3rd War Opt Flag Option

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EverettReef

And they were right. They are adding lots of stuff that is not really needed. Tends to happen with games. Doesn't make them any better.

---

Supercell has been for the past year or so had some "gameplay improvement" updates, in which I mean not necessarily new content like Clan Wars, New defenses (#leafblower), or new troops/spells/etc. which has been added. By "gameplay improvement" I mean things like rearm all traps at the town hall, quickly swipe between barracks at the bottom, see if your army is ready on one screen, cloud chat, visual improvements, etc. Things that do not make a major affect on how the game is played like a new troop or clan XP does, rather, it makes it simpler to play. And in games, sometimes the little things go a long way.

Agreed OP.

I do like the idea. I put my profile on opt-out when I don't feel like warring but would be okay enough to join if they are a man short for war and this gives chance for the co/lead to know which they would pull out for wars

What SC should do is make your base unavailable if your flag is set for red.

I hate when my potato leader thinks she can just put me in war even tho my flag is set for red, and then she complains when i refuse to attack ♥♥♥♥.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EverettReef

And they were right. They are adding lots of stuff that is not really needed. Tends to happen with games. Doesn't make them any better.

---

Not every clan is full of hardcore clashers. Some people play this game casually.

+1 for the idea

I like the idea. Personally, I'm always in and only out when upgrading heroes so it wouldn't affect me much, but the casual players would certainly like this. I know we've always been 2 or 3 short and it's tough deciding if we're going to put 1 in or 4 out!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AIhunter

What SC should do is make your base unavailable if your flag is set for red.

I hate when my potato leader thinks she can just put me in war even tho my flag is set for red, and then she complains when i refuse to attack ♥♥♥♥.

---

Some leaders quite reasonably put in a low-level player or two so that more people can be in a war, fully expecting that the "draftee" will not attack (obviously, you only do this with low-level people so there isn't a problem replacing their attacks). Sounds like you have a leader problem that is best fixed by talking with your leader, not by changing the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EverettReef

And they were right. They are adding lots of stuff that is not really needed. Tends to happen with games. Doesn't make them any better.

---

No, they weren't right, as it turns out (I was also of the opinion it wasn't necessary). Having the option of not taking people to war without having to kick them out makes life much easier for members and leaders, with no downside. Members can easily modulate their war duty cycle, war callers have a convenient display of who is expected to be available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Radiating

Wrong subforum. Posts like this should be made at Ideas and Feature Requests.

Now, as for the idea itself...it'd be a bit hard to code, but yeah I like it. Maybe a yellow thumbnail?

Edit: You can move it by reporting it and requesting it to be moved, I have done so already for you.

---

The way I'm thinking about it wouldn't be hard at all to code. They don't need the game to decide to put them in if needed, but rather have it just be text. So say the leader is starting a war, need some people and they see the players with the "In/Out" tag, they can just opt them in.

So I guess what I'm saying it could be is the exact same code as the opt out, but displays "Im in/out" instead of "I'm out"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EverettReef

And they were right. They are adding lots of stuff that is not really needed. Tends to happen with games. Doesn't make them any better.

---

They weren't anywhere near approaching right.

Previously the only way to not be in a war was to get your trophy count down to be in the bottom few (and have a clan size not exactly divisible by 5), or to leave the clan.

I agree that a third choice isn't really necessary (we manage to work this regularly without it), but it won't harm anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EverettReef

Good gawd, just have some clan leadership to solve a non-issue.

---

Cost/benefit.

The cost is very small as this would be something that can be added rather easily.

The benefit is actually pretty sizeable. Is it a major issue? No, but now the leaders wouldn't have to have everyone that opts out post in the clan chat when they opt and and say if they can be available if called upon or stalk players' bases to see who is upgrading heroes, or send out clan mail and hope people respond. So as much of a non-issue as it might be, the benefit seems to outweigh the cost of doing it.