Home EN Suggestions

Back Ground Check

124

Comments

  • artful (US1)artful (US1) US1 Posts: 6,492
    It's really quite simple re: the VF.

    1-Restore the "who started the challenge" in chat.

    2-Limit challenges to 30 minutes for regular members.
    .


    Hate coops but missing out on the benefits?  Check out "Hearts of Gold," the non-coop coop -- we leave you alone to farm your way.  No donations or group participation required.

    https://community.goodgamestudios.com/bigfarm/en/discussion/158239/just-want-to-be-left-alone-to-farm-in-peace-us1-hearts-of-gold


  • I am looking at the whole picture here, but more towards the Cooperatives that are low levels and the ones that are starting out.  They will be walking on the same foot path that the higher level Cooperatives have made.  It is the foot path of 'trials & errors' as they proceed..  and learning along the way.  Just like the higher Cooperative did, but to have this " last known coop''.. would be an asset to have.  Small coops bring in possible acknowledge players.  Larger Coops  a safe mode.  With this..all cooperatives will benefit from it.. It may be just a stone in a big pile of rocks hopefully not fall through the cracks.
  • artful (US1)artful (US1) US1 Posts: 6,492
    But it's so easy to ask for this information, and to verify it. Even if "last known coop" was listed, the leader could give false negative feedback, and they do, from my experience. Our coop doesn't have a high turnover, but when we have added players, I actually have had a leader once or twice, unbidden, message me to tell me what a terrible person that player we added was. Turned out, just a case of bad blood or a bad fit, and the players became valuable team members. If I sensed red flags, I'd simply ask the player where their last coop was and proceed from there. If a higher power player is asking to join a coop that is just starting out, that should be an immediate red flag. Adding "last coop" serves no other purpose than saving the new coop leader a few minutes of time. It's no panacea or a safeguard. If it is optional, as it probably would be if GGS implemented it, then needless suspicions surrounding the player could arise ..."why are they hiding this information?" "what are they trying to cover up?" "why are they being so sneaky?" etc, when all they want is a little bit or privacy.
    .


    Hate coops but missing out on the benefits?  Check out "Hearts of Gold," the non-coop coop -- we leave you alone to farm your way.  No donations or group participation required.

    https://community.goodgamestudios.com/bigfarm/en/discussion/158239/just-want-to-be-left-alone-to-farm-in-peace-us1-hearts-of-gold

