Re: Round 20 Changes
Determining alliances by value is daft.
Basically, you pick the most active alliance, that'll be the winner, as there's no alternative to compensate for others being more active than you. At least on the old system we can rely on people being politically (in)ept to help determine who wins on top of them being shit at the game.
If you don't like being in the 'most active' alliance, what's the point of alliance play, there's not even a prospect of you winning. Activity rewards itself, in greater value. XP is a bit of a leveller and as Barrow states, offers alternative ways of playing if you want to play for an alliance. Basically this means if you want to contribute, you need to play for value, which requires more activity.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|