Alliance restrictions

[Fenrir Oorgata]

I think that the alliance setups here in SGW are way too large... It takes away from the game for all involved... I think there should be a mandated limit to the amount of sub alliances and the amount of people in an alliance and how many alliances you can be formally allied with... Not meant to be specifically at Omega, because CF (when it existed did the same thing and I disagree with it for them as well) I think that these super alliances bullying and policing people is no fun for anyone not in them.. I think that they should be toned down and these should be enforced by the Game Admins to make it so that the game is fair and fun for ALL.

[edit]
to help inforce this... Each alliance should get a forum secton in which they must declare formal relations... that way admin can monitor them...[/edit]

[Fenrir Oorgata]

My suggestion is a max of 1 sub alliance, max of 2 full alliance allies and a max of 75 people in an alliance

[Wolf359]

Alliances such as the GA are there for mutual protection!. If the GA state that if you mass or consistently farm one of their members your whole alliance will be massed in retaliation, then they are not being bullies - rather you are being stupid for ignoring a fair and honest warning!

You must remember that alliances have been around long before in-game alliances. And whether you impose maximum numbers in game or not makes no difference whatsoever, as people will just create more allainces for teh overspill of their members. besides if you look at the majority of teh top alliances - they have less members than the number you suggest as the limit.

The main/massive/large/huge/gigantic flaw in your suggestion is that it CAN NOT be enforced. How can you force it so that, for example, the EPAC alliances cannot work together? The EPAC doesn't technically exist in-game - so how can you stop something that doesn't already exist?

[Fenrir Oorgata]

Alliances such as the GA are there for mutual protection!. If the GA state that if you mass or consistently farm one of their members your whole alliance will be massed in retaliation, then they are not being bullies - rather you are being stupid for ignoring a fair and honest warning!

You must remember that alliances have been around long before in-game alliances. And whether you impose maximum numbers in game or not makes no difference whatsoever, as people will just create more allainces for teh overspill of their members. besides if you look at the majority of teh top alliances - they have less members than the number you suggest as the limit.

The main/massive/large/huge/gigantic flaw in your suggestion is that it CAN NOT be enforced. How can you force it so that, for example, the EPAC alliances cannot work together? The EPAC doesn't technically exist in-game - so how can you stop something that doesn't already exist?

well my point is that I play MANY other mmorpgs and they have restrictions that prevent such large collaborations such as the GA or CF or any other.... my point is they are all too large and there needs to be some sort of system to make the game more fair

I can understand an alliance doing that... but such a large group as the GA is unfair to players because it is HUGE, literally taking up a good percentage of available targets... my point is it shouldn't be allowed in teh magnitude that it currently is.

I am sure I missed some... but I count around 650 members in the GA... thats HUGE. there is no reason why one group should be so large.

[Wolf359]

Alliances such as the GA are there for mutual protection!. If the GA state that if you mass or consistently farm one of their members your whole alliance will be massed in retaliation, then they are not being bullies - rather you are being stupid for ignoring a fair and honest warning!

You must remember that alliances have been around long before in-game alliances. And whether you impose maximum numbers in game or not makes no difference whatsoever, as people will just create more allainces for teh overspill of their members. besides if you look at the majority of teh top alliances - they have less members than the number you suggest as the limit.

The main/massive/large/huge/gigantic flaw in your suggestion is that it CAN NOT be enforced. How can you force it so that, for example, the EPAC alliances cannot work together? The EPAC doesn't technically exist in-game - so how can you stop something that doesn't already exist?

well my point is that I play MANY other mmorpgs and they have restrictions that prevent such large collaborations such as the GA or CF or any other.... my point is they are all too large and there needs to be some sort of system to make the game more fair

I can understand an alliance doing that... but such a large group as the GA is unfair to players because it is HUGE, literally taking up a good percentage of available targets... my point is it shouldn't be allowed in teh magnitude that it currently is.

Again - I ask you - How can you enforce it? The GA is a group of INDIVIDUAL alliances that work together for mutual protection - they do not officially exist in-game - so how can you stop them?

It wasn't really any different in the early days when the TA/EPA worked together - the only alliance at the time that could take them on was The Order of Chaos.

[Fenrir Oorgata]

Alliances such as the GA are there for mutual protection!. If the GA state that if you mass or consistently farm one of their members your whole alliance will be massed in retaliation, then they are not being bullies - rather you are being stupid for ignoring a fair and honest warning!

You must remember that alliances have been around long before in-game alliances. And whether you impose maximum numbers in game or not makes no difference whatsoever, as people will just create more allainces for teh overspill of their members. besides if you look at the majority of teh top alliances - they have less members than the number you suggest as the limit.

The main/massive/large/huge/gigantic flaw in your suggestion is that it CAN NOT be enforced. How can you force it so that, for example, the EPAC alliances cannot work together? The EPAC doesn't technically exist in-game - so how can you stop something that doesn't already exist?

well my point is that I play MANY other mmorpgs and they have restrictions that prevent such large collaborations such as the GA or CF or any other.... my point is they are all too large and there needs to be some sort of system to make the game more fair

I can understand an alliance doing that... but such a large group as the GA is unfair to players because it is HUGE, literally taking up a good percentage of available targets... my point is it shouldn't be allowed in teh magnitude that it currently is.

