Results 1 to 9 of 9

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Clan Wars - Ending Early

  1. #1

    Clan Wars - Ending Early

    (note: I did see a suggestion similar to this, but not how I was thinking)

    So in small clans that have, say, 5-10 members it's relatively easy for them to go through all of their attacks quickly. If both teams were to use all of their attacks (whether it be 10, 20, etc..), they would be left with lots of downtime. So, that leads me to my suggestion, which I have a few variations of that could be decided upon by the developer team/whomever.

    1.
    If both teams have used all of their attacks, the winning team (by percent or stars) would have the option to end the war early
    --
    I think this would generally be the best version of this as it would speed up the process for the last few hours of the war for those who are able to get through all of their attacks.

    2. The war has to last at least 16 hours, but after that time period, if all of the attacks have been used and there is a team that has won, the winning team can end the war early.
    -- This would be my next best option, as it would guarantee that both teams would have to stay in the war for at least 16 hours. It is similar to the idea above, with the main difference being the restraint of having to spend at least 16 hours in war.

    3. If both teams have used all of their attacks and there is a clear winner, there will be a pop-up for the leader/co-leader of the clans in their Clan War area that both have to click 'yes' to
    -- With this idea, after both teams have used all of their attacks, a new pop-up would appear when a co-leader or leader entered into the Clan War section, with the option to 'End War Early: Yes / No." In order for the war to end early though, both teams would have to agree and say yes to that option.

    I understand that there was a 24 hour period for preparation and war day put in, and that this would effect the war timer, but I believe that it would be a change that could be possible. I also do understand that this could be abused in a way that would encourage or lead to farming from wars, and I'm not exactly how a work around this could be set, but an idea I had would be a set maximum amount of wars per week.

    Recap: The general idea from this suggestion would be for that, if both teams used all of their attacks before the end of the war, there would be an option for either A. the winning team to end the war or B. both teams agreeing to end the war early.


    I'm always open to suggestions/feedback/criticisms, so please post constructive comments that could be taken into consideration.


    EDIT ONE: One thing about this would be to allow for them to end the war, but not let them start a war until the past war would have ended (per HonoraryGoblin). This way they can get the loot for upgrades and such without having to wait, but per Ajax, this should resolve progression issues.
    Last edited by TyrantTghn; June 20th, 2019 at 12:56 AM.

  2.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #2
    Supercell are unlikely to have any interest in implementing any of these, because they will take away the thing you are complaining about.

    You are complaining that clans can be "left with lots of downtime.".

    Supercell do not want clans able to run more frequent wars, because that messes up all the progression rates, among other issues.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grill View Post
    But when something like an update is to be expected all stupid breaks loose and it just becomes an idiot storm of catastrophic proportion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Maverick View Post
    Any more balance to th10 will make th10 broken...
    My stats (main account)

  3. #3
    the only reason i can support ending wars early is so the clans could get loot sooner and start upgrades

    the player and clan cool downs would have to remain

    the 800 lb gorilla is that all attacks have to be finished. i can't recall the last time both clans used all their attacks in a war in which I was a participant

    even so the losing clan would likely refuse as a way to stick it to the winner

  4. #4
    Super Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    USA Pennsylvania
    Posts
    805
    Quote Originally Posted by HonoraryGoblin View Post
    the only reason i can support ending wars early is so the clans could get loot sooner and start upgrades

    the player and clan cool downs would have to remain

    the 800 lb gorilla is that all attacks have to be finished. i can't recall the last time both clans used all their attacks in a war in which I was a participant

    even so the losing clan would likely refuse as a way to stick it to the winner
    This is very plausible. I seen this suggestion before and reasons not to do it were virtually the same as you just gave here. Its rare all attacks are used. And the loser most assuredly would make the winner wait anyway.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by HonoraryGoblin View Post
    the only reason i can support ending wars early is so the clans could get loot sooner and start upgrades

    the player and clan cool downs would have to remain

    the 800 lb gorilla is that all attacks have to be finished. i can't recall the last time both clans used all their attacks in a war in which I was a participant

    even so the losing clan would likely refuse as a way to stick it to the winner
    Your first sentence was the main point of this, I probably should have specified that. But yes, the idea behind it is to make it so players can get their loot sooner to start their upgrades. I 100% agree with leaving the cool down.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by bobkoch1984 View Post
    This is very plausible. I seen this suggestion before and reasons not to do it were virtually the same as you just gave here. Its rare all attacks are used. And the loser most assuredly would make the winner wait anyway.
    I'm in my own clan where each war all attacks are used. While I do understand it's rare, it does occur.

    To your point about the losers, in reference to the other post, that's why I provided multiple options for this idea.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajax View Post
    Supercell are unlikely to have any interest in implementing any of these, because they will take away the thing you are complaining about.

    You are complaining that clans can be "left with lots of downtime.".

    Supercell do not want clans able to run more frequent wars, because that messes up all the progression rates, among other issues.
    Not complaining, just suggesting (sorry if that sounds rude, not my intent)

    But in response to the progression rates issue, if they were to allow you to end the war sooner, you would be able to gain the loot bonus then for upgrades, but they could still keep the timer cool down, so you would have to wait until the end of the true war. It would just be a way for the players to get their loot then for upgrades. But I do get what you're saying about that.

  8.   This is the last staff post in this thread.   #8
    Quote Originally Posted by TyrantTghn View Post
    Not complaining, just suggesting (sorry if that sounds rude, not my intent)

    But in response to the progression rates issue, if they were to allow you to end the war sooner, you would be able to gain the loot bonus then for upgrades, but they could still keep the timer cool down, so you would have to wait until the end of the true war. It would just be a way for the players to get their loot then for upgrades. But I do get what you're saying about that.
    Yes, if you couldn't start the next war until that one would have finished, I don't see a issue with it. Whether SC will agree is another question though.

    And it would probably be significant coding for quite limited benefit.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grill View Post
    But when something like an update is to be expected all stupid breaks loose and it just becomes an idiot storm of catastrophic proportion.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lady Maverick View Post
    Any more balance to th10 will make th10 broken...
    My stats (main account)

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Ajax View Post
    Yes, if you couldn't start the next war until that one would have finished, I don't see a issue with it. Whether SC will agree is another question though.

    And it would probably be significant coding for quite limited benefit.
    I fully agree that there may only be limited benefit for those wars where both teams finish all attacks (which is generally uncommon), so thank you for the input!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •