Okay, so basically I feel like there are too many districts right now for the number of players in the game, and since districts are here to stay I figured why not just do a simple revamp instead of anything drastic.

3 Regions.

Western USA / Mid USA / Eastern USA

Each region has 3 major cities which now are the districts.

We go from 15 districts to 9 which I feel is a much easier number to manage and can obviously go up as more people join families/the game.

Is there any reason this wouldn't work? Don't want to flesh it out too much if there's an obvious negative I'm not thinking of. Please respond.

I don't see a huge negative to this. But I will point out what came to mind right away when I thought about it.

There is a legacy with each city. Things people can remember or relate to about a time when they were in a certain city and they enjoyed themselves. Like if they served a great friend or leader in a certain city. Or maybe they were a hand, Cl or GF in a particular city. I consider it important to people to have a place they can feel and remember those times. It would be like losing a part of themselves or a part of history if the districts were no more.

The other thing is that most districts have at least 1 CL or GF in them currently so changing this would cause some serious shifting around and could lead to death over turf. 

For those two reason's I'm personally against it. Not a terrible idea though. Thanks for bringing it to the table it's always nice think about these things.

There is a legacy with each city. Things people can remember or relate to about a time when they were in a certain city and they enjoyed themselves. Like if they served a great friend or leader in a certain city. Or maybe they were a hand, Cl or GF in a particular city. I consider it important to people to have a place they can feel and remember those times. It would be like losing a part of themselves or a part of history if the districts were no more.

The same could be said when we lost New Orleans; St. Louis even. 

I'm not sure the reason why we went to districts other than to promote auths, have the game grow and eliminate the stacking of cities. In a sense it allowed users who haven't ever had the chance to lead, the opportunity to because there was so much space in the world. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that reason. 

To the suggestion at hand.

Originally I was a supporter for the change to districts simply because it allowed growth. When it was introduced the game was at high activity levels. I think the assumption was that it was going to continue to grow and so on. The user base was going to continue to get larger and so on. While it may have, I don't think we ever reached a point to fully occupy every single district. I cannot recall a single time every district had a GF and two crews under it. I remember times where city's had five districts but thats something else entirely.

I fully agree that something needs to be changed. We simply do not have the user base to fully occupy every city. Instead of recycling back to the old cities, why not try regions. 

I just wonder if this is going to make it so its continuously the same people in bold then? I mean it would be an excuse to never give anyone an opportunity once again.

Although in some regards we do go down that road even with districts.

I am on the fence about this truthfully.

That has to be the largest I've ever seen it, and supposedly according to you, even more, coming on the way? Not sure I see where the growth is, just more leaders because people are feeling the need to fill up every district. 

Forcing people into fewer cities is a problem that I hadn't thought about, but the fact that the game is currently giving a bunch of people families without the numbers to sustain them isn't exactly what I'd use to combat the idea. I could see the largest negative being that it will make it easier to control every area for a power group, but outside of that I still see no overly large issue with making the game adapt to its user base count.

Most people buy a 40 man HQ Esther as there are defence benefits with these.

A while back before the last group was in power, there was a group of leaders that tried to convince people to drop their HQs to a 30 man HQ to spread the people about a bit more. Squishy kindly set it so that the 30 man HQ held the same benefits as the 40 man HQ defence wise. I would suspect that these changes are still in place?

If not, I'm sure he'd be open to arranging the same if it meant all leaders were moving to 30 man HQ and thus allowing for there to be more leadership choice with full/fuller HQs instead of several half empty HQs.

As for the OP, I dont feel that amended the District/Region situation does any good to the game tbh. Its simply a cosmetic change that wouldn't necessarily have the desired effect. As someone else mentioned, we previous lost two cities en route to making the current district situation and tbh most users weren't too pleased at the time with that change as we didnt believe it was a necessary change, down the line you can see how it could be a positive benefit having this current system IF the leadership would allow for it to be used in the manner its meant for; i.e. each district is owned and run ONLY by the leaders in that district.

Far too many times we have Godfathers in a District that are answering not only to other Godfathers in their City, but outside their City too.