can be make:

"Dear representatives of clan XX. We have player Moonchild, who by the current rules is not allowed to play our challenge because he does not have internet at weekends. We think that he also deserves to have fun playing clan wars, like every other player.
What we propose to you?
1. That you agree him to play 8 games. he will play it normally monday to friday (unless to him happens something happened which is described in clan sitting rule policy) and he will be away during weekends. josko.ri will sit for him during weekends.
2. If you agree with this, we propose that every game where josko.ri sit for moonchild (1 turn or more) is valuated like 0.5 game for josko.ri. so, if josko.ri sit in every 8 games, then josko.ri is allowed to play maximal 16 games instead of 20 that he would normally play.
3. Every games they will play in the same team, in order than josko.ri does not have influence in games he is not in, and only has influence in games he is anyway in.
4. every game Moonchild will be in team after josko.ri, point of that is that josko.ri can haste/stall his turn, to minimize sitting. For example, if josko's turn comes on Thursday, he can play it as soon as possible, so maybe moonchild's turn comes on Friday, or if josko's turn is Sunday then he can stall his turn in order that Moon's turn comes in Monday.
5. It would be reccomended that our home games that moonchils is in would be joined in Sunday morning by your team. point of that is that his opening turn, which is often the most important in a game, comes to play in next 5 days so it does not to be played by sitter."

So if opponent clan agrees to this proposal, is in this case ok to put player in, who is absent every weekend? or in general, is it ok to not implement some or all of these rules, if both clan agree previous to the clan war?

In addition, I honestly think this is adressed to be rules vs josko, not for the clan benefit in total. otherwise, why would unlimited settings be highlighted in rules over other settings? also word "vast majority" can also be used against josko, but when other players come to the judgement, it can be interpreted different. if those words are replaced by "80%" or "70%" then it would be equal rules for all player. Just information purpose, during last 2 months I sat for Moonchild in 28,1% turns during his weekend absences, so 72,9% he played by himself. In my opinion, it is vast majority of turns played by himself. in someone other' opinion it is maybe not. So i¥t should be precisely stated where is the difference between allowed and not allowed sitting. in my opinion, turns sat by me for him can even go below 20% if both my team and opponent team are careful about timing of playing turns on Wednesdays, Thursday, and if opponent team join games on Sundays. not sure if that enters into "vast majority" definition.

As a conclusion, the main problem of sitting in clan wars those rules did not adress, and it is over usage of player by his sitting. names are not important but actions are important, so I will not mention names... in Clan League 4, Phase 3, one my opponent has played maximal number of games allowed by himself, and also sat for many players. in my opinion, this is real problem in sitting from clan perspective. if someone plays 28/28 allowed games by himself, and sit at least one turn, he is then overused player in the challenge as he played more than maximum allowed. I regret that this rules do not allow part time players to have fun, but still allow some players to be involved in their challenges more than they should, by playing maximal games by themselves and going over the limit by sitting for others. That is main problem in clan sitting policy, and until this will be solved by rules, there will exist players who are going around that rules to get unfair advantage to their clan.

[GoranZ]

More I think about the new rules more I'm against them... I fell that I'm being targeted with new rules because of someone else's misuse. And whats most important proposed rules don't even target the problem, they target players like me who have done nothing wrong, nor they think of doing of something wrong in the future.

Example: Majority of my clanmates are from US time zones so now I have huge problems when it comes of emergency supervision from 9 AM to 2 PM. And now I have to find new sitters who are compatible to my playing style, and are from my time zone, and preferably from my clan.

One very specific question: Is it CD team job to propose sitting rules? according to me NO.

But CD team could have proposed something like this:

1. The announcing in chat, of the name of the person who has covered a turn will now be mandatory.
2. Only 100 turns(number taken by example) can be supervised in a war for all war participants no matter the reasons(exception can be huge RL disasters like earthquake or hurricanes... those clan members supervisions wont count)
3. For every 3(number taken by example) new turns 1 point negative punishment.

Simple solutions that targets those alliances that have a habit of supervising members for strategic reasons and not those clans that play by the rules.

