User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Discussions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 15:53   #1
Dogs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 84
Dogs has a spectacular aura aboutDogs has a spectacular aura aboutDogs has a spectacular aura about
Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Another thread has allready been made but people are only arguing the fact that the alliance limit has been raised and alot of people like my self wanted to see it at 50.

Alliances like ToF may complain because they can easily get a member count of 80 but other alliances imho struggle like hell.

You can say well look at exil they are doing it with a small member count, but thats not the point, they are quality active and very experienced players, but other allies are not so lucky to have everysingle planet in tag as a quality active experienced player.

So instead of arguing that the alliance limit has been raised this round (even though it was wrong to do so) lets see all those in favour of alliance limit of 50 for round 20, it would create a few extra allies and would also give the New HC's of those few new allies a bit of experience and practise but it would/should boost the comuinity and make the game a bit more exciting, we could see a few more wars going on etc etc.

All those in favour make it said.

Last edited by Dogs; 4 Nov 2006 at 16:04.
Dogs is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 15:57   #2
Skyff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 6
Skyff is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

I'm in favor of anything that enhances competition on alliance level, this is one such idea in my opinion.
Skyff is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 16:14   #3
Zirikk
Registered User
Bounce Back Champion, TIE Fighter Shooter Champion, Penguin Bashing Champion, War on Terror Champion, Bugz Champion
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 161
Zirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to behold
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showth...49#post3071049

But yes. 50 might be ok.
Zirikk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 16:31   #4
^Miksu^
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 8
^Miksu^ has a spectacular aura about^Miksu^ has a spectacular aura about
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

But is there a need for "few extra allies"? And is there experienced and willing command staffs to lead these alliances so that they could compete with anyone?
I think it's clear that if the limit would be 50, couple of alliances like eXi and 1up would easily beat the shit out of their competitors and win just by snapping their fingers.
Even now it seems that alliances are bit afraid of eXi and their "quality, active and experienced" players(check out the "omg, eXi is 7th we are all doomed and they will win the round" thread). Reducing the alliance size would just mean that most of the alliances would have no way to compete with those few that can still get their tag full of "quality".
Game may need to be made bit more exciting but it takes something else(/more) than giving even more advantage to those that can rule the game even now. This would just increase the amount of alliances that are competing for the rank of "least loser".
__________________
[F-Crew] - Vengeance - eXilition - ROCK
^Miksu^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 16:33   #5
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ^Miksu^
I think it's clear that if the limit would be 50, couple of alliances like eXi and 1up would easily beat the shit out of their competitors and win just by snapping their fingers.
Dude, as you noticed correctly, they are going to do that anyways!
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 16:38   #6
Snurx
Dirte
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 5,573
Snurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldSnurx spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

You must realize that with a limit of 50, lot of people would quit to play. Who wants to go from a top contender (well, in theory at least) to a lesser experienced alliance? If I cannot play with atleast some of the friends I've got over my pa carrer, whats the point in playing anyway? etc

The dwindling memberbase is a symptom of a much greater problem PA has. And just trying to fix the symptoms wont do any good, as if you fix one another one will appear.
Snurx is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 16:38   #7
Dogs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 84
Dogs has a spectacular aura aboutDogs has a spectacular aura aboutDogs has a spectacular aura about
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ^Miksu^
But is there a need for "few extra allies"? And is there experienced and willing command staffs to lead these alliances so that they could compete with anyone?
I think it's clear that if the limit would be 50, couple of alliances like eXi and 1up would easily beat the shit out of their competitors and win just by snapping their fingers.
Even now it seems that alliances are bit afraid of eXi and their "quality, active and experienced" players(check out the "omg, eXi is 7th we are all doomed and they will win the round" thread). Reducing the alliance size would just mean that most of the alliances would have no way to compete with those few that can still get their tag full of "quality".
Game may need to be made bit more exciting but it takes something else(/more) than giving even more advantage to those that can rule the game even now. This would just increase the amount of alliances that are competing for the rank of "least loser".

But having more allies may be a good thing, think about it that alot of angels will have to go somewere, alot of exil's main team would have to go somewere, etc etc, if the other half of exil or angels creates a new allie then there will be more good alliances, but with more alliances could mean bringing things back such as the XETA/FLTV war but not to that extent, i think more allies out there would create more oportunitys for a better round.
Dogs is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 17:03   #8
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Presumably the reason for it being increased so much last time is still applicable today.

(No idea what that is by the way)
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 17:46   #9
jt25man
Victim of Marriage
 
jt25man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 784
jt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud ofjt25man has much to be proud of
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

There's currently 5 Alliances with over 70, and 2 more over 60. If we just drop the limit to 60, it would be just fine. I think 50 too is too small, it would get some people not being able to join there super ally quitting, but those 81 extra in the top 7 member count allies would trickle down and create a little more competition.
__________________
You mean there's life outside the internet...oh man I'm screwed.
jt25man is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 19:04   #10
jerome
.
 
jerome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,382
jerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so littlejerome contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

so what are you all expecting to happen exactly, all the dead meat of 10 extra or so players kicked off go and transform magically into useful and able players joining forces in their wasteful natures to rule the universe?
jerome is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 19:29   #11
Shoshuro
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 134
Shoshuro is just really niceShoshuro is just really niceShoshuro is just really niceShoshuro is just really niceShoshuro is just really nice
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

50 sounds sweet.
__________________
Omen
Shoshuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 20:02   #12
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

60 minimum. It's not practical to expect alliances to cut (up to) 30 members for next round. 20 is doable, on the other hand.


Besides, it's quite tricky to run an alliance to compete for #1 on only 50 members - assuming that not all members are capable of being officers. eXilition may be able to do it, but not every alliance can. 60's a much better number for the lower-ranked alliances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwtmc
Presumably the reason for it being increased so much last time is still applicable today.

