Arbitrary rules are bad game mechanics mmkay!

You seem to fail to understand that coalitions exist outside the game mechanics. All your suggestion would do is increase the number of alt owned alliances in the game. Infinite isk doesn't just mean infinitd ships, it also means infinite plexes.

that's the beauty of this it does not limit your friends it just limits your ability of control. now people will have to trust some one else to do their bidding. more difficulty collecting easy isk from 64/32 moons etc etc.... if that isk driver is limited you remove the supper alliances that can afford a million titans....

You don't seam to understand that the increase on the number of alliances in a coalition will increase internal issues to any coalition. Human nature will break us apart. in todays coalitions one member of the coalition really owns the big moons the rest are just more cannons. in the future coalitions you will either have to collect rent on some one elses moon (people get tired of paying rent to a moon they have sov too eventually) or let them have those precious moons....


Trust me coalitions will trim big time..... I have seen it thats how oldies did it. When they had a good moon but had no industry they would bring a bigger industry ally to do the work... Turns out big industry ally learned how to live on 0.0 and took over the region eventually example from CDC and PURE....

+1
This is fundamentally true.

Large empires should have a risk of crumbling under the weight of corruption, and corruption is always about having intermediaries to controlling the ISK or taxes income.

The current income and tax control for alliance is "too perfect" in the game right now., which is fundamentally what causes the current issues.

Not really. i have occupied 0.0. and 100 man corp can make a living in a single system barely. realistically you need at least 50 active members per system. spread through different timezone to be comfortable.

Say a 10 corp ally has 10 systems then ideal alliance will be 500 man. ideal coalition will stretch a region so say 5-6 of these alliances.

There will be a long incubation period until all the alliances break up they initially will start paying rent to larger guys eventually forming their own coalitions and turning on the BIG 2

No, the internal pressure will remain the same because the number of actual persons involved will remain the same. Remember that the rank and file of these coalitions don't care about this moon or that moon. All they know is that SRPs are funded, so they go out to fight. The systems with the big moons will still go to the coalition coffers, whether those moons are controlled by one or one hundred alts. Since not every system has one of these big moons, there will still be plenty of space for those not mining a big moon.

Oh, and by your suggestion, no one would be able to pay rent on a moon they don't have sov on, so rental contracts will switch to who is allowed sov in a system. Flesh out your idea more and try to spend a bit more time on where the loopholes will be. If I can find loopholes big enough to fly a carrier through, guaranteed someone more experienced than I will find the others.

most of the coalition members dont even hold sov dude. look at the map and their rental agreements they show their own coalition members just go down the list

Okay, so find me one single CFC member who holds no sov.

Okay, so find me one single CFC member who holds no sov.

Just look at this map and weep.....
http://dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Verite/influence.png

count the big uns using your ten fingers.... what % of space is it just the top 10... There is alliances that have more star systems than your highsec npc governments.... skewed much?

Which is not what I asked. You are stating that coalition members hold no sov. I am asking you to prove it.

Li3 disbanded, they're part of the bastion now. Same with Gents.

You do not understand how coalitions work, yet you think you can somehow break them up. Apparently by forcing people to work closer together.

How does forcing an alliance, which lives in one system, to work with it's neighbours in order to get access to three of the four outposts, logistical routes, ice belts and enough space to actually rat in NOT force them to work closer together?

There would also NOT be any of the other things you seem to think would happen, since the same people would lean multiple holding alliances...

How does forcing an alliance, which lives in one system, to work with it's neighbours in order to get access to three of the four outposts, logistical routes, ice belts and enough space to actually rat in NOT force them to work closer together?

There would also NOT be any of the other things you seem to think would happen, since the same people would lean multiple holding alliances...

Yes but now multiple alliances are needed to hold a few constellation instead of one alliance to hold several regions.. Still dont see this??

And yes you are right alts can hold multiple corps... how long will that last? how long ?

Also in the midst of the chaos corps with greed in mind will slip in the bulk of this small alliances and that is where the cracks begin. Short term it will happen as you say. Long term on the other hand it will break up....

PS: one more thing... Also consider the sphere of influence. the sphere of influence will start to shrink as the ability of a mega alliance to move through several regions gets impeded. No more are they able to jump bridge to jump bridge until they are on the fighting front. there is a million things that will get complicated by this the end result is to make it so that more people are in charge of less space in 0.0 hence introducing the possibility of aggression towards once friends soon to be enemies...

How would this stop pl/goons from just creating an alliance called goons/pl holding with 10 alts in it all in different corps to hold 10 systems with good moons. rinse and repeat till all systems with good moons are controlled by the same people.


All this would do is have all the bad space that is currently under someone's sov but unoccupied not be owned by anyone. Then you will see how bad most of null is for stuff.

How long will that last?
now its just easier to take down space how often will they find out their sov is being challenged?
once every few weeks they refuel?
Now alts will have to maintain rather then 1 corp... You still don't see this how many towers have you had?
how many of them have you had get reinforced?
would you agree to logging in on your 3 alts every day? or three alts in multiple accounts?
how many accounts will this require?

Again adding to that level of difficulty and increasing the need of support increasing the chain of command....

Danika Princip here is the basic idea.... you work separate long enough that every one is on their own... all of a sudden that alliance 3 regions over is not worth the pain of jumping through the jump bridges of 5 different alliances and jumping through 5 0.0 gates to get there. Now your supper caps cannot concentrate in one alliance that has cynos on every tower on their entire side of the galaxy and they now cannot easily move from tower to tower. You also forget all the alliances that get forged in lowsec or wh space. They will be more likely to challenge a 500 man alliance even one in a very very very large coalition vs now where blob is constant. Also this spreads the benefits even among the existing coalitions...