Kowalski Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 Having sanctioning based on membership numbers is yet another attempt to put the onus of recruiting to the game on the players and alliances, while the only alliances who care about being sanctioned for anything other than the flag are archaic, deluded dinosaurs who still think that alliance ranking means something when it comes to judging the power and success of an alliance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChairmanHal Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote name='Katsumi' timestamp='1294813002' post='2572838'] Remember when a sanction required 300 members? And there were only 15 alliances in the game that could even possibly meet that requirement? Maybe it's time to lower the requirement again. [/quote] Not really. If you don't like it and you're in an alliance that stands to benefit should you reach the "magic number", then recruit--if not from within Planet Bob then from out in the real world. Think of it as incentive to do something besides fiddling while Rome burns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alterego Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 [quote name='ROMMELHSQ' timestamp='1294828808' post='2573049'] We didn't recruit. [/quote] My point was that TOPs leader/s didnt come out to this or any other forum crying not having a sanction despite having the NS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Savage Man Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 We'll loan you a few members if you change your pip to a Doomhouse one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Branimir Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) lol There is nothing wrong with the membership limit. As already said-- many alliances these days do not accept all players in. Their choice. Not all CN players can give their life to this game, or care as much to stat whore to extreme. So those alliances disregard them. That is fine and their choice but leaves them short of the membership bar for sanctions usually. So what? As already said, those alliances in general do not care for sanctions. So why the thread? Because 19th in score alliance will get the sanction? Does it matter, since alliances above actively avoid sanctions, do not care for them and fundamentally and most importantly-- DO NOT meet the requirements which they could but do not deem important. What is the problem? Those who care for sanctions have it, those that do not do not typically achieve it and do not care. 200 members really isn't a big deal. Edited January 12, 2011 by Branimir Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KainIIIC Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 Yes, any of the alliances that MCXA will now be sanctioned over if MK loses a few more will not be sanctioned because of their choice. They will not do it either because they choose to pick who they recruit or retain, or because they're too inept to recruit and thus don't deserve sanction. Try making a "Woe is Bob, MCXA is about to get sanction!" argument, but you can just as easily say that the other 7 alliances so suck much that they can't even achieve sanction Honestly, that MCXA is a mass-recruiting alliance shouldn't surprise anyone, they used to be #3 with like 55 score back in their heyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hecate Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 [b]Closing, if you wish to discuss changing the sanction membership limit, [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=79002"]this is the place to discuss it.[/url][/b] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts