Clan War Control

I'm in the military and am in a military clan. To me, and many of my fellow clan members, it is very annoying that when one or more of our members is deployed or in the field, aka "without phone service", we cannot just leave them out of our clan wars. I think there should be a Clan War Control for the Clan Leader that basically would let them chose to take people out of future clan wars until they return. Otherwise your team is without those extra two, or more, attacks. This makes it very hard to win what should be a very balanced war. Thanks for reading!

Bumping this up a bit :)

Yes I agree on this one. In my clan we are giving our members the option to opt out of war, this means we have to kick them before a war search, search for a war, then re invite them when we have a match.. They should make some sort of system for people to either participate or not in wars in general, it doesn't have to be in each war, just say "yes" or "no" to wars, and you will automatically be thrown in or out because of that option.

It would also help for when people go on vacation. We have kicked a lot of people from our clan for not participating in wars only to find out they were on vacation or out of town. It is really upsetting when you lose a war by 1 point and had 3 or 4 members who didn't attack.

Yes, a "Vacation mode" (finals model, deployed in RL etc.) would be awesome. I'd suggest increasing the non-war max membership to 55 or so to accommodate folks being away & still allow clans to field a full 50.

I agree that some sort of feature to opt members in or out for a battle is needed. Along these lines if instead of immediately starting a clan war search the game could allow leaders to poll/ask the clan if they want to opt in or out for a battle. Being able to individually sideline clan members from participating in a battle would work also anything to help manage who is in or out for a battle would be great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SoonerNation

It would also help for when people go on vacation. We have kicked a lot of people from our clan for not participating in wars only to find out they were on vacation or out of town. It is really upsetting when you lose a war by 1 point and had 3 or 4 members who didn't attack.

---

That exact scenario is how we lost our last two wars!

First off, thank you for your service and all that you do for my way of life.

Second, I am one of the few people on the forum who doesn't like this idea at all for several reasons. I admit that most of my reasons are purely5 opinion but I have yet to see anybody address the way this disrupt the already fragile war matching system and balance that exists in the game today. Allowing clans to hand pick only the best members of their clan (yes, this is how it WOULD be exploited) would cause you to loose more wars than missing a few attacks from absent members. I have posted about this in greater detail in many of the 1000 threads on this topic but nobody has ventured to answer it.

cookies....

I would like to see a player settings option to participate in wars or not rather than have the leader or co-leaders decide. Leaders should not be able to decide for other members.

As simple as "Participate in wars?" Yes/No

Going on vacation? Need a break? farming? Go into setting and select No.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceageg

First off, thank you for your service and all that you do for my way of life.

Second, I am one of the few people on the forum who doesn't like this idea at all for several reasons. I admit that most of my reasons are purely5 opinion but I have yet to see anybody address the way this disrupt the already fragile war matching system and balance that exists in the game today. Allowing clans to hand pick only the best members of their clan (yes, this is how it WOULD be exploited) would cause you to loose more wars than missing a few attacks from absent members. I have posted about this in greater detail in many of the 1000 threads on this topic but nobody has ventured to answer it.

---

Interesting point of view. I assumed that if a clan member opted out of a war then they would not benefit in any way if the war was won. So what incentive would there be for folks to do that other than for bragging rights?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥♥♥♥dave

I'm in the military and am in a military clan. To me, and many of my fellow clan members, it is very annoying that when one or more of our members is deployed or in the field, aka "without phone service", we cannot just leave them out of our clan wars. I think there should be a Clan War Control for the Clan Leader that basically would let them chose to take people out of future clan wars until they return. Otherwise your team is without those extra two, or more, attacks. This makes it very hard to win what should be a very balanced war. Thanks for reading!

---

Definitely need something along these lines. Something a little more basic would be a simple "check in" system for Clan Wars. On Prep Day, EVERY member MUST check in. If any of the upper members don't check in for war, then come War Day, they are not included and lower members get the spot.

