Giving leader and officers the power to choose players in the teams and assign them in bgs

I really belive its high time for kabam mike, to impliment this idea of giving leaders and officers or only leaders to give power to select there players and assign them in bgs — as a ingame feature ! Outgame chats groups doesnt really help so much as i m the leader from past 2 years in this game - in east coast avengers alliance ! I really find it horrible when inactive players join war groups when i wanted to start 2 bg wars so assigning should be redefined here

Comments

SMiller80

Why don't you just kick the inactive players out of your alliance? If they can't be depended on to either play or not join AW, they shouldn't be in an alliance. If you are only running two bgs, you only need 20 people anyway.

Sayakono

Kicking isnt always the solution! Sometimes we need to give small players chance to grow slowly

LeNoirFaineant

If they are inactive they aren't making use of that chance

Brew_Swayne

3rd party chat apps are great if every one in your alliance has it and checks it. If you've got a problem with players joining the wrong bg, then it means they aren't using Line or whatever chat app the rest of the team is using.

It's cool that you want to give players a chance to grow, but you also gotta set some ground rules for everyone to follow. And they don't need to be strict. My alliance has 3 simple rules.

Line (have it and check it for updates)
Daily activity
Communicate planned extended absences (more than 48 hrs)

That's it. Not overbearing or too demanding.

Set a few simple rules, remove players who can't or don't want to abide by them and find players who do.

GroundedWisdom

It's been an ongoing issue for me. I organize Wars, and when someone jumps in without permission, it throws off the plan. A large number of Losses I've had were because people didn't follow instructions. Now, I'm upfront about the rule when people join and give a warning. However, I've had to kick a significant number of people for it. I'm pretty chill, but War is a hard-and-fast rule for me. It would be easier if I could remove people from the BG once they've placed mistakenly, or just from not listening. Once they place they're locked and I can't replace them. However, a couple things that occur to me are the fact that communication and following instructions are key. If they don't, they're probably not a good fit. Also, I could see how this could potentially be abused based on personal grudges. It's a tricky suggestion.

Sayakono

@GroundedWisdom yes bro thats the fact ! Outside game chat apps wont help until there is a ingame feature from kabam like we have it in clash of clans ! The duty n power of leader and officers should be redesigned ! To make the game more interesting ! We should have ingame feature to place people in bgs according to teams we decide as a leader

SMiller80

@Sayakono I'm all for letting guys who are small grow. I'm really glad others let me do that when I was small potatoes. The difference is that I knew I wasn't as good as them, so I worked at getting better. I couldn't run for champs at the time, and can distinctly remember the first time I did t4b arena. With that said, I always showed up for every part of the game. I did AQ, completion, etc. I worked to be better. I was never inactive. That's the part I don't get. If people are going to be in an alliance, and gain all the benefits from being part of an alliance, you need to not only work at growing your own account, but also help everyone else grow. It's part of being a good alliance member.

With that being said, I'm all for some changes being made. We occasionally have guys who join the wrong bg by accident, and with AW seasons, it's important to get into a rhythm. So guys in the wrong bg can make things difficult. So I'm all for Kabam making it so an officer can remove someone from a bg. But not an inactive. Those guys need to be kicked for the sake of the ones who are working hard to make everything work.

Primmer79

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

It's been an ongoing issue for me. I organize Wars, and when someone jumps in without permission, it throws off the plan. A large number of Losses I've had were because people didn't follow instructions. Now, I'm upfront about the rule when people join and give a warning. However, I've had to kick a significant number of people for it. I'm pretty chill, but War is a hard-and-fast rule for me. It would be easier if I could remove people from the BG once they've placed mistakenly, or just from not listening. Once they place they're locked and I can't replace them. However, a couple things that occur to me are the fact that communication and following instructions are key. If they don't, they're probably not a good fit. Also, I could see how this could potentially be abused based on personal grudges. It's a tricky suggestion.

I like what you've mentioned here, being able to remove someone from defense. Could solve some problems of mistakenly placing someone, and joining the wrong bg. Sure it could be abused, but kicking from an alliance is the worst abuse of power and we already give that to officers.

VandalSavage

The real issue isn't people jumping into AW by mistake or used the wrong heroes. Not even close. Mistakes do happen but they don't occur often enough to really get under people's skin.

The real issue is that people join AW in order to farm the participation rewards. They are called moochers or welfare players. Call them whatever you like. Except I won't call them "inactive". They are clearly actively getting under people's skin.