(No idea what that is by the way)
I'm not sure anyone does


Personally I liked the 60/80 separation with the top 5 being restricted, but I guess that's gone out the window.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 4 Nov 2006, 23:22   #13
Chika
Black Power MotherF*ckas!
 
Chika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: JAPAN
Posts: 1,812
Chika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to behold
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerome
so what are you all expecting to happen exactly, all the dead meat of 10 extra or so players kicked off go and transform magically into useful and able players joining forces in their wasteful natures to rule the universe?
you have a strong point.
__________________
Ascendancy
When Doves Cry
Chika is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 5 Nov 2006, 01:15   #14
Travler
Bona Fide Jesus Freak
 
Travler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the Word of the Lord
Posts: 765
Travler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to all
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

I disagree with lowering the member limit. There should be differences in alliances. Some alliance will never be at the same level regardless of how many members they have. Lowering the limit will just allow the better alliances to advance quickly and make it much harder to stop them cause you cannot get enough def coverage with 50 members. If anything raise the limit back to 100 for alliances outside of the top 5.
__________________
Matthew 24:9 (New International Version) "Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me."
Who the hell gave you posrep you christian fundamentalist?
god is bollox, mkay and you are not discussing it
You're not the voice of Christianity di**head.

CT R22-20, [1up] R18-16, TGV R15,
The Illuminati - [NoS] - R14-13
Travler is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 5 Nov 2006, 01:41   #15
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Let's just make an alliance limit that dynamically adjusts itself to allow the worst ranked alliance recruit as many members as they want until they meet the score of the best ranked alliance. Just for all you "but 50 fcrew/tof/war disney members cannot compete with 50 1up/exi members!" whiners.
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 16:47   #16
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

When it comes to discussing alliance limits we all need to stop being so narrow minded, there’s more to this game than just the handful of alliances challenging for the top and we have to consider not only these alliances and their members but the game on the whole.

As far as I’m concerned one of the biggest issues is where the surplus players could/would go. While the limits are too high currently and its done some damage to the game at least there is an option for all players to get in a steady alliance no matter what their level (sadly especially lower down don’t take this opportunity) and you have to wonder if this option would still be open. While being in top alliance is no PA player’s right as its something that has to be earned I do think for the good of the game everyone should have access to a steady alliance.

Now at the upper end it’s probably safe to assume that most alliances will let their ‘weaker’ players go and certainly won’t let their star players and their officers go by choice. Are these weaker people up to running an alliance and do they even want to run an alliance? I’m not sure you would get enough people of command quality who wanted to start their own alliances to take on the surplus people. One saving grace might be that perhaps star players in the existing alliances might break away but even then that’s a lot of players who have now lost a home and need a new one and I’m unsure if it’s realistic to expect enough new alliances to form to supply these homes.

They could ofc filter down the levels, it would after all be a safe assumption to hypostasise that your average player let go from an alliance higher up will be better than many of those in an alliance lower down. However will these players really be motivated to play for a lower alliance when they are used to playing higher up?

And even if they are, it then shifts the excess problem down another level rather than sorts it. And it’s this next level where the main problem lies imho. It’s the lower tier alliances that are so often the way in but the quality of leadership down there is weak at best. There are a few alliances that stand out but they are few and far between. Too many of them are blackholes and you could give them all the members they wanted and they still would struggle. These aren’t alliance that we want to be encouraging new players to join yet they will largely be the only option at this point in time. They are like having rotting foundations to your house and it’s not a good base to build from.

I also think furball’s point is valid, while one alliance limit allows one type of alliance to be a viable alliance others require more. And by viable I’m not saying they should be able to challenge for first simply on the membership numbers but enough people to give adequate officer coverage at most times of the day. While it’s higher like this round it may mean there’s fewer ‘viable’ alliances but the other extreme is imho worse of having a whole level of the game having no options to join a viable alliance.

All in all I have to say I firmly believe that previous rounds with staggered limits were closer to the direction we should be having. A limit setup that accounts for the more hardcore an alliance is the fewer people they need to be viable and vise versa. The main problem I think that had was simply that it was too limited. At times F-Crew were 6th and could have 15-20 more members than 5th where as 5 maybe 10 at a push would have been more realistic.

Something maybe like
  • 1-4 – 55
  • 5-8 – 60
  • 9-12 – 65
  • 13+ – 70

Although I do worry even then the drops too big to have in one go. Many of the above problems would still be present (just slightly smaller) after all and the damage to the depth of alliances that this round done won’t really be known until next round. So we may need a smaller drop from this rounds limit than many want but a steady drop to continue for the next few rounds so the drops more manageable
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 17:05   #17
Tomkat
:alpha:
 
Tomkat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 7,871
Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerome
so what are you all expecting to happen exactly, all the dead meat of 10 extra or so players kicked off go and transform magically into useful and able players joining forces in their wasteful natures to rule the universe?
They can all join Ascendancy!
__________________
"There is no I in team, but there are two in anal fisting"
Tomkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 17:14   #18
Zirikk
Registered User
Bounce Back Champion, TIE Fighter Shooter Champion, Penguin Bashing Champion, War on Terror Champion, Bugz Champion
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 161
Zirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to beholdZirikk is a splendid one to behold
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Good post Wakey.
After thinking about current situation and alliancelimits for a while now, I believe that setting low limits wouldn't solve many of the problems.
The biggest problem smaller alliances have now is that there just isn't enough players in planetarion.
I still think that limits this round are far too high tho.
Zirikk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 17:29   #19
Ka`Dargo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4
Ka`Dargo is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

50 member limit is good for the game. and tbh, why should it be made harder for alliances like eX and 1up?? just coz they have good and dedicated members, y should they get punished for that?? if angels wont truly team up with omen to take on eX, then they deserve to lose. problems as it seems, is that to many alliances are afraid of a war...in a war game (LOL!!). you win some, and u lose some. but untill they lose their fear of war, eX will win

