New Super Group Rank: Super Leader! ~Discussion~
By
300_below,
Posted on: 2009-04-03 08:46 in News, Events and Announcement Discussion
In my particular case my Villain group is down to only me. It would be nice if I had a way to for my toon that is the leader, send invites to my other toons that are not in the group yet. I think the Super leader should also be able to adjust the super group ranks of toons who are also offline. It would be far more convenient for us.
[ QUOTE ]
Because I don't believe that is the primary cause of disputes. I would think it is the accidentally promoted that cause the majority of the problems.
[/ QUOTE ]
Accidental promotions can be cleared up now with the auto-demotion if truly desired.
I don't understand what leads you to think this could possibly be the cause of the majority of the problems. It is completely counter-intuitive to anything I've ever experienced, in or out of game.
I'd be interested to hear what the CS stats are on these kinds of issues. I'd be willing to wager a fair amount that intentional promotions and subsequent disagreements and conflicts are a much bigger problem and hassle for CS than accidents.
[ QUOTE ]
It is intended to cure Customer Service getting involved in internal group disputes, and to correct a bug where a character that has been off-line longer than the auto-demotion period would sometimes be selected. I do not see it curing what you think it cures.
[/ QUOTE ]
I see it curing Customer Service getting involved in internal group disputes exactly as you and the devs have stated. The arbiter of internal group disputes will now be internal to the groups, as it should be as I see it.
How about being able to promote/demote characters who are offline?
Can the Superleader do that? Please?
My current SG on freedom has had a problem lately. The leader had an unexpected leave (due to health problems) but came back. Now the person who is the only "leader" wont contact him or anything, this seems like a good tool in the right hands. This will deffinately resolve many disputes over leading. 
" I don't let me kids play on the Freedom Server" -Oya
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That is exactly what I meant, and it should have come as part of this new rank. Customer Service wants a tool to make their lives easier, fine. They should take the responsibility for any abuse of this tool as well. That means they should have the tools to monitor someone abusing this new rank.
[/ QUOTE ]
Except, what exactly would be abuse?
What if an SG in coalition redefines it purpose (RO has done this, tightening/loosening some of the rules and thus changing who is appropriate in the themed SG) so kicks people who don't belong in that particular SG anymore? With the consent of everyone involved. Then you end banned because of an auto-petition?
[/ QUOTE ]
And they could have been asked to leave prior to the boot. If the leadership decided on a whim that a character "didn't fit" and booted without warning, then that is griefing. If they have a communication that the character didn't fit, CS would see that (as you have said below), and not ban.
I see no issue with the auto /petition if the leader in question puts forth a minimum amount of effort to explain themselves before they act.
[ QUOTE ]
There are so many variables in this game nothing should ever generate an auto-report from a player EXCEPT a crash. But, everything is recorded - it's a huge mass of data, but if you petition that your character, and everyone else got kicked after after so-and-so became super leader, they can look it up, and fix the problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, completely missing from this: You don't know who booted you. You don't know who was booted after you. There is no log showing this to the player, so who exactly are they supposed to /petition?
The following should have been put in place:
<ul type="square">[*]Auto message to those being removed from a group stating the global account doing the removal, the character name doing the removal, and the time of removal.[*]SG log stating the character name of the person doing the booting, time of removal, and the character name being removed from the group. This log should be separate from the other activity logs (storage interaction).[/list]This way CS and the rest of the group do not have to sift through mounds of data to determine who did what.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
[ QUOTE ]
How about being able to promote/demote characters who are offline?
Can the Superleader do that? Please?
[/ QUOTE ]
No they can't.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
[ QUOTE ]
I'd be interested to hear what the CS stats are on these kinds of issues.
[/ QUOTE ]
So would I.
[ QUOTE ]
I'd be willing to wager a fair amount that intentional promotions and subsequent disagreements and conflicts are a much bigger problem and hassle for CS than accidents.
