New feature: ability to remove a faction member during war

[own]

I see no reason to block this ability. It's too easy for dirt bags to jump from team to team to do nothing during war. Allowing teams the ability to kick a player during this time gives the teams the power needed to make sure deadbeats don't ruin the fun for the rest of the team. I'd rather be a person short than knowing this guy just got rewarded to do nothing.
I'd like the communities thoughts on this please.

[JPetermon]

I'm in full agreement with this.

[C-Dub]

Then how would you protect against a faction leader holding on to a player or two that he wants to drop, but uses them for war long enough to get some good WD points from those players (perhaps they even use some gold) and then the faction leader drops them right before war ends so they dont get any reward. Seems to me that not being allowed to drop a player during war is a safety valve for both sides.

[Yankster]

So have a resume when applying for factions? Or allow players to rate another player such as a performance record? How about an evaluation page and rate people with stars and an area where leaders and officers can write an eval on them? Kinda like in grade school when teachers out sticky stats on tests. I never saw too many but I'm sure others did.oh what fun this would be.

[Mr. Pink]

I use to agree with this feature but have had a change of heart. Leaders and Officers need to live with the decisions they make and learn from their mistakes. Adding the recruitment equivalent of a "mulligan" doesn't fix the underlying issue.

For all the issues in this game, Factions have been a great training ground (or laboratory) on social dynamics and managing/building teams in a competitive environment. Some leaders take a heavy handed approach while others are more collaborative.

In my opinion, everyone tends to know who is getting the boot (even before WD starts) and it's rarely a surprise when it happens afterwards. If a cut occurs that surprises the faction, that is the leaders fault for not communicating better.

I'm starting to believe each member should have specific goals and expectations set the weeks before WD and cuts should actually occur before WD if they aren't met.

[own]

Then how would you protect against a faction leader holding on to a player or two that he wants to drop, but uses them for war long enough to get some good WD points from those players (perhaps they even use some gold) and then the faction leader drops them right before war ends so they dont get any reward. Seems to me that not being allowed to drop a player during war is a safety valve for both sides.
Problem solved, if you drop a player during war, you lose any points they earned. Keeps both sides honest and niether side can take advantage of the other.
I also like the rating idea! For that to work it must have a comments section, but that's a great idea as well!!

[Sir josh]

So have a resume when applying for factions? Or allow players to rate another player such as a performance record? How about an evaluation page and rate people with stars and an area where leaders and officers can write an eval on them? Kinda like in grade school when teachers out sticky stats on tests. I never saw too many but I'm sure others did.oh what fun this would be.
This is how the real military (USAF) works. They have visible performance reports and the less visible "push notes" to other commanders to fill them in on what the airman is REALLY like. Seems reasonable to me. During real war you do not need a poor performer or potential saboteur. This issue has been a real problem for us. We have had a number of people accepted into the faction who never contribute and sit waiting for their bonus, then get removed.

[britton]

Thumbs up!

I almost went off topic...

[United Nation of Foxes]

Disagree..

[jchow69]

I disagree. What if they scored some important points? What if they destroyed the wall for 2x the points? It is just too difficult to compute, and Gree knows what it is doing.

[United Nation of Foxes]

I disagree. What if they scored some important points? What if they destroyed the wall for 2x the points? It is just too difficult to compute, and Gree knows what it is doing.

That's what I'm thinking, a player could contribute then be booted 1 hour before end of campaign.

[jchow69]

I used to be in Taking no poo and scored 11278 of their 500k Wd points. I was one of 31 players and they let me receive the units for top 750 before leaving.

[Mr. Pink]

That's what I'm thinking, a player could contribute then be booted 1 hour before end of campaign.

It's a bad scenario for players who are active but may be giving up big points and a faction is trying to hold their ranking.

[anonymousMW]

I see no reason to block this ability. It's too easy for dirt bags to jump from team to team to do nothing during war. Allowing teams the ability to kick a player during this time gives the teams the power needed to make sure deadbeats don't ruin the fun for the rest of the team. I'd rather be a person short than knowing this guy just got rewarded to do nothing.
I'd like the communities thoughts on this please.
With all due respect.
"1". Delete a companion in combat, not worth.
"2". Do not know how to play.
"3". The strategy is planned before the event.
"4". You can not have old soldiers. (High-level, small defense)
"5". The 50% are gold players. (You could do better.)

