Toggle players on/off for Clan wars

[Trellish]

Seriously? I'd like to hear the counterarguments to allowing people to opt in/opt out of wars. And ruled out? No it isnt, I checked the sticky again, and it isnt ruled out in there. Stop lying blatently/talking out of your ***

Wow... toxic much? I too have now read the mod posting that said that it's not ruled out... just that the forum was over-reacting to the statements that they had no plans to work on the ideas. I am among those who had believed all the postings saying it had been ruled out. You need to learn to discern between someone who has read erroneous information and someone who is "lying blatently" Truly a typical internet hysterical response of the type that makes me sad.


The counter arguments are many, but unfortunately some of the effects are subtle and thus are being overlooked. To provide the simplest and most obvious few, just think through what happens if opt out is enabled... don't just focus on the immediate convenience factor, but think through the next steps.


1. Opt out will reduce the number of people participating in wars. This will then impact the availability of targets at high membership levels. Remember, to get a fair matchup between clans, there need to be a large sampling of targets available to meet different clan requirements. Opt out, will inevitably reduce the number of available targets for 50v50, 45v45, and possibly even 40v40 matchups. The reduction in people will inevitably skew the distribution of available search targets to smaller membership levels, thus impacting the odds for a fair matchup for those clans who do manage to actually keep a large number of active members. Thus - negative impact for high membership clans. Example: if 100 50 member clans are searching, and even only half of them have a single member marked as inactive, now there are only 50 50 member clans available to be paired with, and another 50 45 member clans to be paired with. The distribution of available clans has been skewed downwards, resulting in a lowered chance of a fair matchup for the 50 member clans. There's no way to predict how bad this affect would be without more information on how many people on average are having to be inactive due to life plus inactive due to not wanting to war.


2. Some clans are also on the low end of membership. Opt out will also inevitably cause some clans that want to war, to suddenly not have enough members opting in to be allowed to participate. Thus - negative impact for low membership clans and a potential actual reduction in the number of total clan war participating clans.


3. Also envision implementation. If opt out were controlled at the leadership level, then we will inevitably have control and troll complaints. We already see that even with just the ability to boot people. We'll also see clans where the leader decides to stop people from participating even though they want to war, because in the leaders opinion, that person hasn't been earning enough stars. I don't see that going over very well with lots of people. I predict many hurt feelings in this situation.


If instead opt out were controlled at the membership level, there are obvious leadership problems.... inactive members who leaders are unable to get to change their availability status preventing the entire clan from warring. The ability for a few friends to get together and troll clans by preventing a low/med member clan that wants to war from being able to do so. Leaders will still have to make the same decisions they always did about booting people who don't want to participate in war.




We need to think through not only how a function like this would be used, but also how it would be potentially abused... this is the internet after all. There's more ways this idea can be abused... I'm just listing a few.


Many of these problems would still be solved by leaving to joint a like minded clan, booting people who aren't like minded, or by dividing into warring clans and non-warring clans, however people are frequently thinking that adding an opt out option would prevent us from having to take those kinds of steps. Instead, it would just change the reasons why we have to take those actions.... i.e. it's not the solution that would prevent us from having to do those things that many claim it would be. It just creates entirely new sets of problems that have to then be dealt with. Leaders will still have many of the same membership problems that they already do, just for different reasons... and the distribution of available clans to be paired with will skew to lower numbers, increasing the chances of mis-matched fights for clans on the high end of membership. Both Low and High members clans would have negative impacts, though the middle sizing would probably benefit.



Will the game immediately die? Of course not. Would there be a convenience factor for those trying to manage clans. Of course. Will leaders still have to do various types of management including booting managing multiple clans, etc. Of course. (despite the frequent claims that opt out will solve all these issues) Will the game be impacted by a significant change in the distribution of available Fair matchups? Definitely.

[LegionOK]

You are so sure youre better than everyone else. It just cracks me up. You put the me in team! You do realize it's a game right? And not real? Game enhancements encourage people to continue to play. Without those people you will rapidly run out of sparring partners. Look at it as a whole and not all about me and my wonderful perfectly run clan that nobody can do better at.

