Alliance leadership should control the war "opt out" box, not the members MASTER

Should be ONLY A PORTION of the Action.

Yes though REMOVE ALL WAR MEMBERS FROM WAR AT END OF EACH WAR… + A FINE TO THOSE NO SHOWS IN SOME FORM TO CURB THE GAMES TOO MANY PEOPLE PLAY WITH TRYING TO GRAB FREE LOOT ON WAR SIGN UPS YET ARE NO SHOWS!!

Meaning… if you had a HISTORY OF BEING IN THE WARS? PARTICIPATING. BUT ARE A NO SHOW AS YOU CONTEND IN 24 HOURS SOME ADULTS CAN’T SHOW UP… IN 24 HOURS TIME?? I DOUBT THAT. UNLESS THEIR INTERNET SERVICE GOES OUT FOR A PERIOD OF TIME… I SINCERELY DOUBT THE PERSON JUST COULDN’T SHOW UP FOR THE WAR THEY CHOSE TO SIGN UP FOR!
However perhaps so on very rare occasion.

Only reason NO SHOW I can PERCEIVE AS VALID IS
IF INTERNET IS OUT… EMPIRES CAN SET AN OPTION TO SUBMIT A SCREEN SHOT OR OTHER IMAGE SHOWING LOSS OF INTERNET FOR CONSIDERATION OF NOT BEING PENALIZED.

OTHERWISE…
PENALIZE THE NO SHOWS.

RESTRICT ALL THEIR GAME PLAY FOR 6 WEEKS TO CURB THE TOYING WITH ALLIANCES AND GIVE INCENTIVES TO NOT JOIN WARS WHEN YOU DON’T CARE IF YOU SHOW UP OR NOT BUT… NO SHOW WILL COST YOU.

AND ALLOW THEIR ONLY GAINS FOR 6 WEEKS WILL BE IF THOSE TYPE PAY $$ TO EMPIRES.
PERIOD.

PEOPLE DON’T STOP THEIR UNTOWARD BEHAVIORS WITHOUT REPERCUSDIONS.

EMPIRES NEEDS TO NOT PENALIZE THE WAR TEAM BCOZ SOME QUIT DURING WAR…

THEY NEED TO REMOVE THAT PLAYER OUT OF THE WAR INSTANTLY UPON QUITTING.
LEAVING THEIR ACTIONS PRIOR TO “THE QUIT” WHETHER LOSSES IN POINTS BY D BEING ATTACKED OR POINTS GAINED.

DON’T PENALIZE ALL WAR TEAM BCOZ OF A QUITTER.
PENALIZE ONLY THE QUITTER!!
INCLUDING LIMIT THEIR ACTIVITIES ON EMPIRES FOR 6 WEEKS FOR THEIR CARELESS ACTION TO CAUSE OTHER PLAYERS A HANDICAP DURING PLAY… IE THE WAR.

RESTRICT THAT QUITTER ON EMPIRES.
6 WEEKS.

SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE THAT EMPIRES EXPECTS CONSIDERATION OF FELLOW MEMBERS IN EVERY ALLIANCE!!!

Send the message that Empires DEMANDS IT.

REPERCUSSIONS FOR LACK OF.

DEFINITELY REPERCUSSIONS ARE NEEDED.

This too is a good idea.
Combined with some others we should see FAR LESS of some players messing over A TEAM OF PLAYERS!

… this needs to be long to Leader, Co-leader and Elders WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE WARS.

What do they call you in the real world? GENERAL! lol

general

1 Like

Hi NDarkNS!
You made excellent points!

Do lvl 12 members OPT TO JOIN IN WARS or are they THEY AUTOMATICALLY FORCED AT LVL 12 TO JOIN WARS??

IDK.
But some say APP FORCES LVL 12 INTO WARS
others say lvl 12 members ARE NOT FORCED BY APP AT ALL… THEY OPT IN
???

AND still some say APP FORCES LEVEL 12 MEMBERS INTO WAR TUTORIAL AND INTO WAR while many others say UNTRUE, LVL 12s DO NOT HAVE TO TAKE THE WAR TUTORIAL. & ARE NOT FORCED INTO EVEN THE 1ST WAR.

do you know the answers??

ty for any insight you have

Wow been forever since I had do tutorial. Lol. I believe that afterwards the game tells you that you can opt in once you reach level 12 as the tutorial your level 1. If you click war before your high enough level the game tells you that you can’t join yet. As far as I remember it’s totally your action to do so. This would be an answer for another im afraid. For instance, level 12 player or higher joins, do they have to opt in or is it automatically done?

