Opt-out for Clan wars option/button

[Anupam1]

http://redd.it/2g3ptd - official Reddit post

PLEASE DO NOT ADVERTISE ON MY POST, I WILL REPORT YOU. I want this post to help the community. Thank you



good news is that they are working on it, just as i stated before, SuperCell didn't wanted this as a intended featured (If i was a game developer, i would totally agree on this), bad news is that we still might have to wait on something similar to this button.

lets keep helping them with idea/feed back.

Controversy by comments:


Players has voice out that even though SuperCell has decided on this feature to be implemented in the long near feature, their sight fall short of seeing that even tho it's a better experience to stick it out, faith in all, WE the players still face a certain thing call time; Emergency, vacation, out of internet range and work.

Also the idea of a clan who just wanted to be a Farming clan and that their philosophy of letting players experience war in participating; doesn't fit into these type of clans.



I just realized that some clans are built upon elitist and that the current problem that i'm starting to see is that one of the reason why an opt-out button can't be built in is because players will abuse the button, namely LEADER. I'm very sad and disappointed for those who force players that you have personal accepted or invited in to, just to say no, you can't join us (even if a co-leader or elder accept for you, your the one who en-stated them and promoting them base on your ideas of a leader, so their fault is your fault).

This whole metaphor "crab claw" hits me when a player comment on how the opt-out button should be used by a leader and/but has a more reduce abuse used in it's function, at first i thought the abuse was for a player to keep using that button to not join war (but that has no problem with me because they just want to stay in clan and farm and receive donation) but now the abuse for me is that the beggar can't be chooser and leaders make all the right call for opt-ing out a player.

upon all player i want to point out, how out rages that is for me and anyone else who suffer this treatment

imo the controversy in this case is that the abuse for this button is not what i thought it would be but what the abuse is totally a different matter. The button should be implemented by now and the abuse for opt-ing out players should be address in another manner. (If i was president of SuperCell, i'll put in a reporting button for fail leader! but that's me; In the real correct case, players should just stand up and refuse to be apart of a abolish clan that runs with an iron fist) this is a social game, i don't see why not being a team player has anything to do with playing a team base game.

you can have all 50/50 members join the war, why the heck would you start a 35v35 clan war when all of them wants to come with you? *brain explode*

everything i posted up until now was base on a well bread leader, i was totally bias and oblivious to this Crab claw problem (yes i'ma officially name this case, the "crab claw problem") so if you read anything else, be sure to think of a clan that respect all member, that's why i wanted the opt-out button for all to use, not judge by the leader.

note: the blue text is base on what i understand now and according to supercell problem on abuse.

p.s: I super give my apology if i came off on the wrong way, my feedback were sincere and i didn't understand the main problem at hand. So; I'm am sorry that I've been rude to you (supercell) if you saw it as so.

(i will continue/constantly update this and add respectful/helpful comment as i see fit. thanks for understanding if you don't see your point of view on the front page)

__________________________________________________ ___________________________________

i would like to request a button that would let a clanmate sit-out/opt-out for war (button that the clanmate control).

reason:
In my clan, we are a high donation/farming clan but we do war once a week and some players join just to receive donation and we have a donation requirement just to keep track of how active the player should be to be part of us but here's the thing, if they wanted to drop out of war, we have to kick them and re-invite them back in once we are able to start the war but that reset their donation count and i have to manually record their donation count and remind them where they are at!

also it's not just sitting out because they don't want to be part of war but they are under going a spell factory upgrade or a barb king or archer queen upgrade and those unit are what makes fine plays for that 100% win.

conclusion:
A button to sit out of war!

after posting, I just happen to read similar threads. So now i will give more input into this, beside the whole pretty please and stand up for what I think my clan deserve to have.

So here is my idea:

each players will have their own opt-out button (mostly for clanmate, could be a different matter for elder/leader).

opt-out has a expire time of 12 or 16 or 24 hours, to prevent abusing the button, this also force the players to be active in knowing when the clan is going to have a war. (can't keep the button on 24hours/week) and another 24 or 48 hours (which is the duration of an entire war) for cool down.

so basically your immune to going to war for 12 or 16 or 24 hours and after that duration, the button is unavailable for 24 or 48 hours

when in the state of opt-ing out, that doesn't prevent the leader from starting a war (other then not having the require amount to start a war). So in fact, it's just limiting the amount of VS, ie: if you have 50 members and 6 players opt-out, you end up in a 40vs40 war.

more ideas by comments:

beside having a opt-out button, a war enlistment button is a possible idea.
http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...-In-Out-of-War

Ranking system, this might not be a solution to the opt-out but potentially it could be one. if recruits are disable to access all war content, it could be the same thing as opt-ing out. (stamp by supercell creditable idea) http://forum.supercell.net/showthrea...n-Rank-Recruit

(Still adding IDEAs to help expand their range of idea. It it quoted that they have talked "ALOT" on this matter but lets try to fill all the blind spot if not already been touch upon)

Final conclusion:
the button doesn't really hinder the game from actively having war, in fact if the leader/co-leader/elder see that a member isn't fit because they are always choosing to opt-out, it's up to them to replace them and War is only fun when you can have that 100% percipient rate, that extra one star can be the different from a win or a lost. (i would personally kill a guy if he was the last guy who could have made a big different to our war effort *joke*)

As a leader of my clan, I gather all the elder/leader into a personal chat room to discuss our clan's future and to control our member and truthfully, we made a few mistake when trying to opt-player's out and keeping a list of opt-out could be hectic at times.

