DeletedUser
Guest
i'd love this. i want to see a vote on it.
Passed Alliance Forum Access Levels
- Thread starter Qlander
- Start date
-
- Tags
- dns list passed idea
- Status
DeletedUser
Guest
I think, it will be better if we have color system for level like red, green and so on. Purpose of that is, level should not be hierarchical. Alliance founder should have access to all color level. For everyone else, he has to give color level to them.
In this way you can give temporary rights to certain people for specific operation and they can not see what else other guys are doing.
Also you can use to to filter spy very easily.
Yogesh
In this way you can give temporary rights to certain people for specific operation and they can not see what else other guys are doing.
Also you can use to to filter spy very easily.
Yogesh
DeletedUser
Guest
sounds a little more confusing but good
DeletedUser
Guest
i like the idea
DeletedUser
Guest
I think that 5 is too much. I like there to be 3. 1 is too few, and 5 is to many.
DeletedUser
Guest
I think the idea is great.
DeletedUser12379
Guest
great idea
DeletedUser
Guest
Its great to see this has been noticed as having potential and so been moved to development and discussion.
As to the previous comment about 5 levels being too many i would have to disagree. As with 5 levels it gives you flexibility in your alliance structure. you can have multiple levels of hidden forums and can limit it so someone can see a forum but not be able to post on it. Which is ideal for an announcement section, where you do not want discussion or posts. Currently you can just lock such threads, but this does not stop the posting of new threads in this forum.
Personally i think 5 is ideal.
As to the previous comment about 5 levels being too many i would have to disagree. As with 5 levels it gives you flexibility in your alliance structure. you can have multiple levels of hidden forums and can limit it so someone can see a forum but not be able to post on it. Which is ideal for an announcement section, where you do not want discussion or posts. Currently you can just lock such threads, but this does not stop the posting of new threads in this forum.
Personally i think 5 is ideal.
DeletedUser
Guest
i think this is a very good idear 
DeletedUser
Guest
Come on, can we get on a vote on this already
DeletedUser
Guest
I've thought about this. It could be used for Battle Groups too, allowing each battle group only to look at their BG's forum. +reps for you!
DeletedUser
Guest
i like, especially the non-heredity part.
DeletedUser
Guest
Really good idea, hope its put in the game
DeletedUser
Guest
So to just sum this idea up...
There are 5 different forum group levels, 1-5. Players are assigned to any of those five forum group levels.
Within those groups, players will be given one of three access levels 1) no access 2) read only 3) read/write.
If I read that correctly, then I need Qlander to explain the "Details" section better for the description of how it works. It's a bit confusing atm with the 5 groups and then the 3 access levels. I would also like to see at least 2 examples that demonstrate this idea. I'll then move this over to a vote.
If I did not read the idea correctly, then someone explain it to me and if it's a well enough explanation, i'll edit it into the first post.
There are 5 different forum group levels, 1-5. Players are assigned to any of those five forum group levels.
Within those groups, players will be given one of three access levels 1) no access 2) read only 3) read/write.
If I read that correctly, then I need Qlander to explain the "Details" section better for the description of how it works. It's a bit confusing atm with the 5 groups and then the 3 access levels. I would also like to see at least 2 examples that demonstrate this idea. I'll then move this over to a vote.
If I did not read the idea correctly, then someone explain it to me and if it's a well enough explanation, i'll edit it into the first post.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
If you are correct Eclipse then wouldn't a simplified version of this idea just be that when you create a new tab in the forum you assign it a level, 1-5. And a player must have that level or above to be able to see it...
So if you wanted the 'Possible enemies' tab to be very secretive, you would make it level 5. And only people with level 5 clearance would be able to see it...
Just to add, i do really like the idea!!!
So if you wanted the 'Possible enemies' tab to be very secretive, you would make it level 5. And only people with level 5 clearance would be able to see it...
Just to add, i do really like the idea!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Guest
No, it was stated it was no heredity. For instance, you can have lvls 1, 3, and 5, but not 2 and 4. I like it, and want to see a poll on it.
And eclipse, you have it right
DeletedUser
Guest
Quandler, eclipse wants you to edit it into the first post.... before we get a vote on this,
DeletedUser
Guest
Instead of level 1-5, choose color. With level, hierarchy come in mind and everyone thinks that it is like where you have access to level 4 then you will have access to all level below automatically. In truth, it is just to have five different sets of level colors so that you can have separate tabs for separate groups of player.
Yogesh
Yogesh
DeletedUser
Guest
I think yogesh has a point. There's no sense in having it hierarchical, if you want a hierarchy, it can be done through the levels. Colors, maybe letters would be a better choice. Definitely something that's needed.
DeletedUser
Guest
Not colors, letters or numbers would be better. But I agree that there should be no heredity. Maybe, though, if your alliance is especially large and needs more classes of top-secret items, you should be able to create as many access levels as necessary for you. You will only start at 5 access levels default.
In addition to the following permissions for people who have access to a particular forum: 1) read-only 2) read and write, there should be a third permission, called Create Forum. Through this it would not be dependent on leadership status whether or not you could create a forum. This is because although you may trust someone to lead your alliance, you may not trust them to make forums, and vice versa.
In addition to the following permissions for people who have access to a particular forum: 1) read-only 2) read and write, there should be a third permission, called Create Forum. Through this it would not be dependent on leadership status whether or not you could create a forum. This is because although you may trust someone to lead your alliance, you may not trust them to make forums, and vice versa.
- Status