  • But it's so easy to ask for this information, and to verify it. Even if "last known coop" was listed, the leader could give false negative feedback, and they do, from my experience. Our coop doesn't have a high turnover, but when we have added players, I actually have had a leader once or twice, unbidden, message me to tell me what a terrible person that player we added was. Turned out, just a case of bad blood or a bad fit, and the players became valuable team members. If I sensed red flags, I'd simply ask the player where their last coop was and proceed from there. If a higher power player is asking to join a coop that is just starting out, that should be an immediate red flag. Adding "last coop" serves no other purpose than saving the new coop leader a few minutes of time. It's no panacea or a safeguard. If it is optional, as it probably would be if GGS implemented it, then needless suspicions surrounding the player could arise ..."why are they hiding this information?" "what are they trying to cover up?" "why are they being so sneaky?" etc, when all they want is a little bit or privacy.
    I understand where you are going with this.  You have the knowledge as you have been playing for a long time.  Maybe your cooperative has been burned by a few.. I don't know, just guessing.  But you do have the experience of playing this game.  Fair judgement to state of.   But what of those who do not come to forum to view all the information that is put out there.  It is those who do not come, need a helping hand.  This 'last know coop' is a good idea. I am strongly for it.  Someone made suggestion to "extended to "last 5 known coop." ".  Five might be extreme.. but i can see ' last 2 known coop' for suppose of high level coops.  But for the small coops..just seeing a player in applicants who has been on a coop before..  might and could be a asset to helping a smaller coop succeed.  The smaller coop wouldn't even think about contacting former leader of said new player with old coop name on application.  Just knowing new player was on another coop is an asset.  If you can see it in that way.. then it is worthwhile to move it forward.   As for the higher coop and having this ' last know coop'.. it is the option of the leader/deputy to utilize.  It will be there should one need, that is all.
  • artful (US1)artful (US1) US1 Posts: 6,492
    But it's so easy to ask for this information, and to verify it. Even if "last known coop" was listed, the leader could give false negative feedback, and they do, from my experience. Our coop doesn't have a high turnover, but when we have added players, I actually have had a leader once or twice, unbidden, message me to tell me what a terrible person that player we added was. Turned out, just a case of bad blood or a bad fit, and the players became valuable team members. If I sensed red flags, I'd simply ask the player where their last coop was and proceed from there. If a higher power player is asking to join a coop that is just starting out, that should be an immediate red flag. Adding "last coop" serves no other purpose than saving the new coop leader a few minutes of time. It's no panacea or a safeguard. If it is optional, as it probably would be if GGS implemented it, then needless suspicions surrounding the player could arise ..."why are they hiding this information?" "what are they trying to cover up?" "why are they being so sneaky?" etc, when all they want is a little bit or privacy.
    I understand where you are going with this.  You have the knowledge as you have been playing for a long time.  Maybe your cooperative has been burned by a few.. I don't know, just guessing.  But you do have the experience of playing this game.  Fair judgement to state of.   But what of those who do not come to forum to view all the information that is put out there.  It is those who do not come, need a helping hand.  This 'last know coop' is a good idea. I am strongly for it.  Someone made suggestion to "extended to "last 5 known coop." ".  Five might be extreme.. but i can see ' last 2 known coop' for suppose of high level coops.  But for the small coops..just seeing a player in applicants who has been on a coop before..  might and could be a asset to helping a smaller coop succeed.  The smaller coop wouldn't even think about contacting former leader of said new player with old coop name on application.  Just knowing new player was on another coop is an asset.  If you can see it in that way.. then it is worthwhile to move it forward.   As for the higher coop and having this ' last know coop'.. it is the option of the leader/deputy to utilize.  It will be there should one need, that is all.
    I definitely understand your point of view. I guess I'm just playing devil's advocate with a caveat that in reality, it probably won't help all that much in the grand scheme of things. And when push comes to shove, there aren't any shortcuts to experience gained from playing the game a long time. I'm learning new things every single day. :)

    .


    Hate coops but missing out on the benefits?  Check out "Hearts of Gold," the non-coop coop -- we leave you alone to farm your way.  No donations or group participation required.

    https://community.goodgamestudios.com/bigfarm/en/discussion/158239/just-want-to-be-left-alone-to-farm-in-peace-us1-hearts-of-gold

  • If the game had the proper fail safes and activity chat logs set in place:
    only leaders/deputies can start VF challenges
    activity chat log shows which deputy starts a VF challenge
    activity chat log shows which deputy starts a co-op project
    activity chat log shows which deputy starts co-op boosters for co-op events: CC, CHWE, etc.
    activity chat log shows which deputy starts a village building upgrade
    ...any action that involves starting a co-op related activity should chat log the player who starts it.

    ...then there wouldn't be a need to instill background checks on players trying to join a co-op.



    To my understanding... Leader/ Deputies can start a challenge once one is finished..  then there is a 30 minute wait for a member to start... this is where the problem lies.. ( should a new member out to harm a coop, has to wait the 30 mins ) to start a challenge... it will be.  Then by that time a challenge has started.. it is too late to do anything but to remove that player.  I think, new members coming in... that start button should stay grey until the new player has been on a coop for a month.  It wont matter that if the names were on chat on who started it.. the damage is already done.  This is why the ' last known coop' should be on a player's applicant when applying.

    Yep I agree. once the damage is done, the chat log will only tell which player did it. yet at least you can boot them from the co-op.   Then no repeat offense would occur.

