Alliance cap
Moderators: JettJackson, Holti, jouldax
Something needs to be done, that's for sure. I'm one of the big supporters for the 24 or 48 hour rule. I feel it's the best way to offset the pro benefit against the con . Simply put, as an example, Mad Matt joins Crusaders in an hour because he can decloak Peru. Leaving the alliance is Double Secret Probation. Now, you might thing 24 hours is fine but truth be told---(1) DSP is thevian and probably a TAC, so he has no forces to worry about but more important, with the speed 1.25 right now, 48 hours would bring him to nearly 500 turns--which would directly cause an issue because without being a member, it would much harder for him to be productive with those turns.
Some of you are saying this hurts the small alliances but the truth is, this only is really being used by the big alliances and not once or twice but often. I know we don't have a huge playerbase but the game is very active right now and each alliance has 30 spots and my biggest arguement would be: planets are only deadly as of the last few days, with some alliances finally have 100 hangars--don't tell me you need 1 extra player to clear mines and take baby planets. If you can't get 10-12 members or 10-15 for an op, the alliance should suffer for putting together a roster that's possibly filled with talent but that falls short in being able to op.
If you want to rotate people, it has to come at a cost--with the Creo Dev and the Nij Fury and thevian TAC all forceless (I think lol), it's easy for alliances to rotate members without the fear of mines in the galaxy being a problem. The benefit from rotating members is great but the risk should be as well.
Some of you are saying this hurts the small alliances but the truth is, this only is really being used by the big alliances and not once or twice but often. I know we don't have a huge playerbase but the game is very active right now and each alliance has 30 spots and my biggest arguement would be: planets are only deadly as of the last few days, with some alliances finally have 100 hangars--don't tell me you need 1 extra player to clear mines and take baby planets. If you can't get 10-12 members or 10-15 for an op, the alliance should suffer for putting together a roster that's possibly filled with talent but that falls short in being able to op.
If you want to rotate people, it has to come at a cost--with the Creo Dev and the Nij Fury and thevian TAC all forceless (I think lol), it's easy for alliances to rotate members without the fear of mines in the galaxy being a problem. The benefit from rotating members is great but the risk should be as well.
oc12 here, what you playing with slowpoke?
1) A turn cost (for example 100 turns) for joining an alliance. I personally don't like this one, since it penalizes everyone, including players joining their primary alliance at the start of a game, as well as minor alliances choosing to op together. We cannot implement a turn cost for leaving an alliance since this causes problems with removing members, and we cannot have negative turns.
Though could be a good idea if you added this with a start time scale, say 100 hours after the game starts this rule comes in to play?
2)A time limit for joining an alliance after leaving one. This delay would need to be something like 48 hours/game speed in order to be effective and once again also penalizes legitimate alliance switching. Anything longer than this delay starts to become detrimental to the game IMO.
What is a legitimate reason for switching alliances so quick apart from Oping with a verbal assigned alliance, in which the other alliance having up to 30 members should be enough, if not you have a problem with your leader, not the switching of flags? Apart from say newbie help alliance.. maybe I corrected myself there as I understand there are also temp alliances like maps:pw hmm nice debatable issue though.
3) A limit to the number of times a player can join any given alliance. This is my favourite. I can think of absolutely no valid reason for needing to join an alliance more than (for example) 3 times during a game. This does not hurt anyone except the players abusing alliance switching, and very effectively puts a stop to the use of rotating roster spots. Obviously, disbanding an alliance and re-forming with the same membership to get around this would be against the rules.
Agree with you Ard
Though could be a good idea if you added this with a start time scale, say 100 hours after the game starts this rule comes in to play?
2)A time limit for joining an alliance after leaving one. This delay would need to be something like 48 hours/game speed in order to be effective and once again also penalizes legitimate alliance switching. Anything longer than this delay starts to become detrimental to the game IMO.
What is a legitimate reason for switching alliances so quick apart from Oping with a verbal assigned alliance, in which the other alliance having up to 30 members should be enough, if not you have a problem with your leader, not the switching of flags? Apart from say newbie help alliance.. maybe I corrected myself there as I understand there are also temp alliances like maps:pw hmm nice debatable issue though.
3) A limit to the number of times a player can join any given alliance. This is my favourite. I can think of absolutely no valid reason for needing to join an alliance more than (for example) 3 times during a game. This does not hurt anyone except the players abusing alliance switching, and very effectively puts a stop to the use of rotating roster spots. Obviously, disbanding an alliance and re-forming with the same membership to get around this would be against the rules.
Agree with you Ard
The truth is there, just don't look blindly
Further comments and clarification:
1) Turn cost. The revised suggestion is that the turn cost is 10* ship speed and that there is no cost the first time (in a game) that you join an alliance. This requires coding, and would be a long term solution.
2) Time limit. This also requires coding.
3) The rule would be that you cannot join one particular alliance more than x number of times (3 or 5 have been suggested). This would not affect joining other alliances. This does not require coding to be put into effect and could therefore be implemented immediately as either a permanent or temporary measure. Obviously, a coded change is preferable, but that is unlikely to happen right now.
1) Turn cost. The revised suggestion is that the turn cost is 10* ship speed and that there is no cost the first time (in a game) that you join an alliance. This requires coding, and would be a long term solution.
2) Time limit. This also requires coding.
3) The rule would be that you cannot join one particular alliance more than x number of times (3 or 5 have been suggested). This would not affect joining other alliances. This does not require coding to be put into effect and could therefore be implemented immediately as either a permanent or temporary measure. Obviously, a coded change is preferable, but that is unlikely to happen right now.
Read the rules, follow the rules, and stop complaining!
I like Option #3
Option 1 - it's no big deal to lose 100 turns if you're built up to max turns for an OP.
Option 2 - no big deal if you're swapping traders in and out it just gives them time to save turns in a PSF.
Now the only loophole i can see in Option 3 is creating a Temp alliance for major OP's, that would still allow you to do that 3-5 times a game.
Option 1 - it's no big deal to lose 100 turns if you're built up to max turns for an OP.
Option 2 - no big deal if you're swapping traders in and out it just gives them time to save turns in a PSF.
Now the only loophole i can see in Option 3 is creating a Temp alliance for major OP's, that would still allow you to do that 3-5 times a game.
Cowboy