We have at least 12 members who don't even attack in war!! Which is very aggravating to the ones of us who participate. We have kicked many members for not battling in war but it never seems to solve the problem!!

We just created another clan today strictly for those of us who want to war. We have lost too many wars because of those who do not care about it. It's not fair at all.

I totally agree that there should be some type of update to let us chose who battles and who doesn't. It would make our clan A LOT happier!!!

I wish this would happen, my clan loses wars because of this, and sometimes i just cant kick or dont want to kick out an inactive cuz their a good member, this would be really helpful. SC make it happen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NitroBlast

Interesting point of view. I assumed that if a clan member opted out of a war then they would not benefit in any way if the war was won. So what incentive would there be for folks to do that other than for bragging rights?

---

Thank you! I was just about to reply the exact same thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥♥♥♥dave

Thank you! I was just about to reply the exact same thing.

---

Yep, bragging rights is one of the main reasons. Just like being elder there really isn't any tangible value to having high war win numbers except that you have them. The only tangible value it brings is recruiting. Due to the complete absence of any recruiting or clan search tools war wins often attract more active members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceageg

First off, thank you for your service and all that you do for my way of life.

Second, I am one of the few people on the forum who doesn't like this idea at all for several reasons. I admit that most of my reasons are purely5 opinion but I have yet to see anybody address the way this disrupt the already fragile war matching system and balance that exists in the game today. Allowing clans to hand pick only the best members of their clan (yes, this is how it WOULD be exploited) would cause you to loose more wars than missing a few attacks from absent members. I have posted about this in greater detail in many of the 1000 threads on this topic but nobody has ventured to answer it.

---

Hello again it seems we argue over the same idea and I have answered your concern, fact is you think your putting in your most powerful players guess what...... Ur go in to be matched with someone thinking the same way! Matchup are done by lvl! Now you can be the same lvl as someone else and feel overmatched but your not it's just the other guy got his lvl based on other things he did differently than you! When you go to war supercell does not take the overall lvl of your clan for war only the wars participants! And as I said before you would pick the clan mates before you do a war search so that only the participants you select would be taken into the overall total of lvl for war! And it would be smarter for beginners and middle players to take an even mixture of the strong and the weak into battle! Have the weak ones attack first and have the stronger attack last, in order to have a few definite stars.at least! Again I vote leaders have the option of opting out members from war! So members don't have to be kicked from a clan when they are on vacation or w/o else!

And I do agree with ice in thanking you and all the other soldiers for what you do for America! So we can have the freedom to work live and die free and mostly in charge of our own futures!!!

A great idea for exploitation. I agree with iceageg it would be done just as he suggested. Everyone knows it too.

Type opt into the search bar to vote for this option

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobtroll

A great idea for exploitation. I agree with iceageg it would be done just as he suggested. Everyone knows it too.

---

Ok!!!!!! EXploitation would be going against someone you know you can beat! Perfect example Farmers they drop their trophies to fight people they know they will beat! Ok so you choose all your best players for clan war........ Search begins........ Guess what happens, someone thinking just like you is now your opponent and each one lvl 1- 10 is an even match for yours! Now if your smart and you put a few weaker people into the war and you wait till last to fight, Well now you could have a more possible win! Because you know you can take on the lower lvl and if you need an extra star to win then you attack and Walla! Will clan wars always be equal, No of course not, but they are not always equal now because too many people play that think differently, and there for have different strategies! But NO if you decide to put all of your best players in the war, it's not a exploit bc for it to be a exploit you have to know your go in to win! And as I said for like the.second or third time, their will be others thinking.like you and you will be paired and you will be unsure if you can win!!!! There for its not an exploit!!!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobtroll

A great idea for exploitation. I agree with iceageg it would be done just as he suggested. Everyone knows it too.