    With regards to the "last known coop,"  I would have that list extended to "last 5 known coop."   Because a player could be sneaky about it-- just bounce around co-ops and 'play the part' before joining the intended 'mark.'   >:) 

    So in the meantime.. .the leader would have to ask the applicant beforehand, "what co-ops have you play for?"   Then speak with leader/s of those co-ops for references.  A cumbersome job for leaders to deal with, if you ask me.  :/



    that is a good idea because it would probably very easy for them to go into one of those open coops where u don't have to apply before applying for your coop and then you would not get the real coop he/she came from. they could still do that with 5 pevious coops history but it might set of some red flags with some people that his/her 5 last coops were open coops.




    Made by Jonquille6 (FR1)
  • But it's so easy to ask for this information, and to verify it. Even if "last known coop" was listed, the leader could give false negative feedback, and they do, from my experience. Our coop doesn't have a high turnover, but when we have added players, I actually have had a leader once or twice, unbidden, message me to tell me what a terrible person that player we added was. Turned out, just a case of bad blood or a bad fit, and the players became valuable team members. If I sensed red flags, I'd simply ask the player where their last coop was and proceed from there. If a higher power player is asking to join a coop that is just starting out, that should be an immediate red flag. Adding "last coop" serves no other purpose than saving the new coop leader a few minutes of time. It's no panacea or a safeguard. If it is optional, as it probably would be if GGS implemented it, then needless suspicions surrounding the player could arise ..."why are they hiding this information?" "what are they trying to cover up?" "why are they being so sneaky?" etc, when all they want is a little bit or privacy.
    I understand where you are going with this.  You have the knowledge as you have been playing for a long time.  Maybe your cooperative has been burned by a few.. I don't know, just guessing.  But you do have the experience of playing this game.  Fair judgement to state of.   But what of those who do not come to forum to view all the information that is put out there.  It is those who do not come, need a helping hand.  This 'last know coop' is a good idea. I am strongly for it.  Someone made suggestion to "extended to "last 5 known coop." ".  Five might be extreme.. but i can see ' last 2 known coop' for suppose of high level coops.  But for the small coops..just seeing a player in applicants who has been on a coop before..  might and could be a asset to helping a smaller coop succeed.  The smaller coop wouldn't even think about contacting former leader of said new player with old coop name on application.  Just knowing new player was on another coop is an asset.  If you can see it in that way.. then it is worthwhile to move it forward.   As for the higher coop and having this ' last know coop'.. it is the option of the leader/deputy to utilize.  It will be there should one need, that is all.
    I definitely understand your point of view. I guess I'm just playing devil's advocate with a caveat that in reality, it probably won't help all that much in the grand scheme of things. And when push comes to shove, there aren't any shortcuts to experience gained from playing the game a long time. I'm learning new things every single day. :)

    Juliette9 is right, lower cooperatives wouldnt even think to contact former coop leaders.. The lower coops would be pleased as punch to get someone from another coop.   But i am glad to see someone finally see what we were trying to say..  stepping outside the bubble  to look inside from the outside.  It is a whole different perspective... Hey i am still learning too.. :)))   Look at this ..someone please teach me how to put up a smiley face.
  • Ooop it is there already..   Oh i figured it out... see i am still learning...  lol..   I would like to see "last known coop" on it because as we been saying.. it will benefit everyone once they realize it.  We are all in talks of it now, Who is to say,  if it get added.. those who kept saying NO NO NO to it.. ends up using it and it helps them.  Then it was all worth it...  
    As for open Coops,, my coop i never leave it open, you never know what you going to get... like Forest Gump and his box of chocolates... :wink:
  • Ooop it is there already..   Oh i figured it out... see i am still learning...  lol..   I would like to see "last known coop" on it because as we been saying.. it will benefit everyone once they realize it.  We are all in talks of it now, Who is to say,  if it get added.. those who kept saying NO NO NO to it.. ends up using it and it helps them.  Then it was all worth it...  
    As for open Coops,, my coop i never leave it open, you never know what you going to get... like Forest Gump and his box of chocolates... :wink:
    true, but i can tell you that there are (or on my server anyway) lots more than 5 open coops to choose from.


    Made by Jonquille6 (FR1)
  • Summer (SKN1)Summer (SKN1) SKN1 Posts: 840
    I believe that most now agree to ´last known co-op´ = a players previous co-ops name sticks to the player on application(s) until s/he is accepted at another co-op.

