View Poll Results: What do you think of the 24 hour cool down instead of 72 hours?

Voters
858. You may not vote on this poll
  • I like it better than 72 hours.

    276 32.17%
  • I do not like the reduction of hours.

    79 9.21%
  • I'd prefer a cap on how many alliances I can join in a 72 hour period

    503 58.62%
Page 5 of 36 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 357

Thread: Developer Chat: Reducing Alliance Rejoin Cool Down

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The last Historic Poster hideout
    Posts
    6,563

    Default

    Working on the revote, please be patient...

    In this time, make sure you know what you're voting for.

    I like it better than 72 hours. I saying I like 24 hour cool down better then 72 hour cool down.

    I do not like the reduction of hours. This is saying you want it to stay at 72 hour cool down, in other words changing nothing.


    I'd prefer a cap on how many alliances I can join in a 72 hour period Self explanatory.

  2. #42

    Default

    If it was between the 72 hrs and 24 id go for the 24 less disruption for all the reasons already mentioned. but the vote has an option for a limit on how many alliances can be joined within a 72 hour period limit it to say 3 then people have the option to leave and return to alliance at least 0nce a day if needed.

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    in my room ^_^
    Posts
    90

    Default

    lol why dont u put a vote for someone like us who wants to merge our server?
    i think thats all we need not that 72hours cooldown lol
    "He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot, will be victorious. "



    rodel18

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    In my bed... With a pillow between my legs.
    Posts
    3,055

    Default

    so im going to choose the capping how many times you can join.

    This sounds like a more reasonable option, lets say in a span of 24 hours? you can't join/rejoin your alliance more than 4 times? (4 is just a random number that sounded like a nice number because it's even)

    If you want to remain with a 72 hour span then maybe like 10 times?

    Just reducing it to 24 hours is not good enough (its better than 72 yes) but it's not sufficient to not be able to join your alliance after 24 hours.

    Another point is what happens when you're hacked and said hacker leaves your alliance, you would be vulnerable to attacks and your alliance would never know you were attacked and wouldn't be able to help.

    Sometimes love is not enough and the road gets tough
    I don't know why
    Keep making me laugh, Let's go get high
    The road is long, we carry on
    Try to have fun in the meantime

  5. #45

    Default

    lol Glad to see the changes in the wording of the poll options. I assume, then, that you zeroed them so that the results are actually meaningful and not already otherwise skewed toward supporting the 72-hour option when people clearly did not?

    (honest... just trying to help here, not meaning to just be a pain, but it's simple statistical mathematics lol)

  6. 11-26-2011, 01:25 AM

    Reason
    Not apart of discussion

  7. 11-26-2011, 01:25 AM

    Reason
    Yea..No.

  8. #46

    Default Developer Chat: Reducing Alliance Rejoin Cool Down (UPDATE)

    Yes they were all zeroed out.
    Last edited by Thalin Athasian; 11-26-2011 at 01:39 AM.

  9. #47

    Default

    The cool down period only benefits the strongest players.That certainly doesn't level the playing field

  10. 11-26-2011, 01:31 AM

    Reason
    banned member

  11. #48

    Default

    This would Help In situations where the person leaving the alliance would be gone for 24 hours or more anyways. Situations where they were 1. Joining another alliance to coordinate extended attacks, 2. Joining another alliance due to minimum holiday restrictions in their normal alliance, or 3. Leaving the alliance for disciplinary purposes.

    This would not effect the major points of concern most people are bringing up, IE dropping prestige to avoid being quite litterally un-helpable, transfering cities and/or heroes between alliance members or smaller players contributing resources to the larger and more active players.
    SS37

    Less QQ more PewPew

    Quote Originally Posted by Prodigy the 5 View Post
    cush has a point... and he is right
    Ya.

  12. #49

    Default

    It is often the little players that most benefit from the passing of cities and heros. Reduction of cool down helps BUT if an Officeholder wants to help their smaller members. They are either then forced to push these smaller players out leaving them unprotected for 24 hours or they have to leave the alliance for 24 hrs. Doesn't work so well if u are a Host or Vice Host.

  13. #50

    Default

    Ok, the voting should now be fixed. Sorry, we had to create a new thread. Please vote!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •