Please make AQ selection idiot proof
Cryptic_Cobra
Member Posts: 532 ★★★
So ya, one of our officers screwed up today and from what I have heard many other alliances have been having this problem.
Possible solutions-
1.)start every alliance with 3 bgs and let them choose if they don’t want to run that many. Let’s be honest, the majority of players are in 3 bg alliances.
2.) give a warning message to officers when they select only 1 bg in an alliance with 20-30 members.
3.)let alliances start more bgs even after the fact.
6
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Fixing the issue would mean you would need to let someone else that pays attention set up AQ. Same goes for other allys that can't do it right either. You get 2 chances during set up to confirm selections.
Fact is this is a reoccuring problem and despite what a few people have said here, it’s still happening to more and more alliances. It’s clearly not idiot proof, and people continue to screw it up.
it is clear... and i agree.....
unfortunately someone did it in my ally on day 5 also.....
but...
why does kabam not make it default to 3 bgs?? most run 3bgs.... the interface would stay the same only the default would be different.....
it remembers the maps you ran the day before we ran 5,4,3 and when selecting 5,4,3 we only had to choose the maps day 1. Why not remember the last choice of how many bgs????
i agree the interface is clear and easy to follow....i am also one that believes everything should be made easy as possible.
so it might be ok as it it but really defaulting to 3bgs would be better.
I can't say most Allies run 3. It all depends on how many Members they have. It likely defaults to the lowest value. I suppose the same mistake and argument can be made with 1 BG. It's just prudent to pay attention to what selections we're making. Especially when something is new. I've made mistakes myself with jumping in. Really, it won't make a difference to take an extra moment and choose carefully.
This is certainly not to imply that that level of quality management needs to exist inside of a game. It’s just meant to imply that if it actually did matter, blaming people over process or tools would never get you what you are looking for.
my point is that it remembers what maps you last did to make map selection easy....
why cant it also remember the amount of bgs you last ran??????
and yes but on the occasion where someone does mess up it is annoying. so it would be handy to reduce the risk of that.......
this will make it idiot proof for all bar day 1.... an officer will not need to change anything and AQ will be exactly same as day before.....
The thread's about quest.
The quest procedure is there to allow for micromanaging maps and rooms.
There is no similar interface for war.
Irony is awesome.
In my defense, it was a new car.
There's something to be said for User Error. Mistakes happen. No doubt. However, repeated mistakes can be attributed to a lack of communication, following instructions, and paying attention. After the first mistake, it's best to take care, or talk to the Officer that's responsible if that's the case. Part of having Officers is entrusting people with the ability. I don't agree with foolproofing the system unless there's a valid reason. Fact is, people are responsible for paying attention, and for who they trust to open BGs. Once would be an understandable mistake. Repeated mistakes would be the only reason I'd see for making it foolproof, and if there are repeated mistakes, that becomes a different issue. It would be more prudent to pay attention, or have a conversation with the ones doing it over and over. I don't make someone Officer unless I trust they are on the same page.
Picking 3, picking map, and hitting go adds too many steps, apparently. Lots of opportunities to fail.
Streamlining is always best. Like, log in, click quest, connection error screen, complain on boards. Straightforward!