josko.ri wrote: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.