User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Suggestions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 21:32   #1
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
[Discuss] Alliance member count

I was wondering if the number of planets allowed to be in any 1 alliance should be reduced. Maybe down to 70, maybe even as low as 60.

If you take a look at the state of the game at the moment then you will see that the top 4 alliances all have over 70 planets. These 4 alliances are all very well organised in my opinion and have some high quality members. Reducing the alliance member count to a maximum of 60 would disperse a lot of the talent in the top alliances and increase the number of viable alliances.

Take a look at last round for example. Both Exilition and Angels proved that you can come first and second with less than 70 members, and that was when we had a 100 member limit.

I think that reducing the size of the alliances will make for a more dynamic round as there will be more competition at the top and will reduce the chance of 1 alliance running away with it.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 21:45   #2
Phil^
Insomniac
 
Phil^'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,583
Phil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldPhil^ spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Alliance member count

all that would happen is the alliances seperate into two battlegroups which attack together if the alliance size drops (significantly) below the number of members in them, though it would put a crimp in being able to defend each other adequtely. but its not too much of a hardship for active alliances really. they'd draw defence from the same bg where possible, and from xan planets in the other if not.

edit : also , if they do split theres the possibility, however remote of the top #1 and #2 alliance merely being different BGs of the same alliance.
__________________
Phil^
Phil^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 21:53   #3
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Alliance member count

Kal mentioned something very interesting one time about having dynamic memberlimits on the alliances based on number of players. That way it can both be bigger alliances and smaller alliance limits based on numbers of players playing.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 21:54   #4
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
all that would happen is the alliances seperate into two battlegroups which attack together if the alliance size drops (significantly) below the number of members in them, though it would put a crimp in being able to defend each other adequtely. but its not too much of a hardship for active alliances really. they'd draw defence from the same bg where possible, and from xan planets in the other if not.

edit : also , if they do split theres the possibility, however remote of the top #1 and #2 alliance merely being different BGs of the same alliance.
Yeah, that's pretty much the same conclusion I came to. More alliances with lower member counts means a likelihood of more cooperation between alliances. I still think there is a strong argument in favour of having smaller alliances though since as you say it is a lot harder for people who do not share an alliance to defend each other.

But is there going to be much cross alliance defending? I think it's unlikely that alliances will impliment a system of making defence calls for planets in a twinned alliance, they will just deem it to be impractical.

Also if one group of alliances that have "twinned" do become top dogs it's possible that they will choose to coordinate less with each other and perhaps even attack each other. Much more likely than an alliance with 100 members and an insurmountable lead choosing to kick a large number of its members out.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 23:43   #5
The Real Arfy
Registered User
 
The Real Arfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,081
The Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance member count

Sorry to be ****ting all over your threads recently ChubbyChecker, but this isn't the first time we've discussed this. True, thats for round 13 - but the arguments still stand.

Also don't forget - the memberbase will (touch wood) grow again next round and we will see alot more alliances anyway
__________________
Dynamic Salvage!

[16:10:34] <[lfc]stif|afk> "dont be the worst in your alliance, join CT. We have Arfy!"
The Real Arfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Aug 2005, 23:58   #6
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Real Arfy
Sorry to be ****ting all over your threads recently ChubbyChecker, but this isn't the first time we've discussed this. True, thats for round 13 - but the arguments still stand.

Also don't forget - the memberbase will (touch wood) grow again next round and we will see alot more alliances anyway
I got bored after reading a few posts but here is one good point that I hadn't considered:

Quote:
personally I think the 100 player cap, is probably the best amount, if alliances like 1up choose to go below that its entirely there choice, i dont think you should make other allies go less than 100, because theres a lack of quality alliances at the moment, players will leave etc etc if they cant find an alliance to there standard, past few rnds have shown that new alliances can be difficult to setup and maintain i.e. absolute and phraktos
The relevant bit is when he mentions that people are looking for an alliance up to their standard. Every alliance needs good organisation. Even with 60 members (this isn't particularly few either tbh) you need people to pick targets, organise defence, etc...
How many people are actually willing to do that? Enough people to make 60 man alliances a viable option? I don't know. This round we have seen a number of alliances crumble and merge due to the lack of players compared to last round, this is largely due to the alliance's lack of organisation. If next round we force the number of alliances to increase there might not be enough viable alliances to keep people interested and the player base will dwindle as a result.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 00:54   #7
The Real Arfy
Registered User
 
The Real Arfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,081
The Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance member count

I'm not denying that alot of alliances are suffering due to a lack of players. I'm simply pointing out that its because this is a summer round (or at least, I really hope it is) and come r15/16 we will see an increase in the number of alliances (e.g. EXilition/Angels) and their members.

I don't think its a cause for concern. Yet.

P.S. I have no real opinion on this matter - I simply posted to say its been discussed before and perhaps you might want to read what had been said just a few months ago.
__________________
Dynamic Salvage!

[16:10:34] <[lfc]stif|afk> "dont be the worst in your alliance, join CT. We have Arfy!"
The Real Arfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 01:03   #8
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Real Arfy
I'm not denying that alot of alliances are suffering due to a lack of players. I'm simply pointing out that its because this is a summer round (or at least, I really hope it is) and come r15/16 we will see an increase in the number of alliances (e.g. EXilition/Angels) and their members.

I don't think its a cause for concern. Yet.
From what you're saying it seems that you think that the member count should be reduced because there would be plenty of people willing to run an alliance to cope with the larger number of alliances present.

