Awareness regarding the people destroying alliances

Okay so I got it. I shouldn't name people here in forums or else my post will be deleted. So basically a person who shall be unnamed join my alliance a few days back. He was a thronebreaker and we trusted him blindly. Made him an officer and later a leader. He then kicked everyone out of the alliance of which I've been a part For 5 months. My journey in this alliance started as a conquerer and now I'm cavalier. I submitted a ticket to kabam regarding this issue and also told them the name of the person responsible. I hope it gets resolved soon. That person should be banned and we must receive the alliance season end rewards we deserve.

Thankyou.

Comments

Eb0ny-O-M4w

Nothing can be done here, a ticket won't do anything

Aburaees

That sucks, but you were correct to call it blind trust. It’s impossible to demonstrate authentic trustworthiness in a mere few days.

unknown

This content has been removed.

bm3epps

How can you make someone officer and then even leader just after couple of days? This is so disrespectful towards old ally members.

You can't just make someone officer or leader because he is TB or has better roster. That's not how alliances work.

Being officer or leader is a job and it should be given to people you know and who can manage these tasks not to just random dude who join your Alliance.

I sympathize with all your ally members who will miss rewards because of this guy and because of the person who decided to make him leader. Both should be held responsible.

agreed...

Burrito2525

Why would you make them a leader? Like why leader!?! Officer was bad enough but that’s like here’s the keys to my house and let me sign over the deed too

danielmath

I absolutely agree that douchebagery like that should be a bannable offence. Some people will ofc come here and say that you should have known better and blah blah but there is no excuse for beeing a total ass ruining sometimes others have built for so long
Disagree completely. Kabam should NEVER interfere with alliance business.
But they can put checks and balances to ensure people don’t get screwed over

No, they should not. The rules are set, everyone has the same ones. What check can you have? Nothing that would make any sense

Pseudo_19

I’ve talked to alliance members, officers, and leaders in the past; And there really should be some sort of restrictions in place, couple of examples could be:
• Members joining AQ have to request to join (unless there are already assigned groups in game) and officers or the leader must accept their request for them to join AQ, same goes for AW along with being able to kick a player from AQ/AW within a reasonable time limit just in case of mess ups if someone joins by accident, and if that’s the case there shouldn’t be consequences and you should be able to get a replacement member for that AQ/AW
• Nobody can be kicked from an alliance during the last week of AQ or last day of AW until rewards come in. Regardless of the situation those members are pretty much entitled to those rewards.
• When kicking alliance members it should be authorized by the leader or at least 2 other officers.
• Also AQ/AW rewards seem so underwhelming that kabam should implement a kind of “Secondary” alliance were there are 5 reserved spot making it a total of 35 members for alliances were you could join a second alliance solely as a backup in case of emergency. Obviously it would be hard to find reliable people to be a “secondary” or “emergency back up” players which would rely on them being active and good enough to compete in the alliance.

At least some of these could easily be implemented by Kabam and would definitely help the player base along with helping the officers and leaders that run and manage alliances,

Solswerd

I absolutely agree that douchebagery like that should be a bannable offence. Some people will ofc come here and say that you should have known better and blah blah but there is no excuse for beeing a total ass ruining sometimes others have built for so long
Disagree completely. Kabam should NEVER interfere with alliance business.

^^^^^TRUTH^^^^^^^

Last thing I want to see is Kabam devoting people to having to investigate stuff like this. Don't get me wrong, that player that kicked everybody is trash...and is the type of person that makes me really hope that there is karma. BUT, you don't just hand over control of an alliance to a complete stranger. As mentioned above it is disrespectful to everyone else in the alliance, and stupid. Back when I was deep in the "alliance life" as an officer or leader, I was immediately suspicious of any new member pushing to be an officer. It takes time to build that trust, and you owe it to the other members in your alliance to make sure that trust has been earned before you give someone that kind of power.

hungryhungrybbq

I absolutely agree that douchebagery like that should be a bannable offence. Some people will ofc come here and say that you should have known better and blah blah but there is no excuse for beeing a total ass ruining sometimes others have built for so long
Disagree completely. Kabam should NEVER interfere with alliance business.
But they can put checks and balances to ensure people don’t get screwed over
No, they should not. The rules are set, everyone has the same ones. What check can you have? Nothing that would make any sense

I don't think I would have issue with a 2 key system in place tbh.

unknown

This content has been removed.

hungryhungrybbq

I absolutely agree that douchebagery like that should be a bannable offence. Some people will ofc come here and say that you should have known better and blah blah but there is no excuse for beeing a total ass ruining sometimes others have built for so long
Disagree completely. Kabam should NEVER interfere with alliance business.
^^^^^TRUTH^^^^^^^

Last thing I want to see is Kabam devoting people to having to investigate stuff like this. Don't get me wrong, that player that kicked everybody is trash...and is the type of person that makes me really hope that there is karma. BUT, you don't just hand over control of an alliance to a complete stranger. As mentioned above it is disrespectful to everyone else in the alliance, and stupid. Back when I was deep in the "alliance life" as an officer or leader, I was immediately suspicious of any new member pushing to be an officer. It takes time to build that trust, and you owe it to the other members in your alliance to make sure that trust has been earned before you give someone that kind of power.