I'm pretty sure (in my perspective! *information isn't true toward the real dev*) as a dev of supercell, they didn't intend for players to sit out and that war wasn't something that you should kill a person over for but the truth is that players don't have time or problems can arise and players do take war seriously, so as a player, it can solve a whole lot of problem if one simple button was apply into the game.

Other true facts in Q&A format:

Q: Maybe you should always just filter out your member!
A: well maybe they had a emergency and wasn't able to inform a elder/leader that he needed to opt-out. hopping on to opt-out with a single click of a button is faster then shouting out on clan chat that he can't make it, also if your clan is active as mines, the chat might get bump off and an elder or leader might have missed it. (we do have alot of elder and leaders but my point is that it could happen)

Q: Maybe your should deal with the unused attacked and accept the out come!
A: Have you ever been in a war? That extra intense moment when literally one star is what set you from wining or losing, your clan chat would be flaming with hate and it's almost to the point of asking them to be kicked. Not that we face that in my clan but it's a possibility. (prevent flaming as a bonus if we didn't have to deal with players who don't opt-out)

Q: but my clan doesn't have that much members, that button would get in my way for war!
A: I promises you one thing, having a full active clan is more fun then a small one, as a leader you should try your best to aim for a full and active clan and work your way up to achieving your ideal war battle. Having a lost is frustrating and you might not end up liking clan war because of it. So an active clan would boost your chance of winning and you would end up loving war even more then ever. (could end up making your clan a war only clan)

Q: dropping out of the league (400 trophy or less) or being at the bottom of the list would take you off of war.
A: True but why would a master or champion league player drop out of league just to be able to sit-out or why would they want to drop down, it's really hard to climb back up. You got to think about all the players, not just your standing point of being a lvl 80 or less (usually crystal league or below at that lvl) it's easy for you at that lvl to climb back up but for higher lvl players, it's not!

Q: Players will abuse the button to no end!
A: As I can see it, why not kick those who abuse the button, it's the Leaders job to kick players who don't fit their clan and if you did get kicked, maybe that clan wasn't meant for you and that you should consider a more open mined clan. In fact maybe start your own. So all in all, it's the players choice to make the button work right.

I cannot read this much ! lol

[iceageg]

.
.
.
So Steve, this feature would be really really appreciated!
I hope it'll be in next clan war bundle!
Thanks for your attention

No, this would be appreciated by casual clans who want to be made artificially more powerful so they can be as strong as clans that are committed to winning wars. It would be a slap in the face to the clans who have gone through the efforts and pains of making themselves powerful through hard work and dedication.

For the record, our clan is also a family/friendly clan with war participation mandatory but fairly relaxed rules about who and how attacks are done. While we have a solid war record we certainly don't qualify as a top war clan. They have walked all over us. We learn a lot from it each time it happens. From a win/loss standing my clan would benefit from an opt-out/opt-in button like most of you but I still think it is a bad idea for the game.

[THEBANDIT240]

No, this would be appreciated by casual clans who want to be made artificially more powerful so they can be as strong as clans that are committed to winning wars. It would be a slap in the face to the clans who have gone through the efforts and pains of making themselves powerful through hard work and dedication.

For the record, our clan is also a family/friendly clan with war participation mandatory but fairly relaxed rules about who and how attacks are done. While we have a solid war record we certainly don't qualify as a top war clan. They have walked all over us. We learn a lot from it each time it happens. From a win/loss standing my clan would benefit from an opt-out/opt-in button like most of you but I still think it is a bad idea for the game.

It would also help serious war clans but that want friends who are not good at wars in their clan.

[gamul1]

No, this would be appreciated by casual clans who want to be made artificially more powerful so they can be as strong as clans that are committed to winning wars. It would be a slap in the face to the clans who have gone through the efforts and pains of making themselves powerful through hard work and dedication.

My sense is you have no clue what you are talking about. An opt out button would do absolutely nothing like what you are babbling about.

Your clans strength is your clans strength. It has zero to do with how many wars you have won or lost. Each war you are paired with another clan of similar strength, and that strength is determine by who is in the war. So if you had 50 people but 15 were on opt out - you would have a 35-35 clan war and the strength match up would be determined by the remaining 35 in it. That strength is determine by how strong your base is - nothing to do with any war you may have participated in the past.