[own]

It's a bad scenario for players who are active but may be giving up big points and a faction is trying to hold their ranking.
So why not have the rating system also include a faction rating system? I was apart of TEC prior to leaving for Nutz and those guys are great! I would easily give them five stars and comments to support. This way not only are players rated for their performance, or lack their off, but teams as well.

So if a team was mean enough to drop a player who was active, that player would then be able to have a way to communicate his version.

Keep it going guys, I like the dialog thus far!!

[CommanderHudson]

Some leader don't like a player just drops him so he don't get the rewards. I see the little guys getting screwed. Bad idea

[jchow69]

Yep, it will be a bad idea.

[United Nation of Foxes]

Some leader don't like a player just drops him so he don't get the rewards. I see the little guys getting screwed. Bad idea

This !!!!!!!!

[PITA4PRES]

If they would keep track of hits against the DL and the wall, you would have a better idea of who has actually participated and could exclude players from getting rewards if they did not participate at all. The only issue with this is if you know a player is not going to be available for the battle. In that case they could allow the faction leader and officers to determine if they felt that the player did enough prior to the battle to be worthy of getting the unit, but only if the faction is notified prior to the beginning of the battle. An alternative option would be to allow the players that are not going to be available to battle to designate themselves as such and have the faction leader and officers determine beforehand if the player should be eligible for rewards based on past performance. This way otherwise good players are not penalized because they have other obligations. Every player, LLP included, should be able to get at least some points by hitting the wall or command center if they participate. Now getting Gree to get any of this to work properly is another issue entirely.

[The new guy]

Bad idea will cause too many issues and tickets.

At the end of the day if this is happening to you especially more than once it is the leaders fault as well, take it as a lesson and don't make the same mistake next time.

[steveo127]

and then what about the player dropped? does he get back the time he spent in the faction and all the gold he spent that now means nothing? does he get to go around with a little bag that says 543,204 WD points and then any faction can pay him the highest bid, he jumps in and they accrue those points?


Problem solved, if you drop a player during war, you lose any points they earned. Keeps both sides honest and niether side can take advantage of the other.
I also like the rating idea! For that to work it must have a comments section, but that's a great idea as well!!

[milankovitch]

this is simple...AGREED!

oh..edit just because of a post above. a "dirtbag" as the OP stated probably wouldn't spend gold in the event...and probably is an overstatement. As the OP stated, they jump around and do nothing. so it's not like they are taking the last hit on a wall, or scoring major points you would need to worry about losing.

[Sir josh]

I disagree. What if they scored some important points? What if they destroyed the wall for 2x the points? It is just too difficult to compute, and Gree knows what it is doing.
So, is this a done deal or another forum rumor?

[jchow69]

You can't calculate that because of all the points he could've helped by destroying the wall or taking down the defense leader? That affects a lot of the faction's points.

[jchow69]

What if he worked hard and doesn't get the prizes that he deserves?

[steveo127]

in theory yes, but absolutely cannot be (assuming you're responding to my post above)

why is it too good to be true? well i'm sure i could come up with several reasons if given the time, but the first reason that raises a huge red flag is that GREE could miss out on money...how? a player earns 250k WD points, then chooses to high tail it out of a faction and puts a big red x on his back, ringing the dinner bell saying "i sell my soul to the highest bidder" the way things are, the person would be able to get paid more in real-cash than he paid for virtual-gold to earn those 250k points. that extra dealing is illegal according to the TOS i believe, and if not, it's still a way for players to take advantage of the system and a way for GREE to not profit....

besides, could you imagine the backlash on the forums if a team were to get 10th place by barely edging out another team due to this loophole?


this is simple...AGREED!

[Valkyrie]

No. I disagree with ability to remove a faction member during war.

Leaders & officers of factions should be making the necessary strides to ensure that their faction members are active, etc. prior to a faction war while looking at previous faction war performance records, current stats, and so forth to base their decision upon.

If you decide to keep a player who was not active in a recent faction war, more power to you if you intend on holding out on them, but it may hurt you in the long run, and that is a decision you have had time to think about.

[jchow69]

Ya, it really seems simple, but it isn't. It is a really complicated mess that Gree doesn't want to get into and I don't want to be part of the mess either.

