Attack as another clan member in friendly challenges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darpan2704coc

He can start/cancel upgrades. Dump all the elixir, spend gems, etc by using their account instead of their troops.

---

Thus, when compared to the idea of OP does he hint anything about those advantages. In my book he only mentions stuff about friendly challenges. Please do not go off topic about things like account sharing. Because Ajax was also obviously responding based on the context of OP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darpan2704coc

He can start/cancel upgrades. Dump all the elixir, spend gems, etc by using their account instead of their troops.

---

Completely, totally, 100% irrelevant to the subject at hand.

Not sure what point you are trying to make, but whatever it is, you are not succceeding in doing so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax

Completely, totally, 100% irrelevant to the subject at hand.

Not sure what point you are trying to make, but whatever it is, you are not succceeding in doing so.

---

'It would be nice to show them using their account how to actually do it.'

This is exactly what op said. Just going by word to word, he never said you should be allowed to attack with same troops and heroes that other player have. He simply said 'using their account'. He might have meant what you said, but he never said that actually. And if 'using their account' doesn't give all the access to the account then I don't know what will. This option won't be there for just him, it'll be there for all. And you can't be sure that everybody will use other player's account for only showing them how to attack. I am still looking for the part where op meant that he specifically wants access to that player's troops or heroes only. Op said he wants to coach them 'using their account', not using his own troops or some option for lower level troops on his own account.

Instead, what toofinedog stated expresses it in a better way if one wants to help out lower level clanmates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax

He is talkking about attacking (in friendly challenge ony) as if he were them - I.e. With the same troops & heroes they would have.

---

Where do they say that? I don't see in the OP where they say with same troops & heroes.

Anyway you look at it the OP is the only one who can clear this up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by darpan2704coc

'It would be nice to show them using their account how to actually do it.'

This is exactly what op said. Just going by word to word, he never said you should be allowed to attack with same troops and heroes that other player have. He simply said 'using their account'. He might have meant what you said, but he never said that actually. And if 'using their account' doesn't give all the access to the account then I don't know what will.

---

There is no real possibility he meant that. None at all.

I'm the one who usually gets accused of being pedantic, and arguing semantics, but that is just not sometyhing anybody would ask. For the simple reason that if they want to let you have control of their account now, they can - it is against the ToS of course, but the OP wasn't asking for a change to the ToS.

Yes, you can pedantically read it as meaning something else, but not reasonably.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ajax

There is no real possibility he meant that. None at all.

I'm the one who usually gets accused of being pedantic, and arguing semantics, but that is just not sometyhing anybody would ask. For the simple reason that if they want to let you have control of their account now, they can - it is against the ToS of course, but the OP wasn't asking for a change to the ToS.

Yes, you can pedantically read it as meaning something else, but not reasonably.

---

What op did ask for wasn't based on wrong intentions, but that doesn't prevent anyone from misusing it. I haven't and won't judge anyone for being pedantic because that's me almost everytime and I don't think it's wrong to find fault in something. I wasn't able to find one in what toofinedog suggested in his comment, but I do find one in what op quoted exactly. Not mentioning specifically what only to be provided to be accessed and simply going with using other player's account. I might have read too much in between lines but I don't think I have read anything wrong. I think we should give op the opportunity to come up and say what he actually meant by that, ofcourse keeping things in concern about what could go wrong with complete access to other user's account.