Our alliance promotes members to Elder who have been around for a while and managed a massive attack against a titan. A few days ago, one of our Elders for months decided to kick a few Members for no reason.
How about some new alliance roles that can be given to members but have no alliance power?
ADDITIONAL NOTE: It should be made more clear in the menus what abilities each role has (or doesn’t have in the case of my request.)
Thank you!! I’m glad someone else thinks so. Elder has way to much authority but at the same time you don’t want people getting kicked out on someone’s whim. We need something between elder and member, or just take away the power of elder.
To date (though this may be changing) we (7dd) don’t have many elder ranks; I’ve never understood the emphasis that some people put on being Elder or whatever, it’s basically meaningless in any rational terms.
Or make everyone an elder, problem solved the other way too. Ultimately rewarding people for something like titan damage is going to be a problem eventually just as you’ve seen here… there is a distinct lack of maturity on the parts of some members, better to play defensively in a leadership role.
Actually, if you don’t make people elder, some of said immature individuals will self select out. Smells like victory to me.
The persons were made elders not to give them power but as a reward for a job well done. Again, this was a first for us, and it was not from someone new who was drunk with power and wanted to cause chaos. It was a long-time Elder who suddenly decided to kick one Member one day and then a second Member the next outside of the rules that we have had set for months.
There are still plenty of Members in my alliance who come and go, but for the people who stick around, there is no way to reward them other than with a “Great job!”. Being able to give them a role that has no power can be a reward without the danger of a power struggle.
We ran into the same thing Blair, in Elvenar. We lost a few reg players. That is why i am trying to figure out what player ranks can and cannot do so we dont got thru that insanity again. If there is anywhere that I can find promotions and descriptions i would apprecitate it very much. Also I do agree on being able to message players in a personal message. Because I for one feel like i would be publicly picking on someone if i had to ask or request participation (we all know who that is) type deal. It would be perhaps more constructive to be able to personalize privately the players pros and cons. Thank you, to all and I will be happy to start learning more from the community !!!
Why couldn’t you setup something like for example a voting system where if leader wants to boot a member off they would click on the remove button which then brings ip an Y/N click box to all ither members in the allience with a for example 51% yes means deleted member.
This why it’s all kept fair and honest and no one person has total power.
I have never known any site/game to have a system like that, and like Lesley-annia said, that sounds complicated.
The only point of this topic is to allow a leader to give members different complimentary titles to make them stand out without giving them power to kick, so that everyone is not known as just “Member”.
As it’s been many times mentioned that leaders have to much power and iften kick Alliance members out either for no reason or without notice.
It’s also been asked many times for leaders to asign roles to different different members.
Now the other side of that is you members asking why they got booted, although not an issue for inactive players the are still many active having this problem for unknown reasons.
Now I don’t see what is complicated about a fair voting system amongst an supposedly active allience. (What if some don’t vote you ask) well then you have made your decision and they stay untill the complete or the other option is it is set to only require 3 to 5 votes for that member to be booted that why not relying on all the members voting.
Why should the leader need to be able to see who voted which way, not important, the point is it’s fair and not one single person has the power.
As for more rights towards other allience members well could complicate things more for one as a dev of websites myself that type of thing can get very complicated. But I’d suggest is make it so the leader has to choose a 1 mediator this way if the leader is not active then at least one other member can run the alliance. But that would have to be a default requirement and nit decided by the allience leader.
From what I’ve noticed when chatting is most leaders are there (start a new allience) because thier sick of the crap that goes on and they want the power to fix it and your asking those people to allocate other roles by choice to other members, that in itself would create more issues and complaints than not.
U fortunately it’s human nature not to play nice when you have power so imagine spreading the power around how many nice there wouldn’t be anymore.
Hi!! May I suggest to add some new charavhters in ally? Now the possibility are Member, Older, co.leader and leader … could you add Master, warrior, … something to inspire our fantasy to let us play with allied roles? Thank you in advaNce
How would you lot feel about another tier in the orgasational structure of an alliance, the addition of another tier.
Currently you have Leader, Co-Leader, Elder and Member. Each alliance will run there alliance differently, Top 100 most are co-leads and thats expected as you are an elite player and deserve it. Other alliances will promote anyone that has a higj personal level. (No matter experience or time in alliance).
Some alliance will promote on merit and commitment to the alliance, this being said a leader and co-leader may not want to promote to many to have a position to kick people as on a bad day people could be booted for no real reason.
My suggestion is the option to promote to a senior member. Meaning it gives you that chance differentiate between longstanding members and newbies to an alliance.
Razor and Anetho in tagging you to help spread the word. @Razor@Anetho
In our alliance, we just make everyone an Elder by default, basically. We don’t use ranks for recognition, really.
As much as anything it’s so we Co-Leaders/Leaders don’t kick someone by accident with the wrong button tap.
It hasn’t yet gained much traction, but there’s an old idea post along these lines, and a few others have come up over last couple of years and been merged into it, so there are some variations in the ideas included:
It would be a nice add at a future upgrade to have on more group or change the “elder” role to just a complimentary title.
Another thing that I would find great, funny, and catchy would be to be able to customize the standard titles leader, co-leader etc.
Keeping the functions of each group the same for all (having different colors for each group in common for all), but personalizing the names of them for your alliance. Either choosing from a list or typing a new one yourself as a leader, giving of course some diamonds in exchange…
That would give a taste of the unique style of each alliance… a knight theme with lords and dukes, or a more dark demon theme, maybe a military theme or a more funny hippy theme, a specific video-game or book theme etc…
when I was searching for alliance to join I would have gone with a Tolkien inspired roles theme like Valar and Maiar… my brother with a Naruto ninja genin chunin jounin theme…
And maybe in the market next of it you could have the option of adding extra special complimentary groups or achievement groups with a few more diamonds…
PS: of course I would prefer them to be free, but e&p is a product that like any other product needs to profit… and it would keep people from overusing it…
PS2: I don’t want a personal message system as it would be full everyday from spam join us msgs… maybe if it had a diamond/energy cost, so we would send only to the ones we really need to contact…
What if the ability to boot for elder (and maybe co-leader too) was changed to a request to boot that required confirmation from Alliance leader. Of course then some form of PM would be required to explain the request but then ultimate responsibility for the boot falls to the leader where it should be anyway.