As we work to get more Alliances into the Challenge Match scene, we are discovering more ways that Alliances can manage to get into disputes and be unhappy with the status quo results.
These are some ideas that would greatly improve the functionality and fairness of determining when and if a game should count or be deleted.
Please consider implementing all of these options and conditions:

- If a challenge is not accepted within 7 days, it should "time out" and disappear, generating a loss for no one.

- If a challenge is using the "start when full" setting and has been accepted but has failed to fill within 7 full days it should "time out" and disappear, generating a loss for no one.

- If a challenge sits dormant for 7 days with no active player, it should time out and close, generating a loss for no one.

Additionally, it would be helpful if one or both of the following options could be made available:

- The game automatically notifies each player through the Community Tab when the game becomes full and starts. (Due to the starts when full option causing it to drag on for many days, even many weeks in the games current state, players are caught off guard by the start of the game)

- Change "starts when Full" to initiate a countdown for the start to occur instead of starting on the spot. Everyone agrees that we'd like a countdown but because the number of hours desired wildly varries... just pick whatever suits the Dev team.

We'd also like access to more maps, including the x4 global.
Alliances would like the x4 global for Internals as well, not only challenge matches.

Additionally, many Alliance Leaders complain about not being able to send a message to all Members at the same time through the Community Tab. And I agree. Even with Discord being as nice as it is, we'd still like to be able to mass mail our members in the Community Tab.

Also if you look at Coalitions, they have an in game chat. We would like for Teams to have an in game chat too. Currently they do not. We believe this was probably an oversight.

Also the ladder is still a big issue.
We want a ladder that penalizes Alliances much less for losing.
And we want a ladder that puts Unranked teams last, not above teams who have played but lost.

There are also the two larger issues that I already presented to you privately.

Thanks!

I agree with Alliance leaders being able to have a game classified as unranked.
However, I can see problems with this too, so I did not include it.

A better solution might be an option where it can be classified as unranked if "ALL" active players in the game were to check the box in the News Feed. In a similar way that public games can be ended.