I’ve see some posts lately on Facebook of a member joining an alliance and kicking as many people as possible. I think this happens because Alliances only have three ranks in which they can promote their members. It’s especially harmful to newer alliances starting out as promotions are frequently used to increase loyalty and promote longevity in an alliance.
I really think five or six ranks would be sufficient. They don’t have to be fancy.
Tier 1 Ranks
Recruit (cannot kick)
Elder (cannot kick)
Lieutenant (cannot kick)
Tier 2 Ranks
General (can demote Lieutenants and Elders, but can not kick)
Co-Leader (can kick/demote Lieutenants and under)
(The tiers don’t necessarily constitute for anything other than perspective while reading.)
Roles change in alliances all the time. I imagine more so in those family Alliances. Some times leaders do all the recruiting and the war time planning. Sometimes they assign people roles within the alliance to handle these duties. Instead of saying “Sally Elder/Co” is responsible for this and this “John Elder/Co” is responsible for that, Leaders can simply refer to rank and associate it with a responsibility.
Of course this is mostly a “quality of life” idea that I think would benefit leaders, just like the alliance announcement.
I know I have seen this vaguely suggested before but because this was slightly different and a little more simplified of an idea of some that I read, I thought it would be okay to share in a new topic. If not I apologize in advance.
Thanks for reading!