I agree with this proposal 

I agree with Mrs D.  and would also like to say that with limited crew leaders it would in-courage people to quite playing...tbh, who wants to play if they know that there chances of becoming a leader is even more slim than what they are now? I know I wouldn't want to play in a world like that.  Plus, how are you going to manage 100 PEOPLE!? lol

well on your point about how are you going to manage a hundred people, what you can have are sub crews in which some other people in the family can lead each sub crew. This in turn can give people their first taste of leader ship and prepare them for more responsibility

Larger crews + Sub crews were taken out in the past, in favor of adding Captains, which is what we now have. This whole suggestion is basically taking a step back on the scale of progress.

but if it was re-instated than wouldn't it make this a wonderful idea? providing leadership opportunities that would at the very least demonstrate to the actual CL who is capable of full leadership capabilities. This idea that has been proposed in this thread is a good one that might put an end to stagnation. The idea of sub crews might make it a better one. How is that a step back?

It's a step back as there were obviously problems with having big crews in the past, now you are wanting to implement them again. I still fail to see how putting a limit on crews would stop the stagnation in the game.

Well lets see. Bigger crew means you need to do more to prove yourself. So that will probably cause more activity in the streets and business forums and all that good stuff. For those that get passed over for promotion they might want to do something about that. Something violent. Or maybe one city has reached its limit and the GF decides he wants more crews under his command and moves on to another city and takes over/ wipes it out. Doesn't sound too stagnant to me. I know we don't, for some good reasons, like to think about what happened when people get frustrated with their station/position in life but it happens as evidenced by the recent actions of foxxy.

Also evidenced by the recent actions of foxxy, they tend to die quick. No one will usurp power if it means they will end up dead. And, what of the crew leaders that prefer small families? They will become nonexistent as each crew leader will have to cram his/her HQ full to compensate for the inability to auth more crews. Not everyone in the game likes to be cramped together in an HQ where the CL hardly knows their name.

Then I would suggest that, in that case, you do something noteworthy, or at the very least introduce your self a so that the CL would at the very least know your name as you say. Also I am of the opinion that if you come with a proper strategy then you might actually last a while.

Rogues die. It's that simple. There's not been a rogue survive in a very long time. As for introducing yourself, how exactly do you expect a CL to remember every person in his HQ if he has a massive one? That was why there were subcrews in the past and also why big crews were taken out. Half of a CL's members didn't even speak to the CL on a regular basis. I would rather have 10 members I can trust than 100 members I can't.

Currently suppose to be revising for my finals, so this is going to be a short and shit contribution to this topic:

I think that putting a limit on the number of crews is a good idea. I think that it will place cities on more of an average playing field and will fill the few families that are allowed to set up, rather than the half numbers we see today.

Someone mentioned that the same old names get authed? This is not true, there have been plenty of first time and second time crewleaders authed in the past, me being one of them.

In my eyes, I feel that the gazillion auths and the half filled families have left a slight stagnant tinge to this site, and believe that a return to the old ways of lesser crews and more family members on average per family would be beneficial.

However I leave with a final note. There is nofair way to implement this system. We cannot simply pull names out of the hat and tell them they have to disband. Nor can we simply cap the now vacant cities, as it would be an unfair to the already existing cities. The concluding point? Great idea, near enough impossible to implement it fairly.

I have had an idea. I’d be interested to know what you think.

At the moment, any city can have an unlimited number of crews. To shake things up a bit, and to limit the number of crews, how about a limit per city? For example, New York famously has five families – maybe art could imitate real life and the NY limit could be five? Las Vegas is a famous mob city – maybe 8 there? How about SL? Not too well known, could 3 be a good number?

Let’s not get hung up on numbers just now though – the idea that each city should have a variable limit is what’s important. A finite number of crews in the whole game, and competition between cities. And, of course, some cities would be more powerful than others. Alliance might be needed to topple the bigger ones. All in all, it could make life very interesting...

What do you think?

I think if you want it done go do it yourself -->  http://mafiareturns.com/war/wack.php