[Banned]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

this is quite a good point, however it shows a collective responsibility that wouldnt really work in other alliances imo. if anything it sort of highlights my point about the overall quality and leadership across ascendancy which allows it to function in the way it does with such great success.

id hope that all competitive alliances have a record of who is recruited, who has vouched etc and with the right characters in that alliance they could communicate effectively to new recruits.

i like both systems tbh. in theory both should work only in 2 different ways.

with the vouch system with a good internal affairs team and record of who has vouched there is some element of accountability within the playerbase but a large amount of responsibility falls upon particular players (those who volunteer to be officers) which should ensure quality as they can motivate and help those who are of 'lower quality'

with the asc system (fruity or however you call it now :P) its good as it spreads the responsibility which obviously is better as generally most people will perform better when not overworked or worrying about other people. im ashamed to admit there have been times ive been doing BC'ing and TA'ing in games and worrying so much about other people not launching ive forgotten to launch myself /o\

the asc system clearly works for you guys but its aided immensely by your current memberbase along with your appeal for potential joinees. i dont really expect others to replicate this recruitment model anytime soon. who knows...

The problem with traditional vouch systems is how they accountability is handled. Like I said, in Ascendancy the accountability is there because members hassle eachother about the people they've sponsored. This drives people to take (some) responsibility for their recruits.

In the last regular alliance I was in, vouching didn't really have any possibly negative consequences and as far as I know, the only time it was really checked up on was if a spy was discovered. And even then it didn't really lead to anything, just lowered the trustworthiness of all that person's other recruits.

dont the majority of alliances with strict rules and who treat their members like children play for 'the win'?

Maybe, but winning is pretty fun. Maybe if they reversed their priorities they'd get further.

and you have to admit Banned, there are quite a lot of players in this game who ACT like children

Yup. And quite a few of them have been or are in Ascendancy.