Planetarion Forums - View Single Post

Cowch · 5 Oct 2010, 22:45

Halving the alliances isn't going to create more competitive alliances. I'll explain what would happen using CT as my example.

CT has about 30-40 solid, active members. We have trouble competing because out of those 30-40 members we have trouble getting enough DC, BC etc. Each round, at about tick 300, someone gets frustrated with sucking and finally steps up to carry the alliance on his shoulders. Then that person burns out and quits at the end of the round.

By halving CT, you wouldn't create a more competitive alliance. You'd get one alliance worse than it is now, and force a bunch of people to quit. If we have trouble getting people to fill officer positions with 80 members, we'd have even more with 40 members, and we'd be a less competitive alliance. And, the 40 we would kick would be the 40 least likely to step up and run an alliance. Rather than form a new alliance, they would, I predict, quit. Maybe a few would find a new home in some crummy alliance, but many would just quit.

I know I would quit if I got kicked. I don't want to play in some shit alliance that averages 1 mil score at the end of the round. And I work a full time job, so I log on each morning to check my planet, and I log on each night to launch attacks and def. That doesn't leave any time to start a new alliance. I finish in CT's top 5 almost every round, so I'm definitely helping make it as competitive as it is. But without decent officership, there wouldn't be anyone to use my skill and marginal activity to its full advantage, thereby making a 40 member CT less competitive than the 80 member CT.

5 Oct 2010, 22:45	#163
Cowch Moo Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 143	Re: Alliance Size for next round Halving the alliances isn't going to create more competitive alliances. I'll explain what would happen using CT as my example. CT has about 30-40 solid, active members. We have trouble competing because out of those 30-40 members we have trouble getting enough DC, BC etc. Each round, at about tick 300, someone gets frustrated with sucking and finally steps up to carry the alliance on his shoulders. Then that person burns out and quits at the end of the round. By halving CT, you wouldn't create a more competitive alliance. You'd get one alliance worse than it is now, and force a bunch of people to quit. If we have trouble getting people to fill officer positions with 80 members, we'd have even more with 40 members, and we'd be a less competitive alliance. And, the 40 we would kick would be the 40 least likely to step up and run an alliance. Rather than form a new alliance, they would, I predict, quit. Maybe a few would find a new home in some crummy alliance, but many would just quit. I know I would quit if I got kicked. I don't want to play in some shit alliance that averages 1 mil score at the end of the round. And I work a full time job, so I log on each morning to check my planet, and I log on each night to launch attacks and def. That doesn't leave any time to start a new alliance. I finish in CT's top 5 almost every round, so I'm definitely helping make it as competitive as it is. But without decent officership, there wouldn't be anyone to use my skill and marginal activity to its full advantage, thereby making a 40 member CT less competitive than the 80 member CT.