Clan war whitelist option (Opt In/Out of War)

[ClashySquill]

i voted no, because an opt out wouldn't represent your whole clan in war, just the good warring ones

[UberJray]

I and others have explained it many times including this thread. 13 pages to sort through but the information is there.

Just a lot of negativity from the minority not in favor of change? A lot of it based on what I perceive to be a lack of understanding of how war match ups work.

The poll speaks volumes.

[iceageg]

Just a lot of negativity from the minority not in favor of change? A lot of it based on what I perceive to be a lack of understanding of how war match ups work.

The poll speaks volumes.

If that's all you saw then you should keep reading. The fact that SC knows how badly so many people want this but are unwilling to even speak on the topic speaks volumes about the potential impact of the negatives.

[MrGemini]

I fully support this idea. Great one!

[UberJray]

If that's all you saw then you should keep reading. The fact that SC knows how badly so many people want this but are unwilling to even speak on the topic speaks volumes about the potential impact of the negatives.

Poor assumption on your behalf, I would suggest.

[iceageg]

Poor assumption on your behalf, I would suggest.

Why? Because you don't like it? If opt-out could easily be determined to have no negative impact I SC probably would have said something by now or at least added it to the list of items in consideration. It is the most popular request these days except for "I want to share resources" and "I want to double up builders on a single building". The fact that SC has remained closed lipped on this topic implies that they see a problem. Call it an assumption if you like, but assuming they are hiding their intention to please the masses seems like a worse assumption.

Our frustration from both sides of the discussion is that we don't have any indication of whether they intend to overcome the problem(s) or if they prefer to stick to the literal definition of "Clan War" meaning the whole clan and avoid the problem(s) all together.

[rwelshjr]

This link goes a thread that is another similar poll in the Clan Wars forum.

http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...-for-Clan-wars

I will post also the suggestion in there regarding how it should work exactly. Several have since commented that this should have gone into this ideas forum instead of being added to that thread.

How it should work...

There should be a button (it can be a new one or the war shield can be modified) that toggles a player as in or out.

Access to hit the button to toggle should go to the leader and the player in question.
---- individual players cannot opt each other in or out
---- its an argument either way to give it to co as well - Good for clans where co is a management job, bad for clans that give it out like candy. (I consider the latter to be a sign of a bad leader)
---- A leader who abuses authority to opt guys in against their wishes are really just hurting their own selves for how they are adding a risk to their war participation. (the guy might then just not attack anyhow, if not seeing eye to eye with leader he wont care)
---- A leader opting a guy out against his wishes has that prerogative to decide who he wants in his war. And its still nicer than just kicking the guy like happens now.

The status of a player is only a factor right at the time a war starts. Instead of just selecting all eligible players from the total population it will just be all eligible players from the opted in group.
---- Can even implement by leveraging the existing eligibility functionality that currently is only driven by a timer.

After that everything works the same. The list of warriors from the clan is rounded to an even 5 via the existing logic and then the matchmaking calculation takes place also using the existing logic.

A player joins a clan with his eligibility set the same way it is today. (He is in unless there is a timer)


Things that would not happen -
...A player cannot add themselves to a war after the fact. If they change their status during a war it makes no difference until the next war when that status is read at startup.
...This would not serve as a way to replace members that take off during war. if they do that then there is the same affect on the war as there is today. Unused attacks stay unused. (it will never change that this just stinks when guys pull that stunt)

[Calim0euf]

+1000 yes for me !

sometimes I am not ready for war because of long upgrades or out of elixir.

[UberJray]

this link goes a thread that is another similar poll in the clan wars forum.

http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...-for-clan-wars

i will post also the suggestion in there regarding how it should work exactly. Several have since commented that this should have gone into this ideas forum instead of being added to that thread.

how it should work...

there should be a button (it can be a new one or the war shield can be modified) that toggles a player as in or out.

access to hit the button to toggle should go to the leader and the player in question.
---- individual players cannot opt each other in or out
---- its an argument either way to give it to co as well - good for clans where co is a management job, bad for clans that give it out like candy. (i consider the latter to be a sign of a bad leader)
---- a leader who abuses authority to opt guys in against their wishes are really just hurting their own selves for how they are adding a risk to their war participation. (the guy might then just not attack anyhow, if not seeing eye to eye with leader he wont care)
---- a leader opting a guy out against his wishes has that prerogative to decide who he wants in his war. And its still nicer than just kicking the guy like happens now.

the status of a player is only a factor right at the time a war starts. Instead of just selecting all eligible players from the total population it will just be all eligible players from the opted in group.
---- can even implement by leveraging the existing eligibility functionality that currently is only driven by a timer.

After that everything works the same. The list of warriors from the clan is rounded to an even 5 via the existing logic and then the matchmaking calculation takes place also using the existing logic.

A player joins a clan with his eligibility set the same way it is today. (he is in unless there is a timer)


things that would not happen -
...a player cannot add themselves to a war after the fact. If they change their status during a war it makes no difference until the next war when that status is read at startup.
...this would not serve as a way to replace members that take off during war. If they do that then there is the same affect on the war as there is today. Unused attacks stay unused. (it will never change that this just stinks when guys pull that stunt)

brilliant!

[Darwyn]

Why? Because you don't like it? If opt-out could easily be determined to have no negative impact I SC probably would have said something by now or at least added it to the list of items in consideration. It is the most popular request these days except for "I want to share resources" and "I want to double up builders on a single building". The fact that SC has remained closed lipped on this topic implies that they see a problem. Call it an assumption if you like, but assuming they are hiding their intention to please the masses seems like a worse assumption.

Our frustration from both sides of the discussion is that we don't have any indication of whether they intend to overcome the problem(s) or if they prefer to stick to the literal definition of "Clan War" meaning the whole clan and avoid the problem(s) all together.

I posted back on page 9 (my original post) on this thread that would address any negative concerns. If implemented similar to the suggestion (note: someone mentioned a separate "war clan castle" for attacking that would work too) then there would be no draw backs at all to this. Also today we already keep bottom 4 spots as low trophy opt out spots and we routinely kick/invite members like many other clans do. So any of your "negative" impact concerns already exist today in the game and are already exploited in the game today.

A side effect of a "full" white list, we would be warring more often for our clan. 1 war a week would be for "lowest" 10 members, 1 war a week for "highest" 10 members and 1 war a week for entire clan. Why? Because it would be fun to mix it up and try different things out.

Conclusion: If SuperCell actually listens to the community they will implement some sort of whitelist, or opt in/out functionality. I should say in the past SuperCell has been good about listening and/or at least responding to posted ideas/features. It is odd they've been so quite about this one. I've had real life friends and family already quit over clan wars, they want to be in our clan but they don't want to war and leaving/rejoining becomes a hassle for them, I think this is sad side effect of how clan wars exists today.