Ranking
Original Post
In regards to the new activity checks
Okay so as you guys know there’s new activity checks

This means you losers have to go ingame and play. I believe it’s 50% of the clan does 5+ games in-game then we get full points.

Also, we must do 7 clan wars each month, for maximum points.

Forums were fine because of you shit posters (Tabby)

I know we can get by with less but I know we’re capable of maximum points.
~ .....Want to become a Market Squid? PM me an application!.....~
.....
~ .....Market Squad..... | .....Administrator.....~
.....
~.....If you have any questions PM me or DM me on Discord: athin. .....~
.....
It's not required that we get max points in order to stay alive, we'd just get a warning.
Somewhat confused about that myself, if per check we're above 25 points would we repeatedly get warnings or would there be a cutoff where we'd be hit with the penalty.

Nevermind I'm just an idiot and didn't read the OP fully.
Originally Posted by duck
3 warnings in 6 months and your clan is going to face the consequences.

We can easily just pump out wars. As for the 50% in game inactivity we still have inactive members; Elias, Plus, EradeoStar, and Tree.
If we remove them if they aren't active we can easily work with our 16 other active members, only 8 would need to be active in game which is easy enough.
Last edited by id; Jul 3, 2018 at 10:57 PM.
Originally Posted by Sucy View Post
We can easily just pump out wars. As for the 50% in game inactivity we still have inactive members; Elias, Plus, EradeoStar, and Tree.
If we remove them if they aren't active we can easily work with our 16 other active members, only 8 would need to be active in game which is easy enough.

I don't want to remove members if we don't need to
Originally Posted by Surge View Post
I don't want to remove members if we don't need to

Just realized I kinda entirely glossed over Oscar100

I get that but with the inactive people there's 21 people which would mean 10 or 11 people would have to go in game regularly which might not work.
Having 16 people (excluding the bank of course) and getting 8 of the to go in and do wars or mess around and whatever is easy.

So far the people I see that go in game at least somewhat often are McNuggets, Hikou, Saturn, Typhon, Grrreatest, Mateo, Frost, you and I.
Everyone else has a day or more between their last game, I know that basing a game a day as a bottom line is extensive maybe but having our current 10 in game active players go in regularly because there's 5 people that aren't even around is also a bit dumb imo
Honestly I can't even remember the last time any of those 5 spoke in the Discord or on forums.
Originally Posted by Sucy View Post
Just realized I kinda entirely glossed over Oscar100

I get that but with the inactive people there's 21 people which would mean 10 or 11 people would have to go in game regularly which might not work.
Having 16 people (excluding the bank of course) and getting 8 of the to go in and do wars or mess around and whatever is easy.

So far the people I see that go in game at least somewhat often are McNuggets, Hikou, Saturn, Typhon, Grrreatest, Mateo, Frost, you and I.
Everyone else has a day or more between their last game, I know that basing a game a day as a bottom line is extensive maybe but having our current 10 in game active players go in regularly because there's 5 people that aren't even around is also a bit dumb imo
Honestly I can't even remember the last time any of those 5 spoke in the Discord or on forums.

We already hit the activity criteria without even knowing that it was being changed/checked; until we get a warning, I don't think we need to make any changes for the sake of ingame activity. When/if we receive a warning, we can start to think about making changes like what you're suggesting - but as long as we're hitting those 50 points each month, there's no obvious benefit to aiming for higher than that.

The way I see it is that we're almost definitely going to get 20 points per month for forum activity. At a normal rate, we'll probably complete one war per month. That leaves us with around 28-30 points out of 45 that we need to aim for in regards to ingame activity (at an estimate). Knowing that 50% of our members being active makes for a full 45 points, 30 points would mean that around 33% of our members need to be active ingame, which, if you think about it, is super easy.

The new guidelines are, in my opinion, way more lenient than everyone seems to be making them out to be. 5 games per month are hardly anything (10 minutes per month?). We should reach the 50 points mark very easily.
I agree with Surge.

But I think we should be making some wars, with the "active ig" guys, such as Sucy mentionated before.


The "Adventurer" rank has war perms so it should't be a problem for anybody.
The perms aren't an issue, it's the number of active to inactive people.

The extra 5 people might not seem like a lot but that increases the number of active people needed to do in game things like wars or just general playing.
I'm pretty sure we have forum posts covered but wars is probably something we'd lack unless we accepted any war that comes our way.

In the end I think we'll be able to come to a conclusion when the new rules actually take effect in 2 months.
I play quite a bit so I could do 5 solo wars in one day ez pz, it's just a matter of if we wanna do it properly or just for stats.
Originally Posted by Surge View Post
I don't want to remove members if we don't need to

Kick Surge first then kick the inactives
NO TITLE
Originally Posted by Sora View Post
Kick Surge first then kick the inactives

xd
Originally Posted by Smaguris View Post
I play quite a bit so I could do 5 solo wars in one day ez pz, it's just a matter of if we wanna do it properly or just for stats.

Either way is fine with me. If, as a clan, we enjoy wars, then do them "properly".