The number of people that may or not play R15 isn't really an issue. There could be as many as 4,000 people playing next round (there won't be), there'd still be perfectly valid reasons to reduce the maximum number of planets in an alliance.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 01:17   #9
The Real Arfy
Registered User
 
The Real Arfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,081
The Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
From what you're saying it seems that you think that the member count should be reduced because there would be plenty of people willing to run an alliance to cope with the larger number of alliances present.

The number of people that may or not play R15 isn't really an issue. There could be as many as 4,000 people playing next round (there won't be), there'd still be perfectly valid reasons to reduce the maximum number of planets in an alliance.
Not in the slightest. I'm saying members and commanders will become more active (e.g. EXi, Angels, LCH, Veneratio off the top of my head).

Currently there is nothing wrong with 100-member alliances and given that we will see more alliances and players returning to the game there is no forseeable problem for coming rounds either.
__________________
Dynamic Salvage!

[16:10:34] <[lfc]stif|afk> "dont be the worst in your alliance, join CT. We have Arfy!"
The Real Arfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 01:24   #10
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
Kal mentioned something very interesting one time about having dynamic memberlimits on the alliances based on number of players. That way it can both be bigger alliances and smaller alliance limits based on numbers of players playing.
An idea he stole off me the bastard and is passing off as his own

*Wakey gets out his kal voodoo doll and starts putting pins in to teach the theiving git

Anyway the problem with the dynamic limit is getting the base limit right. No matter how many people signup there has to be an amount that the alliance limit will never go under as you need to allow alliances a certain amount of planning and chance to get the balance right otherwise you risk placing a small crack in all alliances just waiting for pressure to be applied and open the crack further until it implodes. Getting the balance right though is tough, too small and you cant guarentee that that core of players needed to make sure the alliance runs smoothly cant be guarenteed a place, too large and you dont sort a great deal. Get it wrong either way and you could cause more problems than are solved.

You also have the issue of on who is it decide, is it all accounts or paid, if all whats to stop multies being created to make more spaces. And what happens when numbers drop, will we be forced to remove members? All these issues would need sorted.

And on the general issue of lower limits while I would like that i'm not sure if its maybe too late. There was a time just a few rounds ago where the experiance lower down the alliance foodchain was such that there was many alliances whom could take a training role. Now however many of these have decided to join the higher levels and probaly wont head back down or have quit fully. Now if we have the likes of ND cutting back their newbie intack due to lower levels and the likes of fcrew having to take fewer you have to wonder where new players will find a home now that will develop them. We could do with ensuring more people of experiance were in alliances that could take upa training position if the limits reduced enough to have any impact
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 10:19   #11
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
An idea he stole off me the bastard and is passing off as his own

*Wakey gets out his kal voodoo doll and starts putting pins in to teach the theiving git

Anyway the problem with the dynamic limit is getting the base limit right. No matter how many people signup there has to be an amount that the alliance limit will never go under as you need to allow alliances a certain amount of planning and chance to get the balance right otherwise you risk placing a small crack in all alliances just waiting for pressure to be applied and open the crack further until it implodes. Getting the balance right though is tough, too small and you cant guarentee that that core of players needed to make sure the alliance runs smoothly cant be guarenteed a place, too large and you dont sort a great deal. Get it wrong either way and you could cause more problems than are solved.

You also have the issue of on who is it decide, is it all accounts or paid, if all whats to stop multies being created to make more spaces. And what happens when numbers drop, will we be forced to remove members? All these issues would need sorted.
I really don't see why we should do this. Not only is it hard to balance and open to abuse, it's also pointless. Deciding the number of maximum planets in an alliance before the round starts is perfectly fine. We know more or less how many planets are going to be in the game anyway so if we do want to base our decision on how many people are playing we can do it then. It's not like the number of people playing is going to be thousands different from one round to the next.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
And on the general issue of lower limits while I would like that i'm not sure if its maybe too late. There was a time just a few rounds ago where the experiance lower down the alliance foodchain was such that there was many alliances whom could take a training role. Now however many of these have decided to join the higher levels and probaly wont head back down or have quit fully. Now if we have the likes of ND cutting back their newbie intack due to lower levels and the likes of fcrew having to take fewer you have to wonder where new players will find a home now that will develop them. We could do with ensuring more people of experiance were in alliances that could take upa training position if the limits reduced enough to have any impact
I don't think there's going to be a particular problem for new players finding an alliance. There may be fewer places available in any particular alliance and therefore more competition to get into any particular one but there will be more alliances around to try and get into. You talk as if ND and F-Crew are currently the only alliances that take on new players, fact is most alliances take on new players.
If anything I think a lower member limit will make it easier for new people to find an alliance because it will increase the attractiveness of certain alliances. If you look at the current rankings, if we introduced a 60 member limit right now then alliances like NoS, Vengeance and TGV would suddenly become a hell of a lot more attractive.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 12:22   #12
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil^
all that would happen is the alliances seperate into two battlegroups which attack together if the alliance size drops (significantly) below the number of members in them, though it would put a crimp in being able to defend each other adequtely. but its not too much of a hardship for active alliances really. they'd draw defence from the same bg where possible, and from xan planets in the other if not.
That's what they said would happen when you hard-limited it to 100.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 12:30   #13
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance member count

Its actually as hard if no harder rto actually judge a static limit that a dynamic one due to the fact your not just taking into account the current sutuation but also the situation of the whole round. Lets look at this round for example before the round it was considered fine it wasnt until a hundred ticks or so into the game that Kal asked if the alliances thought it should be reduced to 75 because it wanst until that point .

