Alliance Roster Size

Freon22 · Post by **Freon22** » Wed Jul 14, 2004 7:30 pm

One of the thing that will happen if they cut alliance set down to 25 is you see more players without alliance. Everyone during the game has some real life things that comes up and they have to take some time off. The way it is now with 30 members if one or more needs to take a week or so off, it no big deal. You know that when you get back your friends have been keeping things going for you and you are still in their alliance. When the alliance size is cut to 25. Players that cann't play every or every other day will have to be booted to make room for players that have the time to play almost everyday. The best alliance will still be the ones that have the most active players there will just be 25 of them instead of 30. But you will see more alliances with more inactive players, the players that can only play two or three times a week may have to go to these alliance were they will get tired of not geting any were and will drop out. How it is now with the 30 max size alliances you can be active/inactive you can play and have fun when you have the time and take care of real life and know that when you login your friends are there. I know that Mr.Spock and Azool think that cuting the size of the alliances will help the game but what they may not know is that most alliances carry 3 to 6 members that are part time players. Those 3 to 6 players will have to go play some where else. I think cuting the alliance size is a very bad ideal and will hurt the game far more then it will help.

Tulayrk · Post by **Tulayrk** » Wed Jul 14, 2004 7:59 pm

-=Kard=- wrote:i like the idea, it will spread the talent out more and make the game more fun. The game wont be so much about how many ships you have but more about how well you use them.

The game's about that right now. Poorly coordinated big fleets just aren't as effective as smaller fleets acting in unison (and active players!).

Azool wrote: the point isn't really to help newbies as much as it is to weaken stronger alliances.

So if successful groups of players, regardless of who they are, don't get any spoils, what exactly is the point of success?

Shady_FA- · Post by **Shady_FA-** » Wed Jul 14, 2004 8:07 pm

Jez wrote:It's funny how the admins care so little about the players view on this. Oh well I strongly disagree and I personally will go find another game if the alliance roster is decreased in size. You have already changed so much these last few games, why not listen to the guys who actually play this game and take a rest before you ruin the game?

Me and Jez agree on something! There's a bout 2 people out of all of us who agree on this change, yet they're stubborn enough to go with this idea.

Anx- · Post by **Anx-** » Wed Jul 14, 2004 11:10 pm

Personally if roster size is changed at all I would like to see if set at 20 but allow for one Affiliate Alliance. Would add anotehr element that was lost to the game. Dont like the part of forced newbie inclusion at all.

Incision · Post by **Incision** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:36 am

i wish i could get 30, i think 25 is fine, i've opperated with 25 every game i've been in..

Warlock · Post by **Warlock** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 7:03 am

Now, Incision, didn't you just create a contest because with your current force you cannot get the numbers to do a large op? If alliances are having difficulty doing large ops with the current alliance cap, this poorly thought out idea will merely cripple them even further. Before I saw this thread, I was thinking of making a post about INCREASING the alliance size by 10. Make it more possible to do the big ops.. and have fleet engagements. The best war in SM history was when there wasn't an alliance cap. Furthermore, this will help increase retention in the game, as players will make more contacts within the game, and more newbies will be taken in and trained by the alliances.

SOul · Post by **SOul** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:33 am

i dont really say much here cuz i dont think the admins really care what players say they have a plan and there gonna go with it either way. I dont know why everyone wants to change the game its a great game the problem is getting people to try it most people playing now play it cuz there friends got them to try it and they fell in love with i think we need to think of new ways to get the smr name every where so people can try it instead of changing it. Most alliances dont have 20 actives with an limit of 30 i dont see why taking 5 players will help competion.

Post by **Azool** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 4:34 pm

Any alliance can do just as well with 25 members as they can with 30.

If this kicked 5 members out of DC then those 5 members would join another alliance and make that one stronger and make more of a threat to DC, which causes more competition and that is good

If you remove 5 members from the roster Mining of territory goes down and arguably makes it easier to op.

A couple months ago when we decided this we had almost every player say to make it 25 but to wait until the next game to implement it...why is everyone changing their minds now?

And Anx...there is no forced newbie inclusion...

Vladdy · Post by **Vladdy** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:26 pm

Azool: whatever you do, idiots will complain, admins can't do ANYTHING right (though they did the PERFECTLY RIGHT thing to destroy this game by removing connectivity and smc hunting so any newbie in an IST can be #1)

Warlock · Post by **Warlock** » Thu Jul 15, 2004 5:38 pm

Obviously 'everyone' did not get in on this decision process of yours. Cutting the # in an alliance is a mistake. Again, if anything, it should be raised, because when large group operations cannot occur (which will obviously be more difficult with only 25 instead of 30), a game goes dead. You need the risk created by large ops to keep a game alive. What, do you just want to see a return to temp alliances every operation?