Issue is players join war and does nothing or leaves. Both hurts with matchmaking and with results. If player joins and does nothing what if long time member and u don’t want to kick? Are you stuck with another round of inactivity? New players are easy to kick. if players quits during war it doesn’t help. So ive come up with a NEW SOLUTION. players who are in war cannot quit an alliance while war is active. It won’t help make the player participate but off chance they might contribute. Least you wouldn’t have an ex-member on the field…

I do have something in favor of Leader op-out control. As we all know we have raging storms in Texas. We had three players with no power for three days now they are opted in but can’t access the game to opt out. This is why I would like the option to control opting out a player. Even with set rules, communication and fear of the boot things happen and I rather not boot a good players due to a natural disaster.
Easier solution. Everyone automatically opts out after war. They have to manually opt in before matchmaking. That way there is a smaller chance of someone not participating. (Maybe a compromise with this?)

1 Like

Well that would be an easy fix but their (SG) algorithm just piles newbies into these totally dysfunctional dud alliances.

For several weeks now, a new member, always with a different name, has joined our alliance with level 12. He joins in for the war but does not use any of the 6 fights. As a result, he is expelled from the alliance by us. We always allow new starters in our alliance and always give everyone the necessary explanation of the game. If the leader or Co-leaders had to approve participation in the alliance war for new members, this could be partially resolved. Now I regularly lock up our alliance so that no new members can join temporarily.

I am the leader of a Alliance and its run in a fairly relaxed way so there are only 4 rules.
But when it come to Wars the rule is if you have a team in wars you are required to take part.
As leader I have set this rule and as it is I only have two things i can do demote and kick.
I wish there was a 3rd option that a leader could untick participate as there are many reason
for non participation .
The reason as Leaders we have to be so strict on this subject is because the more teams you
have the stronger the other alliance will be and not to take part makes it ultra hard if not impossible
to have a chance at winning.
But having said that to kick a member and potentially loss them forever that might have just forgotten to untick or lost there internet always feels harsh to me .

2 Likes

Yes it’s a headache, and believe me, most players pass through this, I’m also one of leaders in my alliance, dialogue is always the first thing to do to make things clear and keep fairplay with other members, but if still happen, then you must kick them off, obviously only if this guys doesn’t attack because they don’t want, sometimes things happen in our lives that makes us stay out of war one day or other, but again, the best rule is the dialogue. We already have a thread about this issue, take a look and you’ll see how much leaders have to deal with that, maybe you’ll find some solution there😉…

2 Likes

Just had this happen this war. Leader booted him afterwards.

You have a rule. If it is not followed you need to take action. First time, ask for an explanation. If it is acceptable to you (ie they “forgot” or lost connection), warn (maybe demote) and move on. If it is not, or no explanation forthcoming, then kick as an example. But be sure to explain clearly why you are doing this.

If it happens again (same member) you need to kick. Otherwise, the rule shouldn’t even be there.

3 Likes

My former alliance had missed flags and demotion would happen with risk of being kicked out. But some of the same people would remain even though they were repeat offenders. A handful of us migrated to a different alliance.

Just today in my current alliance someone was kicked for unused flags, even though the leader and person were ‘longtime friends’…

I’m always in favor of holding people accountable. Whatever rules are in place in the alliance that you are in should be followed.

It’s not easy being the boss; I’m not an alliance leader but I’ve run my fair share of kitchens and staff. You lay down the axe cause people aren’t following through with their responsibilities or are disrespectful, and to better your team as a whole.

5 Likes

I can see it was a close war… 5073: 5149
Holding 3 flags when your team loses by less than 80pts :sweat:. Ouch!

Totally agree.

4 Likes

The devs are never going to implement an option where one player, even the leader, can control another players account, which is what opting them out would amount to.

Sadly, kicking them out is your only option. On the flip side, kicking a member can often galvanize the remaining members into a more cohesive team. Them knowing the leader will lead? Priceless. :slightly_smiling_face:

4 Likes

I agree somewhat, though I would also argue that kicking a member out is essentially a form of “controlling another player’s account”.

As alliance leader, I have the power (MUAHAHAHAHA) to potentially kick a member out immediately after finishing a war or titan but also before they are able to collect their loot.

Would be fairly evil of me to do so, and I highly doubt I ever would do anything like that, but I do have the power to use the dark side of the force should I so choose.

Flip side of that flip side is if a leader kicks out a popular member who had good reasons for missing flags. That could result in galvanizing the remaining members into staging a full blown mutiny. :laughing:

Should add that it all depends on the individual alliance. If you’re in an “open” alliance or one that recruits people based only on their participation and contributions, and nobody is really forming any bonds with each other, then yeah - it makes perfect sense to hold everyone to the exact same standards all the time, no exceptions.