And you will notice the word LIKE before ND and F-Crew. Like suggests more than the stated alliance. And the point is the fewer room that alliances have the less space for newbies and theres not enough experiance in many of those whom would bear the brunt of these extra inexperianced players to be good for them anymore. Yes it would bring the likes of NoS and Vgn back into the fold from a competing pov BUT by the time the trcikle down fo the more experiance players had been taken into account these alliances wouldnt have the room to take many new players. We would need to find a way of getting some more quality into the likes of Scythe, HA, tHE_powwer, as well as getting some leadership into some more of those >10 member alliances first because we have lost alot of the depth of quality lowerdown
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 13:36   #14
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
Its actually as hard if no harder rto actually judge a static limit that a dynamic one due to the fact your not just taking into account the current sutuation but also the situation of the whole round. Lets look at this round for example before the round it was considered fine it wasnt until a hundred ticks or so into the game that Kal asked if the alliances thought it should be reduced to 75 because it wanst until that point .
Then change the limit during the course of the round. Having an incorrect formula is not going to make the situation any better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
And you will notice the word LIKE before ND and F-Crew. Like suggests more than the stated alliance. And the point is the fewer room that alliances have the less space for newbies and theres not enough experiance in many of those whom would bear the brunt of these extra inexperianced players to be good for them anymore. Yes it would bring the likes of NoS and Vgn back into the fold from a competing pov BUT by the time the trcikle down fo the more experiance players had been taken into account these alliances wouldnt have the room to take many new players. We would need to find a way of getting some more quality into the likes of Scythe, HA, tHE_powwer, as well as getting some leadership into some more of those >10 member alliances first because we have lost alot of the depth of quality lowerdown
The issue here is about viable alliances. Take TGV for example. They currently have a decent average score and an incredibly low member count. This tells people that their members are viable but the alliance is not. They are caught in a catch 22. People do not want to join them because they have a low member count and they are unviable because people do not want to join them.

You say that people would flock to the top alliances, it already happens now. I know for a fact that a number of people in lower ranking alliances (myself included) have been given a place in high ranking alliances simply because they know that their current alliance's low member count will hinder it. The top alliances are currently leeching the best players from lower ranking alliances exacerbating the problem of allowing 100 planets in an alliance.
If we had only 60 planets people would still flock to the top alliances but would also "settle" for an alliance with few members because they would consider it viable. Very few alliances would fill the 60 member limit because that just doesn't happen. They would always have space for a new player with potential.
Also think of all the alliances that would currently be playing under their own tag right now if the limit was lowered. Angels would be, maybe even Veneratio.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 14:23   #15
The Real Arfy
Registered User
 
The Real Arfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,081
The Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance member count

OK - so I don't have much time (3 mins) so I'll just say this:

Dynamic member limits would not help the game in the slightest. Members work hard for their alliance, most work for their alliance over their own planet. Why oh why do we want to have to eject hard working members from their alliance? Its just plain stupid.
__________________
Dynamic Salvage!

[16:10:34] <[lfc]stif|afk> "dont be the worst in your alliance, join CT. We have Arfy!"
The Real Arfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 14:49   #16
Kal
Inactive peon
 
Kal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
Kal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant future
Re: Alliance member count

I'd like the limit to be 75 next round, this will be discussed with the alliances of course before a decision is made.
__________________
Kal

Round 6-10 NoS member-->NoS junior HC
Round 10.5 FAnG member
Round 11-15 PATeam
Round 17-30 PATeam
Round 31 ???

Check out toastmonster.com for crazy illustrations and art
Kal is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 15:04   #17
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal
I'd like the limit to be 75 next round, this will be discussed with the alliances of course before a decision is made.
I think it makes sense that you want to reduce the limit but why to 75? Seems to me that going to 60 will increase the benefits without many or even any disadvantages.

As for asking the alliances, if you ask the large and organised alliances they'll say no, if you ask the small less organised alliances they'll say yes.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 16:07   #18
Kal
Inactive peon
 
Kal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
Kal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant futureKal has a brilliant future
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
I think it makes sense that you want to reduce the limit but why to 75? Seems to me that going to 60 will increase the benefits without many or even any disadvantages.

As for asking the alliances, if you ask the large and organised alliances they'll say no, if you ask the small less organised alliances they'll say yes.
you'd be surpised he supports what.

Next round is likely to have more players than this round, hence the 75 as ipposed to 60
__________________
Kal

Round 6-10 NoS member-->NoS junior HC
Round 10.5 FAnG member
Round 11-15 PATeam
Round 17-30 PATeam
Round 31 ???

Check out toastmonster.com for crazy illustrations and art
Kal is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 16:27   #19
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal
Next round is likely to have more players than this round, hence the 75 as ipposed to 60
I don't think that the number of people playing the game is really an issue. If we had 10 times more players I think it would be a really bad idea to allow alliances to have 10 times more planets.
Last round Exilition and Angels both showed us that it is possible to make an impact with less than 70 members in a world where up to 100 are allowed. In fact they pretty much beat us over the head with this.
This says to me that an alliance can be a viable entity even without a lot of members. They can still defend each other, they can still attack together, they can still start wars, etc...
What reducing the member limit will do is increase the cooperation between alliances by allowing more wars and NAPs to take place. This should only help to make the political situation more dynamic and therefore exciting.

I do understand why you don't want to reduce it too much though, better to make the change gradually over the course of a few rounds than make a big leap all at once.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 17:22   #20
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance member count

The ultimate factor is a lack of people which are willed to organize things.

A lower memberlimit does not increase the amount of quality alliances, but will tighten the core of a few top alliances. It might lead to a few more mediocre alliances which, by far, cannot compete with the then tightened up alliances - there is already a huge gap between (roughly) the top 5 alliances and the rest.

