I have several suggestions:
As we've been discussing in LTXVI forum I think it'd be really nice to open a vote to limit the alliance size in FFA-diplomacy games. The reason is, in general, the larger the alliance, the easier to win and this makes the game less fair and less fun (even for the winning large alliance). I guess we had limited the team sizes to 6 in LTXV. Why not do the same with ffa games? There will be a major difference from team games of course. Unlike team games alliances in ffa games will still be dynamic as long as no alliance grows above max # of members allowed. Of course once we limit the alliance, we should also limit the winner to one alliance only to avoid collaboration between two large alliances.
My other suggestion is about the # of games. Right now we usually have two simultaneous games: LTex in which new players can always join and another actual game (either diplomacy ffa, team, or no-diplomacy ffa). LTex is very different so if you want to play a real game and the game had just started or you died early in the game, you have to wait several months to be able to play another one. Also, I think this makes us lose a lot of potential new players. I suggest even when the active game is going on, we should always have another game to signup with preferably a different style (ffa, team, no-diplomacy) than the ongoing game as some players have time to play multiple games at the same time. Since I am not sure how many players might be interested in the 2nd game (maybe 5, maybe 50) I think it'd be nice to start those games with less players (e.g. as soon as 10-15 players sign up) as the point is not to wait long. And, after 10-15 players joined the 2nd game and it started, we can then open a 3rd game and start it as soon as another 10-15 players join, and so on...When the 1st game with 30 players ends, another large game can start. But having a smaller real game (not LTex) that is always available to sign up and that starts without much waiting allows players who missed the deadline or who died early in the current game to avoid long waiting periods, and I believe that way we will also gain more new players.
edit:
I have more suggestions regarding diplomacy in the game. Right now, when you meet with another nation for the first time, the default status is war. This causes problems (undesired war declarations and unit teleports) while forming alliances.So, I propose the default status to be peace. Besides, right now the contact time is 0 turns so we can't create alliances without many diplomats. Both can be also solved with a better solution: when your ally allies with someone, you should also automatically be allied with that person, which will also reduce the # of required diplomats/embassies to form a 6 player alliance from 15 to just 5. Also, when your ally establishes embassy with someone else (friendly or enemy), you should also automatically establish embassy with that person. Right now you have to keep asking your ally to provide information to you.
Kryon
Reply to suggestion 1 and a third suggestion
The actual alliance limit in LTXV was 15.
See http://longturn.org/ltxv-team-...
6 was just a suggestion.
I would prefer to vote the max alliance size for each game at the start of that game. This would allow greater variety than fixing one limit for all games. This applies to team games and diplomacy games but not to FFA-no diplomacy which have already been fixed as single player victory games.
An added suggestion -
I would like to change the way we talk about the 3 kinds of game, and have the diplomacy settings fixed to match.
Team games always have team diplomacy.
Lone Wolf games (FFA no-diplomacy) always have no diplomacy.
Wolf Pack games (FFA with-diplomacy)always have diplomacy.
The current policy is to carry over the settings from one game to the next. This means we have to re- vote the diplomacy settings every time. I think the kind of game chosen should automatically have the appropriate diplomacy setting.
voting
I agree that voting for the max alliance size every game would bring more variety. I've just found mrsynical had created a vote for limiting alliance sizes in LTXIII (http://longturn.org/ltxiii-tea...). In any case, back then, things were different, game type votes and diplomacy votes were separate, now we have 3 specific game types with fixed diplomacy types (as kevin551 mentions). As he says, once the game type is voted, voting for diplomacy becomes redundant. Also, if we have multiple games going on simultaneously as I suggested (1 large game + 1 or more smaller games), then we can have all three type of games at the same time. Maho what do you think of always having a small pregame open for left-out players? That'll require more of your time but I really think it'll make our community grow faster.
Kryon
but such pregame always
but such pregame always exists - ltex
regular LT not LTex
As I mentioned, I am talking about regular games which does not allow new players after the game starts, not experimental LTex. If you miss the start of a regular game or you die early and if you want to play a regular game, not LTex, you have to wait several months.
Ok, ok, but now - ltex is
Ok, ok, but now - ltex is different from LTXVI only by name, and by fact that you can join anytime :). Of course - I can add new functionality anytime (and I will do it soon), but I don't understand why ppl are so scary playing ltex.
Anyway - I will take it into account, and launch next "big" LT soon.