Time since a clanmate was online (HEAR ME OUT BEFORE DELETING)

[hawkeye5366]

EDIT: This idea, as it turns out, is ruled out, so please don't post on it.

I think it could really help leaders of clans if they could see how long it had been since a clan member was last online, since clans have no 100% accurate way of telling if someone has become inactive. There are several ways, but none are perfect. Some may even take weeks to show in non-war clans, and it's important not to have space in the clan taken up by inactive members.

Now I know that it's ruled out to add an online indicator that shows whether someone's online, which is why that's not what I'm suggesting. In my idea, the system could check at midnight in SC's time zone and either add one to the number of days since everyone's played, or switch to "less than one day" if they'd been on in the past 24 hours. This way, it would be impossible to tell whether someone was on, so there would be no ruled-out online indicator.

You may argue that this isn't necessary, but it would at the very least simplify inactivity checking, and when you think about it, no modification to the game is necessary; the game is fun and works well the way it is. Any suggestion on this forum is just a way to improve, not a necessity.

For those who saw this when I suggested it the first time: my previous thread of this was deleted, hence the all-caps parenthesized addition to the thread title. If this one gets deleted, I'll let it die, but it's really not the same thing as the ruled out idea.

Finally, I'd like to address the privacy argument. Before you make that point, consider the following question: How does this breach anyone's privacy? Unless you can explain that, please don't make that argument. EDIT: To be clear, other arguments are welcome without a privacy argument explanation. Just please don't make the privacy argument unless you can explain it.

[LukeNQ]

If it says when players were last on. ITS STILL AN INDICATOR.

Its ts not really that difficult to keep track of player activity levels. Maybe a day or two might be hard. But if someone is inactive weeks. You'll know.

[Geronimosemiro]

A decent leader that had the ability to build a clan would notice if their members are active or not, and know to check their collectors for further investigation.

[Cheeserman]

Aswell as what the other two forumers have said, some people just don't want people to know when they are on. For a leader this is useful when monitoring your clan to see if people are mature or behave when they think you aren't on. It can also be useful for people who don't like to chat and just mind their biznezz. My two cents.

[hawkeye5366]

If it says when players were last on. ITS STILL AN INDICATOR.

Frequently Requested:
*Donating (or trading) resources or gems to (with) other players
*An exchange building to convert between elixir, gold, dark elixir, or gems
*Assign multiple builders to one build/upgrade
*Upgradeable builders’ huts – lvl 2 huts for a 5% time decrease?
*Player search function
*Ability to change village name
*Active/ Live “Online Status” examples: colored icons, on/off indicator, etc.
*Indicate last online date
*Remove the “Report” button/feature from global chat. Abused too often, and mute is better solution

It's not ruled out.

As for the point made by two people that it's easy to check as is: it may not be that hard, but it's not that easy, either.

Aswell as what the other two forumers have said, some people just don't want people to know when they are on. For a leader this is useful when monitoring your clan to see if people are mature or behave when they think you aren't on. It can also be useful for people who don't like to chat and just mind their biznezz. My two cents.

It doesn't show that people are on. I specifically made points to show that it doesn't show whether people are on.

[vinnyXo]

Game Center tells ya, get your entire clan on gc and you can stalk away freely

[GoDie]

If it says when players were last on. ITS STILL AN INDICATOR.

Its ts not really that difficult to keep track of player activity levels. Maybe a day or two might be hard. But if someone is inactive weeks. You'll know.

What if that person is lazy to chat, donate, etc?

[mushy]

PLEASE READ THE ENTIRE IDEA BEFORE COMMENTING

I think it could really help leaders of clans if they could see how long it had been since a clan member was last online, since clans have no 100% accurate way of telling if someone has become inactive. There are several ways, but none are perfect. Some may even take weeks to show in non-war clans, and it's important not to have space in the clan taken up by inactive members.

Now I know that it's ruled out to add an online indicator that shows whether someone's online, which is why that's not what I'm suggesting. In my idea, the system could check at a given time every day (maybe midnight in SC's time zone) and add one to the number of days since everyone's played. This way, it would only be possible to tell if someone's on for a couple of seconds each day, so there would be no ruled-out online indicator.

