EA Forums - Banner

suggestion (question)

I have a question for "fathers of this game" :)

is it possible to ? :

in the alliance, the position of the player "inactive" deprives the player of the bonus of the alliance (bonus for the POI) - I think that it will help in managing the Alliance, it certainly will not hurt :)
"inactive" status deprives the player of any bonuses (economic and combat)

it is a small change that will help in managing the allies, especially "wings", but also in the major alliances can sometimes be helpful to commanders

Replies

  • If you do not like an inactive player, remove it from the alliance. Many alliances keep "inactive" in order not to diminish their overall score and / or because they keep POIs. If there was a rule of play on this, many advantages would disappear. So, think about it!
  • But what about the cases where the inactive member gets attacked by means of pvp or forgotten attacks? On some alliances they remove the inactive players once one gets to the bottom of the player roster in terms of score. It is best to have some support bases guard the POI's. At least they can maintain their base when they get attacked.
  • so we do not understand each other
    1)
    inactive status is used sporadically
    2)
    removing the player is a last resort, there are many willing to the main alliance, but it is different in "wings", to the alliance ranking 10 already willing are few, remove the player, who will replace him?
    depriving the bonus is a kind of signal to remind the player
    3)
    the "inactive" status is only a form applied to a player who does not execute commands, as the commandant the only form of "pressure" is to throw the player away - does it do the trick?
    4)
    I will hear immediately that in your allies, everyone works like bees - I do not believe in these stories - I had the opportunity to talk to several alliances and I know what it looks like - in alliances - ok, but wings?
    5)
    you write PvP, it is logical that when there is a war, the Commandant cares for the whole and looks after the rank
    6)
    Example: 90% of the Alliance is working hard, 10% only playing for the ranking and not working for the Alliance - will you remove these 10% of players? Changing "status" without consequences is a mockery
    if after losing the bonus half of those 10% will come to you and start playing alliance, it's OK, and the other half that does not remember is apparently unreformable and should be removed from the alliance
    7)
    I repeat that it mainly concerns "wings"
  • I think it is a very good idea

    in each alliance is that several players are gaining the POI there are also a few players who only smoke posts and do not even guard the POI

    they do not acquire POIs, they do not protect POIs - and they benefit from POIs

    you can always remove such a player, but the risk of losing a bonus is more mobilization to listen to commands

    what you propose will understand the commander, officers - vultures will be opposed

    interesting idea, both in the academy, in the main alliance too
  • The intent of 'inactive' rank was to simply flag them for sorting purposes. As others have stated, if leadership feels the member is a drain on the alliance somehow, then simply boot them and kill off their bases. Inactive or retired accounts should be removed and destroyed, unless they've provided a sub to an active member.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!