Guild War Slackers

[InspectahDeck]

Do members of the guild that did not attack during a war get the rewards the guild won?

[dragonx254]

Yes, they do.

Regardless of whether or not a guildmate actually participated in the war, if they are in a guild, and the guild places somewhere, they get the rewards.

There's no way to exclude members based on participation or anything.

[InspectahDeck]

Ok I was just wondering. In a different game I play if you do not contribute you do not get the rewards.

[Musketeer]

If you are an officer you can express your displeasure by throwing them out after the war is over, but they'll get the rewards from that war. If they're not contributing in the war and not contributing gold, they're not contributing.

[The Pale Rider]

If you are an officer you can express your displeasure by throwing them out after the war is over, but they'll get the rewards from that war. If they're not contributing in the war and not contributing gold, they're not contributing.

One of the features I suggested earlier was the ability for a GM to set a minimum which everyone in the guild had to meet in order to receive rewards. That's already how it works, but because people lie and leech, GM's have to resort to offline blacklists and other difficult methods to track these jerks and prevent them from leeching.

Having a minimum feature would make the game much easier to manage.

[drygores]

Nice idea pale rider. Ide +1 that one.

[Elderad]

They do, and they dont. They do get the rewards, as long as they are there in time for the collection.

For instance in my guild we have 9 players that are not playing regularly, or at all. i contributed 100 fights during the last fusion war. the closest to me was 30 total.

closest to him was total of 24 and then 6.

I understand what you are saying.
But why not just kick those players because they are obviously not suited for a guild at all.

Some of them will even start a war, not even fight once. or start it and lose one then not fight again...
The loss of one battle vs one player is no reason to give up, at least contribute something fight the gate.

Or wait atleast 10 minutes after the war started to see if some one has defeated the sentinal.

[The Pale Rider]

They do, and they dont. They do get the rewards, as long as they are there in time for the collection.

For instance in my guild we have 9 players that are not playing regularly, or at all. i contributed 100 fights during the last fusion war. the closest to me was 30 total.

closest to him was total of 24 and then 6.

I understand what you are saying.
But why not just kick those players because they are obviously not suited for a guild at all.

Some of them will even start a war, not even fight once. or start it and lose one then not fight again...
The loss of one battle vs one player is no reason to give up, at least contribute something fight the gate.

Or wait atleast 10 minutes after the war started to see if some one has defeated the sentinal.

You cannot boot during war. Everyone in guild during a war can redeem after war even if you boot them before they redeem the prizes.

HTH

[busteroaf]

Another option, is making the GW rewards Tier Style much like Arena and Weekly Boss. As your guild gets more points, you get more and more tiers worth of stuff. Those guilds that had a battle until the end for 10th? Well, this way, depending on points, they could get a little bit more and not feel totally jipped.

Or, make your ability to get guild war rewards based on points as well. Individual rewards, and Guild rewards. With Guild rewards tied to your Individual reward points.

For example: In order to collect Guild Rewards, you must have met a minimum.
Rank 1, you must have "contributed" 200k points minimum.
Rank 3, 100k points.
Rank 11, 50k.
Rank 26, 25k.

It is rather easy to do, and other games use this. That way, if you have a leech and they only do 25k, they'd only get the rewards for being #26, not #1. Its not fixing the leeching problem as a whole, but it does fix some of the rage that while many had to carry a leech, at least they won't get the top prize because they won't be eligible for it based on lack on contribution.

[sxespanky]

are you sure? we had a few guys who did not fight, and came in a day later after the war saying they didnt get anything?

[InspectahDeck]

That's why I asked. Sxe. We are having the same issue. But I'm happy about it.

[tshell]

that is the purpose of the reward redemption period, inactives likely won't be around in time to get them. Leeches on the other hand are around but just refuse to gem for minimums so they still get the rewards

[Wolf RedDragon]

I'd like the ability to boot freeloaders/violators DURING the war.

[ZERO_07]

I'd like the ability to boot freeloaders/violators DURING the war.
Too easy to misuse imo

[Paladineguru]

Too easy to misuse imo

Maybe if it was enabled only on last day of war. With the ability to kick them turning on if they're below the gm set minimum for that period of the war, and of course with only officers allowed to control , much like guild purchases.

[sxespanky]

Maybe if it was enabled only on last day of war. With the ability to kick them turning on if they're below the gm set minimum for that period of the war, and of course with only officers allowed to control , much like guild purchases.

what? hes saying its easily miss used because an awful person can boot an entire guild last minute for no reason. it would ruin a lot of peoples games.

