Adjustment to allow the removal of an alliance commander

[iKon]

I'm not sure how difficult it would be, but would it be possible to introduce a voting system that would allow members of the alliance to remove and install a new commander in the case of a no confidence vote or any other situations that might arise where the commander would be required to step down but would be unwilling (or unable) to?

[[BERSERKER]]

Join a different alliance if you dont like how the command is going

[Rukia]

agreed with kull's words...as an alliance leader i'd say take it to alliance forums. the server already has enuf strain on it already...

[Nuto vixen]

I dont think this is a very good idea.

You can always leave an alliance. If you don't like the commander, simply don't request to join.

[iKon]

Actually this is in a majority case where the alliance feels the commander is incapable of the tasks being asked of him, in such a case the 2IC with a majority vote should be allowed to take the helm and remove the previous commander from his responsibilities.

[Ston]

if you want to implement alliance leadership voting like race leader voting in chaos i have to vote no! i think this issues should be solved outside the game.

[Wolf359]

Usually the alliance commander is the person who started the alliance (except in the EPAs case where we appoint an in-game leader) - so to remove the Commander from HIS alliance is unfair.

If you do not want to follow his command anymore - leave the alliance and set up your own - it's not rocket science.

[Brythalious]

I agree with that, I think I would get very angry if people voted me out of the alliance I created and through long hard work got it to where it is. Don't like the leader, Leave.

[skilinho]

each alliance has their own ways of passing on leadership, some vote, some have a high council, some r run by a benevolent leader and some r run like a cake stall with no one seemingly in charge. the case is each alliance has their own ways outside the game of dealing with ineptitude and we should probly leave alliances to their own devices

[Brythalious]

Agreed, each alliance runs in its own way and has its own style forcing a voting button could just get messy.

[Lord Thanatos]

But what if, say, the alliance leader can't get on to gatewars anymore, like if his work/school blocks it or he loses his internet. especially in the case of a larger alliance, it would take time to long to reorganise, because at heart, everyone wants to be the leader, so there would likely be several confused sub-alliances formed in the post breakup turmoil.

[Wolf359]

Which is part of the reason for having a 2nd in comand of the alliance. if a situation arises where the leader has been inactive for some time, then perhaps something could be put in place that would allow the 2IC to take command - but only after the time limit has passed.

[Brythalious]

That would be useful to have, luckily for me my Second in command is also my best friend so I know I can get to him to sort out any issues while I have no net connection.. (As happened a few months ago) But obviously not all alliances are that lucky