---

I highly doubt if it's done by level and not trophy count it shouldn't be exploited. As long as it's based on who is in the war itself and not the clan it would work perfect. Even if everyone only put their best people in the clan war, the only ones profiting/losing if they win/lose would be the ones in the war itself not the rest of the clan. All in all the pros for this addition dramatically out way the cons, period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceageg

I am one of the few people on the forum who doesn't like this idea at all for several reasons. I admit that most of my reasons are purely5 opinion but I have yet to see anybody address the way this disrupt the already fragile war matching system and balance that exists in the game today. Allowing clans to hand pick only the best members of their clan (yes, this is how it WOULD be exploited) would cause you to loose more wars than missing a few attacks from absent members. I have posted about this in greater detail in many of the 1000 threads on this topic but nobody has ventured to answer it.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobtroll

A great idea for exploitation. I agree with iceageg it would be done just as he suggested. Everyone knows it too.

---

I too have answered this in several other similar threads. Like another poster states, this makes absolutely no sense. I see no exploitation as a 20v20 or 25v25 or whatever will be matched vs the same defensive level. It would not cause a loss of war. If a clan wants to do that? Great... knock yourself out. I do not care in the least. Ours would not.

FURTHER- the answer to this is booting them. This is the accepted and agreed upon method that is ridiculous but what we have. This amounts to the EXACT same thing as an opt-out option that you are stating is an exploitation. The whole argument is not only silly, but redundant. And actually, there is one other option that is also a logistical pain in the keister- split the clan and start a WAR clan and have a farming clan. Many have done this. So yet again, you have the SAME thing. Is that exploitation too?

And we too have several Active Military members in our clan. It blows to have to boot those guys (and one girl) as well as everyone else that needs to abstain for a war. There is no logical reason to not have this option. None that I have seen presented.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigDarrick

I too have answered this in several other similar threads. Like another poster states, this makes absolutely no sense. I see no exploitation as a 20v20 or 25v25 or whatever will be matched vs the same defensive level. It would not cause a loss of war. If a clan wants to do that? Great... knock yourself out. I do not care in the least. Ours would not.

FURTHER- the answer to this is booting them. This is the accepted and agreed upon method that is ridiculous but what we have. This amounts to the EXACT same thing as an opt-out option that you are stating is an exploitation. The whole argument is not only silly, but redundant. And actually, there is one other option that is also a logistical pain in the keister- split the clan and start a WAR clan and have a farming clan. Many have done this. So yet again, you have the SAME thing. Is that exploitation too?

And we too have several Active Military members in our clan. It blows to have to boot those guys (and one girl) as well as everyone else that needs to abstain for a war. There is no logical reason to not have this option. None that I have seen presented.

---

Amen! Thank you for your LOGICAL input.

For now why dont u have them drop trophies so they are the last person in the clan and make sure you have atleast one more extra. Ex. 20 v 20, get one extra recruit and make that one clanmate drop their trophies down to the least in the clan and they won't be in the war. Orrrr they can leave and come back?

Its a pretty good idea, but honestly i dont see a need. Many in my clan go on vaca for summer we make em drop their trophies (or just leave if they dont wanna drop) and if we cant find an extra person to fill their spot we boot em leavin em a message to come back.

Idk i can just see clans only useing their highest 20 members or whatever in war and the lower lvls being left out and complaining to nerf wars all together.

yes but this has been suggested so many times

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ayyyyyema

For now why dont u have them drop trophies so they are the last person in the clan and make sure you have atleast one more extra. Ex. 20 v 20, get one extra recruit and make that one clanmate drop their trophies down to the least in the clan and they won't be in the war. Orrrr they can leave and come back?

Its a pretty good idea, but honestly i dont see a need. Many in my clan go on vaca for summer we make em drop their trophies (or just leave if they dont wanna drop) and if we cant find an extra person to fill their spot we boot em leavin em a message to come back.

Idk i can just see clans only useing their highest 20 members or whatever in war and the lower lvls being left out and complaining to nerf wars all together.

