Possible Alliance Recruitment Idea

[Chloe11111]

just to deter some TOP20 alliances from recruiting me

You know, there is always an option to politely say no

 

[Navigata07]

I think it's fair to say that the current situation is "just the nature of the beast". Clearly everyone is feeling the squeeze in regards to the attrition of reliable alliance members. But at the same time, the pax requirement goes up....a bit of a disconnect there. Couple things could contribute to this:
1) The alliances that are full are growing in terms of performance, pushing the threshold higher
2) The alliances that are partially full are relying more on the heavy hitters to carry the load. They could be legitimate in their performance or cheating; both means have the same result.
3) Some alliance members may not be playing as much, allowing their contribution to slip. This could be due to just life being busy or people's enthusiasm for the game is slipping away.

I think all 3 contribute to the current situation with the rankings

 

[Navigata07]

By the way, we never got the feeder alliance list going. I'll make an attempt here:
Damien Saez Alliance Leader: @Dafsade
Airforce77 Alliance Leader: @Madge59230
Constellation Alliance Forum Contact: @Bridogg72

If we know any others, we can add them on the list

 

[Brian D]

By the way, we never got the feeder alliance list going. I'll make an attempt here:
Damien Saez Alliance Leader: @Dafsade
Airforce77 Alliance Leader: @Madge59230

If we know any others, we can add them on the list

Constellation Alliance - I am forum contact though not leader

 

[Navigata07]

Constellation Alliance - I am forum contact though not leader

Good enough for me

 

[Barkmi4 (Mike)]

I think it's fair to say that the current situation is "just the nature of the beast". Clearly everyone is feeling the squeeze in regards to the attrition of reliable alliance members. But at the same time, the pax requirement goes up....a bit of a disconnect there. Couple things could contribute to this:
1) The alliances that are full are growing in terms of performance, pushing the threshold higher
2) The alliances that are partially full are relying more on the heavy hitters to carry the load. They could be legitimate in their performance or cheating; both means have the same result.
3) Some alliance members may not be playing as much, allowing their contribution to slip. This could be due to just life being busy or people's enthusiasm for the game is slipping away.

I think all 3 contribute to the current situation with the rankings

Remember Facebook players got moved to mobile around 6 months ago. Means more competition at the top, but we don’t see that pool of players here (typically) to recruit from.

 

[jpm-wv]

You know, there is always an option to politely say no

Actually, I put a statement at the top of my long signature that says this:

At this point, I value task completion at 50% of the Alliance Mission Tasks because I need the coin from that bonus to develop my facilities and I still depend upon that bonus to help with this long process. At this point, I would prefer that over an Alliance Map. Do not even bother trying to convince me because I know what I want so don't waste your time.

That does do the job quite well and I learned the hard way to do that. I do worry that you may have some smooth talking recruiters that may in cutthroat desperation, attempt to deceive, withhold critical information, or use any trick in the book (and yes, there are books on the subject) and some players are in professions such as sales.

I know what I describe is more an exception than the rule, but the temptation is out there and it's very easy to deceive yourself into any number of excuses such as "I was trying to help the person", "I know I'm right", "I thought that he said ***", or something else. You can deceive yourself into thinking that the player was saying one thing when they were saying another. I may say to you right now, "The S3 planes and Mystery Super Bonuses are Nice" and you think I'm saying, "I'll go for it" when what I meant was "The S3 planes and Mystery Bonuses are NOT a priority". And sometimes, people just do not take the word, "NO" as an answer.

 

[Navigata07]

Remember Facebook players got moved to mobile around 6 months ago. Means more competition at the top, but we don’t see that pool of players here (typically) to recruit from.

Good point. There are quite a few non forum alliances in the top 100....most of them are non forum alliances actually. And because they are open to anyone, their rotation is probably pretty quick

 

[jpm-wv]

I think it's fair to say that the current situation is "just the nature of the beast". Clearly everyone is feeling the squeeze in regards to the attrition of reliable alliance members. But at the same time, the pax requirement goes up....a bit of a disconnect there. Couple things could contribute to this:
1) The alliances that are full are growing in terms of performance, pushing the threshold higher
2) The alliances that are partially full are relying more on the heavy hitters to carry the load. They could be legitimate in their performance or cheating; both means have the same result.
3) Some alliance members may not be playing as much, allowing their contribution to slip. This could be due to just life being busy or people's enthusiasm for the game is slipping away.

I think all 3 contribute to the current situation with the rankings

And all of that could lead a situation where people will NOT even bother trying or people will NOT touch the alliances (they get stereotyped as too brutal). People will talk, word will spread, and TOP20 (a good point for some players) would become an unspeakable obscenity or taboo. Meanwhile, you may alliances such as "The Peacekeepers" that collect the players that wash out and bet your bottom dollar that the "wash outs" will TALK to other alliance members about this. I will happily sing like a canary.

Am I making sense here?

 

[Navigata07]

And all of that could lead a situation where people will NOT even bother trying or people will NOT touch the alliances (they get stereotyped as too brutal). People will talk, word will spread, and TOP20 (a good point for some players) would become an unspeakable obscenity or taboo. Meanwhile, you may alliances such as "The Peacekeepers" that collect the players that wash out and bet your bottom dollar that the "wash outs" will TALK to other alliance members about this. I will happily sing like a canary.

Am I making sense here?

I follow what youre saying, but I dont think hearsay is what drives recruits. At the end of the day, it all comes down to gaming goals and loyalty. If both are being fulfilled, the player will stick with an alliance. If a player thinks an alliance will help them to reach their goal, then they will join one, regardless of hearsay.
For example, I joined my alliance because it was a spinoff of a launch group I formed many years ago...and my goal was to get my purple maps. However, once I became leader, I grew loyal to the brand and wanted to bring my fellow members to the top 10. However, over time, that changed as well, as my goal now is to simply earn my last map and continue to help my fellow members acquire their maps as well...top 50 works best for us and our current playing styles. Could I go to a top 20 alliance and speed up the map process? Sure I can....and so could most of my fellow members. However, we've formed a strong bond and are willing to rise together through the highs and lows. That's why players join alliances.

 

[jpm-wv]

I actually agree with you. It was actually very hard for me to decide to leave "The Peacekeepers" for the GoldenGlobe alliance. It was actually agonizing because "The Peacekeepers" was there when I had to have cataract surgery. I actually help recruit for "The Peacekeepers" even though I am now in GoldenGlobe.

So I left the Peacekeepers of in spite of how good they are because I had gotten a 13nth stand and I was getting pax counts from around 120,000 - 150,000 repeatedly, and I wanted purple maps as well as the 50% bonus. I still have good relationships with some members of the Peacekeepers but Golden Globe was the proper fit given my needs. I said as much to the Peacekeeper's alliance leader he was very understanding about the situation.

I have left very good alliances because I felt that it was best for them and myself. Such decisions are always HARD. It's actually a decision I hate, but it HAD to be DONE and I will make NO BONES about it. It's easy to strawman me as a disloyal person. For me, loyalty is a very nuanced thing and there are counter-principals that come into play.

I have actually left alliances because I felt that me being there would do more harm than good. I believe the expression is "Fall on your own sword."