This request has been made many times now, but I will make it again:

Can the Clan membership limit be increased? I miss having huge 50-player Clans.

What is the reasoning behind the 20-member limit? Is it to keep a select few Clans from becoming too powerful?

Last Season, there were 5 very powerful Clans:
CDAG, SWEET, DICE, SPOON, and QQQ. There was plenty of room in these Clans for players to join.

So, Dan, could you make it happen?

As the leader of a start-up clan that only began this season, I, personally, like the limit.

For one, it forces you to really think about who you want to allow in.

For two, honestly, how many people are going to join that new clan that just started up the other day when the uber-clan with 40 people in it and every buff active is willing to accept them?

Finally, I find the environment to be warmer than I think it'd be if the clans were massive.

But, that's just the 2 cents of a relatively new member.

I like the smaller cap in season 2, myself.

I like the later 20-members limit.

I'd say the same as the others about its advantages, plus it forces some of us to interact to peaople out of the Clan Hall (which is a good thing. believe me.)
And it permits to choose who is joining; that's important for me.

Our favorite caveman changed that for good reasons; let us revel in His wisdom (and faults. Don't forget that) and whine about more essentially needed changes like being able to save 6 or more game-days and bug-squashing.

---

Yes, I have a dream, of electronic sheeps and linen bedsheets. But that's not the point. Or isn't it?

Here, here on all accounts. Although my own preference for Divine CaveDweller focus would be of a more ... mutated ... nature.

Awesome job with the Jokers BTW, I actually enjoy them as much as (possibly a little more than) my speed-killing midgets

Agree on the 20 cap.

---

"You saved Pineapple!"

Ah yes, the twenty member cap. Suffice to say, as a leader of a clan that started up early this Season, I'm rather ambivalent toward the limit. It slows buff progression considerably for everyone outside of (cheatingbasta- I mean, Epaphus.)

While this is annoying, it also means that I need to have a bit more communication with my members in order to coordinate things correctly, which means you are able to make very tightly knit clans.

Ramble on,
Ros out.

---

A magpie's work is never done.

Aw, Rosin, you sweet-talker--you always make me blush!

That's silly. Don't think I've ever seen the chief blush before.

---

If the world didn't suck, we'd fall off.

I think this is a great post and a really bad idea.

In one of those self-referential strange loopy ironies, the OP illustrates exactly WHY clans need to be selective. It's an object lesson. New clans take heed about who you allow to join, or you'll wind up with some effed up player no one really likes.

For clan leaders, there's an "In Case of Effed Up Player" box mounted next to the membership board. Break the glass and pull the lever, and the effed up player is ejected from the clan. It's kinda fun sometimes to sit back and watch 'em popping out the top of the clan halls, kinda like jet-propelled waffles* only with less syrup.
_____

* Mmmm--waffles!

I suggest the max number be increased to 25 or so. Nothing major.

SWEET can only support so many Sister Clans. We already have SUGAR, SPICE, and SOUR, and they're all completely filled. Besides, we'd have 100 people if Max Number was 25.

Yeah, I've seen that big lever. Couldn't ever find out exactly where the spring panel was, though, so it's been kinda difficult ejecting the ones who've been asleep for nearly a month. Sad to see 'em go, but it's also just so funny.


Anyway. Unless you've sold an elderly family member who raised you since birth (coughcoughepaphuscough ;P), then the limit does hamper the progression of Clan Buffs a bit. But that's not such a big deal any more, at least to me, though I do like pushing the little levers and watching the ciggies tumble away to wherever.

So, small clans are fine. 20-30 members is a nice controllable size, and at 20 you have the opportunity to actually interact with all your members. Or at least try.

Now I'm off, to get this cough looked at.

---

A magpie's work is never done.

Rosin: Does it have to be an elderly family member? Prices on eBay are better for the younger ones.

Anyway, a limit of 25 sounds manageable to me.