---

I will try to be brief as I have answered this in numerous other threads. If I am in masters, I am not dropping to Silver to avoid a war. Thats silly and not a guarantee. Right now I have anywhere from 3-7 members out on vacation and I have to track it on a separate spread sheet. Its beyond stupid.

And I have two clans of 50. I am not taking on an additional new person just so I can replace a person that has been with me over a year because they are gone a week. Also beyond silly. All of these "solutions" are ♥♥♥♥ work arounds to a system that is broke. If I had an Opt in/out button..problem solved. No one leaves, no one has to lose their place, their donations, status, get replaced accidentally, feel like they are booted and not part of the clan, have to drop then raise trophies an insane amount etc....

I agree that this needs to be added. a vacation button for the member and also an option for the leader or co leader to turn on vacation mode for the member, leader or other co - leader. The only way a leader or co leader can turn on the vacation mode is if that person did not attack in the previous clan battle. That way the member still has control over their account.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigDarrick

I will try to be brief as I have answered this in numerous other threads. If I am in masters, I am not dropping to Silver to avoid a war. Thats silly and not a guarantee. Right now I have anywhere from 3-7 members out on vacation and I have to track it on a separate spread sheet. Its beyond stupid.

And I have two clans of 50. I am not taking on an additional new person just so I can replace a person that has been with me over a year because they are gone a week. Also beyond silly. All of these "solutions" are ♥♥♥♥ work arounds to a system that is broke. If I had an Opt in/out button..problem solved. No one leaves, no one has to lose their place, their donations, status, get replaced accidentally, feel like they are booted and not part of the clan, have to drop then raise trophies an insane amount etc....

---

Totally agreed. Good thoughts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ♥♥♥♥dave

I'm in the military and am in a military clan. To me, and many of my fellow clan members, it is very annoying that when one or more of our members is deployed or in the field, aka "without phone service", we cannot just leave them out of our clan wars. I think there should be a Clan War Control for the Clan Leader that basically would let them chose to take people out of future clan wars until they return. Otherwise your team is without those extra two, or more, attacks. This makes it very hard to win what should be a very balanced war. Thanks for reading!

---

We seriously need that option! i hate it, u need to ask everyone before starting the search and everyone who has no time needs to rejoin after the search...annoying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MachtNix

We seriously need that option! i hate it, u need to ask everyone before starting the search and everyone who has no time needs to rejoin after the search...annoying.

---

Thanks for your input! Everyone please rate this post 5 stars to give it some much needed attention!!

yea i agree about that a lot but i need to try to control my clan with the wars first then i will try to help you with the war part anyway i know two people in the army.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobtroll

A great idea for exploitation. I agree with iceageg it would be done just as he suggested. Everyone knows it too.

---

Not sure what you think everyone knows. Are you maybe confused how the game mechanics work is why you are thinking this is an exploit to gain advantage? If they opt guys out as you seem to be worried about they will place themselves at a disadvantage meaning they have a tougher challenge on their hands.

Unless you were saying that someone could 'exploit' this for the purpose of making war harder for themselves in which case I apologize and stand corrected. If that is the case I submit that I am not sure that guys seeking tougher wars are a bad thing.

LOL, I just realized that this thread that just appeared today was actually a very old one bumped up from the past. oops.

And rather an obvious solution to an ongoing problem. I came to post a solution, but seeing as this thread exists I thought I'd post here.

My solution is to add a new 'Warrior' tag that is applied like Elder or Co-leader. This would be set by the leaders effectively making your war team. Normal members would not partake in the wars, and would not be able to view war base details (bombs, teslas, cc). This would also solve the spy problem.

Reading through the thread above, a few people have claimed that this would be exploitable. However they have not backed this claim with any detail and would seem to be engaged in thoughtless fear mongering.

It would be a very simple code fix. I urge Supercell to implement this ASAP.