Ka`Dargo
Ka`Dargo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 17:47   #20
Veedeejem!
Hibernating
 
Veedeejem!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Team Kesha
Posts: 1,621
Veedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond reputeVeedeejem! has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Personaly i like the memberlimits like they are now.

no need to fix something that aint broken
__________________
[InSomnia]
Official designated driver

[ToF] - [eXilition] - [Rock] - [Denial] - [DLR] - [eVolution] - [ODDR] - [HR] - [Ultores] - [Apprime] - [Ironborn]
Veedeejem! is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 18:55   #21
Clogg
SiNíng is a lifestyle
 
Clogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Woodenshoeland
Posts: 241
Clogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to all
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snurx
You must realize that with a limit of 50, lot of people would quit to play. Who wants to go from a top contender (well, in theory at least) to a lesser experienced alliance? If I cannot play with atleast some of the friends I've got over my pa carrer, whats the point in playing anyway? etc

The dwindling memberbase is a symptom of a much greater problem PA has. And just trying to fix the symptoms wont do any good, as if you fix one another one will appear.
If that is the case, how do explain the fact that this round has fewer player then last round (atleast I recall last round had more then 2200 planets than it has now).

I personally think smaller alliances are a double edged sword. Yes there will be more alliances closer to the alliance limit and thus increasing the competition among those. The problem however is that there will be a smaller officercorps aswell. So fewer people will have to share the workload making it harder to function.

I personally think smaller alliances will make this game more fun, just don't make any promises about 100% coverage and 24/7 DC's, learn players roids come and go and that your fleet is your most important asset and things will be fine (nobody needs crybabies anyway).
__________________
Cloggystyle should be one of the SiNs
Now serving the DarkLords
Clogg is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 19:22   #22
Cedlind
[SiN] HC
 
Cedlind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 56
Cedlind is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Veedeejem!
no need to fix something that aint broken
But it is.
There's a fair few alliance that's had to give up this round because of the high member limit. Why shouldn't these alliances (both experienced and unexperienced) be allowed in the game because someone thought it's a great idea with the majority of the playerbase in alliance t10?

Lower alliancelimit means more alliances, and I think more alliances will lead to more players, as there are more openings for new players to get into an alliance.
__________________
Think SiN!
Quote:
<@Cedlind> I get a bad wibe on the nick
<@Clogg|zZzZz> you get that with most nicks tbh
SiN->SiNND *shivers*->SiN->TGV->really long break->Asc
Cedlind is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 19:29   #23
Barrow|Pony
snadwich fetcher
 
Barrow|Pony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: ONE LOVE
Posts: 660
Barrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

I'd really really like to see Alliances of 20 or 30. Small enough so that the talent would have to break up (not just kick middle-of-the-road players to the curb), small enough so that the alliance political scene is FRESH and NEW and EXCITING and large enough to need some sort of political coordination in order to make an alliance successful.

Of course, Planetarion's emphasis on the preserving the status quo has been doing exceptionally well since PAX.
__________________
Nude On!
Barrow|Pony is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 20:16   #24
Alki
Drink is Good
 
Alki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,122
Alki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

i agree with barrow, well i would like to see alliances reduced to 30-40, with gal sizes of 5.
__________________
Can we please have a moment of silence...........
Alki is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 6 Nov 2006, 20:21   #25
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alki
i agree with barrow, well i would like to see alliances reduced to 30-40, with gal sizes of 5.
Only because you know you can compete at that level. Most players (i.e. the majority of the player-base) would get pissed on by the elite galaxies and alliances that you would inevitably be a part of.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Nov 2006, 01:48   #26
Barrow|Pony
snadwich fetcher
 
Barrow|Pony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: ONE LOVE
Posts: 660
Barrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond reputeBarrow|Pony has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

have you seen my planet? :/

there (at the risk of starting a discussion that belongs on AD) has never been a thoroughly uncompetetive round with alliances, why would making it smaller be any different? There would be more of the 'elite' galaxies and alliances competeting, opening up the door for more maneuvering and posturing and coordination and ... gasp... strategy!
__________________
Nude On!
Barrow|Pony is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Nov 2006, 01:50   #27
Ultimate Newbie
Commodore
 
Ultimate Newbie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 3,176
Ultimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himUltimate Newbie is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

the WEET/NAR & VVOMM round was pretty uncompetitive if i remember correctly. VVOMM was totally crushed in under three weeks from the start of the round, then there about about 10 weeks of stagnation and then 2 weeks of activity again right at the end of the round.

It was terribly boring.
__________________
#Strategy ; #Support - Sovereign
--- --- ---
"The Cake is a Lie."
Ultimate Newbie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Nov 2006, 14:02   #28
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrow|Pony
have you seen my planet? :/

there (at the risk of starting a discussion that belongs on AD) has never been a thoroughly uncompetetive round with alliances, why would making it smaller be any different? There would be more of the 'elite' galaxies and alliances competeting, opening up the door for more maneuvering and posturing and coordination and ... gasp... strategy!
You're still failing to consider the effect this would have on alliances such as F-Crew, ROCK, Hidden Agenda, Myth, etc.

The reason that they are successful in training teaching people how to become PA players is because they retain a solid base of HC, officers and members who can help newbies round after round. As wakey has stated time after time (and I have verified it), F-Crew's average would be rather a lot higher if only these players were included.

Forcing alliances into a 30/40 player cap is all very well if you're in Angels, NewDawn, Omen, eXilition - or any of the alliances in which a majority of the members could perform officer duties. It's rather more painful for the rest of the alliances, which simply can't be compressed in this way.

