View Single Post
Unread 8 Jun 2008, 12:26   #29
Gate
;D!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,810
Gate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: No new alliances?

By increasing the memberlimit, there is a marginal cost in terms of officer time eg 20 more members may require 1 extra DC. But this cost is very small compared to the initial outlay eg you need 10-15 officers/HC to provide infrastructure, regardless of whether you have 20 or 100 members.

With a memberlimit of 30, that means there are 15 slots for non-officer members. With a limit of 90, there are 75 slots. Tripling the memberlimit quintuples the number of slots for non-officer players.

Of course, the alternative is that alliances get by on less officers, decreasing alliance quality so that members of most alliances have a worse time. Either way, given that active officers are a finite resource, I'm still convinced that lower memberlimits are a bad thing for the game. If you have the officers to generate new alliances (only anecdotal evidence supports this), you end up with poorer quality alliances or with less slots for players who can't commit to DCing/BCing.
__________________
[ND]
Kicked from Ascendancy
Proud to have been a Dark Lord Rising.
Gate is offline   Reply With Quote