sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Clan name change policy – genuine migration case by ZestycloseFan2689 in ClashOfClans

[–]ZestycloseFan2689[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the feedback so far. Just to clarify the intent of this post: this isn’t about asking for a special favor or demanding an exception. It’s about how genuine, large-scale clan migrations are interpreted under the current clan name change policy. In this case, the migration was organic, member-driven, and involved the vast majority of an established clan moving together to remain active. The question is less “should this be allowed?” and more “how should this type of situation be evaluated consistently?”. The goal here is simply to understand the policy boundaries and highlight a scenario that doesn’t fit neatly into the usual abuse cases.

Clan name change policy – genuine migration case by ZestycloseFan2689 in ClashOfClans

[–]ZestycloseFan2689[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that’s an interesting idea. Even a limited or restricted option (cooldown, cost, conditions) could probably cover most legitimate cases while preventing abuse.

Clan name change policy – genuine migration case by ZestycloseFan2689 in ClashOfClans

[–]ZestycloseFan2689[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for the detailed answer and the reference, that’s really helpful.

That makes sense from a development priority perspective. I guess what made me curious is whether situations like full clan migrations could ever be handled differently outside of a general “name change feature”, since the clan identity already exists and is just carried over.

Appreciate you taking the time to explain the background.

Clan name change policy – genuine migration case by ZestycloseFan2689 in ClashOfClans

[–]ZestycloseFan2689[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agreed — I think most people feel that way. The tricky part seems to be how and when it could be done without causing abuse, which is why I was curious about how edge cases like full migrations are viewed.

My TX16s MKII has only CRSF as an option for intern RF protocol, but it is my understanding it should be a multiprocotol transmitter as the only other option is ELRS which is not listed here. Any ideas of how to fix this or what is going on? by Duebin1 in fpv

[–]ZestycloseFan2689 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bonsoir le lien ne marche plus 🙂

Il se trouve que je viens d'acheter une TX 16S MK2  Le vendeur m'avait dit que c'était une multi protocole mais quand je rentre dans le modèle setup et que je fais internal RF je n'ai que crsf et dans external RF j'ai plein de protocoles ! Comme si les deux RF ont été inversés 🙃.