My thoughts: Alliances of 5-8 with 1 treaty and 1-2 NAPs. This may work but it really depends on the overall direction we want to go. Do we go small groups but 4-5 of them each teaming up with one other? Or do we go back to larger groups with no official team up?jouldax wrote: Maybe the solution is something Hugh offered, which is alliances of 5-8 with treaties and NAPs. That's also a possibility.
Personally, right now, I think I'd rather see alliances of 12-15 fighting it out - I don't think we have enough activity at this time to be able to handle this gang-up mentality because it can be extremely off-putting for the alliance that gets crushed.
As of right now, I'm leaning towards raising the alliance cap by 1 vet, raising the turn cap to 700, increasing the game speed to 1.75, and swapping 5 gens for 5 hangars. I would like to implement a 50% turn penalty for swapping alliances assuming it's not too hard to code...people can still switch alliances, but they'd have to do so days before an op if they're planning to get active players together. It also allows for some low-turn joint ops in the spirit of teaming up.
Personally, having played this game for the past 15 years: I would recommend go smaller groups with a single MOP/MDP/Full Aliiance and say 1 or 2 NAP/PNAPs. If we can get the players back into the habit of seeing things as more than just two sides, preferably 4 or more, then we will see more action and then we will see wars between allainces that last only part of the round so that an alliance can go beat up on another opponent.
For now, the only item I would really discourage is raising the game speed.