Clan war solution

[Tollboothwillie]

My clan is dead so the best I can do is run a 5v5. So my argument works in my case.

I can't because I'm in a dead clan and I do solo wars.

I can only war on weekends so I'm fine with my dead clan

This now explains so much about all of your idea threads.

[Ajax]

Yh i think this feature could be that final 5 minutes of the war, if the bottom base has not been attacked, anyone can attack it. Is that any better?

Not even slightly. If it applied ONLY for the first 5 minutes of the war that might be a bit better, but still not really of any benefit to the game.

I never said they dictate, I used 'encourage'. How does my idea destroy the game for everyone else? I'm actually saving people by not getting dipped by the th13s without being attacked by someone they have more of a chance against first.

You aren't "saving" anybody, all you are dong is restricting the choices of a clan, for no reason.

And you are still entirely wrong even to say "encourage". I defy to to find a single post by Supercell that suggests they would prefer players to max out bases. Or that in any way encourages people to do so.

Well at least they get to attack the bottom base with this new idea. I mean why do people like th13s dipping on bottom bases not given a chance to defend? The first attack should always be of the same town hall level and the next one should be a dip if there are any fails. This should be a forced system. The problem is that everyone has the same opinion so everyone thinks exactly the same. Or maybe I'm just in the wrong threads.

The "problem" is that you think there is an issue in the first place. NOBODY else who has posted accepts that first premise.

What difference does it make to anybody in war whether their base is tripled by the first attack or the second?

It makes a difference to the attacking clan of course, in that it severely limits what use they can make of the player who can't triple his oppo. And it means that their high players who have to take their attacks early have no choice.

You then compound that by suggesting they do something which Supercell have always been incredibly reluctant to do, namely by forcing players to pay a certain way. And which almost everybody in a mixed town hall clan will strongly dislike.

Well my idea is so that the low town hall levels attack the low town hall levels first and they have one attack left. Then the higher town hall levels dip. Then the lower town hall levels do the scouts. Then the higher town hall levels finish off the higher town hall levels. My plan does not limit your strategic option. It just makes it harder to pull off. I like a bit of challenge.

If you think this "Plan" doesn't severely limit the strategic options for the clan, then you have no idea about strategic options.

All this idea does is cause the clan to waste potentially useful attacks, just so some low level players can have the "satisfaction" of seeing their base stand up to a first attack.

[Ajax]

Yes actually this is an idea but I thought if I mentioned it people would complain because it would be almost impossible to get perfect wars especially if there is a mismatch. What if the weakest available player in one clan is a th4 while the weakest one in another clan is a th4. This would make it impossible to get the perfect war. However forcing people to attack their own level or above makes people play more strategically.

Most people don't want perfect wars.

There was a large thread just recently where elite players were complaining that perfect wars are too common. For most of us they aren't common, and that is as it should be.

The idea of single attack wars (as an option) is infinitely better than the idea you have actually put forward, and I am sure would actually get some support here.

Many would still prefer the standard format, so it should be an option when searching rather than compulsory, but many would also prefer single attack format.

[Ajax]

I'm not killing clan strategies because the second attack they can strategize

you are taking away half their choices. Which is of course killing strategy. Or at least very severely wounding it.

whilst the first attack they have to attack someone of their town hall level or above which makes the game MUCH more fun and fair.

It does neither, for most people.

Taking away the choice makes it much less fun. And taking away the ability to properly strategize doesn't make it more fair.

[2222]

Personally, I hope the enemy starts by having their top bases dip down. That is not the optimal strategy and I definitely wouldn't want SC to force the enemy to use a better strategy.

[Piper139]

Personally, I hope the enemy starts by having their top bases dip down. That is not the optimal strategy and I definitely wouldn't want SC to force the enemy to use a better strategy.

If one of our top 13s dipped on the bottom early, they wouldn't get their second attack. I can't see it being common anywhere outside the ops focus on 5v5 with extreme roster spread.

[Def4ultpl4y3r]

If one of our top 13s dipped on the bottom early, they wouldn't get their second attack. I can't see it being common anywhere outside the ops focus on 5v5 with extreme roster spread.

I'm just talking about 1 example but I want the lower town hall levels to have a chance to defend in war by being forced to be attacked by someone closest to their level that war.

[Def4ultpl4y3r]

you are taking away half their choices. Which is of course killing strategy. Or at least very severely wounding it.



It does neither, for most people.

Taking away the choice makes it much less fun. And taking away the ability to properly strategize doesn't make it more fair.

Well by fair I mean EVERYONE has a chance to defend. By fun I mean the low town hall levels will feel happy that the base they spent hours making worked for once. It doesn't wound their strategy because they are forced to fight their own town hall levels first so that is fair and fun since you get someone of your town hall level so it is a bit of a challenge and your level. The second attack they can do whatever they want so long as the lower town halls failed on their respective bases. I mean this should be an option so people who don't want this mode don't have to do it but I can see many people agreeing to this mode which can be fun. How do you know this is a terrible idea without putting it into practise?

[Ajax]

Well by fair I mean EVERYONE has a chance to defend.

There is NO BENEFIT for the clan at all to this. None.

By fun I mean the low town hall levels will feel happy that the base they spent hours making worked for once.

So the ONLY "benefit" is to salve the pride of lower level Town Halls. And for that you will wreck clan wars for many, and significantly reduce the options for most.

It doesn't wound their strategy because they are forced to fight their own town hall levels first

Utterly false. If you believe that removing half your choice doesn't wound strategy then strategy is something you only have avery hazy notion of .

so that is fair and fun since you get someone of your town hall level so it is a bit of a challenge and your level. The second attack they can do whatever they want so long as the lower town halls failed on their respective bases. I mean this should be an option so people who don't want this mode don't have to do it

It IS an option. Just tell the people in your clan to do that - in fact you are the only one warring in your clan, so just tell yourself.

Don't expect your opponents to follow the same restrictions though.

but I can see many people agreeing to this mode which can be fun. How do you know this is a terrible idea without putting it into practise?

I can't. Have you seen one single person coming close to even suggesting it could possibly be reasonable?

And we know it is a terrible idea because there is major downside that we can all see (apart from you it seems), with no visible upside.

[Ajax]

its not a terrible idea , its just a blunder , what's so wrong if someone dips? does it cause bugs ? no . does it lower the chance of defending ? no , another person will attack that TH 11 the same , so we don't need this feature , its basically promoting perma-maxing as then people cannot dip and discouraging rushing as people will have to attack people at their TH

Thinking about it, that is probably the real reason behind his suggestion. He seems to be a perma-maxer, and he wants help from SC. Just about all of his suggestions in this and previous threads have been designed to help lower level Town Halls in ways that will encourage perma-maxing.