Likewise new players are going to get it in the ass if they randomly join 5-planet galaxies. It logically follows that the more players in a galaxy, the more chance that one of those players will be of a disposition willing and able to give up some of their time to help a new player adapt to PA and learn how to build ships, to roid, etc. The converse, your 5-player galaxy, makes it less likely - because despite the few galaxies that will put themselves out and train a player, there's scores more that will just exile as soon as they can.


Get the idea?
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Nov 2006, 19:06   #29
The_Tyrant
Giddy little...
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 145
The_Tyrant is a name known to allThe_Tyrant is a name known to allThe_Tyrant is a name known to allThe_Tyrant is a name known to allThe_Tyrant is a name known to allThe_Tyrant is a name known to all
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Whats are the problem only taking the top 30-40 planets in each alliance for alliance rankings?

I'd say that could even reflect an alliances "power" to a greater extent.

maybe not...
The_Tyrant is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Nov 2006, 19:50   #30
Illuvatar
Mastermind
 
Illuvatar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 430
Illuvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the rough
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

50 is quite cool. do it this way
__________________

Community Leader
Illuvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 05:31   #31
Zo0f
Sir peon to you
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 275
Zo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Planetarion doesnt need more pussyfooting, it needs big changes and a direction. The suggested 50man alliance limit is a start, although I personally think 40 would be better.

Now I would like to address some of the issues in this thread:

Training Alliances: If they can train with an 80 man limit, they can train with a 50man limit. Dont be scared of change. At worst training alliances could 'apply' for a special status at the start of each round, allowing them more slots for extra members (that would not count towards their ingame alliance score etc).

Mid Level Alliances: Ive seen a few statements that this would damage them. I have no idea how. I played a round in Howling Rain once, out of the 50+ members only 20 or so ever did anything actively. Infact I was quite horrified to see the memberlist at the end of the round. From talking with friends this seems to be quite normal. What a lot of people do not realise is all this flak can actually be a weakness.

Top Level Alliances: A much lower limit would not only get rid of the trash and allow many to be more 'picky' (i.e. pick more loyal members) which would make them more confident and give them a chance to actually fight for victory. This would make the game more competitive.

wakey: Dear god please stop posting, your so arrogant it amazes me. I had the great experience of having you in my galaxy in r11. You rarely talked on irc and when you did it wasnt anything useful. The few times you did come on and send defence, you sent the wrong fleet or the wrong ships and people lost roids. In the end I exiled you, partly for fun and partly because you were no value to the galaxy at all.

The mere thought of you teaching anyone about the game scares the hell out of me. The fact you think it gives you some great value to the game amuses me.
__________________
Ðragon to the Death!

"The only easy day was yesterday."
Zo0f is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 06:56   #32
Chika
Black Power MotherF*ckas!
 
Chika's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: JAPAN
Posts: 1,812
Chika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to beholdChika is a splendid one to behold
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zo0f
wakey: Dear god please stop posting, your so arrogant it amazes me. I had the great experience of having you in my galaxy in r11. You rarely talked on irc and when you did it wasnt anything useful. The few times you did come on and send defence, you sent the wrong fleet or the wrong ships and people lost roids. In the end I exiled you, partly for fun and partly because you were no value to the galaxy at all.

The mere thought of you teaching anyone about the game scares the hell out of me. The fact you think it gives you some great value to the game amuses me.

ROFL. ABOUT TIME. I always knew wakey had good intentions, but he comes off as a self-righteous idiot.
__________________
Ascendancy
When Doves Cry
Chika is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 07:29   #33
Travler
Bona Fide Jesus Freak
 
Travler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the Word of the Lord
Posts: 765
Travler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to allTravler is a name known to all
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

An alliance limit like this is mostly useless. If the top 5 alliances all have 70-80 good players then we will most likely see two alliances working together as one on attacks and then defending withing themselves. It will be an Alliance A and Alliance A jr. situation much like TGV had set up for R16. The better players get "promoted" into the larger score alliance. Alliance limits just makes it harder on honest people.
__________________
Matthew 24:9 (New International Version) "Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me."
Who the hell gave you posrep you christian fundamentalist?
god is bollox, mkay and you are not discussing it
You're not the voice of Christianity di**head.

CT R22-20, [1up] R18-16, TGV R15,
The Illuminati - [NoS] - R14-13
Travler is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 13:45   #34
SpaceMonkey
Warden
Reactor Champion
 
SpaceMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Far Side
Posts: 137
SpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to behold
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

I think having changing limits based upon rank, similar to Wakey's suggestion, is a good idea. There was a similar system a few rounds ago, what was wrong with it?

To reply to Zo0f -
Training Alliances: although there is nothing to stop training alliances sticking to a 50 man limit, is this really a good thing for the game? There are only so many people willing to work at running an alliance in this way, yet we have no end of people wishing to join. Where would they go? There are also a lot of people who move on from training alliances to join the Mid Level Alliances...

Mid Level Alliances: The same kind of applies here but you are right in saying that the less active members could be a weakness. This is up to the alliance to decide. When they notice the weakness they can always start to remove members, or not, depending on how they want to play the game and what their goals are. You still need somewhere for up and coming players to graduate to.

Top Level Alliances: I couldn't agree more but then I don't run a top level alliance and I'm sure those that do have their own views.

Basically my point is, all these new players everyone wants have to go somewhere. There won't be more alliances magically popping up to take them because there are so few people both willing and capable. Lowering the limit might force some people to try but what are the chances?

So, to everyone who agrees to a 50 member limit for all alliances:
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to run an alliance that achieves a top 25 ranking for 2 rounds.
SpaceMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 15:27   #35
Zo0f
Sir peon to you
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 275
Zo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey
I think having changing limits based upon rank, similar to Wakey's suggestion, is a good idea. There was a similar system a few rounds ago, what was wrong with it?
I think it would be better for training alliances to apply for more space, having to meet certain standards decided by PATeam on how they train people. Mainly because they are the only people who need more space.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey
Training Alliances: although there is nothing to stop training alliances sticking to a 50 man limit, is this really a good thing for the game? There are only so many people willing to work at running an alliance in this way, yet we have no end of people wishing to join. Where would they go? There are also a lot of people who move on from training alliances to join the Mid Level Alliances...
Firstly not everyone moves up through training alliances, my first round took 3 weeks until I joined a fairly decent alliance (hey NewDawn - you were amazing fun!). In my time I have taken a fair few new players and helped move them up quickly as they showed exceptional activity and willingness to learn.

