Sorry m8, but nothing is wrong with my attitude. I didn't insult anyone, nor trolled, merely stood up for my opinion, as I do now...
And just because you can't see what goal one would wanna achieve with a proposal, it doesn't make it an outcry for rule-change to make their game easier...
So in reality it goes like this:
you check a feature -> you see that the feature is highly dominated and used only by a very select few -> you make changes to widen usage by making it more accessible to everyone
I could give you a simple example:
- GE could be adjusted so hard, that only people with the highest bonuses and having enormous number of troops could use it
- Then you'd see that out of let's say 50.000 people a 100 would use it
- In this case again, you could say "hey you have the same chance, you'll use GE when you get there" and in a way you're right
- Though they probably didn't implemented GE to be played by 0.2% of the players, nor they thought that maybe after 5 years you will be lucky enough to use it, so what you do is you adjust it, this way more people can enjoy
- Oh and guess who would fight to keep it that way? EZ, those 100...
- Now the only question remains, whose interest matters more. The 100, or the 49.900 players...
It's exactly the same we talk about here. But until you "fighting to keep your place and precious privilege", in other words, for your own interests, we are trying to simply make it more accessible to more players.
About your guarantee, again with a simple example I can show you you're wrong:
I could implement a rule that no single guild could have more than 5 or even 3 (you tell me) regions in AA map.
Boom. Adopt to that...
Now I guarantee you that it would achieve the effect we're looking for. From that point there would be the very least 20-30 guilds in the map, with a probably much more fluid mix of guilds. Of course I'm not saying this should be the way, it's just a rough example. But with smart rules you CAN regulate how a feature works.