See, the problem with saying people have to listen to one another, is if you fail to do so yourself, I can't honestly see anyone ever bothering to take notice of you. I mean, the perma sat thing, sure, though frankly I thought that issue had been laid to rest months ago. With the newer sitting rules perma sitting simply isn't possible, well, not to the extent that is a world changing issue at the moment. As for a couple of the other points made, I'll simply quote others.
only way to save this world is if all the world leaders sit and listen to each other
they should come to a agreement to
- drop their empires and start some independant tribes
We only have 25 odd members in a compact space so we probably wouldn't split. Even if OTB split into it's component tribes there would still only be 4 of us, and three of those tribes have close ties. Very little up here would change. I can't say I know enough to comment on potential local politics elsewhere.
In W8, there aren't exactly families like we have here, but they have a north/south war just like we do. Allies have shared external claim forums and shared internal forums as well. The only major difference is that we have Archdukes, who provide direction and a tie breaker vote when leadership disagree on policies. Without formally organized families, allies/MDPs in close proximity tend to band together and war with those outside their bounds. So really how is what they're doing all that different from the way we're playing it? It seems to be a common pattern of how diplomacy and war play out in the game.
I like the high level of family organization here, it's made the politics a lot more fun even if the wars are drawn out. You can go to many worlds where single tribes dominate. W3 offers something special.
if they manage this the funn will come back for sure !!
- evrywhere in the world there will be action again it would feel like a restart of the world but evryone has a descant account to play with and they build them selfs
- evyone can make new friends
- you can challenge old friends or players you could never come allong with in the current tribe
So yeah, there won't be worldwide action again, as for the mostpart things will remain as they do currently.
I can make new friends now, if you know everyone that is in your tribe well, lucky you. There are people I don't manage to speak to due to there being a lot of players in families, and whilst yes, this can be seen as a weakness of sorts, it's not one that would be fixed by segregating tribes further, that would only restrict the possibilities for friendly contact with other players. I've just started talking to someone I'd previously had little contact with, wasn't an effect of any world shake up. It can of course be argued, that you can be just as friendly to an enemy as you can an ally (something I would personally refute, I prefer to not communicate with my enemies, MrsC taught me that lesson, she just seems too nice to attack... evil woman. lol), but in that case, why would any change be needed in order to reach this end? It is no different to what you can do now.
Challenging old friends, I'll give you that one, it is a very fair point, certainly something that a world shake up would allow (Given that you didn't end up with your friends in your new tribe which seems highly probable to me). However. My friends do not wish to attack me, they are friends. I mean, if you become friends while warring, there is a friendly rivalry that was always an underlying base to your friendship. But someone who you have fought with, defended with and called a friend... the notion of me attacking any of my friends is just one I cannot grasp. Even if a friend of mine went to the enemy side, I wouldn't attack them, see that Nic27 village on K15? Not getting attacked, not by me. I shant go on as I'm just babbling, can't make sense of it.
Don't get me wrong, if you are looking for change and it seems like the preferable option, that is your choice, but the fixes suggested here are nothing but painting over a crack in the wall. You may not be able to see it for a while, but the problem you had is still there. This misguided notion that getting rid of families will make a radical change to the worlds politics seems unrealistic.
I look at it this way. If everything that wasn't working quite as people liked was scrapped completely, rather than improved upon (taking the elements you like and disposing of those you do not) just think how technologically/socially/politically/scientifically retarded the world would be. Change may be needed, but starting afresh is never as simple an option as people would like to believe.
