Why so many alliances?
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: The World
Forum Name: Politics & Diplomacy
Forum Description: If you run an alliance on Elgea, here's where you should make your intentions public.
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=3384
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 04:27
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Why so many alliances?
Posted By: Subatoi
Subject: Why so many alliances?
Date Posted: 03 Apr 2012 at 22:15
|
***Anyone who is mentioned here is not mentioned with a feeling of hatred or jealousy or human based emotion, just used as an example.*** I think this goes here..Why are there so many alliances in Illyriad? The majority all stand on the same principles *peaceful and crusader-like* and generally seem to therefor like the same people *ryelle, SF, Fluffeh etc* So why so many different alliances? It's clear that the majority of players will also stand to defend the people they admire, so why not just bump up the max limit of players in an alliance? there already is pretty much just one giant alliance divided under different sector-like names anyway. |
Replies:
Posted By: HonoredMule
Date Posted: 03 Apr 2012 at 23:33
|
I'd like to see the alliance cap increased myself, but for many mechanics (especially with regard to tournaments) the cap serves to foster competition and promote fairness. A player can only be so large, and sometimes that limit is significant no matter how many friends he has. So it is with alliances as well.
------------- "Apparently, quoting me is a 'thing' now." - HonoredMule |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 01:24
|
I think there are benefits to alliances by limiting their size. Realistically in a 100-member alliance about 20-30 people are most active in chat and other alliance activities. Managing a 100-member alliance is already a challenge -- managing more than that would go from "occasionally a drag" to "total nightmare." The larger an organization is, the easier it is for some of the folks to fall through the cracks -- this is already a problem with 100 members and would be worse with 200. I've led alliances with 200 players in other games, and I think a lower limit makes sense. In addition, even alliances that share the same ideas about things like inter-alliance politics can have very different characteristics. The Crow Federation alliances share fairly similar ideals but attract players with different goals and interests, just as one example. That doesn't mean I'm absolutely opposed to increasing the membership limit on alliances, just that I see a number of valid reasons not to and no compelling argument for doing so -- especially after player-run chats are introduced.
|
Posted By: Prometheuz
Date Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 11:22
|
I have had similar experience and would support Rill's suggesstion to limit indivudual alliance membership to no more than 100 players per allaince for the same reasons. As for limiting the number of alliances in a sandbox game. No! Absolultely not. In a sandbox everything changes and I mean everything |
Posted By: SugarFree
Date Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 11:23
|
no, no no! cap everything! ------------- Nuisance |
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 04 Apr 2012 at 13:58
| And, Subatoi, you will find that there are definite differences between alliances. You just need to dig a little deeper... |
Posted By: laimer
Date Posted: 06 Apr 2012 at 15:22
I've led alliances with 200 players in other games, and I think a lower limit makes sense.
|