You select the number of BGs, then the Map, and then have a Summary to review. I'm not sure how much clearer that could be, outside of resurrecting Miss Cleo.
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.
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.......
and how exactly would you make the process idiot proof? Care to give an example that everyone can agree is idiotproof? There is already a summary screen that anyone who takes the time to read can use to double check.
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.....
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.
of course... and my officer mad this mistake once... he admitted he was in a hurry... i am confident it will not happen again......
but still....
why cant we ask for things that mmake life easier.....
like the guy asking the otherday to have the inventory sorted properly......
not really a problem.....
but something that could be done better......
efficeincy and reduced error rate come froms simplified streamlined designs and memory where possible.....
if something can be designed to default to the most common used or the last used setup then it should.....
as i said the mas default to last selected... why not the number of bgs????
why would anyone be against this change???? it has no potential to cause more error then the current system... only the potential to reduce error.....
why be against it?? unless you want to benifit when someone else fails
We have this current system in place because kabam is giving us the option to do a different map for each BG which is a decision I like. As a result, the old system where a new BG is opened up automatically once 3 people join a BG is no longer an option. People just gotta adapt to this change if they want to be able to do a different map for each BG, which im sure lots of alliances want.
everything in game remebrs last used option....
why not this????
AQ team = last used
AWD team = last used
AWA team = last used
Solo Quest team = last used
arena team = = last used (provided they have refreshed)
map selection for AQ = last used
why is the number of bgs different????
it only makes sense it would also be last used.....
Well, for one thing it defeats the point of making a selection process to begin with. For another, it bypasses people taking responsibility for being in such a rush. Lol. There's literally no Map that is not able to be completed if people take a moment and pay attention to what they're doing.
Well, for one thing it defeats the point of making a selection process to begin with. For another, it bypasses people taking responsibility for being in such a rush. Lol. There's literally no Map that is not able to be completed if people take a moment and pay attention to what they're doing.
everything else defaults to last used...
why not this......
by your logic map selection should default to map 1
and team selection should default to you 1* champs....
nether of these would be a problem for most as you would easily select you correct map / team.....
but it makes it easier that it remembers......
everything in game remebrs last used option....
why not this????
AQ team = last used
AWD team = last used
AWA team = last used
Solo Quest team = last used
arena team = = last used (provided they have refreshed)
map selection for AQ = last used
why is the number of bgs different????
it only makes sense it would also be last used.....
well yeah cus when i use them i could easily be typing more than i do... but i have cut my statement short to move on to the next. so they are grammatically correct.
you should hear how much more information i provide when i actually talk. I am a massive chatterbox
everything in game remebrs last used option....
why not this????
AQ team = last used
AWD team = last used
AWA team = last used
Solo Quest team = last used
arena team = = last used (provided they have refreshed)
map selection for AQ = last used
why is the number of bgs different????
it only makes sense it would also be last used.....
Choosing what Team you use is not the same as making decisions for an entire Ally.
everything in game remebrs last used option....
why not this????
AQ team = last used
AWD team = last used
AWA team = last used
Solo Quest team = last used
arena team = = last used (provided they have refreshed)
map selection for AQ = last used
why is the number of bgs different????
it only makes sense it would also be last used.....
Choosing what Team you use is not the same as making decisions for an entire Ally.
exactly it is more important. so there is more reason for it to have the ability to remember your previous selection. cus it affects 29 others if you make an error....
I wish that possible for soooo many things in life.......
so many laws and regulations are designed purely to cater for idiots......
That’s because we live is a world filled with idiots. The intelligent people are smart enough just to not do stupid things in the first place, while the idiots need rules made for them. It’s a sad reality, but it doesn’t change the fact they live amoung us. Hundreads of alliances are having this problem. Sure, the process is clear and easy to follow... for someone that isn’t brain dead. My whole point is we need to catter to the brain dead half of the community.
everything in game remebrs last used option....
why not this????
AQ team = last used
AWD team = last used
AWA team = last used
Solo Quest team = last used
arena team = = last used (provided they have refreshed)
map selection for AQ = last used
why is the number of bgs different????
it only makes sense it would also be last used.....
Choosing what Team you use is not the same as making decisions for an entire Ally.
exactly it is more important. so there is more reason for it to have the ability to remember your previous selection. cus it affects 29 others if you make an error....
If it defaults then there will be complaints about forgetting to change back etc.. No one will happy regardless of what system it is.
One of our officers accidentally started day 2 with 1 BG...SMH!
Yes but according to some people, your alliance is just a bunch of idiots and you should just start kicking/demoting all your leaders. 🙄
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.
The reoccuring problem is your officers who are overhasty, illiterate or whose cognitive functions are performing below standard. It is not the selection screen that's the probkem. There are 3 points where you can go back and correct an error in selection before pushing 'start'. How on earth can you claim it's the App's fault? The claim alone underlines said lack of patience, reading skills or intelligence.
To all those claiming all alliances start 3 bg anyway: Not every alliance is like yours. We, for example, have 16 solid players, with real life obligations, and now we can do map 3 and map 2 instead of either benching 6 players or losing prestige. This change is most welcome!
In any industry in which quality actually matters, you address the process and not the people. It is recognized by industries like aviation and medicine that vigilance is an inadequate tool for guaranteeing the outcome you’re looking for, and human error will always occur when given an opportunity. Thus the process and the tools in the process are the chief focus of all quality work. You don’t start looking at people until the process has been proven to be evidence-based and effective, and the people continue to make errors after being mentored repeatedly.
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.