[/ QUOTE ]
Barring CS stats, I think we will have to agree to disagree on this point.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
[ QUOTE ]
In the current system, no one can demote someone who is at their same level, and there is no self demotion.
[/ QUOTE ]
Positron, was there no way to add self-demotion without putting one person over the others who were happy sharing rank 5?
Was there no way to add the ability to demote another rank 5 by having a majority of the other rank 5s vote to do so?
I understand the issues that the Superleader position was meant to address, but it also causes quite a number of issues as well. Could not solutions have been found that did not cause other problems?
[ QUOTE ]
And they could have been asked to leave prior to the boot. If the leadership decided on a whim that a character "didn't fit" and booted without warning, then that is griefing. If they have a communication that the character didn't fit, CS would see that (as you have said below), and not ban.
I see no issue with the auto /petition if the leader in question puts forth a minimum amount of effort to explain themselves before they act.
[/ QUOTE ]
Except that this feature is intended to provide less work for CS, not more. They want disputes to be handled by the players, whenever possible. Since griefing can come in many forms, and is such a grey area for most, don't you think that the onus to resolve things should be on the players themselves, first and foremost? There's a reason the technical side of CS has you jumping through the same hoops when you first start petitioning with a problem. They want to see if you can fix things on your end before they have to get involved further. Why? Because the majority of issues fall under the same few problems that other players have already figured out how to fix. Then they (CS) have time to deal with the stickier problems more directly. SG/VG internal problems are no different. They should be worked out as much as possible before anyone petitions CS. Accidental promotions is just one problem, and probably not as big as you claim, though as you say, we don't know for sure either way till we can see some numbers. But that alone isn't even enough of a reason to make the act of promotion/demotion auto-petitionable. If the Devs/CS set a line for when the auto-petition triggers, the people that are actually trying to do sinister things within their group can find a way around it, and still get their job done. It wouldn't slow down anything, much like the SPAM button in the email system seems to be doing little to deter spammers.
If you've got a real problem, you should be man enough to put your name behind a petition and follow through with it. Who would CS talk to if there were an auto-petition generated? They'd have a much better chance of picking the wrong leader (if there were multiples) than the one with the problem.
[ QUOTE ]
The following should have been put in place:
Auto message to those being removed from a group stating the global account doing the removal, the character name doing the removal, and the time of removal.
SG log stating the character name of the person doing the booting, time of removal, and the character name being removed from the group. This log should be separate from the other activity logs (storage interaction).
This way CS and the rest of the group do not have to sift through mounds of data to determine who did what.
[/ QUOTE ]
These are separate issues from what the SL rank is supposed to address. And if anything, they should be put in just for the players to do the investigative work themselves first. CS shouldn't be first on the list to work out anything, unless it's a bug. SG problems are not bugs.
Loose --> not tight.
Lose --> Did not win, misplace, cannot find, subtract.
One extra 'o' makes a big difference.
[ QUOTE ]
If you've got a real problem, you should be man enough to put your name behind a petition and follow through with it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Who would they /petition against? The players have no record, which leaves CS to tell the player "too bad, go join another group". Not a good enough answer.
I don't have any problem writing a /petition if someone is griefing me.
[ QUOTE ]
Who would CS talk to if there were an auto-petition generated? They'd have a much better chance of picking the wrong leader (if there were multiples) than the one with the problem.
[/ QUOTE ]
As others have said: there is a record of the person doing the booting in the system logs. I doubt that they'd get the wrong person. I don't believe the CS team is full of people that cannot read.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The following should have been put in place:
Auto message to those being removed from a group stating the global account doing the removal, the character name doing the removal, and the time of removal.
SG log stating the character name of the person doing the booting, time of removal, and the character name being removed from the group. This log should be separate from the other activity logs (storage interaction).
This way CS and the rest of the group do not have to sift through mounds of data to determine who did what.
[/ QUOTE ]
These are separate issues from what the SL rank is supposed to address.
[/ QUOTE ]
These address problems that the new rank makes worse. Again, the cart has been placed before the horse.