However I am aware that quite a few people do start off in these alliances, so I have no problem with training alliances applying for 20more spots. Assuming PATeam check that the alliance has systems in place to actually train people and it is not just an excuse for being terrible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey
Mid Level Alliances: The same kind of applies here but you are right in saying that the less active members could be a weakness. This is up to the alliance to decide. When they notice the weakness they can always start to remove members, or not, depending on how they want to play the game and what their goals are. You still need somewhere for up and coming players to graduate to.
Just like HR didnt back then, I dont think many people realise what a weakness they are. Most people see a limit and keep recruiting until they get to it. When alliances have a completely open recruitment policy this leads to the problem I stated above. If you size them down it encourages them to be slightly more picky (i.e. activity) which will only make them stronger.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey
Top Level Alliances: I couldn't agree more but then I don't run a top level alliance and I'm sure those that do have their own views.
I think most are suffering from the same sort of problem as I stated above for Mid Level alliances. All the flak/selfish members only endup removing any form of power from the alliance. Allowing them to be more picky would only make them stronger in the long run.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey
Basically my point is, all these new players everyone wants have to go somewhere. There won't be more alliances magically popping up to take them because there are so few people both willing and capable. Lowering the limit might force some people to try but what are the chances?
Supply and Demand. If you lower the limit you will increase demand. Personally I do not think this would be much of an issue as so many members of alliances are simply flak and not worth having anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey
So, to everyone who agrees to a 50 member limit for all alliances:
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to run an alliance that achieves a top 25 ranking for 2 rounds.
Wont be needed.
__________________
Ðragon to the Death!

"The only easy day was yesterday."
Zo0f is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 16:09   #36
SpaceMonkey
Warden
Reactor Champion
 
SpaceMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Far Side
Posts: 137
SpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to beholdSpaceMonkey is a splendid one to behold
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zo0f
Just like HR didnt back then, I dont think many people realise what a weakness they are. Most people see a limit and keep recruiting until they get to it. When alliances have a completely open recruitment policy this leads to the problem I stated above. If you size them down it encourages them to be slightly more picky (i.e. activity) which will only make them stronger.
...
I think most are suffering from the same sort of problem as I stated above for Mid Level alliances. All the flak/selfish members only endup removing any form of power from the alliance. Allowing them to be more picky would only make them stronger in the long run.
But you are not allowing them to be more picky, you are forcing them to be more picky. I don't have a problem with reducing the sizes for the top alliances but forcing it on everyone will just increase the divide between the different levels of alliance. This is of course a bad thing and leads to stagnation.

I think basically we want the same thing, just I'd have more levels. This way a switched on alliance can be more discerning but a less fussy one could still compete with them by having more members. If this a serious weakness then the pickier alliance could stay ahead by taking advantage of it. We'd still see the cream rise to the top but it would also allow a more flexible playing attitude.
SpaceMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 17:33   #37
Saphi
Leo's Pwn :P
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: just outside of Newton Abbot, Devon, UK
Posts: 118
Saphi is infamous around these partsSaphi is infamous around these partsSaphi is infamous around these partsSaphi is infamous around these partsSaphi is infamous around these partsSaphi is infamous around these partsSaphi is infamous around these partsSaphi is infamous around these parts
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

This is possibly the worse round for alliance limits... Its really is bad. Smallers alliances dont stand a chance in an Xp Round when the alliance limit is 80.
50 seems to me to be right area for the alliance limit size ... Ethier that or we go upto 150 and bring back the wings of the main alliances.

Any which way it has to change from the way that it is at the moment. Its just completely unfair on the alliance who had below 70 members ... Look at VSN and P|M for example. They had to lose most of there core to survive in the T5 this Round. Now tell me is that the way it should be done or should something be don about the limits to make all alliance sizes have half a chance. Just not the biggest alliance
__________________
neg rep me if u must but remember red is my favourite colour in pa
------------------------------------------------
[TDM] an mmo alliance coming to an mmo near you soon
------------------------------------------------
The answers you seek are not here
Saphi is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 17:42   #38
wakey
Hamster
 
wakey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Crewe, England
Posts: 3,606
wakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himwakey is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zo0f
wakey: Dear god please stop posting, your so arrogant it amazes me. I had the great experience of having you in my galaxy in r11. You rarely talked on irc and when you did it wasnt anything useful. The few times you did come on and send defence, you sent the wrong fleet or the wrong ships and people lost roids. In the end I exiled you, partly for fun and partly because you were no value to the galaxy at all.

The mere thought of you teaching anyone about the game scares the hell out of me. The fact you think it gives you some great value to the game amuses me.
Arrogance! Is having an opposing view due to my different background in this game to the masses that post on the forum arrogance. Should I also take then you’re complete and utter lack of understanding and care for the lower players and the alliances they are in plight as arrogance also then.

