We had the same trouble, so i created a new alliance and all the actives members migrated.
Sorry for my poor English
Please consider demoting leaders for inactivity. Or deleting inactive alliances. I am sure it will free space on your servers and motivate people to log in regularly. You could also add a group demotion features where several members can elect to demote an inactive leader who is skewing war matching and frustrating the rest.
I agree with this. This was a huge problem in the original alliance I was in. He is still the leader of a dead alliance and has not logged in over 500 days. Lol
Here’s a thought. Instead of demoting the leader and deleting alliances for any reason at all, unsatisfied members may always group up, leave the alliance and start a new one on their own, with new leadership, new rules, and new opportunities. Simple as that.
As for the part about members organizing elections in order to change the leadership, definitely NO! This is E&P, not the senate, where people get to debate leader’s decisions and make calls about the alliance’s general direction. How about if I get a bunch of my friends into an alliance and vote the leader off, just because I can? You may have read, several days ago, about the complains of people getting banned from the general chat because they get targeted and reported by a bunch of trolls for made-up reasons… would you like that kind of things to happen within your alliance?
If you actually read what was stated, it was for inactive leaders…
If you actually read read my comment,
Forget about deleting alliances and changing leadership, go start your own, it’s easy. Just click on create, pay 50 gems and take it to top 100. Success! As for the people who decide to stay in a dead alliance, they do that by their own free will, there is absolutely no reason to disband their alliance.
I think the original idea as I understand it — if the leader doesn’t log in for a full week (or similar) he or she is automatically demoted to co-leader and the co-leader with the longest time in the alliance is promoted to leader — would actually be helpful. Why force people to found new alliances and leave zombies behind to trap newbies? If we can fairly avoid the problem, I think we should do so.
I’m pretty sure that isn’t about active/inactive leaders. An alliance can be active even if the leader is inactive. And if I decide to stay in a leaderless alliance, that is my personal decision, I don’t need you or anyone else deciding what is best for me. How on earth could you presume that poposing about disbanding my alliance would be ok, leader or no leader?!
For instance, this alliance has one member and hasn’t been active in a very long time. So why take up server room for a dead alliance?
Now this alliance has 29 players 1x leader and 28x members which none are higher than member rank due to their leader not logging in for over 200+days as well.
So now tell me why should all those 28x players(whom worked their tails off to lvl that alliance and slay all those titans and war points) have to start over? Who is that fair to?
I think that other guy is on to something here V…it makes total sense…let’s make 10 million alliances to flood the system…there for allowing less people to be able to play…which in turn…everyone will lose less cups…there will be no one to raid…this is goddamn…brilliant…
This I am not sure about…I thought after two (?) wars and the person does not participate, that they are automatically opted out of future wars? So shouldn’t be counted in the matching process.
Is this the get flagged thread?
B2T: One can’t degrade or delete sb or sth, who paid sth or which anybody paid for. Everybody’s got the LEAVE option and that would be my option, if I was unsatisfied with my ally. There are 1000s of alliances willing to have active players or one can simply create an own…
You are correct. But the point that was being made is that if you and 28 others worked months to get into higher titans war score…etc. and your leader just says eff this I’m out. You cant dump him and keep your stats…which would make sense. Instead you all need to leave…and start a new alliance…as its day one…1 star titans and lower war opponents…bad loot…even worse than the usual…its not fair to the others to have to suffer for one dbag…being in this situation with 28 other players was rough…after 2 hits titans dead…and the game lost a lot of fun…heroes I couldn’t get ascension items for…etc…it makes sense to allow this. So yes it’s about choice…but it’s more about saving progress… it’s like playing a video game getting close to the end and dying…and realizing…there’s no save option before you die and gotta start over…
Starting a new alliance is hard work! If you haven’t had to build up titans from scratch, you don’t know how lucky you are! I completely agree that leaders that have been offline for… lets say 30days… are no longer interested in leading an alliance and leadership should automatically bump to someone else.
Well said. I agree with yah @DarknessReborn. But as you see, I don’t think some folks are agreeing because since it’s not there problem they could care less about those 28x folks that worked hard to get the alliance up. Some folks never had to fight a lvl 1 Titan and work their way back to the top.
I think there may be an overlooked problem here … what if a leader goes missing by some unforseen accident.
I’ve raised this issue before. As leader, if I were to suddenly fall ill or otherwise be unavailable and unable to contact my alliance, there is no mechanasim that would allow them to promote another leader.
The alliance would want to stay together but chances are they wouldn’t be able to coordinate everyone.
I would like to see a change so that if a leader is inactive for some ridiculous amount of time (I don’t know how long but for me 40 days would be crazy), then the most senior co-leader should be able to be promoted.
Perhaps it could be done by putting in a support ticket, with a screenshot showing the inactive leader.
If an alliance is perfectly content with having no leader, then they don’t put in a support ticket and carry on as usual.
Absolutely. That’s the problem most folks now a days don’t understand the grind and dedication it took to get the alliance to where it is. Then to have a leader just poof and leave you dangling and having to start over sucks and it really is bad for the moral of the entire alliance. I know from personal experience. Been playing this game since second week it came out. Had a great alliance and after 6 months of grinding and making it to the top 50 our leader went offline and never came back. He abandon us. We just watched as the days went by of no log in. When this happens you have no choice but to either keep it with dead weight or move on. We decided to move on and start a new. Sucks, but we had to do it. Lost some members in the process and starting over from scratch is never fun. But some will never know the struggle of this cause they jump into and alliance which is already started and at a 5-6* titan. I remember when those titans where tough to kill. Having to flask to put one down lol.
This idea is needed. Right now, nothing can be done about an alliance leader that disappears. I had one that would disappear for weeks at a time. Then come back and boot everybody who showed more than 24 hours inactive. This would give the alliance a chance to handle these situations.
I don’t think building a new alliance would be so difficult. Starting an alliance from scratch, is no easy task, I know this first hand, (I built my own from scratch, last summer) but having 25 or more people of a certain level, that are used to working together, starting over in a new alliance wouldn’t be nearly as difficult as that. It would take about two or three weeks to get back to the fitting titan level (it would take about three or four days to climb one star on the titan scale, and I don’t think a leaderless alliance is fighting high level titans), but killing a few low level titans would be a joke and the AM losses neglectable… as for the war score, it will still be almost the same, except for the points for recent victories, if that’s the case, so there could be two or three miss matches, favoring the new alliance, which will actually lead to gathering 10 or 15 easy war chest points. Also, as in the “Honesty Branch Library” example and many other more, I bet, people might find it ok to play in a leaderless alliance. That Caian guy left 300 days ago and still the alliance is doing fain without him.
I have to agree there isn’t room for inactive leaders… Leaders are to set an example for their teams, to show strength and unity, to teach and guide … you can’t do that if you are not active… They should be demoted… I for one would not let my teammates go a stray…