Again - I ask you - How can you enforce it? The GA is a group of INDIVIDUAL alliances that work together for mutual protection - they do not officially exist in-game - so how can you stop them?

not quite sure...I'd really have to think in depth... even get some other opinions from people about how they think the problem should be fixed...


but do you agree that it should be changed?

[Fenrir Oorgata]

It wasn't really any different in the early days when the TA/EPA worked together - the only alliance at the time that could take them on was The Order of Chaos.

I wasn't around in those days, but I disagree with them doing the same...


I quote Omega when I say "This is a war game" so get to warring instead of huddling up together like they do...

[Fenrir Oorgata]

CF was obliterated by the GA... now let me tell a story and accidentally give a clue as to my identity in the process...


I made a suggestion to Robe that to beat the GA she'd need to bring on almost every able bodied alliance... We didn't and paid the ultimate price for it... My point is... such a collaboration is unfair because literally to beat it, you'd have to band together everyone in the game to combat them... the majority of the good, seasoned players are in the GA, they are huge. There is no other way to overcome such a large force... That in my opinion is unfair... That almost every rmaining strong alliance would have to band together to get rid of one massing, bullying superpower... (and dont say they dont bully... because pianomutt massed my friend into oblivion for no reason earlier) and he is untouchable... becuase the GA feels that any attack on it, whether retal, or offensive, is rewarding of a joint massing... that is infact bullying by all standards

[Wolf359]

Please refrain from triple posting - use the edit button!

The problem is it can't be changed - all that would happen is that via MSN a group of alliances will say - let's all gang up on alliance X. How can they be stopped?

I do not agree that it should be changed (partly because I know it can't)- there is nothing stopping anyone else from creating such groups - and it has been done before - The Liberum Coalition, Crystal Force/The Faction. The EPAC started because the EPA found it easier to manage a small number of players rather than one big group.

And the GA turns away applications for new alliances to join on a weekly basis.

You could count on one hand the amount of times that the GA has actually ever been activated in anger (such as against the groups mentioned above - CF/Faction/TLC) - most member alliances being quite capable to handle their own incidents.

I understand your point - but believe it won't be implemented simply because it can't be implemented.

As for bullying - the GA does not bully - perhaps individual members might - but the GA do not say 'let's all go and mass an alliance for a laugh'. nor would or should teh GA get involved if a player gets attacked and it is their own fault.

[J.S.]

I am sure I missed some... but I count around 650 members in the GA... thats HUGE. there is no reason why one group should be so large.

Well form your own GA without the actual GA knowing about it..

If your not happy with a superpower form your own.. There are plenty of players there..

OR you could just get all your friends playing and make your own alliances..

[Fenrir Oorgata]

As for bullying - the GA does not bully - perhaps individual members might - but the GA do not say 'let's all go and mass an alliance for a laugh'. nor would or should teh GA get involved if a player gets attacked and it is their own fault.

but my point is when its members bully... they are shielded by the alliance since any attacks on them in retal will be met with EXTREME retal from GA even if the retal was justified... that is bullying isn't it?

[hidden]

of course it's unfair but it's like trying to stop murder or people getting off scot free in court

i would like to hear about these games with restrictions because i sure havent found any

[Fenrir Oorgata]

of course it's unfair but it's like trying to stop murder or people getting off scot free in court

i would like to hear about these games with restrictions because i sure havent found any

cybots, ogame, starkingdoms

[Wolf359]

From my perspective (and that of the EPAC) - if a member goes around farming/stealing from the wrong people, are warned to stop and then carry on - it is their own fault! We would try and help resolve the situation - but we would only use massing as a last resort.

Similarly - if any of my members threaten someone with EPAC/GA over a single attack - or threaten them with mass retaliation if they try and retaliate - then that member is firmly told that that they shouldn't be doing that - and if they continue, they are kicked.

And I still cannot see how you can stop groups like the GA from existing. If you can think of a way (because it is after all, the topic) then please state it - otherwise I see no value in this thread continuing.

[Fenrir Oorgata]

From my perspective (and that of the EPAC) - if a member goes around farming/stealing from the wrong people, are warned to stop and then carry on - it is their own fault! We would try and help resolve the situation - but we would only use massing as a last resort.

Similarly - if any of my members threaten someone with EPAC/GA over a single attack - or threaten them with mass retaliation if they try and retaliate - then that member is firmly told that that they shouldn't be doing that - and if they continue, they are kicked.

And I still cannot see how you can stop groups like the GA from existing. If you can think of a way (because it is after all, the topic) then please state it - otherwise I see no value in this thread continuing.

Give me a day to think about it... But since this is a suggestions thread... why dont you give it a little time to see if anyone else can think of a way to solve it... since this is a forum, a place to converse... no offense to you mods, but you all close topics way too quickly here..