You may argue that this isn't necessary, but it would at the very least simplify inactivity checking, and when you think about it, no modification to the game is necessary; the game is fun and works well the way it is. Any suggestion on this forum is just a way to improve, not a necessity.

For those who saw this when I suggested it the first time: my previous thread of this was deleted, hence the all-caps parenthesized addition to the thread title. If this one gets deleted, I'll let it die, but it's really not the same thing as the ruled out idea.

Finally, I'd like to address the privacy argument. Before you make that point, consider the following question: How does this breach anyone's privacy? Unless you can explain that, please don't make that argument.

It is as simple as checking the collectors in their base once a day when you suspect they may be inactive. You have to be extremly lazy to say no this is harder then an indicator as it only takes maybe 10 or so extra seconds. And yes checking collectors is a good indicator of activity because I dont believe any active player of a game will not empty their mines unless the storages are full. Another indicator is no change on camp troops and empty castle and used traps not reset and empty xbows and dead infernos.

[hawkeye5366]

Game Center tells ya, get your entire clan on gc and you can stalk away freely

Not everyone uses iOS. Additionally, I prefer to only be Game Center friends with people I know IRL, and I'm sure many others feel the same way.

What if that person is lazy to chat, donate, etc?

Exactly. Plus, while many clans kick for not donating, what if someone donated and receives a ton in the first few days of a season, but then goes inactive for the rest of the season? Unless you were carefully monitoring their donated and received troops, you wouldn't be able to tell they were inactive for weeks.

It is as simple as checking the collectors in their base once a day when you suspect they may be inactive. You have to be extremly lazy to say no this is harder then an indicator as it only takes maybe 10 or so extra seconds. And yes checking collectors is a good indicator of activity because I dont believe any active player of a game will not empty their mines unless the storages are full. Another indicator is no change on camp troops and empty castle and used traps not reset and empty xbows and dead infernos.

I do use the collector trick, but it's not as reliable as it's often made out to be. An extremely high percentage of the loot can be stolen from collectors, often preventing more than 12-18 hours worth of loot from piling up (and 12-18 hours of inactivity isn't a problem). As for army camps, people tend to use the same army in most attacks; the clan castle doesn't work because many people don't like to request; and only th9s and th10s have xbows and infernos, I'd like to be able to see on th8s and below as well.

[rwelshjr]

PLEASE READ THE ENTIRE IDEA BEFORE COMMENTING

I think it could really help leaders of clans if they could see how long it had been since a clan member was last online, since clans have no 100% accurate way of telling if someone has become inactive. There are several ways, but none are perfect. Some may even take weeks to show in non-war clans, and it's important not to have space in the clan taken up by inactive members..

For a leader to be able to instantly know the moment it occurs for him to wonder I really do not think is necessary. Its easy enough to watch who does not get their badge back after a reset and then from those look at donation/request numbers. Once you start to wonder about a person(s) do a clan mail that is a shout out to them by name. then give another decent amount of time to find out. The time this takes will separate the ow activity from the no activity.

Then you (and you can go right to this if you want to move up the timetable) kick them but put in the note that you are 'dropping what appears to be an abandoned account' (don't use the word kick at all). Even follow it up with an invite in their mailbox. If they are active just slow and do turn up again they can pop back in and if not you never need worry about them again.

Now I know that it's ruled out to add an online indicator that shows whether someone's online, which is why that's not what I'm suggesting. In my idea, the system could check at a given time every day (maybe midnight in SC's time zone) and add one to the number of days since everyone's played. This way, it would only be possible to tell if someone's on for a couple of seconds each day, so there would be no ruled-out online indicator..

A person can still note when the indicator changes as a crude way to find out that the person is online at the moment. And so there is the possibility of a privacy violation. Its not as strong as a straight up indicator. But it is still there.

Finally, I'd like to address the privacy argument. Before you make that point, consider the following question: How does this breach anyone's privacy? Unless you can explain that, please don't make that argument.

Oh, a dare. So I have to accept this dare to say why its a privacy violation to be allowed to provide my input above? That's kind of over the top dude. But whatever, I'll bite.....Its a privacy violation to SC because SC has decided its a privacy violation to Sc. If you don't like it don't cry to us. Cry to them. They have the contact info published. Write them a good long letter and give them a piece of your mind. But leave the rest of us out of it please.