Vacation Setting

I have discussed this with my clan and everyone seemed to think it is a great idea.

We win our wars through participation, we might not be the strongest at times but we get in all of our attacks. We all know each other in real life and that is our stipulation to get into our clan. We have recently lost wars because people have been on vacation and hence this is where this idea stemmed from as we try and go to war twice a week.

In the settings section, there should be an "on vacation" box. If selected, then that member is not counted towards going to war and the next person is included. For example, if you have 24 members in your clan and 3 people have the vacation box checked, then members 21, 22 & 23 are included.

I believe this is a pretty simple feature and could get more people involved.

This is a good solution tbh my clan is a b2b war clan. and we solved the issue ourselfs.

We have two clans.

TENEBRA'S WATCH (Active b2b warring)

TENEBRA'S CHILL (war free zone, When upgrading spell factory/Royals/Vacations/School etc etc.)

What's the point of calling this a vacation setting?

This is a simple opt in/out feature.

A feature Supercell has stated multiple time they are not interested in implementing anytime soon.

It's called Clan Wars not Some of the Clan Wars.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxionXD

What's the point of calling this a vacation setting?

This is a simple opt in/out feature.

A feature Supercell has stated multiple time they are not interested in implementing anytime soon.

It's called Clan Wars not Some of the Clan Wars.....

---

But its a fact that nearly every clan has that problem and solves it with clan "copies": "war clans" and "idle/vacation clans". that often causes problems with memberships and recruitment. so why not solving that issue with an opt in/out feature?
I'd like that feature and i guess a lot of other players too. i'd even go further and would like to see a feature, so that the clanleader can decide which members can participate. we often have a problem with new members, leaving hours after the clan war being started.

looking forward to read some more opinions!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaysusw

But its a fact that nearly every clan has that problem and solves it with clan "copies": "war clans" and "idle/vacation clans". that often causes problems with memberships and recruitment. so why not solving that issue with an opt in/out feature?
I'd like that feature and i guess a lot of other players too. i'd even go further and would like to see a feature, so that the clanleader can decide which members can participate. we often have a problem with new members, leaving hours after the clan war being started.

looking forward to read some more opinions!

---

You can find all of the arguments for and against an opt-out feature with a brief search. There is a link in my sig to the thread that SC responded to. The fact is that some clans are already using the leave/boot then rejoin tactic to ♥♥♥♥♥ the war match making system. Making it easier for them to accomplish this will simply make that problem worse and more widespread. I can see maybe allowing 1 opt out spot for every 10 clan members because there are times when the 8 total minutes invested in war attacks is not possible (deployed, hospitalized, cruise, vacation to a 3rd world country, etc.) but that is not the case for most people so just a few will be adequate to accommodate the truly disconnected.

SC did not 100% rule out the possibility of a future opt-out system but they were clear that they considered it better to find a solution that encouraged the entire clan to participate. They are well aware of how badly this is wanted and we can safely assume they have taken into consideration the very real concerns of the anti-opt in crowd. Their concern is (and should be) the health of the game as a whole instead of the happiness of individual clans or players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Untamei7

This is a good solution tbh my clan is a b2b war clan. and we solved the issue ourselfs.

We have two clans.

TENEBRA'S WATCH (Active b2b warring)

TENEBRA'S CHILL (war free zone, When upgrading spell factory/Royals/Vacations/School etc etc.)

---

Thanks Untamei7! We may try this until SC decides one way or the other. How do you get around the leader situation of the "Chill" clan?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxionXD

What's the point of calling this a vacation setting?

This is a simple opt in/out feature.

A feature Supercell has stated multiple time they are not interested in implementing anytime soon.

It's called Clan Wars not Some of the Clan Wars.....

