[[B5]Londo]

Originally Posted by Clouds

If the PA team implemented the smaller tag limit change, the player-base would shink even more and will probably result in the game closing the following round because players won't be able to play in their 'community' alliances. This game is still alive due to players being loyal to the game and most of all loyal to their alliance.

I Believe that this has been proven wrong before:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

I have not been able to find a correlation between alliance limit and number of people playing in alliances, nor between alliance limit and number of planets in the universe.

It's been a while since I last posted the graphs, so here they are:

http://s3.kkloud.com/gett/10qGRmE/to...ablpkz9f6r.png
http://s3.kkloud.com/gett/10qGRmE/av...qdt3k81tt9.png

Some comments:

All numbers are from round end.

The spikes in number of players rounds 16, 22, 27, and 44 (?) were due to free rounds. Round 30 was supposed to be the last round of PA. PA was bought by Pete before round 31 and by Jagex before round 38.

Alliance limit only shows total number of planets allowed in a tag, regardless of what the counting member limit was.

The "people in alliances" stat is really "number of people in alliances of >= 40 people" and "total alliances" is "number of alliances with >= 40 people"

"Average members" = "number of people in alliances >= 40 people" / "number of alliances with >= 40 people".

"Total" is total number of players. I think I disregarded planets without roids, but I can't be sure.

Unfortunately Mz's graphs no longer work for me but everyone should agree that Mz is always right anyway!