It mostly depends on the user interface. If done well, it could work. Work as in not too cluttered or 'busy' looking, and people can easily figure out what it does and how to do it.
Yes
No
It mostly depends on the user interface. If done well, it could work. Work as in not too cluttered or 'busy' looking, and people can easily figure out what it does and how to do it.
Agreed. The user interface and design would be extremely important. It would need to be simple enough so that it wouldn't make it hard to navigate and utilize.Originally Posted by WarrenJames
Great Idea
I am a leader in my clan and have members from bronze to gold and all with different style of attacking so I always ask people to call out what they want to attack in the war, but im not on at night and the chat room can only hold so much space, I think there should only be two colors though. because im in a clan with 40+ people and that's way to many colors to have o one screen. so like green for when you view as your flags and other peoples flags are blus with there name inside of the flag.
I think a small sword or dagger would be thematically better, the same graphic from the two swords hitting, than a flat. Or you use the little clan shield stand you see in the background before doing single match raids, and calling your CC troops.
Why not try staying close to your number? The way you are numbered in clan wars higher as well as lower are just about equally matched depending on number of people attacking. My clan does this, it gives us success in being able to leave easier bases for people who are equally matched for attacking that certain base
This is very well thought out. I like the visuals a lot, it makes it clear how this would be implemented. I think that having the member names wouldn't work too well.
I know in most clans, (including mine), we know just about everyone, but that might not be the case. That is only a trivial matter that need only be mentioned.
The largest downside of putting member names inside flags if my name is EmeraldRange23WhoTriesToGetAnOutrageouslyLongName. Of course, this example probably exceeds the character limit, but my point is that long names could get too small or just visually displeasing. And it only gets worse when you have Asian characters because that takes more visual space (这个名字很长但我很喜欢这个名子 vs. 15CharacterName).
So I suggest that the corresponding number is place (your number in friendly territory) is written on the flag. I know that when it comes to war planning, many clans (including mines) start calling people numbers (e.g. 10 attack 9 and 10, 9 will clean 9 and attack 8)
Logic is cold ............... Embrace it.
-_--__---__-____-__--___-__-_--_-__---__--_------__-_--_-___--__--_------__---__-__-____-__-__---__--_--
IGN:EmeraldRange Clan: --NOT PLAYING ANYMORE--
Signature-BB-code-limit, you forced me to unleash colour theory.
Really? A few of us in out clan has suggested that for weeks, with people still calling dibs on a different war bases, including the leader... which kind of kills the idea. And then a Co-leader said you had to attack the base with the same number, and we got more than several 2 star wins, which is awkward, since attacking again would yield so little for the effort. Not sure if it was the people attacking, the base, or what, but we went back to attack as strong a base you know you can 3 star... not just think you might.
It was a disappointment to see the idea of 'attack the same base number' get another blow against it.
The "attack your mirror" or "attack the same number as you" isn't necessarily always the best option, and here is why.
If I am #20 on the map, that logic says I should attack #20 on the enemy map. But maybe #20 on the enemy map has really strong air defenses that are hard to get to which means my giants healer combo attack would not work as well and probably result in 1 maybe 2 stars. But by doing some scouting, I determine that I could easily 3* the enemy's #16 because the air defenses are much weaker and placed in an easy location to take out, making my giants / healer combo attack much more effective and much more likely to get 3*. But, if #16 our my team takes out their #16, now I'm stuck attacking #20 who I'm not sure I can get the most stars on.
Instead in this situation, my teams #16 should look at using their stronger attack against a base that I cannot attack as well (like maybe the enemy's #20). This leaves their #16 open for me to get 3* and still leaves our #16 to use their stronger attack on another base. The end result would be more stars (assuming our #16 also attacks a base they know they can get 3 stars on).
Planning out a strategy like this is almost impossible without proper communication which cannot be effective by using just the clan chat. My clan has been talking about this a lot and found a solution like I described could help bring a much more strategic approach to the clan wars.
Obviously this is just an example situation, but hopefully it demonstrates my position or thought process.
Overall I like it. I am a big proponent of adding some tools to direct war strategy. While I did not add images you may find the link in my signature worth reading for ideas as well. In the end even a simple "dibs" system with leader/co-leader level override would help immensely.
Madmojo LVL 112/TH9 - Clan Leader - THE CHOSEN FEW
Hi,
I agree w/ the poster of this feature request. The clan that I am in is very organized, yet we still have times where people attack somebody else's village that was called out in clan chat. We have a lot of chatter in our clan and those call outs get lost and people miss them. Having a tagging feature to tag your intended target would be a huge improvement for war planning.
Then clan members can use the chat feature to negotiate w/ others if they want to swap targets. We only have 20 people in our clan. If we had 50, calling them out in chat would be a real hassle.
Posting Permissions