There is nothing wrong with teamwork, structure, or strategy. But it is after all a pastime. Something that should be for enjoyment and if it's taking over your whole life so that it's all consuming I would suggest you get off that chair and go for a walk in the real world where real things are happening to real people that preclude them getting online and warring.

Clans wars are supposed to be an enhancement to the game not a profession.

Clan wars are a huge enhancement to the game. It really brought our clan together. I put in two war attacks last night. GoWiPe. Took me about 10 minutes of actual screen time for both. It took me another maybe 3 minutes to study the other clan a little and send out our strategy in clan mail. When the war is over, it'll take me another 3 minutes to adjust my roster. The rest pretty much takes care of itself because everyone knows what the expectations are, everyone knows pretty much what they need to do to get 3* attacks. It has taken us months to get to this point, but we're here.

And after the work of putting together a solid warring clan, yes, I expect we will absolutely steamroll casual clans such as yours and we deserve to.

Now note, that is not a value judgement, I am not suggesting I'm a better person than you in any way. However, if your clan is as you say it is and you're not getting near 100% participation in war, remember that when you point fingers at others, four are pointing back at you.

[Sirix]

This is one of those things only leaders of successful clans really understand. Putting together a clan which attacks every war or members know how to leave before the matchmaking starts is a challenge in itself. If you can't build that kind of culture, you really are a weaker clan and that will show up in war. War is not just about whether your guys can beat the other guys. It's about strategy, coordination and teamwork. If you have players who can't even be bothered to show up, that is a lack of teamwork and coordination and why shouldn't the other clan benefit from that?

Yeah, a successful hardcore war clan. However that destroys the social aspect of the game and it's hard to build a clan from scratch because you're losing members all the time and replace them with strangers. This makes many wars easy for you, which isn't necessarily a bad thing but it makes match making more lopsided

1. Opt out will reduce the number of people participating in wars. This will then impact the availability of targets at high membership levels. Remember, to get a fair matchup between clans, there need to be a large sampling of targets available to meet different clan requirements. Opt out, will inevitably reduce the number of available targets for 50v50, 45v45, and possibly even 40v40 matchups. The reduction in people will inevitably skew the distribution of available search targets to smaller membership levels, thus impacting the odds for a fair matchup for those clans who do manage to actually keep a large number of active members. Thus - negative impact for high membership clans. Example: if 100 50 member clans are searching, and even only half of them have a single member marked as inactive, now there are only 50 50 member clans available to be paired with, and another 50 45 member clans to be paired with. The distribution of available clans has been skewed downwards, resulting in a lowered chance of a fair matchup for the 50 member clans. There's no way to predict how bad this affect would be without more information on how many people on average are having to be inactive due to life plus inactive due to not wanting to war.
One benefit in narrowing the match up size is that there will be more potential targets for less lopsided wars. There will be minimal 50v50 and little 45v45 but there will be more of everything else. This would cause big problem for hardcore war clans but at least you get to fight other war clans for a good challenge (or bad clans that didn't bench anyone).

Anyways, you can reduce this type of problem by limiting benching to only the first 4-5 players who opt out or you can remove this problem by only allowing benching when it wouldn't cause the clan war size to shrink (ex: clan of 48 can bench 3 people max and still do 45v45)

2. Some clans are also on the low end of membership. Opt out will also inevitably cause some clans that want to war, to suddenly not have enough members opting in to be allowed to participate. Thus - negative impact for low membership clans and a potential actual reduction in the number of total clan war participating clans.
If a clan has like 10 members, the leader can just tell them that no one needs to bench themselves. After all, benching helps the clan but doesn't hurt the inactive guy at all so he has no reason to sit out. Also the leader could also get the ability to bench/unbench people so this wouldn't be a big issue as far as I can think of