There is a difference: In aviation and medicine, an error means death. This game is not remotely of that importance. Moreover, the processes are so much more difficult that it is almost impossible for humans to oversee everything. Reading 3 very straightforward and unambiguous screens, with the option to correct a mistake, is primary school level difficult. So this comparison of yours is flawed.
If we stop making people responsible for their actions, the world will end. Now I agree with not relying on human vigilance in areas where the consequences are disastrous if an error occurs and/or the processes are of such complexity that it invites errors, but for something my 6yo son wouldn't have trouble with and which, if done wrong, does not seriously harm anyone, we should always place responsibility with the individual. Because no mistakes = no learning.
@Cryptic_Cobra if its too hard for your officers to read and review last page before accepting bg groups then why dont you just take the time to get on and do it yourself. The system is very striaght foward if you pay attention and read.
Calling your officers idiots and to demoralize them on a public forum isnt going to help either. Making good choices when picking officers is important maybe you need think more about who you promote.
Calling your officers idiots and to demoralize them on a public forum isnt going to help either. Making good choices when picking officers is important maybe you need think more about who you promote.
I was thinking about that too, what if the officer from his alliance sees this? He must be a joy to be in a alliance with
One of our officers accidentally started day 2 with 1 BG...SMH!
Yes but according to some people, your alliance is just a bunch of idiots and you should just start kicking/demoting all your leaders. 🙄
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.
The reoccuring problem is your officers who are overhasty, illiterate or whose cognitive functions are performing below standard. It is not the selection screen that's the probkem. There are 3 points where you can go back and correct an error in selection before pushing 'start'. How on earth can you claim it's the App's fault? The claim alone underlines said lack of patience, reading skills or intelligence.
To all those claiming all alliances start 3 bg anyway: Not every alliance is like yours. We, for example, have 16 solid players, with real life obligations, and now we can do map 3 and map 2 instead of either benching 6 players or losing prestige. This change is most welcome!
it is a very welcome change.....
which is why i suggest it defaults to the last amount of BGs u used. same as your map defaults to last maps run.....
everything in game remebrs last used option....
why not this????
AQ team = last used
AWD team = last used
AWA team = last used
Solo Quest team = last used
arena team = = last used (provided they have refreshed)
map selection for AQ = last used
why is the number of bgs different????
it only makes sense it would also be last used.....
Choosing what Team you use is not the same as making decisions for an entire Ally.
exactly it is more important. so there is more reason for it to have the ability to remember your previous selection. cus it affects 29 others if you make an error....
Again, once is an error. Repeatedly is just not paying attention.
Comments
of course... and my officer mad this mistake once... he admitted he was in a hurry... i am confident it will not happen again......
but still....
why cant we ask for things that mmake life easier.....
like the guy asking the otherday to have the inventory sorted properly......
not really a problem.....
but something that could be done better......
efficeincy and reduced error rate come froms simplified streamlined designs and memory where possible.....
if something can be designed to default to the most common used or the last used setup then it should.....
as i said the mas default to last selected... why not the number of bgs????
why would anyone be against this change???? it has no potential to cause more error then the current system... only the potential to reduce error.....
why be against it?? unless you want to benifit when someone else fails
why not this????
AQ team = last used
AWD team = last used
AWA team = last used
Solo Quest team = last used
arena team = = last used (provided they have refreshed)
map selection for AQ = last used
why is the number of bgs different????
it only makes sense it would also be last used.....
everything else defaults to last used...
why not this......
by your logic map selection should default to map 1
and team selection should default to you 1* champs....
nether of these would be a problem for most as you would easily select you correct map / team.....
but it makes it easier that it remembers......
i already listed if you had read my previous post........
well yeah cus when i use them i could easily be typing more than i do... but i have cut my statement short to move on to the next. so they are grammatically correct.
you should hear how much more information i provide when i actually talk. I am a massive chatterbox
confirmation boxes are always helpful...... they do it for aq team and aw team selections
Choosing what Team you use is not the same as making decisions for an entire Ally.
exactly it is more important. so there is more reason for it to have the ability to remember your previous selection. cus it affects 29 others if you make an error....
i wish that possible for soooo many things in life.......
so many laws and regulations are designed purely to cater for idiots......
There already is. Its the last step before hitting confim
If it defaults then there will be complaints about forgetting to change back etc.. No one will happy regardless of what system it is.
The reoccuring problem is your officers who are overhasty, illiterate or whose cognitive functions are performing below standard. It is not the selection screen that's the probkem. There are 3 points where you can go back and correct an error in selection before pushing 'start'. How on earth can you claim it's the App's fault? The claim alone underlines said lack of patience, reading skills or intelligence.
To all those claiming all alliances start 3 bg anyway: Not every alliance is like yours. We, for example, have 16 solid players, with real life obligations, and now we can do map 3 and map 2 instead of either benching 6 players or losing prestige. This change is most welcome!
There is a difference: In aviation and medicine, an error means death. This game is not remotely of that importance. Moreover, the processes are so much more difficult that it is almost impossible for humans to oversee everything. Reading 3 very straightforward and unambiguous screens, with the option to correct a mistake, is primary school level difficult. So this comparison of yours is flawed.
If we stop making people responsible for their actions, the world will end. Now I agree with not relying on human vigilance in areas where the consequences are disastrous if an error occurs and/or the processes are of such complexity that it invites errors, but for something my 6yo son wouldn't have trouble with and which, if done wrong, does not seriously harm anyone, we should always place responsibility with the individual. Because no mistakes = no learning.
I was thinking about that too, what if the officer from his alliance sees this? He must be a joy to be in a alliance with
it is a very welcome change.....
which is why i suggest it defaults to the last amount of BGs u used. same as your map defaults to last maps run.....
Again, once is an error. Repeatedly is just not paying attention.