Functionality of ‘Prohibit Engagement’ in TB

QOL niceties like this for guild leaders should be a thing, it's done in other games, it makes less work for us players (You know, that stuff we shouldn't have to spend so much time doing because this is supposed to be fun?), and helps us function easier.

"We don't want players to make decisions about other player's rosters!" Sure doesn't seem to effect datacrons and pushing us to rent them because other players are.  Or doing relic 9 and 10 on characters so we can remain competitive.  It's a silly argument since we're supposed to be a guild, not 50 individuals.

But then TB and TW have been ignored for years.  So, don't expect it to change.

Ah yes. Yet another forumer who thinks anyone that disagrees with them must be a dev.

I agree it’s not the player’s fault if the officers didn’t block the missions. That’s on the officers. 

Speaking of devs, they have said many times before that they aren’t going to implement something that allows players to control the way other players engage with the game. They’ve said this about not allowing officers to remove TW defences, and I’m sure this would extend to TB zone locking. 

Are you all EA devs? Afraid of making changes? Afraid of work?

the player (just one) added 1 character to a mission. This deploys GP. Then we got 1 star unintentionally. We got really close to 1 star on purpose. The player didn’t get a warning! I’m not gonna kick him for that. He is no problematic player. I blame the game

my point is: there wouldn’t be a problem (no problem, zero problems, no problemo) if the functionality worked as I described it should. Simpler. A block. And a reset after a phase change. Problem solved

If they mess it up multiple time for everyone in the guild, boot them out since they are not following ''orders''. 

No this does not need changed. If you have players ignoring the blocked icon, the node label & the pop up , you have a management problem. And if it was an absolute lock, it would create more burden for management engagement than this "solves". 

It’s better left as it is.  Unfortunately officers have lives and get busy too, sometimes people have to make a judgement call and take a rogue action when it’s the right thing to do.  If people are consistently ignoring the block and deploying when they are meant not to, ignoring the zones they’re supposed to deploy in you boot them.  That’s pretty simple.

Wait, your initial post was all because of fear of rogue or problematic players - "There is a warning if players still want to deploy but this can be ignored.". 😂

If a player ignores the giant red circle with a line through it, and then clicks to confirm to go rogue anyways? Kick them. Done. Easy.

Still think the functionality of ‘Prohibit Engagement’ is not working properly right now. In both replies there is fear of problematic players or rogue officers. But that’s just motivated by fear. And we all know what Master Yoda said about fear ;-). I think problems can be avoided if the comment ‘Prohibit Engagement’ is automatically reset to ‘None’ with every phase change. This is easy to do

I say: keep it simple. Simple is always better

Officers would rather have the ability to also place warnings on platoons so they don't get filled early. An absolute lock is open to abuse, in extreme cases, a rogue officer could lock the whole guild out of tb. There's also the issue of needing officers to be online 24/7 then to remove it if required. The reason they've given is not wanting any player, even a guild leader, to be able to influence a player's ability to play the game that much. Warnings aren't an ideal solution but your idea is problematic. TB and officers do need better tools but this has never been a CG priority. That's why we have discord and third party apps like hotutils. 

You have to actively click past the warning to take a rogue action. If you have people going rogue in your guild despite instructions on the map, your problem is the guildmates, not the map. 

The TB UI does need improvements, but your argument is weak.