But yes, I agree. Generally speaking, anyone I promoted to officer was usually both there for several months at a minimum and also never asked for it. Was us who offered it unsolicited.

Ghost_Driver

Wow, no this is on Your alliance. Why would you make someone officer and then a LEADER just because they're TB?? That is such an irresponsible thing to do

KattohS

I’m always a bit weary of alliances with 7 or more officers.

An alliance doesn’t need more than 4 officers in my opinion. An joining an alliance shouldn’t be a prerequisite to be an officer.

Piviot

I’ve talked to alliance members, officers, and leaders in the past; And there really should be some sort of restrictions in place, couple of examples could be:
• Members joining AQ have to request to join (unless there are already assigned groups in game) and officers or the leader must accept their request for them to join AQ, same goes for AW along with being able to kick a player from AQ/AW within a reasonable time limit just in case of mess ups if someone joins by accident, and if that’s the case there shouldn’t be consequences and you should be able to get a replacement member for that AQ/AW
• Nobody can be kicked from an alliance during the last week of AQ or last day of AW until rewards come in. Regardless of the situation those members are pretty much entitled to those rewards.
• When kicking alliance members it should be authorized by the leader or at least 2 other officers.
• Also AQ/AW rewards seem so underwhelming that kabam should implement a kind of “Secondary” alliance were there are 5 reserved spot making it a total of 35 members for alliances were you could join a second alliance solely as a backup in case of emergency. Obviously it would be hard to find reliable people to be a “secondary” or “emergency back up” players which would rely on them being active and good enough to compete in the alliance.

At least some of these could easily be implemented by Kabam and would definitely help the player base along with helping the officers and leaders that run and manage alliances,

Asking to join aq/aw is a hard no why in the bleep would you think that would stop the kicks

Let alone all the extra work you put on the officers/leader it’s just too much and it’s stupid as heck

And two alliances come on we can’t even help the other groups IN the alliance how would you get to join two alliances(players would like it two rewards for every aq/aw)

Can I have what you smoking must be better than mine

Wiredawg1

I absolutely agree that douchebagery like that should be a bannable offence. Some people will ofc come here and say that you should have known better and blah blah but there is no excuse for beeing a total ass ruining sometimes others have built for so long
Also you never know when someone could snap, you could tell them they’ve made a mistake with a rank up, you could tell them you don’t like their favourite champ, or they may have had a bad day and decided to kick loads of people.

Not to mention someone could specifically try and gain trust to kick a bunch of people.

The fact that as an officer I could right now go and kick 20 or so members and deprive them of plat 3 season rewards just isn’t something that should be purely in my hands. All that’s stopping me is my good grace and charm. There needs to be a fail safe, or a secondary measure in place to stop people losing out on a months work.

There is a fail safe with getting kicked before aw rewards are sent and you have 5 wars. You can email kabam and if you prove you was kicked and didn’t leave you will get rewards. I seen it done multiple times

Wiredawg1

I’m always a bit weary of alliances with 7 or more officers.

An alliance doesn’t need more than 4 officers in my opinion. An joining an alliance shouldn’t be a prerequisite to be an officer.

Totally disagree. We have 2 officers per bg and sometimes an extra for aw diversity. You seem to forget officers have life’s. Having more then 4 helps

GroundedWisdom

Unfortunately, this is what happens when you trust people completely after a couple days. This is also the reason relationships end much worse.

MrChunky

Making a complete stranger officer and then a leader was a death wish my friend, Not sure if Kabam can really do anything about it.

DawsMan

I didn't read all the posts so maybe its been said, but maybe a thing where officers suggest kicking a player and have to have agreement from the leader, or another officer for it to go through.

FlyGalaxyBomb

Can I get a TLDR on this post >_<
Are people arguing that officers have too much power? Dictatorship? Mutiny?😭

GroundedWisdom

Can I get a TLDR on this post >_<
Are people arguing that officers have too much power? Dictatorship? Mutiny?😭

unknown

This content has been removed.

hungryhungrybbq

I’m always a bit weary of alliances with 7 or more officers.

An alliance doesn’t need more than 4 officers in my opinion. An joining an alliance shouldn’t be a prerequisite to be an officer.

I like 6. One pair per bg (the leader can fill one of these if desired). So they can work together, cover each other when not available and share the responsibilities (one for AQ planning, one for war, etc.).

Aburaees

If there were a failsafe it shouldn’t be based on participation alone. A kick should always be available as a punitive measure or you’ll end up with 5 of these:

The scenario in this thread, sadly, was self inflicted by exercising “blind trust” instead of “smart trust”, and handing ultimate power to a stranger.

Mauled

I’m always a bit weary of alliances with 7 or more officers.

An alliance doesn’t need more than 4 officers in my opinion. An joining an alliance shouldn’t be a prerequisite to be an officer.

Depends what you run. In my alliance we are playing T1 wars which take a long time to plan. 2 officers/bg is perfectly reasonable. If we did Map7/8 would make sense to have another couple to manage that and take pressure off those doing AW

Kabam Porthos

Hey @SKIPPER7, I'm sorry to hear this happened. However, we believe that allowing Alliances to have a certain degree of autonomy is a fundamental part of the game. Therefore, we prefer not to intervene in situations like this.