And for the record - if you think the number of war wins shown is an indicator of strength you are wrong on that as well. There are clans that fight non stop and have 40 wins. But because they fight non stop - by now only having 40 wins means they probably have 40 losses too. There are clans with only 10 wins. They are new and have only had 10 losses. They are probably a better clan at wars than the first one.

Dont make up dumb stuff

[fister]

Woops, added a thread on this, but I'll put here all the same. Hey ho..

Opt Out won't work...but Opt In might. If a player is afk for a while, they can't opt out of a War, can they? It would be a lot more sensible for clan members to opt in, then if only 15 do in a clan of 50, that is what the match is based on.

then only players that are 'live' when a war is announced will play.

simples.

[iceageg]

.
.
.
Your clans strength is your clans strength.
.
.
.
And for the record - if you think the number of war wins shown is an indicator of strength you are wrong on that as well

Dont make up dumb stuff

If as Steve hinted and their initial deployment indicates it is SC's intent for Clan Wars to be exactly that (the entire clan), then pitting your top 35 vs a dedicated full clan of 35 is the definition of making a weak 50 person clan competitive with a strong 35 person clan. You are allowing the 50 person clan to stack the odds in their favor. There is well documented evidence of this in every form of competition. Take two high schools for example. One has 500 students, the other has 2500 students so the state considers them both to be in the same division. They only get to put 5/6/9/11 players on the field at a time depending on the sport. However the bigger school will almost always be the favorite to win, because they have more players to pick from. Scale this back to the much smaller numbers and dynamic of CoC and you create a clan size disparity of power that does not currently exist, and was not originally intended to exist.

And for the record - I never mentioned war wins indicating anything. Strength is determined by the level of the buildings in your base and your troop levels. It has nothing to do with the strength of your base or your ability to attack. If everything was the same level a pure farm base with an exposed town hall is ranked the same strength as a base that has never given up more than 1 star to any attack. There is no accurate indication of a clan's war strength, only their potential defensive ability.

[gamul1]

If as Steve hinted and their initial deployment indicates it is SC's intent for Clan Wars to be exactly that (the entire clan), then pitting your top 35 vs a dedicated full clan of 35 is the definition of making a weak 50 person clan competitive with a strong 35 person clan. You are allowing the 50 person clan to stack the odds in their favor. There is well documented evidence of this in every form of competition. Take two high schools for example. One has 500 students, the other has 2500 students so the state considers them both to be in the same division. They only get to put 5/6/9/11 players on the field at a time depending on the sport. However the bigger school will almost always be the favorite to win, because they have more players to pick from. Scale this back to the much smaller numbers and dynamic of CoC and you create a clan size disparity of power that does not currently exist, and was not originally intended to exist.

And for the record - I never mentioned war wins indicating anything. Strength is determined by the level of the buildings in your base and your troop levels. It has nothing to do with the strength of your base or your ability to attack. If everything was the same level a pure farm base with an exposed town hall is ranked the same strength as a base that has never given up more than 1 star to any attack. There is no accurate indication of a clan's war strength, only their potential defensive ability.

I do see your point and how it could be manipulated. But I still do not think that it has the result you think it would. The 35 ppl that go to war still have a calculated strength and are paired with a clan that has 35 available members whose strength is comparable. So even if they take the best 35 in their clan, they are still going to be paired with a 35 member clan that has similar strength.

I actually think your scenario would only work in a situation where the leader takes the 34 worst ppl in the clan, plus himself (assuming he is strong) and then they will be matched with a weak clan where the leader is likely to have two easy wins.

In any case, I apologize for my earlier rude comment.

[FateValkyrie]

I cannot read this much ! lol

maybe it is alot to read.... i'll put in a table of content

[iceageg]

In any case, I apologize for my earlier rude comment.

No worries. This is the internet and this is a topic that our community is passionate about. I have been around long enough not to get butthurt over peoples opinions. I agree that the risk lies more in clans opting their lowest members in than their highest and have detailed that in several previous posts. In the end groups of people who can select a few from many always have a advantage statistically over groups who have fewer to choose from or no choice except all.

[FateValkyrie]

Win or lose, the opt-out button shouldn't be in the same subject matter. i personally think that the button should be impermanent and we should address the problem at hand.

if your worry about the control portion of how a war is being dictated then thats really a human interaction side of it and be resolved on a personal level.

Just leave if you think that their war is dictated through power and clan war are based on the top picked player and that you have no chance in being part of that war.

if above case is still the same on dictatorship and the person wants to stay but doesn't want to war and that clan is okay with it... i dont see why the opt-out button should be restricted because of this problem. In fact this is where the button comes in handy.