Removing inactive players from tribe:

[Kegan]

I would not be against a resource system as long as it was not a nightmare to keep up with. Don't forget that there are casual players out there that only play a few times a week and don't want to spend all there time finding stuff to keep there tribe lands.

As far as the system we have now i would say a person is active if there subscription is paid or not. If a persons subscription is canceled and stays that way for more then 30 days there inactive and removed from the tribe.

[Book]

I would not be against a resource system as long as it was not a nightmare to keep up with. Don't forget that there are casual players out there that only play a few times a week and don't want to spend all there time finding stuff to keep there tribe lands.

As far as the system we have now i would say a person is active if there subscription is paid or not. If a persons subscription is canceled and stays that way for more then 30 days there inactive and removed from the tribe.

This pretty much sums up my thoughts on the subject as well.

[Atlantica]

I agree with Znaiika,

I have seen big tribes that have around 70 % inactive players , and they holding huge land.
The industrial strenght is a example of that.

[banden]

I agree with Znaiika,

I have seen big tribes that have around 70 % inactive players , and they holding huge land.
The industrial strenght is a example of that.

Lol, IS is like the most active tribe around, they might have inactive people inflating their tribeland but I would say they are the least fitting example...

[KeithStone]

Lol, IS is like the most active tribe around, they might have inactive people inflating their tribeland but I would say they are the least fitting example...

I say perfect example

[MrDDT]

I agree, however, if you notice how IS-BC is built. The # of actives we have will still support what we have built.

We built our city based on the tribe size of only 25 members. Even though our land extends out 90m more, we havnt used it to build up. Ive been expecting a system change this is why we have built it like this.

The biggest problem is the simple fact there is no way to plan how many actives are going to stay playing, thus you cant plan how large you should build your tribe.

I'm 100% in favor of kicking our all inactives. Unlike most tribes, IS-BC is likely one of the few tribes that will not have to worry about things outside its radius if they were to remove the inactives.

Many other tribes that hold huge areas will be dropped down to 1 man totems (25m radius) and lose all the work they have done. I dont think thats right either without some type of warning.
Which is also why I hate the current system being based off # of players in a tribe, and I dont like the idea of it being based of # of actives. There is no way to plan how many people you will have active from 1 week to the next, or worse 1 month to the next.

I think its funny that you point out Industrial Strength, yet its one of the only tribes that have enough actives to support its area.

You should point the finger at other tribes like, Pawnee, Hopi, PG, Pandemic, Audacia, DarkHand of Valor, Templars, etc. These tribes would be lucky if they have 1 or 2 active members.

[fatboy21007]

my tribes got more then 5 active, they are with me in wurm, waiting :-P. However, punishing all of us bigger tribes who has been here since the game launched is a bad idea also. I kept my tribe active for almost a year, and i can tell ya now, its almost impossible to hold 30 actives beyond 1 month. Most of the time ur left with 2-10 actives. Not are fault folks dont stick around, this is a problam that has plagued xsyon since launch and will always plague this game. So no matter if ya choose a material based system or keep the current. No one will be able to reach 30 -80 member tribes without hitin the inactive barrier. always ends the same way no matter wat. DDT got lucky when the pop started pickin up. eventually that trend dies off and then ur left with a ton of inactives, then the pop picks up again and repeats. So w/e way the devs decides ALL tribes need to be factored in and the current issues that plague all are tribes from trying to keep active.

[MrDDT]

my tribes got more then 5 active, they are with me in wurm, waiting :-P. However, punishing all of us bigger tribes who has been here since the game launched is a bad idea also. I kept my tribe active for almost a year, and i can tell ya now, its almost impossible to hold 30 actives beyond 1 month. Most of the time ur left with 2-10 actives. Not are fault folks dont stick around, this is a problam that has plagued xsyon since launch and will always plague this game. So no matter if ya choose a material based system or keep the current. No one will be able to reach 30 -80 member tribes without hitin the inactive barrier. always ends the same way no matter wat. DDT got lucky when the pop started pickin up. eventually that trend dies off and then ur left with a ton of inactives, then the pop picks up again and repeats. So w/e way the devs decides ALL tribes need to be factored in and the current issues that plague all are tribes from trying to keep active.

If a tribe cant keep 30 to 80 actives, then they shouldnt have a 30 to 80 active sized tribal area.

My problem isnt the size of the tribe, its at as tribe leader there is no way for me to plan from week to week what size my tribe will be, so I have to plan for a very very small area.

Again my tribe is built up on the fact we can keep 25 active accounts, so Ive planned my city that way. Even though we have 100+ members and maxed out at 200m radius. Nothing outside the 25 member range is built on.

If they change the system, IS is likely still going to be ok, as we have more than enough actives in game to cover this. The problem is still there, there is no way to plan from week to week what size your tribe will be.

Using a resource system instead of a # of actives, or # of players. Allows tribes large and small to plan however, they want. They know they have to upkeep X amount of resources per week to keep the tribe the size they want. Also if they want to grow, they know how many resources they will need for that size.

This resource amount isnt going to change. So if they lose 10 members out of 20, they would still have to put in the same amount of resources as before. Now they can choose to keep paying the resources of the current size, or make plans to goto a small size to support the resources they feel they can get.

[simple69]

I agree with Znaiika,

I have seen big tribes that have around 70 % inactive players , and they holding huge land.
The industrial strenght is a example of that.

lol, you been in the game probably less than a week and you make this acquisition? Please provide some evidence of this? We have 25 actively playing members right now at all times of the day as we have many EU players as well.

[Willowhawk]

lol, you been in the game probably less than a week and you make this acquisition? Please provide some evidence of this? We have 25 actively playing members right now at all times of the day as we have many EU players as well.

Not that I am taking any sides here, I'm not. But his 70% inactive player estimate would be correct if you have approximately 25 active and 100+ claimed members on your roster. Anyway I digress.

The question isn't about inactive members really, most games have tons of inactive players on their guild rosters. The question I think is "should a tribe retain max area even if the current active players base drops well below that minimum required for that area.

In a real world setting it wouldn't make much sense. And the resource idea is a bit out of context for this game in my opinion. I mean there are no states or government or landlords, so who would we be paying upkeep to? the Xsyon Gods?

Don't get me wrong, I don't care to lose land area either but I think we are trying to fix a symptom of an ongoing problem as fatboy pointed out. Probably best to leave it alone until the game can sustain a more consistent population, then these problems will most likely no longer be a problem.