Should alliances be able to hold rosters up to 300 members???

Agame86

Comments

shadow_lurker22

That would be way too much to keep up with I mean that's 30 war groups no thanks

Terra

Why tho? 30 is sufficient to keep a alliance. 10 for each bg. Why 300? This isnt Sparta

Fhfjghhggggjfhfjg

Running an ally with 300 members would be way too much work

Neotwism

I would like to see the members increased to max 32. That way u can give ppl a day off if they r busy or something comes up. It's not a huge deal though since my alliance isn't extremely competitive in AW. The first 30 get to koin and the others miss out on AQ or AW

unknown

This content has been removed.

Hidden_Knight

30 Is fine, Having 300 members completly disrupts AQ, AW and alliance objectives. It would be way to hard to run something that large for one guy and a handfull of officers to handle.

Lvernon15

Wow, this is on the same level as trading in terms of how bad an idea it is

LeNoirFaineant

LOL

LeNoirFaineant

Have you got 270+ guys who want to join your alliance?

unknown

This content has been removed.

NEO_mr_Anderson

Honestly, 40 would be nice.
You keep the 3 bgs in AQ/AW, with 10 ''backup''
Some dont like AQ, or, AW, with 10 over, you would have reserve.

Aryl

Why tho? 30 is sufficient to keep a alliance. 10 for each bg. Why 300? This isnt Sparta

TP33

As an alliance leader it’s hard enough sorting out war placements, but 1500 champions to sort through individually and move about, you need a MODOK sized brain to do that