[ QUOTE ]
And if anything, they should be put in just for the players to do the investigative work themselves first. CS shouldn't be first on the list to work out anything, unless it's a bug. SG problems are not bugs.
[/ QUOTE ]
And it isn't my job to make theirs easier at my expense. I am paying NCsoft money to provide a service. I have a problem with them offloading their work onto me.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
[ QUOTE ]
Why dont you put in a VOTE system to elect the super leader? Give the current leaders a vote each. Tied voting means no super leader.
I mean, we are all about democracy right? :P
This way any SG politics would not affect customer service - CS would just have to worry about if the voting system works or not.
Upsen.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why put in a voting system for a one time thing?
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
[ QUOTE ]
I see no issue with the auto /petition if the leader in question puts forth a minimum amount of effort to explain themselves before they act.
[/ QUOTE ]
Other than the fact that the CS staff has enough to do without the system giving them false alarms?
[ QUOTE ]
This way CS and the rest of the group do not have to sift through mounds of data to determine who did what.
[/ QUOTE ]
CS already has this kind of data available to them.
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, completely missing from this: You don't know who booted you. You don't know who was booted after you. There is no log showing this to the player, so who exactly are they supposed to /petition?
[/ QUOTE ]
So your SG has no way of contacting each other except throught /sg? You have other issues then, my friend.
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
[ QUOTE ]
And it isn't my job to make theirs easier at my expense. I am paying NCsoft money to provide a service. I have a problem with them offloading their work onto me.
[/ QUOTE ]
What additional work is there to you if anything happens because of it? That could not happen before? Hopefully anyone of leader rank is a decent person - because you can boot anyone below you - it's one of your leaders that will be superleader, not some random shmoe in your SG.
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This way CS and the rest of the group do not have to sift through mounds of data to determine who did what.
[/ QUOTE ]
CS already has this kind of data available to them.
[/ QUOTE ]
Buried in all the other data.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, completely missing from this: You don't know who booted you. You don't know who was booted after you. There is no log showing this to the player, so who exactly are they supposed to /petition?
[/ QUOTE ]
So your SG has no way of contacting each other except throught /sg? You have other issues then, my friend.
[/ QUOTE ]
They may not be available in a timely fashion.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
[ QUOTE ]
Why dont you put in a VOTE system to elect the super leader? Give the current leaders a vote each. Tied voting means no super leader.
I mean, we are all about democracy right? :P
This way any SG politics would not affect customer service - CS would just have to worry about if the voting system works or not.
Upsen.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sorry, but this seems to be the essence of what all the problems with this boils down to:
"This isn't fair, it's not democratic, we have to have a say on this!"
We the players can't have a say in everything that the devs put into the game. I don't know why so many who hate this hate it because it's "undemocratic" - I have few speculations, but I'm not going to say right now - but I do know that this is coming and we should try to see what the end result is before complaing to the high heavens.
Global: @All-American Teen
70 toons across 11 servers.
Top hero -All-American Teen lvl 50 eng/invul Tanker (01:10 EST; 1/24/09)
Top villian -Poisoned Plum lvl 30 robots/devices Mastermind
[ QUOTE ]
And it isn't my job to make theirs easier at my expense. I am paying NCsoft money to provide a service. I have a problem with them offloading their work onto me.
[/ QUOTE ]
No...actually, it is exactly our jobs to make CS's job as easy as possible. We word our petitions the way they want them (if we want them to know what's going on and how to duplicate the issue). We give as much information as we can when we describe griefing, including taking our own screenshots. If your car breaks down, and when the mechanic asks you what happened, all you can do is say "It made a funny noise and then it broke. Fix it." he'll figure it out...eventually, and you'll probably spend twice as much on labor as you would if you could be more descriptive of the problem. If you want good service, you don't leave all the work up to the person providing it. They're not mind readers, and as you said, there's a mound of data to sift through. Why make them go through more than they have to? It is your problem, after all. You pay for service, but you have to be prepared when you ask for it, or your service will be poor.
[ QUOTE ]
Who would they /petition against?