As for you other allegations.
  1. I don’t remember being in your galaxy ever
  2. I was always in my round 11 channel
  3. I have a distinct memory of my round 11 galaxy hardly being very talkative.
  4. My main period of free time for idle chat came during a period where no-one else was awake
  5. I remember being the only one awake most of the time when the first lot of incomings showed up each night. As such I was the one reporting all the incoming to people’s alliances
  6. The above point was the exact thing I said when the exile was started, infact it originally persuaded the GC to cancel the exile but 10 mins later when all the ministers were on it was redone
  7. I never defend without checking with the planet or the galaxy member organising the defence so if I sent the wrongs ships ever it was the person running the calls fault
  8. My new galaxy which was higher ranked and more active were more than happy with my contribution to the galaxy. Infact it was one of the best galaxies I’ve been as it resembled the early round galaxies most where the galaxy put alliance differences aside and worked as a unit and didn’t forget the fun and comradeship a galaxy should have
  9. For someone who had no value to the galaxy, wasn’t active and apparently sent wrong ships on defence (which would normally imply Id lose ships) I did extremely well. I finished just outside the top100 that round while being in an alliance that only managed 17th spot. I was certainly the highest scoring F-Crew member that round by a fair way and also the highest defender in the alliance by a fair amount so I was doing something right


As for your actual points

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zo0f
Training Alliances: If they can train with an 80 man limit, they can train with a 50man limit. Dont be scared of change. At worst training alliances could 'apply' for a special status at the start of each round, allowing them more slots for extra members (that would not count towards their ingame alliance score etc).
A reduction in members Doesn’t mean a real reduction in the personnel you need to run the alliance. This largely stays the same if you have 80 member or 40 members as its connected more to coverage of the requires people. While an alliance who’s average player spends 12 hours online might be able to get a good level of DC coverage on just 5 people another alliances who’s average time online is lower will probably require more. Its also effected by quality, if they are at the top of the game a player is likely to be able to handle more calls an hour than someone less experienced and skilled. And it’s not like the games blessed with an endless supply of people who are willing to do the role and are 100% ideal. The best people get picked up by the top alliances and everyone else has to do what they can with what they have got.

At F-Crew for example our ‘command’ numbers around 30 members (around 37% of our members). This includes but isn’t exclusive to the following roles
  • HC
  • Senior BC
  • Junior BC
  • Scanners
  • Recruiters

This provides us a fairly good coverage for the HC, BC, Scanners and Recruiters and enough depth in BC so that at peak incoming time the BC’s aren’t completely swamped. With fewer members there’s the possibility of cutting some of these people but not at the 33% reduction that keeps it in line with the member’s reduction (that equates to around 11 command staff cut) unless we wanted to seriously overload these people and completely take over their lives.

And I would say we are one of the better alliances in this kind of situation, we have actually built up enough of a core to have the foundations of a solid command and we are less prone to issues of someone having to pull ridiculously long shifts or cancel ‘personal time’ else it doesn’t get done.

And yes you could allow people to apply for more members that don’t count but who decided what is and isn’t a training alliance. A lot of people argue that F-Crew’s top10 finishes mean we aren’t a training alliance; we however still put a significant focus on helping new/inexperienced players and feel we are.

And if 1up return and announce they are going to be a training alliance, or Angels announce they are shifting focus and being a training alliance but do you call them lairs and restrict their ability or do you grant them it and potentially give them an advantage of having support planets in tag. If they do that they are just making a mockery of the limit and defeating the object

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zo0f
Mid Level Alliances: Ive seen a few statements that this would damage them. I have no idea how. I played a round in Howling Rain once, out of the 50+ members only 20 or so ever did anything actively. Infact I was quite horrified to see the memberlist at the end of the round. From talking with friends this seems to be quite normal. What a lot of people do not realise is all this flak can actually be a weakness.
It depends how people are classing Mid Level alliances. One thing I will say as a member it’s often hard to judge how active people really are. At F-Crew we had this one BC who every day would moan that he hadn’t ever seen 10-15 specific players and demanding they were kicked. At the same time some of this group were moaning they hadn’t seen another 10-15 people (one of which was the BC moaning about them) and demanded they were kicked. On the whole both sides were wrong, their online times were different and hence they weren’t coming across each other even though both sets were pulling their own weight.

Also someone who might be considered flak in one alliance may do more than enough in an alliance with fewer choices and hence makes a positive contribution. If they don’t make a contribution then they will probably be kicked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zo0f
Top Level Alliances: A much lower limit would not only get rid of the trash and allow many to be more 'picky' (i.e. pick more loyal members) which would make them more confident and give them a chance to actually fight for victory. This would make the game more competitive.
How does it make it more competitive? How competitive an alliance is has a lot more to do with comparative strength of the alliance than strength of the individuals in the alliance. The individuals will always be stronger in some alliances than others and you need to do more than just lower a limit to overcome this. You need to offer methods for alliances to overcome or at least offset the members difference a little so they are more able to compete

Also how does it make alliance more confident and able to attack each other more? After all let’s say you have AllianceA and AllianceB. They both have 80 members and a similar score, size and averages. You then tell them they can only have 50 members so they kick the weakest 30 and end up largely keeping things the same but with fewer members. If they wouldn’t attack each other before nothings really changes to make them more inclined to attack now.
__________________
Wakey
PD and Suggestions Moderator
Co-founder of [F-Crew]
The Farnborough Crew
Cos anything else is just an alliance
Join our public channel at #f-crew
wakey is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 18:16   #39
Zo0f
Sir peon to you
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 275
Zo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
Arrogance! Is having an opposing view due to my different background in this game to the masses that post on the forum arrogance. Should I also take then you’re complete and utter lack of understanding and care for the lower players and the alliances they are in plight as arrogance also then.
No, your aggrogance comes from thinking far more of yourself than is realistic. You arent the only person who understands the game from the low tier point of view. You arent the only person who understands the game. Yet you post like those are true and like you are fighting to single handedly save the game.

