Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
This is exactly what (at least a lot of people in) Ascendancy are actually favouring over artificially limiting alliances: If you want people to not play for Ascendancy then go and make them want to join your alliance. It is not Ascendancy's fault that its members don't want to join elsewhere.
And the support planet rule is the biggest pile of rubbish this game has ever seen. The outcome of the game should be decided by its game mechanics, not by some arbitrary rules that inconsistently enforced.
And, with that in mind: Quite a few people in this thread did more complain about broken game mechanics than anything else, and use that as an argument for lowering alliance limits. Seriously, think again about that. I do fully agree that this game's mechanics are utterly broken, inconsistent and enforce too much one-dimensional gameplay. But I urge everyone to reconsider whether those broken mechanics are really fixed by lowering the alliance limit. In my opinion they aren't, and maybe someone can once again post the statistic for "amount of players per round linked to alliance limits" to show that it would actually do more harm than good to have lower limits.
I count 3. In the top 15 tags. Where do you get those other 4 alliances from?
|
Sorry, i took dlr as a new ally also (they were new last rnd)
Tof/spooooon/evolution/wafhh/insomnia/ec are bg's i'm aware off