Thus I do not think a lower alliance limit would lead to more competition.

On a sidenote, 1up were first to prove you can win with less than 70 people sized alliances in this environment (round 12).
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 18:54   #21
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Alliance member count

Having 75 players in alliance does promote smaller alliances, gives us abit more healthy picture with more allinaces prolly popping up also. I think that by setting it to 75 you will get better players spread over more alliances.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 20:35   #22
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
Then change the limit during the course of the round. Having an incorrect formula is not going to make the situation any better.



The issue here is about viable alliances. Take TGV for example. They currently have a decent average score and an incredibly low member count. This tells people that their members are viable but the alliance is not. They are caught in a catch 22. People do not want to join them because they have a low member count and they are unviable because people do not want to join them.

You say that people would flock to the top alliances, it already happens now. I know for a fact that a number of people in lower ranking alliances (myself included) have been given a place in high ranking alliances simply because they know that their current alliance's low member count will hinder it. The top alliances are currently leeching the best players from lower ranking alliances exacerbating the problem of allowing 100 planets in an alliance.
If we had only 60 planets people would still flock to the top alliances but would also "settle" for an alliance with few members because they would consider it viable. Very few alliances would fill the 60 member limit because that just doesn't happen. They would always have space for a new player with potential.
Also think of all the alliances that would currently be playing under their own tag right now if the limit was lowered. Angels would be, maybe even Veneratio.
In the bigger picture of things Im the biggest supporter of a reduced limit, i spent rounds championing the reduction, the problem is that we are past the point where it would be advantagous. The reason we are lacking some alliances this round and why mergers have been so common recently is due to the limits not be reduced sooner, by not doing so it suffocated the experiance at the lower end of the game adn forced them out of the game or up the food chain which has limited the ability for new players to be produced. When the alliances cant get the players they need to take the position in the top 10 that they believe is their god given right the players get unmotivated and its a simple decision for most to either not play or merge to gain that position and hence motivate them again. As such its not good for anyone to reduce the chance of new players to get into the game or to just increase the viable top 10 alliances. There needs to be more viable and stable alliances at all levels rather than just make more elite alliances while increasing the gap between the the top and lower alliances and then a reduced number might very well be advantahous. Otherwise your just going to see the same problem arise in a round maybe at a push two as the replacements dont come through the ranks

Oh and you contridict yourself, you keep saying that alliances have shown that they can compete with less members, and then your saying the lack of members is preventing them from competing. which one is it?
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 21:54   #23
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
The ultimate factor is a lack of people which are willed to organize things.

A lower memberlimit does not increase the amount of quality alliances, but will tighten the core of a few top alliances. It might lead to a few more mediocre alliances which, by far, cannot compete with the then tightened up alliances - there is already a huge gap between (roughly) the top 5 alliances and the rest.

Thus I do not think a lower alliance limit would lead to more competition.

On a sidenote, 1up were first to prove you can win with less than 70 people sized alliances in this environment (round 12).
Looking at the alliance rankings it seems that the opposite is the problem. If we didn't have many people willing to run an alliance then there'd be a small number of alliances, all with 90 or more members in them. The current problem appears to be that we have too many chiefs and not enough Indians.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
Oh and you contridict yourself, you keep saying that alliances have shown that they can compete with less members, and then your saying the lack of members is preventing them from competing. which one is it?
I said that Angels and Exilition proved last round that an alliance with less than 70 members can still have a significant impact on the game, even with a 100 member limit. I said that TGV, NoS and VGN are perceived to be an unviable alliance due to the 100 member limit. I said that Angels and Veneratio would currently be playing under their own tag if the limit were reduced significantly. None of this is contradictory.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 22:15   #24
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
I got bored after reading a few posts but here is one good point that I hadn't considered:



The relevant bit is when he mentions that people are looking for an alliance up to their standard. Every alliance needs good organisation. Even with 60 members (this isn't particularly few either tbh) you need people to pick targets, organise defence, etc...
How many people are actually willing to do that? Enough people to make 60 man alliances a viable option? I don't know. This round we have seen a number of alliances crumble and merge due to the lack of players compared to last round, this is largely due to the alliance's lack of organisation. If next round we force the number of alliances to increase there might not be enough viable alliances to keep people interested and the player base will dwindle as a result.
VGN has managed fairly well on 40 members, close to 35 once you take away inactives and new starters. All you need is a good sense of communuity and HC willing to work their arses off for their alliance.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 22:18   #25
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
VGN has managed fairly well on 40 members, close to 35 once you take away inactives and new starters. All you need is a good sense of communuity and HC willing to work their arses off for their alliance.
I'm guessing also like TGV the lack of members is somewhat self impossed isnt it. By that I mean that you have choosen not to have 100 members for the sake of it, you are rather making sure the members are right for you and meet your requirements
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Aug 2005, 22:43   #26
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance member count

Yes, you got it in one


Last round we had 70 members and 20-30 of those were useless - only coming on for attacks, not chatting in channels, not helping with defence but then complaining when we weren't able to cover them. They've all gone. It was a little messy (although not as messy as I'd have liked - showing exactly why they needed to go). This round we have 40 committed members and took in some oldies who signed up mid-round with new planets. Having established ourselves in the rankings and got quite a few high-ranked planets, we felt able to be there for our 'community people', those who left before the post-Round 13 cull due to real life circumstances. They have an equal place inside VGN, and we feel able to look after them (but, say, couldn't during the early round). We also have quite a few people coming to join us now - but have made them subject to our requirements, with a few exceptions.