My complete and utter lack of understanding and care for the lower players in the game helped take Howling Rain from out of the top10 to 3rd(?) in round 11. One of, if not the, biggest improvements of any small alliance to my knowledge.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
As for your other allegations.
I don’t remember being in your galaxy ever
I was always in my round 11 channel
For someone so active not knowing your GC is quite sad. Perhaps the other galaxy members will jog your memory: XtotheZ, Dreadnought, MiX, MaD, TheGeek.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
I have a distinct memory of my round 11 galaxy hardly being very talkative.
We werent, XtoZ/MiX/TheGeek/MaD all went inactive pretty fast. Leaving me and Dreadnought the only buddypackers in the galaxy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
My main period of free time for idle chat came during a period where no-one else was awake
Myself and Dreadnought were always awake, being top10 in a galaxy with only 2 active players requires a lot of time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
I remember being the only one awake most of the time when the first lot of incomings showed up each night. As such I was the one reporting all the incoming to people’s alliances
Could you be more ignorant? Myself and Dreadnought (and early on MaD) took turns to watch for incomming every single night. Perhaps if you had been more involved you would of known.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
The above point was the exact thing I said when the exile was started, infact it originally persuaded the GC to cancel the exile but 10 mins later when all the ministers were on it was redone
Yeah, with only two actives in the galaxy it was difficult to exile!

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
I never defend without checking with the planet or the galaxy member organising the defence so if I sent the wrongs ships ever it was the person running the calls fault
Im going to assume top50 1up planets are more likely to be careful when dealing with defence than a tiny inactive f-crew planet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
My new galaxy which was higher ranked and more active were more than happy with my contribution to the galaxy. Infact it was one of the best galaxies I’ve been as it resembled the early round galaxies most where the galaxy put alliance differences aside and worked as a unit and didn’t forget the fun and comradeship a galaxy should have
At least something good came of it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
For someone who had no value to the galaxy, wasn’t active and apparently sent wrong ships on defence (which would normally imply Id lose ships) I did extremely well. I finished just outside the top100 that round while being in an alliance that only managed 17th spot. I was certainly the highest scoring F-Crew member that round by a fair way and also the highest defender in the alliance by a fair amount so I was doing something right
You spent your entire round in top10 galaxies(or close to it), starting off in c5 which was full of top10 galaxies and recieved hardly any incomming at all. Not reaching top100 fully supports what I have been saying. If you cant get top100 in galaxies that get hardly any incomming then you have a serious problem, no matter what alliance you are in.

Ill reply to the rest of your post in a bit, I need a break after that!
__________________
Ðragon to the Death!

"The only easy day was yesterday."
Zo0f is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Nov 2006, 21:27   #40
Zo0f
Sir peon to you
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 275
Zo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of lightZo0f is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
A reduction in members Doesn’t mean a real reduction in the personnel you need to run the alliance. This largely stays the same if you have 80 member or 40 members as its connected more to coverage of the requires people. While an alliance who’s average player spends 12 hours online might be able to get a good level of DC coverage on just 5 people another alliances who’s average time online is lower will probably require more. Its also effected by quality, if they are at the top of the game a player is likely to be able to handle more calls an hour than someone less experienced and skilled. And it’s not like the games blessed with an endless supply of people who are willing to do the role and are 100% ideal. The best people get picked up by the top alliances and everyone else has to do what they can with what they have got.
While I find it hard to believe you need the same amount of people to train in an 80man alliance as a 40man, I do see why it would be difficult for you to adapt to the change. Alliances applying for training alliance status might not be perfect, but it is the best way to deal with the situation in my opinion. Training alliances are the only people with any possible need for more members.

Exactly how PATeam would decide wether or not someone is a training alliance is up for disscussion. I dont think it is that hard though, it is obvious eXi/Angels/1up are not training alliances, nore would they have any interest in doing so. The main thing would be for the alliance to prove they had a certain degree of abilitiy and the foundations with which to pass this on to new players. Which would stop every small alliance from becomming a training alliance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
It depends how people are classing Mid Level alliances. One thing I will say as a member it’s often hard to judge how active people really are. At F-Crew we had this one BC who every day would moan that he hadn’t ever seen 10-15 specific players and demanding they were kicked. At the same time some of this group were moaning they hadn’t seen another 10-15 people (one of which was the BC moaning about them) and demanded they were kicked. On the whole both sides were wrong, their online times were different and hence they weren’t coming across each other even though both sets were pulling their own weight.
You are correct it is difficult for members to see who is and isnt active. However, I did not base my statement on my opinion on peoples activity. I based it on seeing 20 planets that after an entire round were less than 1/20th of my score and that had hardly sent any attacks or defences all round. Yet they did get incomming which drained defence usually very early in the evening before the active people needed it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
How does it make it more competitive? How competitive an alliance is has a lot more to do with comparative strength of the alliance than strength of the individuals in the alliance. The individuals will always be stronger in some alliances than others and you need to do more than just lower a limit to overcome this. You need to offer methods for alliances to overcome or at least offset the members difference a little so they are more able to compete.
Once you lower the limit you allow alliances to raise standards. At the moment all top alliances are full of flak and selfish idiots that make running an alliance incredibly difficult. The largest effect is on your power, while you may have 80 members as soon as you try and fight a war the flak and planet NAPs destroy any punch you could of had. This means you have to be in for the long haul, which no-one wants as there are lots of people waiting to take advantage of this. This incourages blocking and stagnation, with no-one wanting to get dragged into a real fight.

Lowering the size and allowing them to increase standards gives them the power and punch to hit a target with a lot more force than they could of done, comparitively with 80 members. This allows them to be a bit more bold, to take chances they might not of done otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wakey
Also how does it make alliance more confident and able to attack each other more? After all let’s say you have AllianceA and AllianceB. They both have 80 members and a similar score, size and averages. You then tell them they can only have 50 members so they kick the weakest 30 and end up largely keeping things the same but with fewer members. If they wouldn’t attack each other before nothings really changes to make them more inclined to attack now.
The difference is, with the lower membersize they know their power better, they know what a punch they can deliver. When you have an alliance topped up with flak and selfish players with NAPs, it can be difficult to judge the outcome of a prospective war/attack. This adds more uncertainty and makes them less likely to take the risk.
__________________
Ðragon to the Death!

