LABAN PHMaster III#2G99VR0QP

Clan level 23 · 167 war wins

Synced 18 days ago · updates weekly

LABAN PH coaching focus · Clashalytics

War typeBoth Regular CWL

Window7d 30d 90d All

Clan health score

0 / 100

Scored 0 to 100, higher is better.

▸What goes into it

The mean of the four dimensions that actually decide whether this clan wins wars: Engagement, Usage, War attack, and War defense. War defense is a conceded rate, so a low one counts as a good one here.

Focus firstWar attackBehind all 17 tracked clans

▸How this is scored

War attack, War defense and Usage are compared against every other daily-tier clan's identical roster-wide number, not a theoretical 100 -- a 100% three-star rate isn't realistic against real competition, even for a strong clan. "Focus first" is whichever of the three has the worst percentile among real peers, not the worst raw score.

Engagement isn't part of this comparison -- it's the one dimension where 100% is genuinely reachable (real members already hit it), so it's still read against that flat target rather than a peer percentile.

Percentile against tracked clans, not a score

War attackFOCUS

War defense: not enough data

Usage

The four focus dimensions

These are this clan's own real rates, not a ranking against other clans, so they will not match the percentile bars above.

▸Why these differ from the bars above

Each is a rate this clan actually produced, on a 0 to 100 scale. Higher is better on three of them; War defense is the share of defences that got 3-starred, so lower is better there. The bars above place the same clan against every other clan tracked here, which is a different question and a different scale.

Engagement0

On a typical day, 0% of the roster shows real evidence of playing: a battle, a war attack, or a raid weekend, over the last 28 days. Counted from evidence only, so it understates rather than overstates. 72 of 72 members show none at all.

→Raw Stats and the player page show exactly which members have no recent battle, war, or raid evidence.
→A quiet roster spot is worth a direct check-in before it becomes a departure.

▸How this is scored

Days with real evidence that a member played (a battle, a war attack, or a raid weekend), as a share of the days we have been able to watch them. Each member is only measured over their own time in the clan. Evidence only, never a live session log, so it reads low rather than high. Averaged across the roster.

▸Player by player72 needs attention · 0 worth watching · 0 on track

Last

Needs attention (72)

0 of 28 days

War attack usage is also low (0%) -- likely a genuine drop-off, worth a check-in.

693 given · 0 received (current)

Usage0

0 of 80 attacks used.

→Raw Stats lists who left hits unused, per war.
→Bench can't-commit members before prep day ends. An opt-out beats a no-show.

▸How this is scored

War attacks used as a share of attacks available, summed over every completed regular and CWL war recorded here in the last 30 days.

▸Player by player40 needs attention · 0 worth watching · 0 on track

Last

Needs attention (40)

0 of 2 attacks used, 1 war

Also quiet overall (0% engagement) -- likely a real drop-off, not just this window.

War attack0

0% 3-star rate on war attacks.

→Weak-attack flags on Raw Stats, broken out per base.

▸How this is scored

Roster-wide War attack 3-star rate, summed across every real attack in the regular and CWL wars in the window.

▸Player by player40 needs attention · 0 worth watching · 0 on track

Last

Needs attention (40)

0 of 2 attacks 3-starred

Struggling to convert, and skipping attacks too (0% used) -- a bigger engagement problem than technique.

War defenseGathering data

Not enough war defenses recorded yet.

Also tracked

▸What these two are

Progression and Retention are TH and membership signals, shown here at their real current values alongside the four dimensions above.

ProgressionGathering data

TH history spans under 14 days. Scores at day 14.

RetentionGathering data

0 of 3 membership events logged. Scores at 3.