    Tbh and not really knowing much about programming, I think that asking for the last i.e 5 co-ops or so would involve a too huge of a job due to implementing tracking of all the thousands of players+their past co-ops and therefore end the posiibility of getting our wish fulfilled.

    While implementing the last co-ops name would be easier. Thinking that we are already registered and tracked at a co-op.... And tbh getting the last known co-op on the application isssss a lot better then none. So I believe we should suggest:

    1) Mainly getting the last known co-op name on applications.
     
    2) If possible getting the last 5 known co-op names on applications. But not making it a must if it means we won´t get even the last known co-ops name on applications.

    Do any of you own progamming skills that can confirm my suspicion? Please speak up :smile:

    Cheers :smile:
  • u think (US1)u think (US1) US1 Posts: 39
    Having this 'last known coop' attached to application with a possible 2 previous coop.  ( think 5 is asking for too much..would be nice..  However this would spot a coop user as well.)  But for the purpose of the VF having  2 previous coops would be justified.  Then the perpetrators out to do harm will cease activity if they know they been tagged.

    Least i not forget.. the starting out / low levels coops  would benefit this added feature with the promise of finding players with game knowledge.
  • u think (US1)u think (US1) US1 Posts: 39
    So now that we have done all the pros & cons to my idea, where do we go from here.?  How do we get the Moderators to read and maybe forward it onto those who do the adding.?   

    As i think this will benefit all coops....  
  • i have to admit it would do good to a lot of people and i don't think it could harm anybody that doesn't need it.


    Made by Jonquille6 (FR1)
  • u think (US1)u think (US1) US1 Posts: 39
    i have to admit it would do good to a lot of people and i don't think it could harm anybody that doesn't need it.
    Exactly !  Point well made.
    The "Last Known Coop" would be on the application but it would be at the discretion to be utilized by the individual who brings a player in.
  • MRG1 (US1)MRG1 (US1) US1 Posts: 1,553
    All this aside, wouldn't it be much easier to just not allow members who have joined the co-op in the last 30 days to start a challenge?

    That's the way the old Village Challenge used to be, so the code is already in there.
    Or (as has been stated numerous times already) just make it so only the Leader and Deputies can start challenges longer than 30 minutes. 
    MRG1  (US1)
    Former avid player... and long-time Outlander fanatic




  • Summer (SKN1)Summer (SKN1) SKN1 Posts: 840
    edited 22.04.2019
    @ Southern (US1) and MRG1 (US1) 

    Yes, both suggestions would be good concerning the VF problem, but would not be of any help for the new/smaller Co-ops. We are discussing two reasons for getting the `last known co-ops name` on applications. Trust you guys have read up on the inputs here?

    Cheers :smile:
  • All this aside, wouldn't it be much easier to just not allow members who have joined the co-op in the last 30 days to start a challenge?

    That's the way the old Village Challenge used to be, so the code is already in there.
    that is a valid suggestion but if it is a coop with a few or no deputies and the leader of course is not on 24/7 that would punish everybody else just because of the potential of a "sabotager". and sometimes even in a big coop with lots of deputies their not always on or take an hour to start a challenge.


    Made by Jonquille6 (FR1)
  • artful (US1)artful (US1) US1 Posts: 6,492
    edited 22.04.2019
    Again, it seems like enough people are uncomfortable with this not to warrant ruffling of feathers. It also seems that no one has posted a really  valid reason as to how this would help small or young coops. All they would know is that the player was in a coop previously. It's no guarantee at all of a successful match. 
    Post edited by artful (US1) on
    .


