Organizational Layout - Civilian

This is what I would like to see. We have the Home Secretary who is over all the in house defenses in regards to what is the minimum required for each colony based on its current size ( I recommend size being based upon Town Hall).

The Senate is the overall Deciding body on actions of declarations of war, Peace and the direction of the Alliance. The Alliance gives directives to the Leaders who execute the will of the Senate. Senate is based upon population, 1 Senator per 10 members, odd number of members are represented by existing Senators until a 10th member is admitted to the Senate whereas a new Senator will be elected by the newly formed voting block. Senators are beholden to the voting block. The President of the Senate is the Home Secretary who is appointed by the Leaders. If there is a tie in the Senate the Home Secretary is the Tie breaker.


The Leaders appoint with the approval of the Senate the General, Foreign Minister/Ambassador, and the Home Secretary. The Home Secretary appoints 2 Governors (or more depending on the needs of the Alliance) who are assisted by 2 Deputy Governors.

The Governors duties are to inspect the member states, making sure they have the needed Armies, Defenses, and resources to protect the Alliance and support the Generals Needs to maintain a standing Army and Navy.

Holding a position of Civilian Leadership does not exclude each person from being assigned a position in the Military and be expected to serve.

The Deputy Governors are to assist in inspecting and keeping logs on the individual regions they cover. If a City is found deficient and refuses instructions to correct said deficiencies this is reported upto the Home Secretary who in consultation with the Leaders will Remove the Offender.

Currently I need Two people assigned who will help me finish the maps. I need the locations of everyone of our colonies and all of the enemies.

Broken down by

Players name
Players city name then grid location.

I like this, you got things worked out pretty well.

I want to make sure I understand all of this. We as an alliance vote on whatever the number is of Senators and they basically run the alliance. The leader appoints people based on the approval of the alliance. The home sec appoints 2 or more Governors and deputy governors who check up on the alliance. Do I have that right? Also I have a few questions. How often are Senators elected? Does the leader have a veto power to over rule the senate? Are the governors and deputy governors appointed with senate approval or does the home sec have sole authority to pick them? Who gives out the requirements that the governors are supposed to follow? I know its a lot of questions and overall I think it could be a good idea

From what I understand, and it will be ironed out, when we merged, we decided to have a senate, with 4 members each from the old GAY and the old Hetre. I believe Hard/Hell will get their own.

Switch handled all those particulars tho.

This is what I'm proposing, we create Senatorial districts with 10 alliance members. Everyone from LEader on down is assigned a District. Each Senatorial District will vote among themselves who will represent that group of 10 in the Senate. When we have odd number of Alliance Members they are assigned to currently standing SD's (Senate Districts). When 10 more members are in the Alliance a new Senate Seat is created and that district will vote on the New Senator. The length of time between elections is something I think should be discussed Alliance wide. I'm making a very detailed blueprint but I Think we need to have the the membership as a whole have some say in the makeup and have a vote by the Alliance on if this is what we want. Require a 3/4ths MAjority for this to pass. the Current Senators will stand until we have an election cycle. Then have a transition of Officers.

As for the Governors, They are appointed by the Home Secretary Because they are the HS's deputies and he/she needs to be able to trust them The Deputy Governors should be appointed by the Governors. If the Deputies fail to perform its on the head of the Governor. And the same goes for the HS.

As far as the way the Alliance titles are laid out. I think it needs to be laid out either Militarily or In a Civilian fashion. And not try and mix them on there or it will get exceedingly confusing. Again this needs to be discussed and picked apart. Either way I Want to see us grouped into groups of responsibility and not just Frontliner, Supplier or SF. Those are too vague a title and can be assigned in each military unit. That is something we can break down on the Military board.

I think the military lay out will work better

This is the Leadership overlay that I've spoken about. In this particular example there would be 6 Senators if there were 69 members there would be three Senate Districts with 12 members and three Senate Districts with 11 members. when the 70th member would join that would make the 7th Senate District.


This is the Regional Government overlay. It should be rotated 90 degrees so that it doesn't look like the Diplomat is beneath the Home Secretary but that they share similar resources. I think that the Regional diplomats in conjunction with the Deputy Governors are more than ample enough people to be Recruiters.

Great work Shastar!
May I suggest we change the word "Diplomat" to ambassador for the perspective regions b/c matters of diplomacy should go thru our diplomat/leaders and the term would be confusing for our membership for who is really the go to person! Also the term Foreign Minister would be changed to Diplomat so this doesn't get confusing and we end up thinking we have 5 diplomats!

So it looks like the deputy governors and the regional diplomats work hand in hand to work on problems and they both report to their respective higher ups. If I'm wrong please tell me (everyone else does lol). The main concerns that I have are that I think the leader should get some sort of Veto power over the senate, and about how often the senators are elected. I think that the leader should get some kind of extra power due to the fact that they have to be able to have all the embassies to be able to hold all of us. I have talked to Shastar briefly about that and it might be something that can be brought up in front of just us or in front of the whole alliance.

Currently i am a Diplomat of a small alliance well 60 members.
this alliances Leader dose of course have final say over us(members,HS ,General and Diplomat).
WE have meetings every wednesday night ( these meetings are open to the whole alliance) you are allowed to discuss anything you choose.
Now if something worth while is presented..We "the leadership" discuss if its worth while to present to the alliance as a whole.
then if said issues is found to be so...its presented to the alliances as a whole and voted on as to see if it will be implied..A majority of the alliance has to vote yes for the said implemented action to take place.
So as you see..even tho the "Leader" is just that..its more then what the leader says ..
the alliance as a whole is the true voice and if its members are happy..seems the leaderships job is much easier.
But we in "leadership " still play are roles and keep in constant communication with each other and the leader.
So with this all said..I do agree the leader should have the possibility to "VETO" a ruling of the Senate but more so..if the majority of the members of the alliance agree it should be done.

nice! i think i would be a good senator to head my district in my area. unless there is a more active player there than i am, i would volunteer for the job.