War Season Rewards & Vengeful Officers

TheRealmKeeperTheRealmKeeper Member Posts: 231 ★
in General Discussion
Would like to know why there’s no fail safe to prevent ill tempered loose cannons from sabotaging alliances and preventing hard working members from receiving rewards.. Yesterday an officer on a rant fueled meltdown tried kicking an entire team, luckily only got through a few before the leader noticed and booted him. I have in and out of game screenshots to prove this and all members who were kicked rejoined same day, but are now out of season end rewards. Is there anything that can or will be done about this Kabam?

Comments

  • Nick_Caine_32Nick_Caine_32 Member Posts: 587 ★★★★
    They have dealt with this from other groups and their message to them was "they don't get involved in officer/alliance drama." so basically I would guess the answer is no, just like every other issue with that game mode - they don't see any issue with it.
  • TheRealmKeeperTheRealmKeeper Member Posts: 231 ★
    That’s a real shame, all the evidence is there that this man was off his meds. Guess the only thing to do is make everyone an officer lol. Lagacy actually put out a great video on the subject recently that I implore Kabam to watch. Fact that our money, items and time has been wasted on a sociopath is all kinds of wrong.
  • TheRealmKeeperTheRealmKeeper Member Posts: 231 ★
    Also to anyone giggling or thinking maybe the boots were warranted.. He started with top performers down lol
  • DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Member Posts: 22,024 ★★★★★
    TheRealmKeeper wrote: »
    Would like to know why there’s no fail safe to prevent ill tempered loose cannons from sabotaging alliances and preventing hard working members from receiving rewards.. Yesterday an officer on a rant fueled meltdown tried kicking an entire team, luckily only got through a few before the leader noticed and booted him. I have in and out of game screenshots to prove this and all members who were kicked rejoined same day, but are now out of season end rewards. Is there anything that can or will be done about this Kabam?

    Where would the checks and balances stop? There would be complaints of it being to hard to kick someone.
  • Primmer79Primmer79 Member Posts: 2,968 ★★★★
    Honestly, a situation like this is on the leader as much as the officer. People like that shouldn't be an officer. Theres two solutions. Have no one be an officer, or have everyone be an officer. I hate both of those. Lot of responsibility for the leader, or too many cooks in the kitchen. Gotta find a balance with the right people
  • Dean9300450Dean9300450 Member Posts: 85 ★
    There is one more solution, instead of 5 wars how about 2 wars to be eligible for season reward
  • Primmer79Primmer79 Member Posts: 2,968 ★★★★
    Colinwhitworth69 wrote: »
    Idea for solution: no one person can kick out a member. Require two people to agree to it first.

    I kinda hate this, only because of the burden it would put on officers when trying to slide someone into the alliance quickly between wars and AQ. If anything I could understand needing leader's approval maybe? or just allow the leader to kick? it would still require only one person.
  • Primmer79Primmer79 Member Posts: 2,968 ★★★★
    Dean9300450 wrote: »
    There is one more solution, instead of 5 wars how about 2 wars to be eligible for season reward

    I think the 5 wars was good for the 2 month long season. With the change to one month long, it should be 3 wars. One full cycle.
  • PaytoPlayPaytoPlay Member Posts: 762 ★★★
    Colinwhitworth69 wrote: »
    Idea for solution: no one person can kick out a member. Require two people to agree to it first.

    I was thinking about this too yesterday... Ideally the leader and one officer. Also to add to this, to kick a leader all officers need to agree (saw this on another discussion about an inactive leader)
  • TheRealmKeeperTheRealmKeeper Member Posts: 231 ★
    PaytoPlay wrote: »
    Colinwhitworth69 wrote: »
    Idea for solution: no one person can kick out a member. Require two people to agree to it first.

    I was thinking about this too yesterday... Ideally the leader and one officer. Also to add to this, to kick a leader all officers need to agree (saw this on another discussion about an inactive leader)

    Some great thoughts here. Would love to see what kabam has to say about the subject. Kills the spirit and if I’m being honest, the desire to play after investing so much and losing the payoff at the end due to people with bad intentions.
  • DTMelodicMetalDTMelodicMetal Member Posts: 2,785 ★★★★★
    TheRealmKeeper wrote: »
    That’s a real shame, all the evidence is there that this man was off his meds. Guess the only thing to do is make everyone an officer lol. Lagacy actually put out a great video on the subject recently that I implore Kabam to watch. Fact that our money, items and time has been wasted on a sociopath is all kinds of wrong.

    Yes he did. Lagacy appears to have matured, very nice to see MCOC YouTubers accurately speak on behalf of the community.
  • RancidDevnullRancidDevnull Member Posts: 5
    Another game I play locks the Alliance until after the Alliance event is done.
  • HoneymonsterHoneymonster Member Posts: 69 ★
    Only the alliance leader should be allowed to boot imo
  • TheRealmKeeperTheRealmKeeper Member Posts: 231 ★
    At worst there should be something in place as to where you put in at least 5 wars with 1 team. Whether you’re still on one or not (in my case due to a terrible person) you should get some kind of rewards. Fact kabam obviously doesn’t care about people ruining their game/experience and can’t even be bothered to comment says a lot.
  • Blax4everBlax4ever Member Posts: 683 ★★★
    Kabam doesn’t care
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Member, Guardian Posts: 19,658 Guardian
    TheRealmKeeper wrote: »
    At worst there should be something in place as to where you put in at least 5 wars with 1 team. Whether you’re still on one or not (in my case due to a terrible person) you should get some kind of rewards. Fact kabam obviously doesn’t care about people ruining their game/experience and can’t even be bothered to comment says a lot.

    Actually, it just puts them in the middle of a continuum of games that allow players some control over certain aspects of meta gaming. On the one hand, there are games where alliance leaders have almost no power to alter other players' game experience and are held responsible for any negative thing they do. On the other side of the fence, there's Eve Online's legendary laissez faire attitude towards interplayer politics where basically the only thing you aren't allowed to do is literally kill opposing factions in the real world. But you can bribe them in the real world with real cash to sabotage the gameplay of tens of thousands of other paying subscribers because they are in a position of power, and all's fair.
Sign In or Register to comment.