    Hate coops but missing out on the benefits?  Check out "Hearts of Gold," the non-coop coop -- we leave you alone to farm your way.  No donations or group participation required.

    https://community.goodgamestudios.com/bigfarm/en/discussion/158239/just-want-to-be-left-alone-to-farm-in-peace-us1-hearts-of-gold

  • I am the leader of a small but not young co-op. Having the last known co-op would be useful for us to contact the previous leader (as we have done before) and ask what happened to have that member leave or ask how active they are. Most leaders are really honest about it and say they weren't online enough for them, they went red, or were inappropriate in chat. Most members were honest about why they left too, wanted me online all the time, too much research, expected too much, those we find go red quickly but give our expectations and them a chance. Also, our co-op will not accept someone who is currently in a co-op, leaves their co-op for ours, and we do not recruit or send PM's to people already in co-ops so ours is not pleased as punch to get someone else from another co-op; we wouldn't want it done to our players, so we don't do it to others. A small co-op needs active members for VF and it would be useful to know how active or inactive someone is or if they are a plant from somewhere else to sabotage, which in my opinion is really petty, but has happened. My co-op has an understanding that only a leader or Deputy will start a VF challenge due to the "complexities" (lower levels picking 14 hour challenges) but having not been a part of a larger co-op, I can only speak my experience and opinion.  
  • My coop is small as well..  I brought in a player about 3 weeks ago who was level 81 to which is level 83 now.  Yeah so this one came from somewhere, and I have been trying to communicate with him. with no response.  I just hope it is reading my post messages about how we do the VF.   Requesting all new members not to start a challenge, until they know what to expect on how to do.  But without communication sort of difficult as to what this player will do.  It doesnt seem right to kick off coop cause you are afraid he might do harm with VF.  If there was a ' last known coop' attached to his application.. i would be interested to know why it left another coop being at that high level.
    But also when new players start.. the VF start button should remain grey for them until a certain time limit. But as it stands, Leader / Deputies can start new one after one finishes, members have to wait 30 mins if Leader/ Deputies dont.  And there is nothing to stop them from picking a 1 hour / 2 hours / 3 hours or even a 4 hour challenge.   
  • Summer (SKN1)Summer (SKN1) SKN1 Posts: 840
    Again, it seems like enough people are uncomfortable with this not to warrant ruffling of feathers. It also seems that no one has posted a really  valid reason as to how this would help small or young coops. All they would know is that the player was in a coop previously. It's no guarantee at all of a successful match. 
    I can´t see enough people being uncomfortable with this so am puzzled by your words. Tbh I see more that wish for it.

    You write that no one has posted a really good reason as to how this would help small or young co-ops. I say they have. Tbh I can´t see any good reason posted to why it shouldn´t be implemented. So there is your argument right back at you :wink:

    There is no guarantee for anything in games or life, but we can seek solutions that benefit more, that can make things easier. And this suggestion would be a good one in that respect.

    Cheers :smile:

  • On the US1 server there is  3385 cooperatives and out of that 3385 cooperative  only about 20 players speak here with regards to this thread.  If you times the amount players per coop.. i would say that is a lot of players.. to only 20 who speak here.  Also having other servers included in these talks :  INT1 /SKN1 & GB1..   with a few that speak from those other servers.  The point i am making here, we are only a handful of players deciding the fate of this thread .. ' last known coop'.  We are only a minority here whereas the majority dont even come here to have their say.  I stand up for the majority who dont speak, to have this ' last known coop' added .. having this attached to application is the ''knowing''.  It will be your choice to contact former leaders.. it will not be mandatory.. your decision.  And i am sure if it gets added.. all those who were against it will be looking at it.
    Like Autumnsharon20 said, she brought in a player 3 weeks ago at level 81.. if the 'last known coop' was on application, i am sure she would have contacted considering the fact Autumnsharon20's coop is at level 15, ranking 1048.  Why would a level 81 go to a lower coop.???.  There i believe that is a valid reason for the smaller cooperatives.
  • SuzyQ22 (US1)SuzyQ22 (US1) US1 Posts: 1,472

    Like Autumnsharon20 said, she brought in a player 3 weeks ago at level 81.. if the 'last known coop' was on application, i am sure she would have contacted considering the fact Autumnsharon20's coop is at level 15, ranking 1048.  Why would a level 81 go to a lower coop.???.  There i believe that is a valid reason for the smaller cooperatives.
    First I want to say I cannot believe you all are still hashing this one out in here, lol. 

