Clan wars opt in or out feature

[WarrenJames]

This idea is still stupid. You don't go to war unless you're in it. No one is sitting there halfway on the battlefield still deciding wether they want to war. You're ether in or you're not. Not a hard choice.

Wrong target there sure-shot. My idea is different than OPs.

Try again with better aim, and I'll delete this post.

[rwelshjr]

Wrong target there sure-shot. My idea is different than OPs.

Try again with better aim, and I'll delete this post.

I'm afraid I disagree with OP and also the 'either; designation both. I think a person that is undecided should be putting themselves out. When a clan goes to war they only want the guys that can be absolutely depended on so that's on;ly the guys that have said "yes, I am committed".

Especially in clans that will kick for unused attacks with no excuses allowed. The only fair way to hold a person accountable for their commitment like that is if they did actively give that commitment.

[WarrenJames]

I view the Either/Or as effectively opted in, to an extent, since they obviously want to be in war enough to to say so, but are willing to say "You can leave me out if need be". I mean, that's a team player that is able to put aside personal gain so the clan can do what it needs to.

[rwelshjr]

I view the Either/Or as effectively opted in, to an extent, since they obviously want to be in war enough to to say so, but are willing to say "You can leave me out if need be". I mean, that's a team player that is able to put aside personal gain so the clan can do what it needs to.

That's everybody opted in is the 'if need be' category. All opting in in does is say they can make the commitment if chosen. From there the leader chooses who of those is going per whatever criteria the leader wishes. Most leaders pick everyone. But If choices are forced by numbers it can be who's been struggling, or something else. In our case we rotate it.

A person can commit, or they cannot commit. Its a serious question for those that want only people they can absolutely depend on. Any gray area (no pun intended) would be a mistake to add to the game.

[WarrenJames]

That is why I liked the yellow middle ground better. Intuitively makes sense to most people in a modern setting.

When people opt in, it is assumed they get in, period. There is no question about not being in the war. They Opt in, they are in, unless the leader says they @#$%ed up, and said "No war for you." It is just assumed. It would be a task to get it stated to people, especially new people (which maybe emotional teenagers... hush, I been a teenager too ) that Opt in does not always mean you get into war, and is only a possibility.

Yes, it is the Leader's job to make sure members know the rules, and how things work, but if Supercell wants to make the Leader's job easier, add in a neutral "Don't mind either way" option, so there is less conflict, less explaining, and less drama if the rules that contradict common sense are forgotten, or not explained.

[rwelshjr]

That is why I liked the yellow middle ground better..

The color does not matter. Its the middle ground that would be a mistake. A person can make a commitment or they cannot. You are looking for a way to 'sort of' commit, but that is not how a competitive team would operate.

[WarrenJames]

You are confusing my idea with what the OP wants, which they want an "I don't know" feature, which logically would be Opt out, given they lack the commitment to war.

You Opt in, you say "I'm in Chief" and assume you are in. If not in, after Opting in, that will miff players, as they will think Opt in means "100% I'm going to war". Others can be committed to war, but don't feel like they have to be in it 100% of the time, and can say "Include me in, if that's OK with you, Leader." Being on call when needed does not make one is any less dedicated. Firefighters and emergency responders are on call, when needed, and I'm sure you'll get a few choice words and dirty looks if you call them "Not dedicated".

[Ninja352]

Have the badge gray not green, if a clan member has not made a choice to participate in a clan war. I want to only take members into war that want to go to war and attack. As it stands now, there still is no real way of knowing if a member wants to fight if his badge is green.

He is talking about when they are ineligible for war

[MikeyD]

The problem as I see it is that you cannot be truely sure if someone has opted in or not as the default is in. Have they made a decision or just not bothered to change the choice. Default needs to be set to opt out after every war then the onus is on the player to actively opt in

[OzAudi]

The problem as I see it is that you cannot be truely sure if someone has opted in or not as the default is in. Have they made a decision or just not bothered to change the choice. Default needs to be set to opt out after every war then the onus is on the player to actively opt in

The opposite situation is equally true. Leader and co when starting war can override either Opt In or Opt out. Only way is to ensure a player has selected their intended option us by reminding them, trust they listen and have acted.

We ask members to select for next war before the current war ends. Some are not online in time to switch options between wars. A reset after war would render the whole thing useless.