[/ QUOTE ]
The SL, of course. That's kind of the point of having someone designated the #1 leader. CS has someone to go to first, without having to wade through the mire of "It's my group, no it's mine!"
If, as a lower ranked member, you have no one at leader rank to turn to, it might be time to go find a new group. And that's probably what CS would say if they didn't find any evidence of actual griefing.
Loose --> not tight.
Lose --> Did not win, misplace, cannot find, subtract.
One extra 'o' makes a big difference.
[ QUOTE ]
They're not mind readers, and as you said, there's a mound of data to sift through.
[/ QUOTE ]
Hence my suggestion for the log and the notices that should have been put in place alongside this new rank.
[ QUOTE ]
Why make them go through more than they have to? It is your problem, after all. You pay for service, but you have to be prepared when you ask for it, or your service will be poor.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again, see the points about why there should be notices and logs. Logs have been on the player list of group requests for over a year now. They would give players that information that we could bring to the CS team. Yet we still don't have it.
[ QUOTE ]
The SL, of course.
[/ QUOTE ]
Isn't that like telling the victim to deal with their attacker before calling the police?
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
Not to add more drama to the mix over this new rank. I really do not see a NEED for this. I already think it is insane the founder of the group, the one who actually started it, can be auto demoted due to a real life moment that can arise at any time causing them to be away from the game for an extended period of time.
I started my own groups because I disagreed with how many other groups ran and telling me how often I need to play and how often I needed to group and what I should be doing when online. Since then I have invited other people into my VG that was looking for a no pressure group that teamed often.
I have found my attention diverted from CoH for reasons like this where larger groups have struggles of power internally and thus it can be taken out on the smaller groups who may lose control over what they worked extremely hard to build.
If they did choose to come up with this SL position it should be like any other game where that person only loses it voluntarily and not by force due to a 45 day inactivity rule I started my own group to get away from.
This of course has given me the thought of booting every member out of it to ensure I maintain control of the group that I myself worked very very hard to build. No one helped me do it I did it alone.
I certainly wish NCsoft would put more energy into more pressing matters in this game, like stability, than in something like this while it was working for everyone as is. CS only has to tell members that all matters concerning SG matters need to be handled with its leadership and if they are not happy then the option to quit and start their own or join another is always there.
This is not a QQ, but, definatly not fair to those people who built up their bases from the ground up and decided it a good idea to invite others with similar gaming ideas as they do to lose it to someone else that does not even play in sg mode since I do not enforce this.
Of course I am out on vacation the week this game goes live so it is extremely likely I will come back and have to fight for control of my own group back. A fight like this would not be worth it of course so I would just find something else with less stress.
I understand the need for this. Its not a major need and I think there are several other things I would prefer to see added/edited to the game before something like this but I understand it and it doesnt make a big deal.
Its pretty simple and there shouldnt be any drama with this added. Only way drama occures if egos get in the way or if drama already exists... just waiting to bubble to the surface.
But anyways, yeah its pretty simple, in my case I am the founder of my SG thats been around since CoH went live. I will be getting the Super Leader rank.
Does this mean I am above anyone else? NO. The Super Leader rank in my SG will be named "Founder" and it will be (as far as leading the SG and running things and votes and whatnot) equal to the 5th rank, aka Leader.
My SG still remains NOT a dictatorship and pretty relaxed and whatnot.
Seems like people are over complicating this thing. Yes, there are other things that could have been worked on besides this but yes there are valid reasons for this and no, it should not cause drama or problems in places where drama and problems dont already exists. I could however see it being the straw that breaks the drama's back and lets the damn flow free.
It'll be released... drama will occure where it will and shortly there after, everything will run just fine once again. No worries.
Need help making your own CoH comics or read other's comics at cohcomicindex.com
www.jkcomics.com for Justice-Knights comics series and more!
Storylines:
Introductions, Obey,
[ QUOTE ]
Isn't that like telling the victim to deal with their attacker before calling the police?