    As for your question above, perhaps the player wants to be a in a coop that is not major competitive?  Ulterior motives are not always a bad thing.  Maybe this player just wants a break from all the major competition and went to a lower ranked coop to get out of the loop.  I don't know, I have no idea who the player is, but if said player has not caused any issues then why is it an issue anyway?

    I really truly don't see a need for this last coop info being needed for anyone.  As I have said before, it is so easy to just remove a player from the game, and lock down the coop, then have them apply to join the coop.  So easy to do, all this need for the last coop just seems so mundane to me.


  • artful (US1)artful (US1) US1 Posts: 6,492
    On the US1 server there is  3385 cooperatives and out of that 3385 cooperative  only about 20 players speak here with regards to this thread.  If you times the amount players per coop.. i would say that is a lot of players.. to only 20 who speak here.  Also having other servers included in these talks :  INT1 /SKN1 & GB1..   with a few that speak from those other servers.  The point i am making here, we are only a handful of players deciding the fate of this thread .. ' last known coop'.  We are only a minority here whereas the majority dont even come here to have their say.  I stand up for the majority who dont speak, to have this ' last known coop' added .. having this attached to application is the ''knowing''.  It will be your choice to contact former leaders.. it will not be mandatory.. your decision.  And i am sure if it gets added.. all those who were against it will be looking at it.
    Like Autumnsharon20 said, she brought in a player 3 weeks ago at level 81.. if the 'last known coop' was on application, i am sure she would have contacted considering the fact Autumnsharon20's coop is at level 15, ranking 1048.  Why would a level 81 go to a lower coop.???.  There i believe that is a valid reason for the smaller cooperatives.
    Again, all they have to do is ask what their last coop is, then contact the leader of that coop. Having GGS provide that info isn't at all necessary.
    .


    Hate coops but missing out on the benefits?  Check out "Hearts of Gold," the non-coop coop -- we leave you alone to farm your way.  No donations or group participation required.

    https://community.goodgamestudios.com/bigfarm/en/discussion/158239/just-want-to-be-left-alone-to-farm-in-peace-us1-hearts-of-gold

  • artful (US1)artful (US1) US1 Posts: 6,492

    Again, it seems like enough people are uncomfortable with this not to warrant ruffling of feathers. It also seems that no one has posted a really  valid reason as to how this would help small or young coops. All they would know is that the player was in a coop previously. It's no guarantee at all of a successful match. 
    I can´t see enough people being uncomfortable with this so am puzzled by your words. Tbh I see more that wish for it.
     


    Not the only forum where comments made in this forum are discussed. :)

     Summer (SKN1) said:

    You write that no one has posted a really good reason as to how this would help small or young co-ops. I say they have. Tbh I can´t see any good reason posted to why it shouldn´t be implemented. So there is your argument right back at you :wink:

    The onus of reason why falls to those who want the change. Always. Basic Debating 101. :)

    Again, no real benefit added. The leader has only to ask a few a questions, then go to the previous coop leader if they feel it necessary.


    .


    Hate coops but missing out on the benefits?  Check out "Hearts of Gold," the non-coop coop -- we leave you alone to farm your way.  No donations or group participation required.

    https://community.goodgamestudios.com/bigfarm/en/discussion/158239/just-want-to-be-left-alone-to-farm-in-peace-us1-hearts-of-gold

  • Summer (SKN1)Summer (SKN1) SKN1 Posts: 840

     Summer (SKN1) said:

    You write that no one has posted a really good reason as to how this would help small or young co-ops. I say they have. Tbh I can´t see any good reason posted to why it shouldn´t be implemented. So there is your argument right back at you :wink:

    The onus of reason why falls to those who want the change. Always. Basic Debating 101. :)

    Again, no real benefit added. The leader has only to ask a few a questions, then go to the previous coop leader if they feel it necessary.


    That could only work if the new, accepted member answers the mail(s) and provides the correct last co-op. Ofc not accepting any application before the player answers ones mail would be the way to go, but then there is the fact that new co-ops are more often then not in the learning position and am just thrilled when a higher or whichever lvled player knocks on their door.

