MPQ's Most Needed Change

Unknown

Eh, I don't think he was that abrasive. This probably is the biggest single issue that *he's* having with the game right now. Is it the biggest single issue that the playerbase as a whole needs to have addressed? Clearly not, but it is a valid issue that several alliances are facing/have faced, and one that many more are likely to face in the future.

I'm very familiar with guild-based systems in MMOs, the governance issues that can arise there, and the tradeoffs that are necessary in those cases. MPQ's alliance system is only loosely similar, and the differences are pervasive enough to make MMO-guild governance solutions not very relevant. I've heard that LoL/DOTA2 team organization might be a better analogy, but I'm not familiar enough with those systems to say for sure.

The start of the problem is that adding slots to an alliance is relatively expensive, but with a quite high return on investment...eventually. Because of the high initial expense, most alliances that aren't completely funded by a whale will try to spread the costs, offering to make potential recruits a Commander in exchange for buying their slot. (This offer is more or less forced, because you have to BE a Commander in order to purchase a slot, and there's no way to *temporarily* make someone a Commander without involving CS, or extending a significant amount of trust at the outset by joining, getting promoted, buying the slot, leaving, and being reinvited.)

As is, the system is clunky enough that it needs some revision to be long-term viable. Issues arise often enough that saying "take it up with CS" just isn't a good solution, because there are many other game issues that CS needs to deal with, and CS is notoriously unreliable on the communications front anyway.

Solutions: We need a "Founder" rank that can add/remove Commander without CS getting involved. We also need some method of pooling HP to buy slots, to permit alliances to grow without being forced into making unwise up-front promises to new recruits. There's no perfect system; governance issues will still arise, but I think those two fixes would be some improvement.

Unknown

Vairelome wrote:

Eh, I don't think he was that abrasive. This probably is the biggest single issue that *he's* having with the game right now. Is it the biggest single issue that the playerbase as a whole needs to have addressed? Clearly not, but it is a valid issue that several alliances are facing/have faced, and one that many more are likely to face in the future.

I'm very familiar with guild-based systems in MMOs, the governance issues that can arise there, and the tradeoffs that are necessary in those cases. MPQ's alliance system is only loosely similar, and the differences are pervasive enough to make MMO-guild governance solutions not very relevant. I've heard that LoL/DOTA2 team organization might be a better analogy, but I'm not familiar enough with those systems to say for sure.

The start of the problem is that adding slots to an alliance is relatively expensive, but with a quite high return on investment...eventually. Because of the high initial expense, most alliances that aren't completely funded by a whale will try to spread the costs, offering to make potential recruits a Commander in exchange for buying their slot. (This offer is more or less forced, because you have to BE a Commander in order to purchase a slot, and there's no way to *temporarily* make someone a Commander without involving CS, or extending a significant amount of trust at the outset by joining, getting promoted, buying the slot, leaving, and being reinvited.)

As is, the system is clunky enough that it needs some revision to be long-term viable. Issues arise often enough that saying "take it up with CS" just isn't a good solution, because there are many other game issues that CS needs to deal with, and CS is notoriously unreliable on the communications front anyway.

Solutions: We need a "Founder" rank that can add/remove Commander without CS getting involved. We also need some method of pooling HP to buy slots, to permit alliances to grow without being forced into making unwise up-front promises to new recruits. There's no perfect system; governance issues will still arise, but I think those two fixes would be some improvement.

Yes, the Founder rank is something that most guild/alliances have and I fully support it. I hope that we see this change as well as many other highly sought after suggestions in the patch that nerfs Spider-Man. At least give us a little something to ease the nerf.

And Vairelome

I am SUPER, SUPER sorry for the gender confusion. Totally my bad. I met another user whose name also started with a V but was a girl around the same time I met you and I read usernames fast and carelessly. Lame excuses for being a total ditz but I really am very sorry. And I still think you are awesome man or woman.