[/ QUOTE ]
No, it's like telling the victim to call the police, not expect them to show up automatically without anyone telling the cops they are needed.
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.
Why can't the Founding member be made the "Super Leader"? If the founder is no longer in the SG it should go to the next in SG membership time. This way a level 1 "LEADER" won't magically become "Supreme Ruler and Dictator".
CyberGhost
[ QUOTE ]
Why can't the Founding member be made the "Super Leader"? If the founder is no longer in the SG it should go to the next in SG membership time. This way a level 1 "LEADER" won't magically become "Supreme Ruler and Dictator".
[/ QUOTE ]
Why are you promoting level ones to leader level?
Why are you assuming that every SG has a dictator waiting in the wings for the opportunity to take over? Geez...the paranoia is strong with some folks. Again I ask, if you can't trust the people you play with, why do you play with them? Why do you play with people that invite and promote folks you don't know? If that bothers you, go the way some have, and keep it a personal SG.
There's a need for this new rank. Not every SG was born yesterday, and not every SG has had the same leaders for its entire run. People find themselves, due to RL issues, locked out of their base when their leaders are auto-demoted and there's no one left that's active to fix it, for example. CS says "Hey, we could do our jobs better if there were a way for players to designate the leader of the leaders (which shouldn't always be the founder, as much as some folks want it to be). This way, a lot of the more trivial problems with accidental promotion/demotions, permissions, etc., can be handled at the player level, and we can concentrate on dealing with more pressing matters, like investigating griefing."
You can dispute the methods they chose to implement, but I don't think there's been a good argument yet for why they shouldn't do it at all. There shouldn't be things a leader can do that can't be undone, like promoting others to leader rank (and no, having that person quit the SG and get reinvited with zero prestige is not a valid option. It's a poor work-around at best, and one done grudgingly)
Loose --> not tight.
Lose --> Did not win, misplace, cannot find, subtract.
One extra 'o' makes a big difference.
This is great news, we had a civil war in our SG years ago and the people that left put in a few anchors to sabotage the group everytime we pushed forward. Now with this system the correct senior person can take charge and the frustrated members can come back and have fun again. Thanks Devs!
ArchRex Dojhrom x ?
* Sidus Loricatus: B-NRG2, S-BS/Reg, T-Fire/Ice, MM-Bots/FF, St-NRG2, Dom-Psi/NRG, Cor-Son/Traps, Cor-Ice/Kin, Ctrl-Fire/Kin, PB-LB/LA
* Arachnos Loricatus: Soldier, Widow
* Praetoria Loricatus: B-DP/Dev, Cor-Elec/Elec
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Again, why not?
[/ QUOTE ]
It would be nice to have an self-demote, but maybe their system won't play nice with it. *shrug*
Unless you mean the GM call - as to that, I can think of no situation which auto-generates a petition without the player starting it.
And as for using the auto-demote to self-demote, I also should not be forced to NOT play a character.
[/ QUOTE ]
you wouldnt be forced to not play that character you would be just working on that day job!
[ QUOTE ]
That is exactly what I meant, and it should have come as part of this new rank. Customer Service wants a tool to make their lives easier, fine. They should take the responsibility for any abuse of this tool as well. That means they should have the tools to monitor someone abusing this new rank.
[/ QUOTE ]
Except, what exactly would be abuse?
What if an SG in coalition redefines it purpose (RO has done this, tightening/loosening some of the rules and thus changing who is appropriate in the themed SG) so kicks people who don't belong in that particular SG anymore? With the consent of everyone involved. Then you end banned because of an auto-petition? There are so many variables in this game nothing should ever generate an auto-report from a player EXCEPT a crash. But, everything is recorded - it's a huge mass of data, but if you petition that your character, and everyone else got kicked after after so-and-so became super leader, they can look it up, and fix the problem.
Orc&Pie No.53230 There is an orc, and somehow, he got a pie. And you are hungry.
www.repeat-offenders.net
Negaduck: I see you found the crumb. I knew you'd never notice the huge flag.