---

Exactly AxionXD and everyone in our Clan likes to go to war. But, for some of us, we get away and go on vacation and when that happens it hurts the clan in wars. This next week we have 25% of our clan on vacation. I know when I am away, COC is not my priority. So yes, I called it a vacation setting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaysusw

But its a fact that nearly every clan has that problem and solves it with clan "copies": "war clans" and "idle/vacation clans". that often causes problems with memberships and recruitment. so why not solving that issue with an opt in/out feature?
I'd like that feature and i guess a lot of other players too. i'd even go further and would like to see a feature, so that the clanleader can decide which members can participate. we often have a problem with new members, leaving hours after the clan war being started.

looking forward to read some more opinions!

---

We are one of those clans that did the War and Farming Clans.

As the above poster stated, they haven't "ruled it out" but they have said that they do not plan on making this feature anytime soon.

If you can't get everyone on board to war, then you don't go to war. If the leaders force the issue without coordinating with his members, you are destined to lose. In war, you don't get to pick who goes to to fight. You are part of the clan and you will carry your weight and the weight of others if necessary. If someone doesn't carry their weight, they do not belong in your clan. If you do not want to get rid of them, then you have to weight between a loyal group of members or frequent wars.

What's more important to you?

Having two different clans, one for war the other for farming, is perfect. Only those that will use both attacks go to one, if you need a rest you go to the other. It's been working perfectly for us and we've actually grown well in both clans. We try to keep the war clan under 35 people, which means if you only use one attack you are on the chopping block. 25 is actual ideal in my opinion, but we can and have gone up to 35...

Our farming clan fluctuates upwards of 35-45 people depending on if more are warring or not.

We have a dedicated 20 or so that stay in our warring clan practically permanently. We do not rest, war starts as soon as the last one ended.

It's been working perfectly fine. You are either a war clan or you are not. There is no room for inbetweeners. Those that try to be inbetweeners ends up being Loot Feasts for those of us that are dedicated war clans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxionXD

What's the point of calling this a vacation setting?

This is a simple opt in/out feature.

A feature Supercell has stated multiple time they are not interested in implementing anytime soon.

It's called Clan Wars not Some of the Clan Wars.....

---

i agree with this point..

however it could be a good idea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shooter80

Exactly AxionXD and everyone in our Clan likes to go to war. But, for some of us, we get away and go on vacation and when that happens it hurts the clan in wars. This next week we have 25% of our clan on vacation. I know when I am away, COC is not my priority. So yes, I called it a vacation setting.

---

Other clans have the exact same problem. It is self balancing/self canceling.

I like this idea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaysusw

But its a fact that nearly every clan has that problem and solves it with clan "copies": "war clans" and "idle/vacation clans". that often causes problems with memberships and recruitment. so why not solving that issue with an opt in/out feature?
I'd like that feature and i guess a lot of other players too. i'd even go further and would like to see a feature, so that the clanleader can decide which members can participate. we often have a problem with new members, leaving hours after the clan war being started.

looking forward to read some more opinions!

---

I agree with Jay. Clan wars, not some clan wars. Why not just set up a feeder Clan? Too easy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxionXD

. . . You are either a war clan or you are not. There is no room for inbetweeners. . .

---

Yes there most certainly is!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxionXD

. . . Those that try to be inbetweeners ends up being Loot Feasts for those of us that are dedicated war clans.

---

See, you proved yourself wrong. Like the giant billboard outside of one of the small Wyoming towns I drove through said, "There is room for all of god's creatures, right next to the potatoes and gravy."

Ignoring the matchup/balancing exploit issues that an opt-out button creates this is the basic philosophical problem. SC is under no obligation to (and many would argue should not) provide a way to artificially power up weaker clans who are not dedicated to winning so that they can be on an even playing field with clans who are organized and dedicated to winning. If clans can hand pick which players they send to war they should change the name to "mercenary battle" or "special forces skirmish". Anything except Clan War . . . because it no longer has anything to do with the clan. Besides, from a game design standpoint what is wrong with having ONE feature that is for everybody while the rest is completely free flow?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceageg

If clans can hand pick which players they send to war they should change the name to "mercenary battle" or "special forces skirmish". Anything except Clan War . . . because it no longer has anything to do with the clan.

