Hold up the bottom 4?
Yup.
And clans routinely require about 8 or 9 folks to even be a clan?
Yup again.
See the issue here? This has effectively cut some clans in basically half, to be totally disregarded in the clan average to decide the fight card. Now how can you really have a clan war when you have such lopsided matches? You're effectively punishing small clans for being small, and tossing them to the wolves.
I realize the Devs were trying to shake things up, and try something new. I get that, I really do. What I do not get is how chopping clans in half for averages seemed like a good idea. Some clans of course will fight well beyond their division, others wouldn't have much of a chance even with standard averaging.
This is true for every clan war no matter how divisions are lined up. However this decision that was made and carried out in game doesn't even allow clans to try if they are small. Half their people right out of the gate are taken right out of the process. No one except for the top players in the top brackets of their divisions are really playing on a level field.
Yes I know war isn't fair, this is a war game, etc, etc, etc. But here's the key word in that sentence sparky, "GAME." Yes some games are unfair as well, toss in RNG and we could debate all day about how skewed the game is or isn't. None of that matters however as this isn't real life, nor is it the RNG. This is people making decisions at the end of the day that we have to live with as players using their game.
As such we can only provide appropriate feedback for things that are done. In this case my stance on the issue at hand is, that was an extremely bad idea. You crippled clans right out of the gate and paved the way for some highly lopsided divisions. Normally I don't say much about how wars are set up. This time even I couldn't believe it. So Devs how about we never do that again. The process wasn't thought through it seems, and the results were highly one sided at best.
Submitted by Pat Willis#224534