3. Also envision implementation. If opt out were controlled at the leadership level, then we will inevitably have control and troll complaints. We already see that even with just the ability to boot people. We'll also see clans where the leader decides to stop people from participating even though they want to war, because in the leaders opinion, that person hasn't been earning enough stars. I don't see that going over very well with lots of people. I predict many hurt feelings in this situation.
Limiting the number of benchers can help with this. Also people who are doing bad probably shouldn't go to war either since they're hurting the clan and themselves when they lose. Besides, people could just leave and join a less serious war clan if needed. There are clans with 90% loss rate and they wouldn't mind much

If instead opt out were controlled at the membership level, there are obvious leadership problems.... inactive members who leaders are unable to get to change their availability status preventing the entire clan from warring. The ability for a few friends to get together and troll clans by preventing a low/med member clan that wants to war from being able to do so. Leaders will still have to make the same decisions they always did about booting people who don't want to participate in war.
The unable to war thing seems related to the small clan issue which has been explain above. Besides, the leader can still kick the trolling opt outers but at least they have more freedom now. Opting does not negatively impact this situation


We need to think through not only how a function like this would be used, but also how it would be potentially abused... this is the internet after all. There's more ways this idea can be abused... I'm just listing a few.
I agree and I am thinking... or at least I think that I'm thinking

Many of these problems would still be solved by leaving to joint a like minded clan, booting people who aren't like minded, or by dividing into warring clans and non-warring clans, however people are frequently thinking that adding an opt out option would prevent us from having to take those kinds of steps. Instead, it would just change the reasons why we have to take those actions.... i.e. it's not the solution that would prevent us from having to do those things that many claim it would be. It just creates entirely new sets of problems that have to then be dealt with. Leaders will still have many of the same membership problems that they already do, just for different reasons... and the distribution of available clans to be paired with will skew to lower numbers, increasing the chances of mis-matched fights for clans on the high end of membership. Both Low and High members clans would have negative impacts, though the middle sizing would probably benefit.
The community isn't divided by war and non-warring clans. People can be liked minded in other areas like regionally (ex: Made in Italy clan), socially (friends/families), hobbies (anime), and etc

[LegionOK]

Yeah, a successful hardcore war clan. However that destroys the social aspect of the game and it's hard to build a clan from scratch because you're losing members all the time and replace them with strangers. This makes many wars easy for you, which isn't necessarily a bad thing but it makes match making more lopsided

I wouldn't call us "hardcore war." We've only got 31 wins (32 in a couple hours). We war with 24-hour breaks. And yes, it is hard to build a clan. Thanks for acknowledging that. Only around 1:50 or so are leader and there are a lot more who want to be leader, but lack the skill set to put anything together.

My clan is something that myself and my other long-term members cultivated over a period of many months. I didn't go off to Global and start spamming "join" with any expectation that I was getting anything good. There is turnover, and every once in a blue moon, you find someone who really fits.

One of the key ideas with my clan was that it was named after my home state. This has attracted many people from my home state and we are actually going to start having social meetups here and there. We also have valued members in Canada, Australia, Malaysia, Dubai, China and Indonesia. We have 14-year-old high school students, homemakers, oilfield workers, aircraft mechanics, a member of the U.S. Air Force currently deployed, college kids, teachers, salesmen, med students and professionals such as myself. We work together, we do our part and everyone benefits. At any rate, our social aspect is just fine.

After doing this awhile, you get pretty good at screening candidates. I look at war *s, loot totals (I'll take a gemmer, but they'd better be teachable), donations and most importantly, whether they have a war timer. When they join, they are given a clear explanation of what is expected of them. When we war, they are given a strategy and a specific role in winning the war. We get hoppers just like you do. Our new #5 hopped during the prep day of our current 45 v 45 war. Of course warring at a higher number gives you more of a margin of error, so that was no big deal.

But yes, it's hard to build a clan from scratch. You have to sell the idea that belonging to your group, which doesn't have any inherent advantages from any other group vs. starting your own clan and having more control is in a member's best interest. You have to keep them loyal and get them to do their part. Yes that's hard. If you can't do it, maybe you should join a better run clan or get better at running your own.

