We've seen disbandment after disbandment recently, which is highly unsurprising in and of itself - CN is shrinking afterall, and there are less active members around than before, when most of those alliances were founded. What IS surprising are the alliances themselves. The ones I have expected to disband haven't, and the ones I expected to succeed has disbanded.
Of course, Pesarus was an unfortunate incident. Ban evading is never good. I'm not sure I would've treatied with them if I knew that earlier, despite Gandolf being an awesome guy.
Other alliances, however, all seem to have been struck down by the inactivity bug.
So what is it that keeps micros so inactive? No matter how hard I try get activity going in my own alliance, there are particular members that just refuse to go on the forums and IRC. What is it that keeps them in the game(these particular nations are nearly a year old) when they're not having any interaction with other players?
If this trend continues, then many people will get their wish of the huge alliance phenomenon again, despite other alliances still surviving with a small number of players. I personally don't like that, as choice and freedom is an important factor in my gaming/role playing experience. Even so, it would simplify our politics a lot
Just rambling, so if it doesn't make sense... meh. Just trying to get my thoughts out in a half coherent fashion.