Started by Sami, August 02, 2010, 02:26:55 PM
Quote from: sami on October 11, 2010, 09:26:13 PMThe alliance score needs defnitely also rework. I didn't expect the bankruptcies to be so huge and causing so many negative scores, so one shouldn't worry about the negatives for now when considering new members.
Quote from: JumboShrimp on October 11, 2010, 10:51:00 PMI don't think it is the bankruptcy that is the problem. It is only one time -10 points. It is the other items (missed maintenance, staff strikes) that may cause one airline in a tailspin to generate negative 100 points.
Quote from: NorgeFly on October 11, 2010, 10:54:05 PMI agree and WorldLink's policies have reflected this so that these events were kept to a minimum. Before the game even started we made it clear to our members that bankruptcies (just to restart the airline), missed maintenance and staff issues were unacceptable and put rules in place for the game to avoid them.
Quote from: ucfknightryan on October 11, 2010, 10:57:39 PMOut of curiosity, what kind of rules did you use to accomplish this? I sincerely doubt most people who's airlines wound up collapsing and generating all those negative points sat back and watched it happen, they most likely were not able to log in for several days...
Quote from: sami on October 12, 2010, 12:27:50 AMI would opt to make this so that if you set alliance setting to "open for applications" then a new member could autojoin the alliance. If not, you can only invite more people. And with this setting the world would be open to public.
Quote from: JonnyAngel on October 12, 2010, 10:50:11 PMAlright, I'll speak for BIG. We've lost a lot of players so we'd be happy to get an infusion of fresh blood, and it might liven up the remaining months play.I say keep the cap at 25 members, and make choice of alliance mandatory.Here's the question; how do we keep the applications fair though. I mean, if you're a good player, you'll want to join WL (inversely, a bad player may want to hitch himself to a winning horse and end up taking them down). All of us in our respective alliances have played with or against each other in previous gameworlds and know our strengths and weaknesses.How would we assess newbies as they joined? And how do we prevent a rush of players in the direction of one alliance or another?
Alliance: Alliance Challenge - Best International Group 7Alliance: Alliance Challenge - GlobalSky 16Alliance: Alliance Challenge - Mega Fly Worldwide 12Alliance: Alliance Challenge - Silver Star Alliance 19Alliance: Alliance Challenge - SkyNet 15Alliance: Alliance Challenge - UNITEAM 6Alliance: Alliance Challenge - WorldLink 22
Quote from: carrisi on October 13, 2010, 08:24:35 AMMy view is this. All alliances had the chance to start with members, and recruit some replacements earlier on.The fact they have lost members, or have been unable to recruit more, is part of the game. The score is the score, and the membership levels reflect the strength of each alliance. Given the inability to attract more players, I say close the game early (say in 3 game years) and lets all move on. We all know the fun part is starting up. So lets call the end.