So you look at it as an unfair advantage that I have. I look at it as something I and the rest of my clan busted their humps for months to achieve and now we're there and reaping the rewards.

*and we presently have two openings, so anyone lvl 80+ who is a decent human being is welcome to fill those.

[jimd1977]

I think this idea is horrible. It would tear clans apart even more. And make those jurk leaders even worse..."hey i dont like u, u cant be in war or u get kick". And if u thought wars were hard, imagine how hard they would be if they put your idea into use. Everyone only wants to make the game easier, but you also make it easier for the other team.. if u stink at wars, then u would suck here. As long as both teams get the same rule nothing would change. The good clans would still kill the bad one.

[SomeRandomName]

What kind of fool hit no?

I am the leader of a clan. I have one member that is waiting for supercell to recover a lost account. If he leaves, it is harder to come back. I have a member out of the country for a month. I have a member who is available weekdays and gone weekends. I have a member that has a single lvl 1 cannon and will not build a wall or defense until he gets an infurno tower (messing around base). At a 40 member clan, this is a lot of attacking to lose in war. These members would all opt out of war if we could. They are friends we made through CoC and I do not want to lose them, but war makes that hard.

[rwelshjr]

I am the leader of a clan. I have one member that is waiting for supercell to recover a lost account. If he leaves, it is harder to come back. I have a member out of the country for a month. I have a member who is available weekdays and gone weekends. I have a member that has a single lvl 1 cannon and will not build a wall or defense until he gets an infurno tower (messing around base). At a 40 member clan, this is a lot of attacking to lose in war. These members would all opt out of war if we could. They are friends we made through CoC and I do not want to lose them, but war makes that hard.

Didn't you mean that you would want to hit yes? (Yes, is for being in favor of this feature)

[Trellish]

One benefit in narrowing the match up size is that there will be more potential targets for less lopsided wars. There will be minimal 50v50 and little 45v45 but there will be more of everything else. This would cause big problem for hardcore war clans but at least you get to fight other war clans for a good challenge (or bad clans that didn't bench anyone).

That's true enough. I agree the mid sized clans would benefit. From supercells perspective they need to be thinking about everyone though. New players, mid game clans, end game clans, small clans, large clans, family clans, war focused clans, farming clans, etc. Nearly all but the farmer focused clans will participate in war to a greater or lesser degree, so my thinking is that a change that benefits mid sized clans at the cost of others, is probably not the best approach from the big picture perspective. That's my own opinion though.

As others have said, clans that have really focused to make themselves good at war, so that they do all the work to have 50 active members every war... that's really hard to do, and it takes both dedicated leaders and members. I'd hate to create a scenario where they are the ones who end up facing a higher percentage of outmatched wars than most people.

[JohnnyPC]

My clanmates and I have discussed this idea on many occasions. It would help us out so much. Our clan consists of only real friends (no randoms) and of course a couple people have to sit out every war because we don't have an exact multiple of 5. Leaving/kicking then rejoining is the only solution, but that's a pain. A simple "toggle switch" for each member on the clan info page would be perfect.

[rwelshjr]

That's true enough. I agree the mid sized clans would benefit. From supercells perspective they need to be thinking about everyone though. New players, mid game clans, end game clans, small clans, large clans, family clans, war focused clans, farming clans, etc. Nearly all but the farmer focused clans will participate in war to a greater or lesser degree, so my thinking is that a change that benefits mid sized clans at the cost of others, is probably not the best approach from the big picture perspective. That's my own opinion though.

As others have said, clans that have really focused to make themselves good at war, so that they do all the work to have 50 active members every war... that's really hard to do, and it takes both dedicated leaders and members. I'd hate to create a scenario where they are the ones who end up facing a higher percentage of outmatched wars than most people.

The button is just about giving choice. That actually does benefit all the groups you mention. The only ones it hurts are the folks that want to be able to pick up easy wins here and there.

I did put up a poll asking if folks would like it or not want to see it. It is just over 80% of people say they would like it which lends itself to your point about how Supercell should seek to please the majority.