DeletedUser
Guest
Well, how did this promising alliance come to and "End"? :s
It all started with this message from Exit strategy:
"Hey man I don't know how to sugar coat this so I will be blunt. It is not a knock on your leadership but for the good and the future of the alliance we would like to add bergle and Kylie as founders and flip mad I as leaders full rights. Again not a knock . You run a tight ship and we like that. We would like to talked the best players from Rohan and merge them into us. Again for the good of the alliance"
Well well well, what is this? It is a power hungry group of people wanting control of the best alliance in Omega!
A bit further on:
"So just to let you know we have a quorum of players ready to leave and start are own alliance of the changes aren't made. You are welcome to join. Please make the changes immediately ."
Threats!
And so, we have a little conversation, he tells me he "just wants what's best for the alliance", I tell him 3 founders isn't really reasonable, I prove him wrong about 500 times (well, maybe more like 10), and then he gets all mad and they all leave and start "The Beginning".
Pretty pathetic... so let's just name some names so you know who not to invite to your alliance in the future!
Exit strategy
flipflarnix
The Berglemonster
Seen Kyle?
Those guys are the culprits. So anyways, I will go back to focusing on Theta, where I will get my crown and they won't. 8)
Good luck to Dreadful Nightmares, by the way.
Here is a funny part:
Exit tells me I have to make Seen Kyle? and flipflarnix founders, and him and The Berglemonster leaders. (or else they will leave).
I tell him that wouldn't work.
He tells me that it is impossible to succeed without multiple founders.
I tell him that's how we roll in Theta.
He tells me to make the changes or else.
I reference the wiki with this:
"Democracy
Democracy in an alliance sometimes work, depending on the experience and trust of the members. Members have ideas, submit them and then each member has a vote to choice whether it should go ahead or happen or not. With democracy, the members near enough control the alliance so therefore, it is paramount that you trust the members as well as the members trusting you to pass down any ally requests or information. However, if members are untrustworthy, immature or inexperienced, some terrible descions may be made that make the alliance go horrible wrong. Sometimes advisable for premades.
Dictatorship
Dictatorships, as you may jolly well know, are where the leader controls everything. From the way a member plays (defensive or offensive) to who comes in and out. It can be good, as you can strictly control what happens within the alliance. It works well if the trust between leader and members is good, but may fail if members feel that they are being bossed about too much. They could revolt. Especially if the leader makes an unpopular decision. Everything is in the hands of the leader. Recommend only if you are highly accurate, highly experienced and know what you are doing.
Mixed
A mixed approach takes the best of both democracy and dictatorship. The best thing about it is that you can personalise it to your preference. I recommend leaving it up to the leader on diplomacy and recruiting, whilst ideas about the alliance or involving alliance members up to them. The most important thing though is that the leader makes the final decision.
Once you have planned this, you are almost ready to start leading. But before that, think about your objective. What do you wish to do and how do you wish to achieve it? As well as this, you may wish to think about a name. Try something not too cheesy but not too nooby. Simple names are usually best, as well as names involving famous latin quotes."
He leaves the alliance.
It all started with this message from Exit strategy:
"Hey man I don't know how to sugar coat this so I will be blunt. It is not a knock on your leadership but for the good and the future of the alliance we would like to add bergle and Kylie as founders and flip mad I as leaders full rights. Again not a knock . You run a tight ship and we like that. We would like to talked the best players from Rohan and merge them into us. Again for the good of the alliance"
Well well well, what is this? It is a power hungry group of people wanting control of the best alliance in Omega!
A bit further on:
"So just to let you know we have a quorum of players ready to leave and start are own alliance of the changes aren't made. You are welcome to join. Please make the changes immediately ."
Threats!And so, we have a little conversation, he tells me he "just wants what's best for the alliance", I tell him 3 founders isn't really reasonable, I prove him wrong about 500 times (well, maybe more like 10), and then he gets all mad and they all leave and start "The Beginning".
Pretty pathetic... so let's just name some names so you know who not to invite to your alliance in the future!
Exit strategy
flipflarnix
The Berglemonster
Seen Kyle?
Those guys are the culprits.
So anyways, I will go back to focusing on Theta, where I will get my crown and they won't. 8)Good luck to Dreadful Nightmares, by the way.
Here is a funny part:
Exit tells me I have to make Seen Kyle? and flipflarnix founders, and him and The Berglemonster leaders. (or else they will leave).
I tell him that wouldn't work.
He tells me that it is impossible to succeed without multiple founders.
I tell him that's how we roll in Theta.
He tells me to make the changes or else.
I reference the wiki with this:
"Democracy
Democracy in an alliance sometimes work, depending on the experience and trust of the members. Members have ideas, submit them and then each member has a vote to choice whether it should go ahead or happen or not. With democracy, the members near enough control the alliance so therefore, it is paramount that you trust the members as well as the members trusting you to pass down any ally requests or information. However, if members are untrustworthy, immature or inexperienced, some terrible descions may be made that make the alliance go horrible wrong. Sometimes advisable for premades.
Dictatorship
Dictatorships, as you may jolly well know, are where the leader controls everything. From the way a member plays (defensive or offensive) to who comes in and out. It can be good, as you can strictly control what happens within the alliance. It works well if the trust between leader and members is good, but may fail if members feel that they are being bossed about too much. They could revolt. Especially if the leader makes an unpopular decision. Everything is in the hands of the leader. Recommend only if you are highly accurate, highly experienced and know what you are doing.
Mixed
A mixed approach takes the best of both democracy and dictatorship. The best thing about it is that you can personalise it to your preference. I recommend leaving it up to the leader on diplomacy and recruiting, whilst ideas about the alliance or involving alliance members up to them. The most important thing though is that the leader makes the final decision.
Once you have planned this, you are almost ready to start leading. But before that, think about your objective. What do you wish to do and how do you wish to achieve it? As well as this, you may wish to think about a name. Try something not too cheesy but not too nooby. Simple names are usually best, as well as names involving famous latin quotes."
He leaves the alliance.