"The only easy day was yesterday."
Zo0f is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 9 Nov 2006, 09:34   #41
Alki
Drink is Good
 
Alki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,122
Alki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better placeAlki single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Only because you know you can compete at that level. Most players (i.e. the majority of the player-base) would get pissed on by the elite galaxies and alliances that you would inevitably be a part of.
far from it, every bp ive been a member of has failed most of the time bar a couple, ive been playnig as a random the past 4-5 rounds now, this round my galaxy disbanded :shock: anyway that is beside the point my point is alliances and gal sizes go hand in hand, if you reduce the alliance limit i feel galaxy limits should be reduced, and I really believe limits of 5 members per gal would make the playing field alot more interesting.
__________________
Can we please have a moment of silence...........
Alki is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 9 Nov 2006, 11:02   #42
mens
Sheep
 
mens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: IRC
Posts: 563
mens is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

lets base the alliance rankings on avg score rather than the sum.
yey, exi wins again!

<I didn't read the whole thread>
__________________
WP
Ðragons
eXilition
mens is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11 Nov 2006, 12:45   #43
zokka
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 86
zokka has a spectacular aura aboutzokka has a spectacular aura aboutzokka has a spectacular aura about
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
lets base the alliance rankings on avg score rather than the sum.
yey, exi wins again!
If you do that then a one man alliance could win it!
zokka is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 12 Nov 2006, 10:41   #44
Lei~
~Gon
 
Lei~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 290
Lei~ is on a distinguished road
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Without reading the whole thread as I'm much too tired for that, I'd like to say that I've long been in favor of smaller alliance limits. When i read the limits were raised instead of lowered for this round I almost fell off my chair! The playerbase of this game is steadily decreasing and this should be reflected in the ally limits.

The missing officer/command people are the only reason that speaks against this in my eyes, and I think given a chance and some time new people would arise to take those places. After all noone started rd 1 with HC experience.
Also this round we've alrdy seen two capable command teams swallowed up by mergers, because the allies couldnt find enough players to support them.

All in all lower those limits to 50 and don't raise them again before there are at least 3.5k people playing at roundstart.

edit: As wakey fears for his alliance i might add that other training alliances such as SiN for example did quite well with seldom more than 10-15 officers. 30 officers is quite excessive in my eyes. And having a progressive system allowing allies farther down the rankings more members is also viable.
__________________
rd 2 - rd 19 [Unknown] [FAnG] [Absolute] [SiN] [VsN]

Last edited by Lei~; 12 Nov 2006 at 10:52.
Lei~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 12 Nov 2006, 11:05   #45
MEX
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: g-town, Vienna, AT
Posts: 40
MEX will become famous soon enoughMEX will become famous soon enough
Thumbs down Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DogsGrowl
Another thread has allready been made but people are only arguing the fact that the alliance limit has been raised and alot of people like my self wanted to see it at 50...
Currently in r19 the limit is 60(of 80).

My opinion is that, if you lower the total number of members in a single alliance, many alliances will get WINGS (= additional alliances for their weaker members).

Becaue of this i am for a limit of 50(of 100), but only if the total limit of members a alliace can have is raised while the # of members which contribute to the score of their alliance is lowered to the top 50.

Even better would be a limit of 33(of 99), as this would reduce the mergers between alliances.

MfG, MEX
__________________
MEX is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 13 Nov 2006, 00:13   #46
Clogg
SiNíng is a lifestyle
 
Clogg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Woodenshoeland
Posts: 241
Clogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to allClogg is a name known to all
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Tbh. I think there are to few people left playing this game. So a lot of allies which are full might want to form wings, but with which players?

So it could lead to alliances working together and that might evolve in blocks. It might also lead to more competitors for the #1 spot. Must be my ego, but I would never work with another ally and settle for the 2nd spot, so my money is on the bigger competition for the #1 spot.
__________________
Cloggystyle should be one of the SiNs
Now serving the DarkLords
Clogg is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 13 Nov 2006, 03:07   #47
Shev
So what?
 
Shev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 606
Shev is a splendid one to beholdShev is a splendid one to beholdShev is a splendid one to beholdShev is a splendid one to beholdShev is a splendid one to beholdShev is a splendid one to beholdShev is a splendid one to behold
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alki
...every bp ive been a member of has failed most of the time...
I see a pattern!

:crazyxmas:
__________________
Legion

[RaH] [Mercenaries]
Shev is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 13 Nov 2006, 04:00   #48
Amycus
Flame me...
 
Amycus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 152
Amycus will become famous soon enoughAmycus will become famous soon enough
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

50 is perfect.

But I have to say it should be done in a step form starting with next round being 60, and then maybe r21 being 50.

Funny though I see so much respect thrown out there for exi now, but i remember a time when everyone just wanted to call us cheaters.
__________________
r1: [Ark]HC
r2: [Ark]-[Tuba]
r3: [Tuba]
r4: [Tuba]HC
r11: [SiN]
r12: [SiN]HC
r13: [eX]
r19: [TGV]
r20: Destiny
r21: What? Are you kidding?

Ooooomph! Come back Noah02!
Amycus is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 13 Nov 2006, 10:22   #49
mens
Sheep
 
mens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: IRC
Posts: 563
mens is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

Quote:
Originally Posted by zokka
If you do that then a one man alliance could win it!
that is very correct
__________________
WP
Ðragons
eXilition
mens is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 13 Dec 2006, 17:59   #50
Illuvatar
Mastermind
 
Illuvatar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 430
Illuvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the roughIlluvatar is a jewel in the rough
Re: Alliance Limit 50 in Round 20 (All those in favour)

any news on the ally limit?

dont leave yourself too much time pa team
__________________

Community Leader
Illuvatar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 00:23.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018