[infliction]

what? hes saying its easily miss used because an awful person can boot an entire guild last minute for no reason. it would ruin a lot of peoples games.

If they made it so that only the GM could boot people during war, then it wouldn't be abused. The only people that would be upset are leechers. There could be instances of terrible GMs that boot legitimate people, but a guild like that won't last very long. In the end, the game would balance itself out and the only whiners would be leechers.

Booting during war is essential! Or at the very least, some sort of war history that can be viewed by friends.

[sxespanky]

If they made it so that only the GM could boot people during war, then it wouldn't be abused. The only people that would be upset are leechers. There could be instances of terrible GMs that boot legitimate people, but a guild like that won't last very long. In the end, the game would balance itself out and the only whiners would be leechers.

Booting during war is essential! Or at the very least, some sort of war history that can be viewed by friends.

the only way i could see this being ligitimate - is that it will calculate the person being booted's points being taken out of the war as they get booted. and this mechanic would be fairly flawless.

[ZERO_07]

If anything the GM could set a predetermined point minimum amount that's to be reached within 2 days. Anyone under that min can be removed at any time during the first 24 hours of war. During the last 24 hours no one can be removed.

This way people strive to reach min and not slack during the first days and ensures people who did work hard don't get unfairly removed when war is about to end.

[GrayOne]

are you sure? we had a few guys who did not fight, and came in a day later after the war saying they didnt get anything?

I second this statement. I was just told by a guildmate whose device was not working during the entire 3 day war (thus, he never logged in during the war) that when he tried to redeem during the redemption period, he was unable to get any of the rewards. The message that he said he saw was "You were not in a guild during this war." or something along those lines.

[Kangaroeland]

Same for the people doing 0 in my guild, seems like when you do absolutely nothing you dont get any rewards

[gqhong]

No wonder I had some people attack the gates and then never appeared ever again...
Now I know why....

[@ngelica]

leachers should pay for what they did

[Melibane Urambir]

Keep in mind this is a free cell phone game. With the intention of maximum profit with minimum effort. That being said, a war history tab on their profile would be nice. Sometimes we accept members just to look at their efforts in last guild war, then they may get the boot if that effort is lacking.

[Slayer 1]

leachers should pay for what they did

The inverse could be said to be true also: a preponderance of 'leechers' is the sign of poor guild management and leadership. Ignore your garden and weeds will grow....

[PhoenixZee]

Gotta agree with this.

Forsaken ran hard with us right up until virtually the end, and I hate, hate to see that they had to call it because a quarter of their number were leeching off of them.

While I'm not sad to see that we won, and it certainly saved those in #10 a ton of gems...ultimately I hate that it came at the expense of a guild that tried very, very hard despite a handicap of that magnitude.

It should never have reached that far, and while I'm sure many in the top 10 all had leechers, as did we in Majestic...it shouldn't have that many, and it needlessly rendered what was a nailbiting competition with them for the 10 spot into something that didn't feel quite as hard won as it could have.

That being said, Day 1 and Day 2 with ya'll were simply epic. So much back and forth and scrambling for position at 10 and 11.

[Ishkabibbel]

If you are an officer you can express your displeasure by throwing them out after the war is over, but they'll get the rewards from that war. If they're not contributing in the war and not contributing gold, they're not contributing.

The better, more **** thing to do, is to throw them out a few minutes before the next war starts.

[Archangel-HHM]

The better, more **** thing to do, is to throw them out a few minutes before the next war starts.

I agree 100%. As far as I'm concerned, they should not have the ability to receive rewards from another guild in another war. Let them suffer!!!!

[Stuck At Second]

I agree 100%. As far as I'm concerned, they should not have the ability to receive rewards from another guild in another war. Let them suffer!!!!

Leechers are the worst, but sometimes you have someone who wants to join in place of the leecher, and you can't just make that person sit outside forever.

[taylor1993]

Leechers are the worst, but sometimes you have someone who wants to join in place of the leecher, and you can't just make that person sit outside forever.

Come on man, stop spamming threads. This post makes no sense...

[geo81]

The better, more **** thing to do, is to throw them out a few minutes before the next war starts.

I haven't had a leacher problem lately, but when I do, I do this to them. More often than not though they'd end up leaching a war and quit on their own. To the next guild to leach I guess.

[dangdp7]

To many slackers wish there was a better way to get rid of them