If however your alliance mates are actual mates, friends, family, etc.
Certain allowances may have to be made.
Leadership through mercy and a trust that your members are adult enough to exercise personal responsibility.

I don’t need to punish my alliance members if they miss flags, because they already know they screwed up, and I know they likely didn’t do it on purpose.

All fair points.

I think though that most of the “kick them out” comments, mine included, are aimed at the players who habitually leave flags.

If you know a player is usually very active and they leave a flag or 2? Generally not an issue. But, if it happens with any regularity, then that’s a problem and the leader needs to step in.

1 Like

Absolutely. That’s always frustrating. I guess I’m kind of a softie as a leader.

My first alliance? I started out as a nobody, like everyone else there. Leader told us, “HIT THE TITAN! USE ALL YOUR WAR FLAGS!!! HUT HUT, MAGGOTS! STEP TO IT!!!” and we all said, “SIR YES SIR!!!”

Those who had just recently joined and said “who da hell does this guy think he is, ordering me around?” … the rest of us would just look said new member like “oooooh, OH NO HE DIDN’T! He just stepped up to Master Sergeant.” We all kept our mouths right shut though, as Master Sergeant marched up to new recruit, looked him square in the face.

"THE HELL YOU JUST SAY TO ME, MAGGOT???"

New idiot with cocky attitude: “I said, I don’t know who you think you are trying to order me around and tell me what to do, telling me I ‘must use’ 6 flags in war or else. Or else what?”

Oooooh Master Sergeant polishing up his boots now… c’mon guys, gather round, bring popcorn, the new guy is about to get kicked the **** out. This is gonna be good!!!

And it was. Master Sergeant always delivered on his promise. Every time our alliance picked up a rookie who agreed to play by the rules, but then later tried to decide that the rules didn’t apply to them… they got knocked the **** out, in glorious fashion.

I played by the rules, and I helped the other rookies slog through the trenches, and Master Sergeant saw this, and promoted me to co-leader. Then one day, Master Sergeant told us that he was tired, he didn’t want to run the alliance any more, he was retiring.

After that, it was up to the rest of us co-leaders to run the show. But none of us could properly replace Master Sergeant.

There were 4 of us total trying to run the alliance after that, and disagreements ensued about how to proceed.

While I mostly wanted to keep the alliance running the same as it always had, we had new members coming and going, and unlike Master Sergeant, I wasn’t so keen to shine up my boots every time someone made an honest mistake. Whereas one of my fellow co-leaders quickly became kick-happy, and started kicking out good members because “oh well they missed a flag, so they’re gone”.

They missed one flag in 3 months, so you’re kicking them out??? No, no, no. I do not approve. Don’t do that.

“Well then how else are they supposed to learn?”

Maybe talk to them??? You just kicked out 5 of our best team members without explanation, and I have no way of contacting them to get them back… now the rest of our team is worried that they’re going to be next? 3 more people just left the alliance today because you kicked out their friends… and also by the way, I was also fond of those members. They were here long before you joined, you had no right to kick them out without my consent. :angry:

“Sorry but if they’re going to miss flags, then bye bye”

Yep. Bye bye. Is what I told her as me and at least half a dozen others left the alliance en masse.

My own group now. They don’t opt into wars if they don’t feel up to warring. Those who do choose to opt in rarely miss flags. On the rare occasion that they do? They either have a very valid excuse, or at the very least they apologize for it. I’m not about to kick anyone over something trivial, even if they do end up costing us a win. As long as it’s clear that they didn’t do it on purpose, and they don’t make it a regular habit, one war loss is not the end of the world.

1 Like

An example of one member we had:

Lvl 60+ so he knew the way things worked. We’d get everyone on Line and ask if they were ok for the upcoming war. “Yeah, no problem but I will be on call at work so I can’t coordinate my hits” he says. No worries, just use the flags please :+1:.

Flags left, we lose the war by a slim margin. “Sorry all, work stuff” he says. No worries, everyone has rl.

Next war, rinse and repeat. So we simply ask if he’s on call, can he please opt out. “No, I like wars and I’m good for my flags”. Third strike and you’re out then.

Third strike very next war. Players are getting seriously pissed off with him.

Now, he’d been with us for a long time, well in excess of a year, we considered him a friend, but we came to the conclusion he was banking we wouldn’t kick him due to his lvl and longevity in the group. How wrong he was.

It’s a fine line to tread, appreciating plsyers have lives to lead, while asking they do the simplest of tasks in game, if they insist on opting in.

1 Like

Cookie Settings