Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cypher
not too fussed, aslong as you make sure it can't happen again that alliances have 80 members and are top 5, while the rest is limited to 55. That's just not bad.
|
I personally think the fact alliances like F-Crew, VGN and xVx have been top 5 with significanty more members is alo moret to do with the community outside the top10 than the games machanics.
The problem on the whole seems to be 3 pronged
1) We have alliances whom used to be elite whom still think they are in the position to challenge and still be elite
2) We have new alliances made up of experianced people whom decide their quality means they can can be picky and be able to challenge
3) We have new alliance led by inexperianced players whom dont have the resources to help fellow inexperianced players and keep their membership base around
Now alot of the alliances in 1 and 2 fail to really be anywhere near the pace beause the amount of 'hardcore' alliances is basically at satuation point, no matter how many new alliances you create theres not the players to fill these. You would have to cut alliance size by a fair amount imho to create enough demand for these other hardcore alliances
Now with group 3, anyone doing a bit of reseach into these alliances isnt going to recommend them to people and the people whom do end up there often end up quitting the game or trying to look elsewhere
This obviously causes a problem, at F-Crew for example we have a small window to send people to if we dont take them. For example we have been pushing applicants to us to look elsewhere normally telling them to goto SiN, reinVENted, ROCK, xVX and VGN (Basically alliances whom are more likly to give them a chance yet have a command thats experianced and will offer them a good training experiancee) and tell them we didnt have space for them but we recommended them. Now while some have got places in these recommened alliances some for whatever reason havent been and if they cant get a chance we feel we have to ourselves if we can. It may totally screw up our average, it may also leave us with a large number of what alot of the top10 would consider inactives and thus increase our incoming at a disproportional rate to the defence they contribute.
What the game needs is more alliances in that important middle ground between being the dumping grounds for the almost completly inactive and the hardcore players. Some of the aliances outside the top ten need to either
a) be more open to taking a chance on people, there are good people out there
b) Not be afraid of promoting the fact you will take those lacking score and experiance
c) Show that you have the quality and experiance in your command more so that people are more likly to recommend you
ofc I'm not saying people should decide not to play hardcore, if your happy being a small attack group like DLR and arent that bothered of ranking then thats fine or if you think you have the quality to pull it off like Ascendancy then thats fine but if it turns out you dont stop flogging a dead horse and look for some rough diamonds that could do with the experiance in some of these alliances to shape them into resonably good players (or even excellent players)
If more did that the good thing would be we should get more hardcore players coming through, so the demand for more elite alliances should increase while the amount of more casual players should also increase which is only a good thing for all areas of the game