    Iffff `last known co-ops name` were on the application the player applying would know that questions could be forwarded to that co-op. That should get that player to be willing to answer mail(s) from the leader of the co-op s/he is applying at. Or face getting rejected if not answering. A bit more pressure on the applicant iow.

    I do understand how it could benefit new-in-the-making and young co-ops plus in fact all co-ops and players.

    Alternative would be to copy all co-ops memberslist and go through them each time an applicant knocks on the door. The info is available, not secret, already! Would just be so much easier if the last known co-ops name was on the application. Right?

    Cheers  :)

  • On the US1 server there is  3385 cooperatives and out of that 3385 cooperative  only about 20 players speak here with regards to this thread.  If you times the amount players per coop.. i would say that is a lot of players.. to only 20 who speak here.  Also having other servers included in these talks :  INT1 /SKN1 & GB1..   with a few that speak from those other servers.  The point i am making here, we are only a handful of players deciding the fate of this thread .. ' last known coop'.  We are only a minority here whereas the majority dont even come here to have their say.  I stand up for the majority who dont speak, to have this ' last known coop' added .. having this attached to application is the ''knowing''.  It will be your choice to contact former leaders.. it will not be mandatory.. your decision.  And i am sure if it gets added.. all those who were against it will be looking at it.
    Like Autumnsharon20 said, she brought in a player 3 weeks ago at level 81.. if the 'last known coop' was on application, i am sure she would have contacted considering the fact Autumnsharon20's coop is at level 15, ranking 1048.  Why would a level 81 go to a lower coop.???.  There i believe that is a valid reason for the smaller cooperatives.
    Again, all they have to do is ask what their last coop is, then contact the leader of that coop. Having GGS provide that info isn't at all necessary.
    It is a little difficult to talk to the former coop of this high level player - when the player REFUSES to communicate with you.  Like hello,  ( i wish to keep this player but i can not now cause i have NO CLUE what he will do when the Village Fair comes to town.).   If the ' last known coop' was on the applying application, i would have contacted former leader to find out if the high level player was a '' player of the coop'' meaning participating in Cooperative activities. such as research/ CC / VF .etc., if there was any communication.  I would have done so.  I think all players should have a fair chance at this game regardless of what level they are.  But without communication which i believe is sooo important with being in a Cooperative.  
    My cooperative is a small one.. Coop Rankings 1048 - Level 15 - CP 416.  
    I speak for all those other coops / players who DONT COME  HERE.. to see all this..   To have the 'last known coop' would be beneficial to all.  With VF in player or not, and if it did get added to application.  Leader/Deputies it will be up to them to utilize if they wish to.
    Finding good players is really hard, to get a player from another coop..with knowledge would be good but with communication skills would be even  better.  Those on US1 server can do their homework..by looking up my name to check out who this player is. His game level is higher then mine.  I wish i knew what coop he was on before coming to mine, as he has an impressive looking farm.  This player has up til 27th to start communicating or i will have to remove him... what a shame.

  • JVD (US1)JVD (US1) US1 Posts: 2,746
    I see no real issue if "last know COOP" was added to a players stats... with that said, if a player submits an application to a coop and doesn't respond to emails from COOP leader about their intentions or whatever, why would you accept them... reject them! Communication is key when bringing in a new player... yes, I know they can lie, they can tell the truth... so can the leader of last known COOP... again, if player does not respond to emails of why they want to join, REJECT them!!

    good luck, happy farming and all that!

    designed by Michiru (GB1)
    **Everything you want to know about Big Farm click HERE**



  • I did what everyone here has suggested i do.. remove a player who doesnt communicate.  This high level player who i brought in 4 weeks ago.  Someone suggested that the high level player might have wanted to go to a lower ranking coop to chill out.  Maybe but why not talk...   I am not taking chances on that one.. as those who do not communicate could cause harm.  After removing this player, it slapped an ignore on me.  So i asked another member where did he go. And he went to a higher ranking coop.  ( my coop ranking 1049 ) he went to a 285 ranking coop.   Chilling out.. i dont think so.

    We need the " Last known Coop'' on the applications.
Sign In to comment.