Still, I'm against changing the member limit, it works nicely at 100 in my opinion. Any alliance needs a minimum of 40-50 members to get into the proper rankings - 1st to 12th at the moment, in my opinion. With hard-coded alliances, most struggle to cope with more than the limit - 100 members. Of course, we haven't seen them with more, but that's not my point. I think that if alliances like Wolfpack (RIP) and LCH took on many more members, they'd become over-stretched. Moreover, the universe just isn't big enough for 100+ sized alliances.

I wouldn't lower the limit either. Alliances such as Vengeance choose to have fewer members, we could recruit up to 100 if we want to. However, we wouldn't be doing our members the service that we should, and currently do, if we did. Things are fine as they are imo.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 Aug 2005, 10:37   #27
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
Looking at the alliance rankings it seems that the opposite is the problem. If we didn't have many people willing to run an alliance then there'd be a small number of alliances, all with 90 or more members in them. The current problem appears to be that we have too many chiefs and not enough Indians.
I do not deny that there are also people lacking, this is implied by the small planet base this game is suffering from. But that is not what I was pointing my finger on.

I said that a smaller alliance member size would not create more competition for the top rank, simply because the already well-organized alliances would first go and kick those members which aint really working for the alliance - and those kicked members will, if at all, be rarely willed to provide the required organisational work for other alliances.

The problem you are talking about is caused by the very tiring repeated attacking of the same planets over and over again. This could be solved by introducing AI-driven bot planets, which yet again is a completely different topic that is (or was) discussed here.
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 22 Aug 2005, 09:49   #28
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
I do not deny that there are also people lacking, this is implied by the small planet base this game is suffering from. But that is not what I was pointing my finger on.

I said that a smaller alliance member size would not create more competition for the top rank, simply because the already well-organized alliances would first go and kick those members which aint really working for the alliance - and those kicked members will, if at all, be rarely willed to provide the required organisational work for other alliances.
Maybe you're right. However:

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Last round we had 70 members and 20-30 of those were useless - only coming on for attacks, not chatting in channels, not helping with defence but then complaining when we weren't able to cover them. They've all gone. It was a little messy (although not as messy as I'd have liked - showing exactly why they needed to go). This round we have 40 committed members and took in some oldies who signed up mid-round with new planets. Having established ourselves in the rankings and got quite a few high-ranked planets, we felt able to be there for our 'community people', those who left before the post-Round 13 cull due to real life circumstances. They have an equal place inside VGN, and we feel able to look after them (but, say, couldn't during the early round). We also have quite a few people coming to join us now - but have made them subject to our requirements, with a few exceptions.
This particular chief does not appear to have any Indians.


EDIT: Thing is if the likes of 1up even have 20 crap members (I doubt it) them joining another alliance will only make that alliance stronger. Better 20 not so good members than nothing. If you're worried about defence leeching and the like impliment a scoring system.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.

Last edited by ChubbyChecker; 22 Aug 2005 at 10:13.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 10:07   #29
The_Fish
ND
 
The_Fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
The_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to all
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

I would much rather the limit was reduced to about 50 tbh.

the limit of 100 has caused the round to stagnate. Alliances like ND and Reunion, who had high averages but low membercounts had to recruit to stand any chance of getting anywhere near the top. Some could hack the recruiting (ND) but others could not (Hydra, Insomnia, Reunion) and that is why the round is pretty much over.

Had the limits been lower, then alliances would have been able to keep fighting at a comfortable level then there could be many more alliances at the top now.

To keep an alliance of more than 80 running, you need a solid core, a solid HC and good organisation. This takes time, and you can see by many new alliances faltering this round.

Lowering it to say 50 would keep the round much more itneresting, imo.
__________________
[ND]
The_Fish is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 10:35   #30
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Fish
I would much rather the limit was reduced to about 50 tbh.

the limit of 100 has caused the round to stagnate. Alliances like ND and Reunion, who had high averages but low membercounts had to recruit to stand any chance of getting anywhere near the top. Some could hack the recruiting (ND) but others could not (Hydra, Insomnia, Reunion) and that is why the round is pretty much over.

Had the limits been lower, then alliances would have been able to keep fighting at a comfortable level then there could be many more alliances at the top now.

To keep an alliance of more than 80 running, you need a solid core, a solid HC and good organisation. This takes time, and you can see by many new alliances faltering this round.

Lowering it to say 50 would keep the round much more itneresting, imo.
I pretty much agree with you. I think that the alliance limit should really be as low as possible. In a world with 20 planets in a galaxy (R15 will have smaller galaxies if Kal goes through with his idea) then I think that to make alliances relevant you only really need twice as many planets in your alliance as in your galaxy so a limit of 40-50 is fine.

Having said that though I still think that a 75 planet limit for R15 is the best option. This will make it easier for the current alliances to cope with the change and then we can decide at the end of R15 whether or not to lower it even further. Making the limit 50 straight away would just create far too much chaos as so many people would be getting kicked out of their current alliance and looking to either join a new one or start a new one themselves.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 11:03   #31
noah02
The Original Terran
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Afghan atm
Posts: 1,633
noah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker

Having said that though I still think that a 75 planet limit for R15 is the best option. This will make it easier for the current alliances to cope with the change and then we can decide at the end of R15 whether or not to lower it even further. Making the limit 50 straight away would just create far too much chaos as so many people would be getting kicked out of their current alliance and looking to either join a new one or start a new one themselves.

