That’s a fine suggestion for an alternative.
But to deal with the situation as it stands, migrating to a new alliance is one of the few options available, and so is not poor advice.
2 Likes
I’m interested to hear why you think that. It seems like a simple and easy solution with no downside. What problem do you see with it?
Reminder to follow Forum Rules so I don’t have to apply the Banhammer of Dooooom! 
looks at certain people in the corner
EDIT: I just like saying Dooooom!
3 Likes
Do you have a special outfit you wear when you wield the Banhammer of Dooooom? No, don’t tell me - leave it to my imagination.
3 Likes
Shorts. Definitely short shorts.
2 Likes
The name of the alliance is dead as well as the alliance points. It also is elaborate.
I thing I have to apologize. It was not my intention to attack your suggestion. I wanted to say that SG should find a solution for this old problem and that it is in my eyes not a great alternative to found a new alliance. But yes, it is a solution 
Cat ears are involved of course!
As regards the topic:
While it may be disastrous to suddenly deprive a large number of players their defunct alliances, it is possible to visit said alliances as ambassadors, confirm their leadership is no longer playing (6 weeks, 6 months, etc), and then invite them to join another one.
I am not suggesting sheepstealing players who’s leaders have stepped out for an afternoon or a weekend, but reaching out to those who’s leadership are well and truly gone.
EDIT: The problem with players stuck in a dead alliance is they can neither assume the reins of power, nor disband the alliance (I believe this is by design); they therefore have no choice but stay and stagnate, or move and perhaps thrive.
2 Likes
Available at the official Rook-merch gift shop but almost always sold out…
5 Likes
Do they have those with gatto baffi?
2 Likes
No worries - no offence taken.
I don’t think it is elaborate - I think it is very simple - but we can agree to disagree about that.
The name of the alliance and its points would not die. They would remain with the leader, and it is important to remember that leaders don’t become leaders by magic. They become leaders because it is they who pay the gems to form the alliance, and they who name it, or because leadership is passed to them through a line of succession from the original founder who paid the gems and chose the name. It seems very wrong, to me, to confiscate something a player paid for with gems, because we disapprove of their playing style.
If someone wants to found an alliance, invite a bunch of players to join them, then take a year off E&P without warning anyone, imho that is their absolute prerogative. It’s their alliance. The solution for the other players is simple: leave.
That is a smart and good suggestion.
2 Likes
It’s possible to come up with a very similar name with a bit of punctuation, so the name can live on.
@witch, the Gatto Baffi is more into personal grooming than beach wear.
A well groomed feline is never without her Occam’s razor…
5 Likes
I realize now that the whole bunch of alliance with inactive leader is not so bad actually.
It’s a tampon zone, where new player land “randomly” until they grow enough to become aware of a larger picture and then seek better alliance.
Ultimately, over time, they will be fill with more inactive players and disappear from search.
Not every player land on the forum and find there is a others ways to find better alliance, actually the forum seem more like high end alliance that seek for already well aware and advance players.
And that is perfect as more active player come in forums to enhance their game experience, learn more and share their ideas.
The real fix that is required is the ability to search new alliance in game with some filter
One of the criteria should be “leader last active : last day / last week…”
My personal experience, I am at my 3rd alliance now:
-
My first was a “totally random” first search and pick one that was already well filled (over 25/30) without realizing all leader and elder were all gone by a while.
The advantage was lower Titan level, perfect for learning my way through it.
When I wanted more Titan participation I realized that there was just too many inactive player in this alliance. -
My second, I looked at the alliance score as my criteria because I wanted stronger Titan.
It was a better alliance with 1 active elder, 3 inactive elder and 1 inactive leader, After I brought up that fact, We talked about the possibility to form a new alliance which hook me there for some time, until it was more clear the elder was not really going for it, losing 4 active player / 30 was for me a turn down. -
My 3rd alliance I still searched via game search because I was still unaware of the forums recruit at that points.
I did look carefully to get an active alliance by looking at all the player before joining, making sure most of them did log in the last day/s, there was some rare 7 days last log members so I did not care much at that point because the leader was active in the minutes.
At some point we talked about “faster” kick out for not being active and now we have a nice growing alliance on titan 6*-7* , was on 4*-5* when I got here first, and it still perfect for me as the titan of those level are proper for my current teams of heroes.
Next time I look for an alliance, if I ever do, will be from the forum and looking for an alliance that all member are daily active and that are at titan level that would best suit my teams of heroes.
3 Likes
So our Bard of the Empire has changed his name… goodbye Lesley-Annia, hello Jonah!
I am sure our Gatto Baffi (hmmm, shouldn’t it be Gatta… 
) is very well groomed.
And back to topic - I was just looking at alliances randomly and I am still appalled at the number that show up that are filled with inactive players…
2 Likes
I not only agree fully with this statement, but I have employed exactly what it suggests with very positive results. Though I believe there is an unwritten sense of etiquette to be applied when “liberating” eager fighters from an alliance with dead leadership… perhaps the bigger issue is the game is quickly becoming prohibitive of moving between alliances, especially with the recent AW chest.
I’d love to see a way for SG to incorporate a way to allow periodic movement for the purpose mentioned above, sending veteran members to train in a companion alliance etc., without opening the door to the old “titan jumping” fiasco.
Absolutely. We have employed this method successfully, but it requires a bit of polite common sense.
@witch, well spotted. I shall explain a little in the near future
1 Like
If you wish - there is no real need. You can change your name as you desire.
(But if there is more of a story - or an epic tale - do tell). 
3 Likes
I played a different game where leadership was transferred if inactive for three days. That actually worked well. If it was a vacation deal, leadership was transferred when they returned. This allowed active people to take over alliance and clean it up.
Not sure if you can transfer leadership in this game - I’m a coleader and not a leader so uncertain the options available.
The leader can transfer leadership to anyone.
The co-leader can promote a member to Elder, or demote Elder to member. They have additional powers, such as changing the alliance banner and kicking any Elder or Member (see below).
Elders cannot promote, but can kick members (remember this when you promote people to this level and above!)
Members are your daily fighters, the alliance’s bread and butter.
1 Like
Here, we talk about players that quit the game.
They don’t care to pass the leadership properly to another member…
Result : if the other members want to have the leadership back, no choice, just leave and create a new one, and start with 1* titans (very fun 
).
In another thread, I already proposed a simple solution, and everyone has something is winning (players and devs).
1/
If a player is inactive for more than, say, 30 days, just remove him automatically from his alliance.
2/
If he was the leader, then give automatically the leadership to the oldest member.
3/
If he was the last member, then the alliance is deleted.
Very simple.
Result:
- no more complaining about alliances without leader.
- no more dead alliances
- the server does not have to generate titans (1*) to dead alliances (better performances)
- the server does not have to generate war matches between dead alliances
- better search results
I don’t understand why this simple rule is not implemented yet…
7 Likes
