ORRRRRR you put the limit to 1 hour and 50 people quit because their team is always getting crushed, which is better for his wallet?
I think that most of the people who wanted to change back to 1 hr don't really buy this. Even the logic implied in "their team", suggest that if players in great numbers are upset "their" team is getting squashed, those players mustn't be switching sides often or at all in the first place, if they are on the low side being bashed constantly, right? Wasn't the ENY system supposed to "fix" the whole numbers thing? If it was, and yet the same reason was used to implement the 12 hour rule, then ENY didn't work and failed, right? Yet it's still here isn't it.
BTW, even with the very few hours I put in the MA now, I still see the whine "the rooks/knights/bish are being teamed up on" on a pretty regular occasion, and can prove that with screen shots of text with corresponding clipboard numbers that show that to be in fact true in terms of a numbers imbalance. This being the case, neither ENY NOR the 12 hour rule is a perfect, or even satisfactory solution to said problem, at least in the opinion of some, if not many.
A simple solution that would have satisfied everyone would have been to say "We're going to revert to the 1 hour due to popular demand by enough members for 1 week/whatever, and then post the data showing the numbers regarding team balance". Instead all that was done was HT gave vague reasons, not even any numbers in the air, no numbers at all in fact. What would be the harm in satisfying BOTH sides of the argument, by saying that there will be a trial run both ways over the course of a couple weeks or a month, and the data posted showing the result?
Remember the thread that said "+1 if you want the 12 hour rule changed to 1 hour"? It was only up a day, and had 4 pages and nearly 50 responses. Had it been left alone for a week, I bet it would have climbed into the triple digits. So, it isn't just 12 members, the "Muppet show and friends" (get it, I've waited years to use that one) that were complaining and wanted change, or at least an acceptable (to them) explanation. That could have easily, simply, and fairly been taken care of by a short test of the 1 hour being implemented, and HT saying "see, I told you so", or "perhaps the player base tendancies have changed, and 1 hour or 4, 6, whatever can be implemented for the time being". That would have = NO, or very FEW players upset, and been a huge PR win overall. Instead, defeat snatched from the jaws of victory. Just my opinion.