Damnit you took the words right outa my fingers :/
I was just typing the same thing then pressed the wrong button and ended up on pilkara.
So i give the 75 for next round the thumbs up.
__________________
introduction-Gramma
The following is a list of problems found in various places throughout the manual and game. We love you Noah!

Written by Kloopy Wed Mar 16 22:06:43 2005

Retired just for a bit....

Proud to have been 1up, SiN, Wolfpack, Bluetuba and the leader of ARK.
noah02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 12:10   #32
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

Planetarion has had fewer players this round because it's a summer round. With a lot returning in the autumn, I think that a 100 player member count will remain the way to go.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 12:16   #33
noah02
The Original Terran
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Afghan atm
Posts: 1,633
noah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Planetarion has had fewer players this round because it's a summer round. With a lot returning in the autumn, I think that a 100 player member count will remain the way to go.
We cant be sure of that tbh.
__________________
introduction-Gramma
The following is a list of problems found in various places throughout the manual and game. We love you Noah!

Written by Kloopy Wed Mar 16 22:06:43 2005

Retired just for a bit....

Proud to have been 1up, SiN, Wolfpack, Bluetuba and the leader of ARK.
noah02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 12:26   #34
The_Fish
ND
 
The_Fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
The_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to all
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

I can't be alone in being more active in summer rounds due to less constraints such as Uni, work, socialising.
__________________
[ND]
The_Fish is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 12:36   #35
The Real Arfy
Registered User
 
The Real Arfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,081
The Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond reputeThe Real Arfy has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

You don't socialise during summer?
__________________
Dynamic Salvage!

[16:10:34] <[lfc]stif|afk> "dont be the worst in your alliance, join CT. We have Arfy!"
The Real Arfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 12:43   #36
The_Fish
ND
 
The_Fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
The_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to allThe_Fish is a name known to all
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

I socialise more when I'm at Uni etc tbh.
__________________
[ND]
The_Fish is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 13:08   #37
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

There are plenty of people who didn't sign up for this round because of summer committments or lengthy holidays. For example, neither ToT nor eXilition are playing. A lot of alliances had decreased member levels (LCH, Angels).

I believe that Round 15 will prove me right.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 14:09   #38
noah02
The Original Terran
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Afghan atm
Posts: 1,633
noah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

I still think if all them ppl come back to there alliances they wont exceed 75 ppl and i think the way PA is now 75 ppl is the way forward.
__________________
introduction-Gramma
The following is a list of problems found in various places throughout the manual and game. We love you Noah!

Written by Kloopy Wed Mar 16 22:06:43 2005

Retired just for a bit....

Proud to have been 1up, SiN, Wolfpack, Bluetuba and the leader of ARK.
noah02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 14:17   #39
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

Then what would happen to alliances such as F-Crew, Orbit, Hidden Agenda and xVx? You're denying them the chance to train new players - that's the consequence of a 75 member limit.

If you want a 75 member limit for the top alliances, that needs to be negotiated politically between the top 10 alliances - those truly competing on the 'main stage'. Don't enforce it by hard-coding the limit.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 14:35   #40
noah02
The Original Terran
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Afghan atm
Posts: 1,633
noah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond reputenoah02 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

This is an example:
We have 2 or 3 n00bish alliances (no offence to anyone)
and we have say with no mergers and no disbanding we have say about 8 decent alliances.
We lower the member count of allinaces
We get 8 decent alliances still :-O
but then we get 5 or 6 n00bish alliances(once again please dont take offence)
The way I see it the more lil alliances with over 40 members learning together the better as then they can have there own little wars between each other like APA and co last round.
Just having them all thrown into 1 alliance because they can seems like a lazy option tbh.

Edit:
Like these ppl will get more members amongst there players instead of all moths to a flame to old skool f-crew and such:
Coven
G-II
tHE_powwer
Unforgiven Sin
[BIG]
Bloody Zulus
hirr
Social Outcast
SaX
[IRR]
Obsidian Order
__________________
introduction-Gramma
The following is a list of problems found in various places throughout the manual and game. We love you Noah!

Written by Kloopy Wed Mar 16 22:06:43 2005

Retired just for a bit....

Proud to have been 1up, SiN, Wolfpack, Bluetuba and the leader of ARK.
noah02 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 15:03   #41
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

I'd say that a fair bunch of those are community alliances - hirr and G-II, for example. So they wouldn't be taking in new people anyway.


Moreover, I'd rather see F-Crew, etc, training a lot of people rather than being forced to kick semi-inactives to take in more new players. I don't agree that these people will get new alliances, they will just quit.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 15:31   #42
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

If a training alliance wants to remain a training alliance they can kick out some of their better members (not officers necessarily) in favour of taking in newbies.

And the new alliances that will spring up as a result of the lower limit will also want to take on newish players so if anything a newbie will have more choice when it comes to choosing an alliance than they do now.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 15:35   #43
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

But you need the experienced players to TRAIN the newbies. Do you think it happens on its own, via some kind of osmosis? Of course it bloody doesn't.

</wakey>


I'm all for new alliances springing up to train players, but they need to be able to actually train them, not just leave them disillusioned with PA via a poor structure and command/HC inactivity. This is why alliances such as F-Crew are a cut above the rest.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 16:41   #44
ComradeRob
wasted
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Under the floorboards
Posts: 1,240
ComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

imo, viable cluster alliances are the best way to train newbies - that means eta -2 for in-cluster def.
__________________
“They were totally confused,” said the birdman, whose flying suit gives him a passing resemblance to Buzz Lightyear in Toy Story. “The authorities said that I was an unregistered aircraft and to fly, you need a licence. I told them, ‘No. To fly, you need wings’.”
ComradeRob is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Sep 2005, 16:52   #45
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
But you need the experienced players to TRAIN the newbies. Do you think it happens on its own, via some kind of osmosis? Of course it bloody doesn't.

