DeletedUser37227
can you name an interesting and vibrant sports league where there are only 2 or 3 viable competitors?
my guess is that you are unable.
that is because any successful sports league has 2 things ~
• at least a dozen viable teams
• and all the teams have roster caps
unfortunately, many worlds in the west are dead, or are dying off because fort fighting has become a monopoly and the vast majority of world players are excluded, disenfranchised, and left out of the fun and excitement of fort battles.
in our world, twice a day, the same pool of 300 +/- players take up all the available battle spots, and a huge potential pool of players evaporates out of boredom and disenfranchisement.
2 years ago colorado had 20,000 players, now the population is barely 1,900.
a monopoly of forts by one alliance is always the outcome of a flawed 2 alliance fort-battle mentality. just as a sports league where there are only 2 competitors is completely boring and doomed, so is a game world with only 2 alliances competing for all the forts.
in order to save colorado from the fate befallen other worlds, and also reinvigorate our game world, i propose the following for consideration:
• holes, uc, and popsicles each split into 2 alliances thereby creating 7 competitive alliances (including the searchers)
• alliances, just as teams in a sports league, would agree to a roster cap (in the range of 150 players)
• when an alliance reaches it's roster cap, it then would send players to smaller alliances with the goal of boosting their rosters and thus creating more viable fort battle competitors.
• all alliances would actively help each other to recruit new game players onto the teams that are below roster caps.
• on a bi-annual basis, all the competitive alliances would participate in a "trading week" in which players would be shifted amongst the alliances to create balance and a higher degree of competitiveness.
• with fort battles and alliances treated as a sports league, our world would then be able to create round-robin tournament schedules rather than the current completely uninspired 3 alliance dig rotation.
the bottom line is that by treating fort battles and alliances as a sports league with the goal of having 10-12 viable competitors, rather that a 2 alliance fort battle monopoly, our game world would be able to include as many of our world's 1,900 population and keep players engaged in our world, thus putting a brake on colorado's population decline.
further, colorado would then have a template the other game worlds could emulate and thus curtail population declines in the other game worlds.
i know there will be some high level resistance to this idea, but again the question is ~ how many exciting sports leagues have only 2 or 3 competitors?
my guess is that you are unable.
that is because any successful sports league has 2 things ~
• at least a dozen viable teams
• and all the teams have roster caps
unfortunately, many worlds in the west are dead, or are dying off because fort fighting has become a monopoly and the vast majority of world players are excluded, disenfranchised, and left out of the fun and excitement of fort battles.
in our world, twice a day, the same pool of 300 +/- players take up all the available battle spots, and a huge potential pool of players evaporates out of boredom and disenfranchisement.
2 years ago colorado had 20,000 players, now the population is barely 1,900.
a monopoly of forts by one alliance is always the outcome of a flawed 2 alliance fort-battle mentality. just as a sports league where there are only 2 competitors is completely boring and doomed, so is a game world with only 2 alliances competing for all the forts.
in order to save colorado from the fate befallen other worlds, and also reinvigorate our game world, i propose the following for consideration:
• holes, uc, and popsicles each split into 2 alliances thereby creating 7 competitive alliances (including the searchers)
• alliances, just as teams in a sports league, would agree to a roster cap (in the range of 150 players)
• when an alliance reaches it's roster cap, it then would send players to smaller alliances with the goal of boosting their rosters and thus creating more viable fort battle competitors.
• all alliances would actively help each other to recruit new game players onto the teams that are below roster caps.
• on a bi-annual basis, all the competitive alliances would participate in a "trading week" in which players would be shifted amongst the alliances to create balance and a higher degree of competitiveness.
• with fort battles and alliances treated as a sports league, our world would then be able to create round-robin tournament schedules rather than the current completely uninspired 3 alliance dig rotation.
the bottom line is that by treating fort battles and alliances as a sports league with the goal of having 10-12 viable competitors, rather that a 2 alliance fort battle monopoly, our game world would be able to include as many of our world's 1,900 population and keep players engaged in our world, thus putting a brake on colorado's population decline.
further, colorado would then have a template the other game worlds could emulate and thus curtail population declines in the other game worlds.
i know there will be some high level resistance to this idea, but again the question is ~ how many exciting sports leagues have only 2 or 3 competitors?