They join AW and then ignore the attack phase or they do some minimum effort to make it look like they are doing something. So obviously, they wouldn't care what heroes to use or what BG they should join. Their eye is on the prize. And not surprisingly, AWs are lost. Having assigned BGs won't stop people from mooching. On the bright side, I see opponents have "reserved" players on their attack phase roster too so all it is not lost.

You kick one and he is quickly replaced with another moocher. Endless cycle.

Removing a player out of the battle group would make life easier. They can rejoin the right battle group if a real mistake was made.

Naturally, the moochers would adapt and join the AW 5 minutes or whatever before the attack phase begins. Being able to remove a player from the BG at any time as long as there is 12 hours left in the attack phase should discourage that. The BG would be down an attacking player if it came to that but at least the moocher would get nothing from the participation rewards.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Ozzziie

Even for active alliances, I would love to assign in game people to BGs. Then I don't have to maintain that out of game in a chat.

Also, then there would be no confusion on joining.

Primmer79

VandalSavage wrote: »

The real issue isn't people jumping into AW by mistake or used the wrong heroes. Not even close. Mistakes do happen but they don't occur often enough to really get under people's skin.

The real issue is that people join AW in order to farm the participation rewards. They are called moochers or welfare players. Call them whatever you like. Except I won't call them "inactive". They are clearly actively getting under people's skin.

They join AW and then ignore the attack phase or they do some minimum effort to make it look like they are doing something. So obviously, they wouldn't care what heroes to use or what BG they should join. Their eye is on the prize. And not surprisingly, AWs are lost. Having assigned BGs won't stop people from mooching. On the bright side, I see opponents have "reserved" players on their attack phase roster too so all it is not lost.

You kick one and he is quickly replaced with another moocher. Endless cycle.

Removing a player out of the battle group would make life easier. They can rejoin the right battle group if a real mistake was made.

Naturally, the moochers would adapt and join the AW 5 minutes or whatever before the attack phase begins. Being able to remove a player from the BG at any time as long as there is 12 hours left in the attack phase should discourage that. The BG would be down an attacking player if it came to that but at least the moocher would get nothing from the participation rewards.

moochers should just be kicked. its the style of the game. youll learn to pick out the moochers during recruitng and manage to find good replacements. We just got rid of moochers and feel a lot better. Removing from war is too late to fix this problem, they need to be kicked if you want rid of them.

Cats73

Yup, moochers suck. Recently had one join our alliance, we were like "oh he's uncollected, this will help us" then he joins AQ and does nothing. Joins AW and makes minimum effort.
Thankfully he was kicked soon enough.

Sayakono

Totally loved it guys the way u guys support this issue for betterment of the game which we love n playing for so long ! Really we will appreciate if kabam also takes decision and try to comment on our discussion forum !

xNig

When I was building my new alliance, I made it clear that they had to add me in game, provide me with their contact details so they can be added to our group chat. If they don’t do so within 12 hours they will be kicked. That’s the first screening.

After which, I judge them base on activity level, how often they come on, how well they communicate with the BG. If they don’t update, I’ll give a warning. A second offence means they’ll get kicked regardless whether AQ or AW is on.

If they join the wrong BG but is apologetic about it and don’t make the same mistake, then we forgive and forget.

It’s a give and take in an alliance. I don’t see why, as a leader, I need to condone with people trying to make my life difficult.

NoOnexRO

The perfect way would be to allow the leader to assign the members for BGs - if later they join or not its their problem, but at least they will join the right BG.

The acceptable way would be to allow the leader to kick from BG the members that don't belong there.

And don't start with 3rd party software where we could organize things. We play MCOC not Line, not HQclan or WhatsUp. We should be able to solve and enjoy the game within the game... including this horrible chat that we were provided with.

Sayakono

@NoOnexRO totally agreed bro this is the real point u have mentioned

JustLaCope

I think it also sucks when you have a full team and can't remember everyone's name and trying to see who has and hasn't joined war.

Adding an icon to the members page like they do for champs would be awesome too.

Rap

What is the deal with the battle group assignment mechanism? Does it lock players into assigned battle groups or not?? I have assigned players to specific groups and they still go wherever the hell they want!

Demonzfyre

What is the deal with the battle group assignment mechanism? Does it lock players into assigned battle groups or not?? I have assigned players to specific groups and they still go wherever the hell they want!

You revived a 2 year old thread for this?

unknown

This content has been removed.