</wakey>
I'm sorry, I must have made a typo. You see, when I said that they can kick out some of their better members what I actually meant to say was that they can kick out some of their better members.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComradeRob
imo, viable cluster alliances are the best way to train newbies - that means eta -2 for in-cluster def.
I agree and have suggested this in another thread. I'll say no more since it's off topic
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2005, 12:59   #46
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChubbyChecker
If a training alliance wants to remain a training alliance they can kick out some of their better members (not officers necessarily) in favour of taking in newbies.

And the new alliances that will spring up as a result of the lower limit will also want to take on newish players so if anything a newbie will have more choice when it comes to choosing an alliance than they do now.
Its not actually as simple as that though ChubbyChecker. Running a training alliance is hard work, I would actually say its probally harder to run such an alliance well than it is to run a more elite alliance. You are already prone to losing your best players as they are likly to decide at some point that they want to move to a more elite alliance and as such you cant really afford to then invest time in a player and then let them go at the point where they can finally start giving back. You need them to give back in this way to suppliment the fact that you dont have the same depth a an elite alliance has. The more you big players you lose the harder it is to give the new players a chance to learn and get hooked into the game. This means that kicking people isnt really an option if you want to be able to do the job correctly.

Its this lack of experiance that actually makes most alliances that take new players inefficient. They dont have the resources to really help the players and they often dont understand or ignore the responsability that they have to the game. They start an alliance because they think its easy and because they want to be a leader but underestimate the amount of effort needed to pull it off and rather than stepping upto the plate and really putting in the effort needed they shrink and fail their members. For example theres one alliance who put themselves across as a training alliance whom I hear regular stories from others whom head to their public channel to ask how to report their gal mates incoming to be told to go away as they are too busy doing something else (often playing things like risk). When they raise the issue they get kick banned from teh channel. So how does forcing more new players into alliances like this whom dont have the commitment levels to help them help the game?

I would love to see more alliances as not only is it better for the game to have more compitition at ALL levels BUT also due to the selfish reason of believing that 75+ members is actually to many members for a training alliance to be at its most efficient and it makes my workload ridiculous but i feel a duty to help new players and when I have to say no to people I feel I should be helping its not even as if I have any real options to send people to because theres really no alliance whom would take most of them that I believe would give them even an adequate experiance.

And yes we might get some new alliances, but we get new alliances every round anyway and reducing membership caps isnt going to improve these. They either have the name to attract other good p[ayers, in which case they would acheive this anyway or they have to start from grass roots which makes it hard to attract your experianced core (after all those being kicked have a number of good and established alliance to goto first, especially with a number of alliances potentially to re-emerge) and hence fail to have the eperiance or the numbers to gain and keep and train well these new players.

If the limits are reduced the only good thing you acheive is you make the top of the game more competative. However the problems somewhat arose this round because the compitition at the top was exceeding the resources available to them and reducing the limit doesnt solve this, it will mask the problem for another couple of rounds before it strikes again. It needs the chain from beinga new player to a top player improved to make sure players arent let down at the start and progress up the alliance chain as they go, then smaller alliances are more viable. How to actually acheive this I'm not sure but its certainly not by decreasing the already limited chances new players have

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComradeRob
imo, viable cluster alliances are the best way to train newbies - that means eta -2 for in-cluster def.
I have never seen a cluster alliance do this and I dont think a reduced travel time really helps. We have a reduced travel time in galaxy but thats not helping the teaching in galaxy is it. A cluster alliance conflicts with actual alliances and it encourages people not to help out on this. Cluster alliances have an awful habit of spliting, you get the good players joining up and using the advantage based on their alliance while the people whom need help more often than not get stuck together with no experiance or help. And lets be honest we have people like 1up whom if my 1up gal mates are to be believed often attack their galaxy and order them not to defend so most of the cluster alliance is going to be unable to defend smaller cluster alliance mates even if they feel inclinded to anyway
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew

Last edited by wakey; 8 Sep 2005 at 13:17.
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2005, 13:38   #47
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

What Wakey said.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2005, 14:46   #48
ChubbyChecker
King of The Fat Boys
 
ChubbyChecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 3,331
ChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriendChubbyChecker needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
Its not actually as simple as that though ChubbyChecker. Running a training alliance is hard work, I would actually say its probally harder to run such an alliance well than it is to run a more elite alliance. You are already prone to losing your best players as they are likly to decide at some point that they want to move to a more elite alliance and as such you cant really afford to then invest time in a player and then let them go at the point where they can finally start giving back. You need them to give back in this way to suppliment the fact that you dont have the same depth a an elite alliance has. The more you big players you lose the harder it is to give the new players a chance to learn and get hooked into the game. This means that kicking people isnt really an option if you want to be able to do the job correctly.
I don't doubt that it's harder.
You say you already lose players who wish to move up the ranks, so sticking to the 75 limit shouldn't be a problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
Its this lack of experiance that actually makes most alliances that take new players inefficient. They dont have the resources to really help the players and they often dont understand or ignore the responsability that they have to the game. They start an alliance because they think its easy and because they want to be a leader but underestimate the amount of effort needed to pull it off and rather than stepping upto the plate and really putting in the effort needed they shrink and fail their members. For example theres one alliance who put themselves across as a training alliance whom I hear regular stories from others whom head to their public channel to ask how to report their gal mates incoming to be told to go away as they are too busy doing something else (often playing things like risk). When they raise the issue they get kick banned from teh channel. So how does forcing more new players into alliances like this whom dont have the commitment levels to help them help the game?
You appear to be living under the delusion that F-Crew are the only alliance that helps new players. I accused you of this earlier in the thread and you denied it. Now you seem to be denying the fact that you denied it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
I would love to see more alliances as not only is it better for the game to have more compitition at ALL levels BUT also due to the selfish reason of believing that 75+ members is actually to many members for a training alliance to be at its most efficient and it makes my workload ridiculous but i feel a duty to help new players and when I have to say no to people I feel I should be helping its not even as if I have any real options to send people to because theres really no alliance whom would take most of them that I believe would give them even an adequate experiance.
You're saying that 75 is a better number than 100 then you go on to say that you don't want 75 by falling back on your old denial of the fact that many alliances currently do help out noobs substantially. I see no reason why any new alliances that spring up as a result of this would be any less accepting of noobs than the current alliances. They need to fill up their member count after all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
And yes we might get some new alliances, but we get new alliances every round anyway and reducing membership caps isnt going to improve these. They either have the name to attract other good p[ayers, in which case they would acheive this anyway or they have to start from grass roots which makes it hard to attract your experianced core (after all those being kicked have a number of good and established alliance to goto first, especially with a number of alliances potentially to re-emerge) and hence fail to have the eperiance or the numbers to gain and keep and train well these new players.
Reducing the member count will reduce the size of the critical mass, ie the member count needed to get the alliance noticed. Currently alliances with 40 or so members are overlooked in favour of trying to get into alliances with more members. If the member count is reduced next round then not only will there be more allianceless people looking for an alliance but new people to the game will also take more notice of these smaller alliances; thereby increasing the member count of the small alliances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
If the limits are reduced the only good thing you acheive is you make the top of the game more competative. However the problems somewhat arose this round because the compitition at the top was exceeding the resources available to them and reducing the limit doesnt solve this, it will mask the problem for another couple of rounds before it strikes again. It needs the chain from beinga new player to a top player improved to make sure players arent let down at the start and progress up the alliance chain as they go, then smaller alliances are more viable. How to actually acheive this I'm not sure but its certainly not by decreasing the already limited chances new players have
I'm not sure what you mean by the top of the game being more competitive, if anything it'll be less competitive. The top alliances won't have to work as hard on their recruitment cos they will fill their quota quicker. The top game will be more about skill in politics, attacking, etc.. rather than seeing who can grab the most planets to tag. This'll only help the lower ranking alliances as the threat of their best players being pinched will be greatly reduced.
As you say this will give players who want to play in top alliances less chance to actually do so but so what? Their planet still has the potential to do well, even in a not so high ranking alliance. Take APA last round for example, we had 2 planets in the top 100 and our alliance was ranked 14. Planetarion shouldn't be about everybody scrambling to be in whoever happens to be the number 1 alliance at the time, it should be about each player fulfilling their potential.
__________________
They mostly come at night. Mostly.
ChubbyChecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2005, 15:43   #49
Ferretus
ARS HQ
 
Ferretus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 308
Ferretus has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

F-crew has traditionally been a well known and organised training alliance I think there is no contesting that. The other alliance still like to maintain a competitive edge, this is what makes the likes of F-crew and ARS different to the other alliances.

Sadly I retired ARS from PA 2 rounds ago for the very same reasons wakey was explaining as to why its harder to run a trainee alliance. Your players have a tendency to wander to a new alliance as soon as they got a rough idea of what they are doing, occassionally you get some loyal members which help you run the alliance but eventually most of these will go after a round or 3. You are in a constant state of training things like battle commanders etc to help run the alliance while in addition teaching the basics to your new players (whom next year could well be your battle commanders or your enemies).

Anyways. To keep you all up to date... the private discussion in the alliance forums hasn't made any firm decisions either although there are (like here) valid arguments for the 75 limit and the 100 limit. The only fairest option is to limit alliance size to a percentage of the rounds member count, if this cannot be done dynamically then base it on for example 2% of playerbase from the previous round, being the alliance maximum.

I think planetarion has done too little too late and WILL die in the not too distant future. There is a lack of motivation in the playerbase caused by abuse from other players (in one way or another) and this has lead to a reduction in the amount of alliances/players/competition/skill. Even simple stupid mistakes like having reputation points on the forum has caused drops in morale. Its not required, adds nothing to the game and yet for some players getting a poor feedback for making a suggestion for example will make them realise that the community that PA players like to shout about how great it is actually isn't.
__________________
Ferretus
ARS HQ (R2-R12), ToF (R13), Wolfpack (R13-14). Now happily retired from PA.
"Don't mistake lack of talent for genius"

Please bear in mind that much of what I say is intended to cause discussion. It may not reflect my personal favouritism or even have any involvement with my situation. In short bitching at me is pointless, so discuss the idea :-)
Ferretus is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Sep 2005, 16:09   #50
Ali
Subh HC
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 215
Ali is a jewel in the roughAli is a jewel in the roughAli is a jewel in the rough
Re: [Discuss] Alliance member count

I know some peopel like Shyne are working on alliance tools and I myself have bots that do all the basic stuff. Does anyone think releasing an alliance bot with all the basic allaince needs would help these new start off alliances to be more stable?

In this way making more alliances with less members atleast the problem of having a defbot or something like that would be solved? I have heard that a lot of alliances struggle with this...
__________________
Subh - The rise of honor, loyalty and dedication
Ali is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 15:25.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018