Ran through a lot of wars in other alliances where members would use 3, maybe 4 flags lol. Like, hey don’t opt in if ya aren’t gonna use the flags ya know
Absolutely agree a one time infraction, or repeated infraction with apology / explanation is fine with me. Sht happens as long as it’s explained almost the frequency doesn’t matter too
I don’t care about Titan participation bc I don’t care what star Titan we fighting. But if ya aren’t hitting titans At all you are probably not gonna be an active player much longer , too
Ah, the ole Likert scale you’d need a multi question survey here to assess the same queries with a likert scale.
For example, you ask if we value the following variables in an alliance:
Desire for growth
You can not use a single likert scale question if you want to know all 3. A response choosing an option which says “I don’t care if we have much team power but I want the team to be active and grow” … was the option selected because the person wants an alliance that is Chatty/active, or because they want to be in an alliance that will help them to grow their roster/strategy and rise in the leaderboard ? There’s no way to know which reason the person chose.
Of course if we could agree on specific archetypes for alliances this would be feasible. But you’d want to probably conduct a poll to define those first at which point this is officially a full time job and I’d start in voicing SG
Simplest is, You’d want a separate question around each.
“I value individual players being held accountable to their In game activity, with an expectation that ALL team activities will be participated in.”
Or something of that Ilk. Then ya make questions for the other 2, and then ya chart out the results I guess
If you want to check on those 3 variables in a single question, looking for relevant importance, I would probably build the question like:
“The most important aspects of alliance to me are:”
- activity and personality
- activity and growth (individual and alliance)
- activity (double weight activity as a response here)
- growth (ind and alliance) (double weight)
- growth and personality
- personality (Again you’d double weight the response)
I’d chart out the results of this on a bar graph with only the 3 variables. Every response choosing activity and personality would provide +1 to activity and personality and zero to growth. If someone chose just activity, I’d double weight it. You could even triple weight those responses - for those people it is CLEARLY the most important aspect, so this carrying extra weight in your analysis makes sense. Then repeat for all 3 variables with the same method and viola - what are the most important aspects of alliances to members?
If you wanted to add in a fourth variable (say, team power of members), you’d be in trouble cuz you’d have to add like a bajillion survey options. (Or remove the individual options)
Final edit: while I think your methodology could be improved I supplied some ideas for how I’d approach this survey … that doesn’t mean I’m right or that that’s the only option. The @Brobb of the world could certainly provide a more precise, scientific methodology. I’m just makin sht up same as you but I thought there’s a chance someone may read what I wrote and think “ah, this makes sense.” So, I’m going with it