Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zaejii
better to have additional independent alliances than alliances with 100+ members that keep people out of tag or in a 2nd tag imo. actually promotes growth, forces other people to be leaders, etc.
|
fyp, its much better to have a excited leader(group) who set out to achieve some high goal, than to be lead by a command who is forced to lead a group of players because no one else wanted to (perhaps proven by the lack of innovation in warfare these days, apart from a few nice exceptions i might add).
The only issue that exists to my knowledge with alliance limits, is the lesser quality alliances complaining about their quality players moving on to bigger and better things (which is human nature). The result of lowering the alliance limits is some fake idea of a competition where in the end it's still the same old group actually competing for the win (perhaps under different tags).
[edit]
Just as a note, its quite hard to please 100+ members in a ~1000 active players game. If a group of players doesn't agree or has some other things they want to achieve, i personally wouldn't be too surprised to see splits happening to allow them to achieve their goals. The only thing holding such changes back, in terms of rankings, is the alliance contributed score reset when you leave a tag, making it quite pointles to leave a tag halfway through the round as you can't catch up rankwise anyway (if that is what you want).