[jetsetwilly]

Some clans (mainly speaking of low ranked clans, but not in general) uses this game not so seriously like top ranked clans. can thi rules be not followed if both clans makes mutual agreement about it before the war, in order to avoid complications and make the game simpler for them?

If answer is yes, Another example how the agreement proposal can be make:

"Dear representatives of clan XX. We have player Moonchild, who by the current rules is not allowed to play our challenge because he does not have internet at weekends. We think that he also deserves to have fun playing clan wars, like every other player.
What we propose to you?
1. That you agree him to play 8 games. he will play it normally monday to friday (unless to him happens something happened which is described in clan sitting rule policy) and he will be away during weekends. josko.ri will sit for him during weekends.
2. If you agree with this, we propose that every game where josko.ri sit for moonchild (1 turn or more) is valuated like 0.5 game for josko.ri. so, if josko.ri sit in every 8 games, then josko.ri is allowed to play maximal 16 games instead of 20 that he would normally play.
3. Every games they will play in the same team, in order than josko.ri does not have influence in games he is not in, and only has influence in games he is anyway in.
4. every game Moonchild will be in team after josko.ri, point of that is that josko.ri can haste/stall his turn, to minimize sitting. For example, if josko's turn comes on Thursday, he can play it as soon as possible, so maybe moonchild's turn comes on Friday, or if josko's turn is Sunday then he can stall his turn in order that Moon's turn comes in Monday.
5. It would be reccomended that our home games that moonchils is in would be joined in Sunday morning by your team. point of that is that his opening turn, which is often the most important in a game, comes to play in next 5 days so it does not to be played by sitter."

So if opponent clan agrees to this proposal, is in this case ok to put player in, who is absent every weekend? or in general, is it ok to not implement some or all of these rules, if both clan agree previous to the clan war?

In addition, I honestly think this is adressed to be rules vs josko, not for the clan benefit in total. otherwise, why would unlimited settings be highlighted in rules over other settings? also word "vast majority" can also be used against josko, but when other players come to the judgement, it can be interpreted different. if those words are replaced by "80%" or "70%" then it would be equal rules for all player. Just information purpose, during last 2 months I sat for Moonchild in 28,1% turns during his weekend absences, so 72,9% he played by himself. In my opinion, it is vast majority of turns played by himself. in someone other' opinion it is maybe not. So i¥t should be precisely stated where is the difference between allowed and not allowed sitting. in my opinion, turns sat by me for him can even go below 20% if both my team and opponent team are careful about timing of playing turns on Wednesdays, Thursday, and if opponent team join games on Sundays. not sure if that enters into "vast majority" definition.

As a conclusion, the main problem of sitting in clan wars those rules did not adress, and it is over usage of player by his sitting. names are not important but actions are important, so I will not mention names... in Clan League 4, Phase 3, one my opponent has played maximal number of games allowed by himself, and also sat for many players. in my opinion, this is real problem in sitting from clan perspective. if someone plays 28/28 allowed games by himself, and sit at least one turn, he is then overused player in the challenge as he played more than maximum allowed. I regret that this rules do not allow part time players to have fun, but still allow some players to be involved in their challenges more than they should, by playing maximal games by themselves and going over the limit by sitting for others. That is main problem in clan sitting policy, and until this will be solved by rules, there will exist players who are going around that rules to get unfair advantage to their clan.

To pick up on a couple of your points.

Moonchild's situation is unfortunate but definitely falls foul of this rule:

"You must not enter clan games if you know in advance that you will not be able to take the vast majority of your turns in any game or be unable to take your turns on a regular basis. Having your account sat on a regular basis for the duration of any clan game will no longer be allowed. If you are going to participate in clan games, it should be you who will actually play in these games."

Having your account sat on a regular basis would definitely apply in this case.

For the moment we are not proposing that these rules can be modified on a clan war by clan war basis. As Bruce alluded to, we might review that in the future.

After much discussion amongst the CD's and KA we decided not go with a fixed percentage at this time.

I feel I should also stress that these rules were first drafted on September 20th and whilst we have certainly used recent events as the motivation for speeding up their implementation, they have certainly not been written with any one player or clan in mind.

[josko.ri]

It is no without reason that one part of my post is bold, and other part are not. the bold part is the most important, so I expect the most reply and rules improving regarding that part.