[Superdude]

I think a combination of these would work. For example, maybe they would get some but not all of the factions prizes if they were kicked out during a war...or if they received a compensation

[chinton00]

Then how would you protect against a faction leader holding on to a player or two that he wants to drop, but uses them for war long enough to get some good WD points from those players (perhaps they even use some gold) and then the faction leader drops them right before war ends so they dont get any reward. Seems to me that not being allowed to drop a player during war is a safety valve for both sides.



Reply Reply With Quote

This is the reason why. If we do a good job of recruiting, we get good recruits, when whe slip, they slip in.

[jchow69]

Then how would you protect against a faction leader holding on to a player or two that he wants to drop, but uses them for war long enough to get some good WD points from those players (perhaps they even use some gold) and then the faction leader drops them right before war ends so they dont get any reward. Seems to me that not being allowed to drop a player during war is a safety valve for both sides.



Reply Reply With Quote

This is the reason why. If we do a good job of recruiting, we get good recruits, when whe slip, they slip in.

I agree with you. Being able to remove a player during the wars is just plain unfair.

[fofito30]

In an organized faction, you will have different members (officers, grunts, DL, L, et all) that during the time between events perform different task, some may develop before event intel, others may just donate high amounts of funds while shooters and intel build up their attack/defense, boost buildings, new unit levels, etc.
I understand how unfair is for the gold users to spend x amount of gold and see a fellow member that barely participated, but that, precisely is the faction leader and its officers task. That said, I been able to read some messages posted in many players walls, and its funny how some guys think they are a nasty gunny sergeant dealing with new recruits.
Basically is dangerous and possible solutions may require a lot of changes by GREE and ourselves

[a4194394]

Agree. Feel very bad if some members do nothing and finally the whole faction fall from important ranks.

[jchow69]

Agree. Feel very bad if some members do nothing and finally the whole faction fall from important ranks.

What about the guys who contribute most of the points and gets removed at the last second before campaign is over? How fair is that?

[Chiefusn]

I would like to see it stay the same. The group i am with has three factions. Top middle and camper. Who's to say a faction won't add and remove players from other groups to keep the main group strong.

[Chiefusn]

I would like to see it stay the same. The group i am with has three factions. Top middle and camper. Who's to say a faction won't add and remove players from other groups to keep the main group strong during wars.

[Drama Llama]

I think removing a player during the battle would probably cause GRee some major head scratching coding wise and so part of the locked in nature is due to this.
I think a faction history of a player might be useful info to see when accepting new recruits as this would soon show up the deadbeat faction hoppers.

[Archer59]

Decent faction leaders are not going to boot a member during the middle if a battle unless they are sure the player is not participating. Im all for it.

[Archer59]

I would love to be able to see a player's "faction history". Tired of dealing with "jumpers"!

[DFI]

Bad idea. Faction leaders and recruitment officers should take the blame for recruiting poorly performing members. There are too many other issues that gree needs to address that this is one of those which you ask yourself, who better to resolve? And the answer is yourself.

[jchow69]

Bad idea. Faction leaders and recruitment officers should take the blame for recruiting poorly performing members. There are too many other issues that gree needs to address that this is one of those which you ask yourself, who better to resolve? And the answer is yourself.

I totally agree with you.

[sherlock123]

Completely bad idea.

If faction leaders are given the ability to remove players from faction during war then there is no doubt that they will ABUSE THAT POWER by kicking out hard-working, gold-spending players before the war is over.

Then the player does not get any rewards despite spending a ton of gold, money on faction donations and concrete during war.

[MoD]

what would a faction leader gain kicking a gold member before the end of the war? nothing. he just would lose a gold member and get a bad reputation.

but i would also keep it as it is. deal with pricks after war.

[TheOracle]

Our first World Domination event, we weren't able to pass out prizes until some time after the event had ended. In this short period of time, we had several leaders who booted other players and put in their own accounts on other devices so they could reap the rewards.

Players were pretty miffed, and with good reason. Think about all the players who would get kicked and then not have any faction to contribute to during the event.

The way the system is currently set up has the least possibility for something going wrong as long as you trust the members you have before you start the event.

[MoD]

thanks TheOracle for your official gree version. i appreciate that pov.