Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Lord Hitchcock

Capping alliances at 12 members

Recommended Posts

I'd like to propose the idea of capping alliances to 12 members.

 

I have played many rounds of TE and every round it continues to skew upward. With regular alliances like misfits, the pheonix cobras, TE police, citidal, NDO, krabs, TDO, avengers, now obsoluete (without really a replacement). and it's really made the landscape bare.

 

By capping membership, it would split up a lot of these alliances and make them more prone to war. Even if they decide to 'tie up' like alliance #1 and alliance #2, it would still make for offensive war declarations to be a marker which has always been the sort of 'gentleman agreement' TE uses to maintain the few remaining members that are left. 

 

This proposal would force alliances to be more personable among its members, make closer friends, increases player retention, and creates more activity by preventing nations to sit relatively untouched in the few big whales.

 

The threat of these 'big whales' now-a-days is that they need their fix too. It's a real threat to the few alliances left, for example this current round, if AW and D1 wanted to be asshats they could end the round pretty fast.

Edited by Lord Hitchcock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh, I should have posted my thoughts on this here, rather than in the D1 DoW, but oh well. I am strongly in favour of this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would like more input here. This would be an easy one to implement for round 46 if we can get a consensus on it. Why 12 for the cap?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, admin said:

Would like more input here. This would be an easy one to implement for round 46 if we can get a consensus on it. Why 12 for the cap?

More balanced teams in my opinion. We tend to have teams get flooded with 30 - 50 members becoming unreachable in wars.
Forcing alliances to exist at 12 members would cause them to split apart, and granted they could just team up with one another, the scores won't be effected to much which seems to be a lot of peoples concern

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 or 3 alliance get over 20 nations.... two of them get to fight while the other has to wait of fight 3-5 other alliance to make it "evenish"

 

With capping at 12 member (2 trade circle), this would make multiple same sized alliances for fighting.

 

Will also make awards more fair to win, so the largest alliance doesn't win them all (most casualties)

 

Im sure there will be flaws but may get more nations to step and be leaders..... Would be cool to try it out for a round or 2 at least.

 

Al

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/28/2018 at 1:38 AM, SeaBeeGipson said:

More balanced teams in my opinion. We tend to have teams get flooded with 30 - 50 members becoming unreachable in wars.
Forcing alliances to exist at 12 members would cause them to split apart, and granted they could just team up with one another, the scores won't be effected to much which seems to be a lot of peoples concern

Score isnt a problem with "Strongest AA" gone.

Not having a go at you but there are plenty of AAs who sit there with a handful of nations not contributing to or competing for AA awards anyways.

 

Im neither here nor thereon capping, but if you dont like the fact D1 has 20 plus members and you dont, then recruit as they have done. What reward will they, or any AA for that matter continue to get from recruiting if you cap it at 12? You may get more smaller competition, but surely some hunger to recruit would disappear?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, StevieG said:

Score isnt a problem with "Strongest AA" gone.

Not having a go at you but there are plenty of AAs who sit there with a handful of nations not contributing to or competing for AA awards anyways.

 

Im neither here nor thereon capping, but if you dont like the fact D1 has 20 plus members and you dont, then recruit as they have done. What reward will they, or any AA for that matter continue to get from recruiting if you cap it at 12? You may get more smaller competition, but surely some hunger to recruit would disappear?

For once I agree with you.

 

Alliance caps will pool the most active, coordinated and knowledgeable together meaning the playing field will still be out of balance. I'd say there will be 2-3 dominant super star alliances which is little difference from having 2-3 larger dominant alliances. I think a better solution would be to have inactive micros merge under an active and ambitious leadership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/27/2018 at 9:20 AM, admin said:

Would like more input here. This would be an easy one to implement for round 46 if we can get a consensus on it. Why 12 for the cap?

If you have notice Admin  There is no one who is against it.

 

Your question was why 12  It is 2 trade circles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yo

Capping is fine IMO, Even down to 6 instead of 12. lol  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No 6 would be plain dumb.

It would be ok to try a round with capping it at 12, but I think if its always capped you are going to lose members not gain them. Sure it throws the AA prizes way up for grabs by limiting the effect of recruiting.

The communities that are built out of the AAs we create and run may stick together with hard work from the leadership, essentially running multiple AAs under one umbrella to keep our communities engaged and interacting with each other. or it may just trickle out into nothing.

 

. Some members from the smaller AAs to communicate and participate in the Wider TE Community, but the mainstay is these 20 odd man AAs, who harbour a community that is extremely interactive and communicative.

 

Wolves and Iron can easily grow to 20 odd and that puts us at 4 AAs with 20odd. Decent really.

But you would make all these AAs potentially cut a line down the middle and split into 2, so that the smaller AAs can compete for AA awards?

You guys should just merge.

 

Putting a 12 man CAP will turn it into a cutthroat game, which is absolutely fine for a round. Dont be squealing up declare down declare though. It will be no holds barred thats for sure.

 

Edited by StevieG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep it as it is, no reason to cap anything at anything. Quality over quantity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×