---

I agree. My recommendation is only for the player to choose to select vacation. Not the clan leader. Therefore, a leader can either boot them or let them fight if they arent up to a "clan standard".

Another angle for SC to look at is that I think this option would broaden the audience to the more "non-gamer" type. Our entire clan is made up of people you would never guess like this game. A lot of people feel obliged that if they sign up for something, they participate and may not sign up if they feel like they dont have the time. If they have the choice to "go on vacation" when they dont have time for the game but come back after and still have their clan and can fully participate - I only see this as a positive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shooter80

I agree. My recommendation is only for the player to choose to select vacation. Not the clan leader. Therefore, a leader can either boot them or let them fight if they arent up to a "clan standard".

Another angle for SC to look at is that I think this option would broaden the audience to the more "non-gamer" type. Our entire clan is made up of people you would never guess like this game. A lot of people feel obliged that if they sign up for something, they participate and may not sign up if they feel like they dont have the time. If they have the choice to "go on vacation" when they dont have time for the game but come back after and still have their clan and can fully participate - I only see this as a positive.

---

I understand. Truly I do. I choose to run a "family" style clan. While it does hurt us in wars we still have been able to maintain about a 70% win record even with whole families missing on vacation together. I just don't think it would be right for my "clan" to appear artificially stronger because we kicked out (or hand picked) members. We win together, we loose together and sometimes we get to feast together . . . because Clan. Every other facet of the game is individual except donating troops and we have the same color shield on our castle. Lets keep this one in tact so it represents the group.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AxionXD

We are one of those clans that did the War and Farming Clans.

As the above poster stated, they haven't "ruled it out" but they have said that they do not plan on making this feature anytime soon.

If you can't get everyone on board to war, then you don't go to war. If the leaders force the issue without coordinating with his members, you are destined to lose. In war, you don't get to pick who goes to to fight. You are part of the clan and you will carry your weight and the weight of others if necessary. If someone doesn't carry their weight, they do not belong in your clan. If you do not want to get rid of them, then you have to weight between a loyal group of members or frequent wars.

What's more important to you?

Having two different clans, one for war the other for farming, is perfect. Only those that will use both attacks go to one, if you need a rest you go to the other. It's been working perfectly for us and we've actually grown well in both clans. We try to keep the war clan under 35 people, which means if you only use one attack you are on the chopping block. 25 is actual ideal in my opinion, but we can and have gone up to 35...

Our farming clan fluctuates upwards of 35-45 people depending on if more are warring or not.

We have a dedicated 20 or so that stay in our warring clan practically permanently. We do not rest, war starts as soon as the last one ended.

It's been working perfectly fine. You are either a war clan or you are not. There is no room for inbetweeners. Those that try to be inbetweeners ends up being Loot Feasts for those of us that are dedicated war clans.

---

Actually there are inbetweeners who do quite well fatming & doing Wars in the same clan.They Do so with once a week wars.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iceageg

I understand. Truly I do. I choose to run a "family" style clan. While it does hurt us in wars we still have been able to maintain about a 70% win record even with whole families missing on vacation together. I just don't think it would be right for my "clan" to appear artificially stronger because we kicked out (or hand picked) members. We win together, we loose together and sometimes we get to feast together . . . because Clan. Every other facet of the game is individual except donating troops and we have the same color shield on our castle. Lets keep this one in tact so it represents the group.

---

Yeah, we do the same in regards to wins. We're not researchers by any means, I had heard you could make suggestions so I looked into it and made the post as leader of our clan. We already now have our "vacation" clan created but find it a bit meh, We'd still like to see something like this implemented.

It would be really nice if any variation of this were implemented. Its frustrating when you have to carry a couple clan mates that decided not to mention that they can't attack. It would also help pin point who are actually active/inactive as it gets hard to monitor 40+ other players.

I completely support this idea. It has been suggested a lot and supercell has made a reply.

Quote:

---

"Originally Posted by SuperSteve[Supercell]
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

---