Well, it depends on if they also raised you from birth. If a younger sibling did that, you'd best keep them around for work at your own house. It'd be a much better investment that way.

The Uberklans of last season, such as (which I was a proud officer of back in the day when it was still Rockin' Into Mordor), were a bit... Well, very unwieldy and hard to manage.

I believe, however, that 25 people would be nice and manageable. It's a 25% increase to our current limit, and 50% of last season's (excluding those breaks such as when SWEET had about 100 for a week).

It might be a bitch to code though, and it'll be down the list in that case. But if it's just simply changing a 0 to a 5 somewhere, I approve.

---

A magpie's work is never done.

Disagree on 25, I'd rather it just stay how it is.

(It was CIA that used the loophole to get up to 73 members. SWEET, QQQ, and SPOON leaders knew about the exploit too, I believe, but never went above 53. SPOON, I know, never exceeded 50.)

Rosin, you're absolutely right that a 50-member clan is very hard to manage. Very hard to get everyone involved and caring and doing active things in the clan. At its most active, I would say SPOON had... hmm, maybe ten or fifteen members at most who really participated in clan life. The 20-member limit does pinch a bit, especially when you're full up and there's this Wonderful New Person you're dying to have.

But... I have to admit that would happen at 25, too.

There was a caterpillar with this specific problem around not that long ago. And we all know what happened to that one! *cue dark clouds, lightning, and a howling wolf in the distance*









Yes, yes, i know. He was added to the mass and raised with love and care to turn into Eric the butterfly. THATS NOT THE POINT.

---

"Censure acquits the Raven, but pursues the Dove." "So, that means i'm -always- innocent, right?"

Ok, so, coming very late to this debate, but having thought about it rather a lot...

I would like to state a preference for larger clans (or even unlimited clans, or, clans where the leader could set their own size limit).

I know that there were problems with large clans in Season 1, and I don't know the full details. But from what I've heard, it sounded like the problems stemmed from the fact that clans could compete for ownership of outposts (with large clans being more likely to win), and that clans-in-possession got significant gameplay advantages for their members.

Maybe I've got that wrong - if so, please feel free to clarify. But if I've understood it right ... then, since we no longer have the option for clans to wield power thus ... what would be the harm in letting them get as big as they wanted to?

I can certainly think of some advantages from a role-play perspective.

1) New members keep the clan community fresh - new personalities to play off, new ideas, new stories - it's like oxygen. But when a clan hits 20, leaders can be faced with a tough choice: hold onto their established players, or let new people in? If they opt for the former, there's a risk of things getting static. If the latter, then quiet or intermittent players, who still have much to offer, may feel obliged to leave a clan they love, "for the good of the clan".

2) Established players, if they were aware they have space to recruit, would have an extra motive to take an interest in newcomers to the island. This would lead to newcomers becoming aware they're being watched and recruited, and the whole thing would help foster a sense of audience and interest among the RP community.

3) Established clans, not ever being full, would be able to continue welcoming new members into their sub-community, and integrating them into whatever the clan's style of RP happens to be at that moment.

I guess, on the flip side, there's a risk of clans acquiring unwanted members. But this can happen anyway. Clan leaders can still be selective, even if they don't have a quota - it's just more of a conscious choice. Likewise, there's a risk of cliqueyness and sub-sub-communities forming - but this also happens anyway - especially since dwellings. That's just a feature of communities. I personally think it's more welcoming to have the freedom to say to people "sure, we've got room", and healthier for clans to be able to grow and evolve without constraint.

So I know it's been a while since this last got talked about, and opinion seemed to be against it then, but time has passed, and I'd personally would love to see the size-limit removed from clans.

What gave me away? It was the camera's, wasn't it? Damnit.

From a roleplaying perspective; the Bingo Hall needs all the inhabitants (non-consentual work-slaves) it can get

---

"Censure acquits the Raven, but pursues the Dove." "So, that means i'm -always- innocent, right?"