Quote:
Originally Posted by Light
Yes, that was my point. Alliances will be shit if they want to be shit, it doesnt matter what the tag limit is. If an alliance would recruit to victory and you impose a tag limit, they'd simply block to victory instead. The tag limit really doesnt serve much purpose, we've seen time and time again, it doesnt create more competition.
|
You are arguing that this and this will happen when you actually can't know because....we never had a low tag limit.
Either you have a very good crystal ball or you are selling assumptions as arguments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light
Not really, Active players tend to want to play with other active players. Thats why the majority of rounds, we have a firm favourite.
|
And isn't that exactly the problem, having firm favourites?
Active players are usually those able to adapt best. They will find a group they want to play with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light
Lets take for exampe osiris, people in osiris didnt join osiris due to the tag limit. They joined due to the HC or maybe the previous round, no-one said X is full and Y is full, so i shall join Osiris. They joined as its the alliance they thought they'd feel most comfortable in (and that pre-round, osiris was expect to do well).
Another example would be the xVx/Asc round. With only xVx and Asc at near full tag, you cant use the argument that it forced people to join other alliances. People go where they want to go, and alliances tend to recruit whoever they want,
|
Why you think it is helping your argument citing two failures of the system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Light
Im of the opinion, that if PA has to reduce alliance limits to 30.. then PA is completly dead.
You even said yourself, you dont even know if it would be better, then why the hell are you suggesting it.
|
You don't know if it would not be better, why the hell you are shouting it down with incoherent arguments?