In another thread it was brought up that some people do want to play in smaller clan. Be it for different reasons, some want a small elitist group, others want to hang out with just a couple of buddies or some brothers just want to play with the two-three of them. A shared chat functionality for these small fish to form a school would help them a lot.
The whole alliance system might need a revisit though. Instead of having all clans declare their allies, a system similar to parties would make more sense:
- Clan leaders can create an alliance through the clan npc(or a specialized one).
- Every member of a clan within alliance has additional alliance tag next to clan name or has the clan name replaced by alliance tag. (This is important for both players inside an alliance in case of war and for those players fighting against the alliance).
- Clan leader of the clan in lead of alliance can invite other clans to join the alliance at any time through the clan npc.
- Clan leader of the clan in lead of alliance can kick other clans at any time through the clan npc.
- Clan leader of the clan in lead of alliance can promote another alliance clan into lead through the clan npc at any time.
- Clan leader of a clan part of an alliance can remove his clan from alliance at any time through the clan npc. If the leaving clan was leader of the alliance, then the remaining oldest clan will be turned into alliance leader.
- Every player part of a clan within an alliance can see full alliance chat at any time.
One of the following:
- Every player part of a clan within an alliance can turn to alliance PvP mode, in which his/hers attacks will hit any player which is in a clan that has war declared on by any clan within the alliance.
- If war is declared on clan part of an alliance, then war will be declared on all clans within that alliance and if a clan within an alliance declares war, then allied clans will automatically have war declared as well.
Some explanation for the design choices. This system would promote clans to integrate with each other and bring players closer together by letting all players socialize with other clans in alliance. Some of the small clans could thus become friends and decide to merge clans.
The choice of having all the actions go through npc is just so that clans couldn't jump in and out of alliance in middle of battle. Yet there should be no delays, since sometimes you need to get things done and waiting around is unnecessary annoyance. Think of a situation where the leading clan in alliance has done some crap. The obvious solution is for the rest of the clans to retract from alliance and form a new one, just as players would form a new party. If delays were imposed on players in such situations it could lead to unnecessary drama. Similar to avoiding delays there should also be no currency costs imposed, as these could also lead to additional frustration in times of where **** has hit the fan and let's be honest, this kind of restructuring always takes place when **** has hit the fan and emotions are running high.
The leading clan should have no additional benefits or features over the member clans other than being able to invite or kick member clans. Instead of word leading you should think of along the lines of serving clan, who has to deal with paperwork. It would even be better to refrain from using word leader anywhere in the alliance terminology. The reasoning behind one serving clan is that, the structure and behavior of a clan should come from social interaction and creating of own rules between players, rather than trying to solve it from the developer side. Some alliances might get set up with one strict alliance leader, where leading clan says how things are. Other clans might set up as equals and wait for approval from all member clans before the serving clan sends an invitation. Players are smart. Trust your players.