Alliance membership perks

GasHauler

How many people would like to see Alliances reworked to include perks for being a Leader / Officer, and possibly some longevity benefits for staying in an alliance for a long time? This may encourage people to stay in alliances, or decide if they want to be a leader or officer, or just a member.

Blackshadow0203

Yes, this change would be very welcome and beneficial!

I agree, this would bring so much more commitment in alliances!

Unknown

This content has been removed.

GasHauler

Yes, this change would be very welcome and beneficial!

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

I think the wording of the No option is unfair and not representative of what we could be refuting. I’d agree if it were just tittles anything else would see unfair unless you make the extra perks laughable

I’m not quite sure what you mean. Why would it seem unfair to get some perks for being alliance leader or officer? Those people have to do extra work in the game to keep an alliance running and getting rewards, I think there should be some kind of perk to having to put in extra work, instead of just being an alliance member. Furthermore, I also stated that there could also be a bonus for people based on how long they’ve been in an alliance, such as a boost in gold, loyalty, or other boosts. Maybe unique titles for alliance leaders, officers, and how long you’ve been with an alliance. I don’t know what would be fair or unfair, it’s simply a suggestion to make things more fun being in an alliance and possibly more incentive to stay with an alliance instead of hopping around. My point being, the only reason for people to even be in alliances right now is for the AQ/AW rewards, which are kind of stale except for only the top tier and there’s not much incentive for people to really want to be leaders or officers other than to control who gets invited/kicked and starting AQ/AW.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

GasHauler

Yes, this change would be very welcome and beneficial!

@SquishyjrThe_4TH I’m still not seeing how the poll options is asking two separate things, as it’s simply a yes or no poll, either people think it would be helpful to have something like this, or they don’t. The point of my poll was to see how many of the player base would be interested to see *something* implented into being more involved in an alliance. If you have other specific suggestions, please feel free to offer them, as any ideas would be welcome. I don’t know exactly what would work and what wouldn’t, but I want the idea to spread and create more interest. Yes, I realize that many alliances operate differently, but I still believe there could be a way to incorporate something new into alliances. Currently, there’s no incentives for anyone to want to be an alliance leader or officer, except the title and power to invite/kick other players.

SiriusBreak

Yes, this change would be very welcome and beneficial!

I would be happy to see something like this implemented. I was an Officer for a LONGTIME, and am now a Leader. I can say without a doubt there's extra work put in. I wouldn't want anything too extravagant, but some boosts to various item intakes, a title system that you can acquire over time, etc would be more than sufficient. I agree that giving too much incentive to Leadership would be lopsided and not right. But if it were relatively balanced, and extened to the players. I'd be all for this. I have members that have stuck with us for years. This also indeed should be recognized. Perhaps it could scale with overall Alliance loyalty i.e. the average time spent of all players in the Alliance would in turn increase the boost to Gold, BC, Loyalty, and Shard intake from AQ and AW for all members. Milestone titles for X time spent with an Alliance. This has a LOT of potential if done right.

Lvernon15

Yes, this change would be very welcome and beneficial!

Not necessarily the leader and officer thing, that’s just make alliances with no members and only officers, but a longevity thing would be nice, just something simple like a chunk of loyalty every month you’re in the ally, but with aw and burnout I’m not sure it’d work

PIZZATIME

No, I don’t think this would make any difference at all.

No some allys don't give perfectly hard working members rank to officers but if ur a leader of ur own ally then even w/o members u r getting extra rewards so if this isn't what u mean than plz reword ur description but even officers who were longtime could sometime slack off not deserving rewards

It's an alliance everyone deserves their weight of rewards since u all do the stuff together or u r kicked
We're all in this together!

007md92

Promising thought. But then people would certainly loose ot over getting officer spot.
Too many crooks . U can't make everyone officer. People with experience. May be they should put a badge system. Like
How many mvp. Add an option how many alliance. How many times officer or leader.
& Also they can add something to the leader officer spots. Like who is responsible for what.
Officer /recruitment
Officer /war placement
Officer /BG managing. Etc.

GasHauler

Yes, this change would be very welcome and beneficial!

@007md92 I understand what you’re saying, and I do like your ideas about titles/badges and specific roles for officers. But I still think there’s a way to incorporate other perks for Alliance leaders and officers but also regular members too for staying with an alliance. I could see the concern about fairness, but I’m not saying they should give really big rewards or anything, just something to make it more worth being a leader or officer, as well as regular members getting something for sticking with an alliance. Or maybe a way for Alliance leaders to reward their officers and members with bonuses like crystal shards or extra gold or something but also have a max cap on how much can be given out per day or week or per person. I do not know the perfect system, but I think something could be implemented to make alliances more fun and interesting.

tinman76

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

Dude for one your poll is a perfect example of two separate things being asked and the answers being incredibly one sided. Not all alliance run the same, some have 3 officers while others can have 5. And since it’s not a reward tied directly to game play it could be one sided depending on the leader. My original point was that it should be limited to titles and non roster related stuff which is something we have a common ground.
Unfortunately I tried to edit my comment to address the second issue at hand which was the one about people staying for a long time. I also agree if it came with greater increases in resources such as loyalty since I think that’s the lowest resource to gain. I just don’t think something to grand would be a good model to work with especially during the off seasons

I've actually come across a couple alliances in wars who had more officers than just members. If memory serves me correctly, one had 21 officers! Kind of ridiculous.

GasHauler

Yes, this change would be very welcome and beneficial!

Over 3 years later and I still think *something* to at least reward longevity in an alliance would be nice. I know it won’t prevent people from leaving an alliance if they’re unhappy but at least rewards those that have been with the same alliance for a long time.