The only problem I see with this is if most of the people are there, but the Leader decides to engage in a 30 vs 30 or whatnot, and forces the other players who wish to participate to not participate, or they get kicked. I do agree that having inactive members IS an issue, and there would probably more inactive people than power hungry Clan Leaders, but still, the possibility remains, however small it may be...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnonymousSuggestions

The only problem I see with this is if most of the people are there, but the Leader decides to engage in a 30 vs 30 or whatnot, and forces the other players who wish to participate to not participate, or they get kicked.

---

Currently they just get kicked. Leaders already have absolute power. All this does is provide more options for the leader.

In my current clan we play 10v10 or 15v15 and everyone not in the war gets booted then re-invited after the war is initiated. This is clumsy and stupid, but currently the only option if you want to control who fights and who doesn't. If CoC was a football match, you'd expect the coach to be able to decide who sits on the bench.

This idea has been suggested many times, and I'm a big supporter of it (as my signature indicates).

I am agreeing again and again.... So I'm just going to copy paste.

From my thread (http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...pt-In-Out-Poll)
Reasons
The main reason is, as stated above, because people don't want to kick people and invite them just so they can opt outon war. While that is a solution, it has some consequences, including misunderstandings, drama (omg, you kicked me out so that I wouldn't be in war) and loss of donation statistics.

Some might argue that if one does not wish to participate in war, one must simply join a clan that does not participate in war. The reason this is not true for many people is that those who care about being able to opt out are more likely to be loyal members, or at least friends with many. Leaving as a group is not a solution either since the group of friends would still be split between warring and not warring. Splitting the group results in the splitting of friends, which lowers the amount of motivations to keep playing CoC. If sister/feeder clans been implemented, that would be a long workwaround that could still be flawed.

There is another reason that this is suggested, which is that players will still "have a life" outside of CoC. This includes vacations, examinations, business trips, blackouts (+and other force majuere disasters) in the residence of one player which doesn't affect the others physically etc.. Thus, some players would only opt out some times and return to war actively.

From http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...-option-button
"Originally Posted by SuperSteve[Supercell] In thread:http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...-option-button

Hey Guys,

We've talked A LOT about adding an opt-out feature in Clan Wars and it's not currently in the cards. At this point, we just haven't found the right solution that fits Clash how it should.

We always try to avoid unnecessary complexity in our feature design and strive for features that work consistently and simply for all players. Some players would be thrilled with an opt-out system, but others would prefer things like opt-in, leader-chooses, variable team sizes, or other solutions. Also, letting players pick-and-choose what components of their clan experience they participate in is not a design philosophy we support. When you're in a clan, you should all be in it together! Even further, implementing a system that can enable undue pressure on players ("Opt out or we'll kick you" or "Give me Crab Claws or you can't come to war with us") falls far short of this mark.

That being said, we're in favor of adding more control and meaningful direction to Clan Wars. When we look into the next batch of Clan Wars features, that will be the time to reconsider things like opt-out systems, and possibly come up with better solutions that encourage everyone in their Clan to stick together and participate no matter what. We'll see what happens!

We'll keep tabs on any feedback and ideas you guys come up with for future Clan Wars improvements. Keep the feedback coming.

Cheers,

Steve

----------------
from the same thread as above
From my experience in CoC (not just me, but also my clanmates), I'm going to added to the list [of stuff that people have given to say why the don't want it but need it] at the end of the post.

"They spoke of fractured clans, lost members", lost friends, stress that may have led to GPA loss (hence less chance for college and all that nonsense), lots of drama, rebellions within clans, inter-clan drama/rivalry and family problems of all sorts including, but not limited to, parent/child and siblings.

Now I can add to that list about "disunited on battlefield", if you are ok with that.

My clan is also a military clan that has members that sometimes are unavailable at times. If the clan leader was able to delegate members that are unavailable while they are in the field or other training exercises that would make the clan war more of a fair battle.:)

According to the amount of opt out threads for clan war, this feature or some version of it will probably be added soon.