Alliance Challenge - information and subscription

[Sami]

25 per team, yes.

If the option for player to pick an alliance when joining is made, then there wouldn't be any pre-screening available, as airline is instantly an alliance member when created. That's the downside. But I would feel opening the world to public would encourage more players to join compared to the current signup procedure.

[NorgeFly]

This would not benefit WorldLink much at all as we have 21 members already... also not sure we would be happy to accept 4 random players, but we will get back to you as soon as possible.

[NorgeFly]

Sami,

The official WorldLink stance on your proposal is:

We agree the game could use some new players to reignite some interest in the game. However, we would not be happy for players to select the alliance rather than the more normal procedure where the alliance select the player. Not because we believe WorldLink to be an elite group or anything like that, but because our success in Alliance Challenge is largely down to us pre-selecting only loyal WorldLink members who know how the alliance works. We initially had a list of over 30 interested players, all loyal WorldLink members in other games, but had to turn down 6 or 7 of them.

Also, as WorldLink is the only alliance that is anywhere near full and would not benefit from a fresh intake of players, we propose the limit be raised to 30 airlines per alliance and the current subscription procedure is retained. That way, the game would benefit from additional players (assuming WorldLink and the other alliances can attract new players) without opening the game to open to all players and forcing alliances to accept random players.

I also assume that only players that never joined could be replaced which without the raised limit would mean that WorldLink could not add any players at all.

Steve, on behalf of WorldLink Management

[JumboShrimp]

The 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.

I 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.

[NorgeFly]

I 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.

I 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.

[ucfknightryan]

I 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.

Out 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...

[NorgeFly]

Out 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...

You will probably laugh if I told you we have a set of something like 20+ rules/regulations for this game world so that we made sure that we were well placed. We (managers) have been very pro-active and have taken the game very seriously, as have our players. After all, our alliance's good name was at stake!  

[[ATA] - lilius]

I dont know any potential new members to recruit for Megafly. I wouldnt mind getting a managing member though since Ive been left alone in my alliance.

[Sami]

I 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.

[NorgeFly]

I 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.

But would we only be able to replace no-shows like last time?

[Talentz]

Not sure if this would help. As in my mind and probably that of the rest of the Alliances, WL has already won and Alliance Challenge has ended for say.

Opening the world to random players would further undermine the spirit of Alliance Challenge. I understand you want more participation, but I'd rather see AC closed down and just open a new world.

You would bring in more revenue and have less complaints of "big airlines" already in place.



Talentz

[ICEcoldair881]

+1. only i want to keep my airline up and running. claim it as my first "successful" European airline.

[JonnyAngel]

Alright, 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?

[NorgeFly]

Alright, 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?

WorldLink will not accept players who have not been be pre-approved by us as we see this as potentially damaging. We would be happy for new players to join the game, but using the current method of alliance managers passing approved user id's to Sami so they can then join.

[carrisi]

My 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.

[Bralo20]

Any spots available? 

[Sami]

Note to alliance managers!

The players who have no active account in the game world have now been removed access to this private world. In other words they cannot re-join.

Present membership counts are:

Code: [Select]

Alliance: Alliance Challenge - Best International Group   7
Alliance: Alliance Challenge - GlobalSky                16
Alliance: Alliance Challenge - Mega Fly Worldwide           12
Alliance: Alliance Challenge - Silver Star Alliance           19
Alliance: Alliance Challenge - SkyNet                        15
Alliance: Alliance Challenge - UNITEAM                        6
Alliance: Alliance Challenge - WorldLink                       22


After consideration I think the easiest way is still the member signup what we've had before. I will shortly post a new news for potential members to apply.

[castelino009]

My 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.

+ 100

[hmellouli]

Managers,
happy to hear the good news that the world has a few more openings.

I have placed my name is he forum sami opened this morning. I would appreciate your consideration, especially as i have been campaigning for this for sometime.

I have experience. and i ran a very successful airline. I was a founding member of an alliance, I was also a member of worldlink as well.