Piggybacking off of the previous ask about new packs: if all of the packs disbanded and no new packs formed to replace them, would that ultimately spell the end for 'Souls? Or would Admin "retire" the current pack model that seems so challenging for the primary playerbase to form/maintain and perhaps transition to something more along the lines of the loner band model? Have there been any discussions or brainstorming happening behind the scenes to see what ways leadership could be made easier?
For what it's worth, we find that scenario pretty unlikely. The lowest number of packs 'Souls has ever had was three, mostly in its earliest years. Four was the baseline norm for a long, long time, and there were years where five felt like a lot of packs. The trend over the last few years has been for fewer and larger packs, which tends to mean each pack is more stable (higher number of very longtime members, lots of worn in routines). This does mean that it's more notable when a pack disbands though.
When we had many more packs (at our peak, we had nine?? packs -- eleven made it in the yearbook that year, with two disbandments and two new packs formed), it was always sad when a pack disbanded, but it felt less like a blow to the board on the whole -- and as mentioned, people were always eager to start new packs in their wake. Even if all the packs disbanded, we don't see a reason to retire the pack formation process -- why not keep it around for when someone else wants to start a pack? In the meantime, sure, loner bands are there to be utilised. It may be that 'Souls transitions into a loner band-centric place, which somewhat resemble the simpler, classic packs of yore. We don't think there's anything wrong with that. The game has always, to some extent, changed and adapted with its players. As our playerbase continues to age, it may be that that more relaxed model of group management (loner bands) is better or more desirable, but that doesn't mean the pack model can't still work for some players who have the time/energy. We've endeavoured to simplify leadership responsibilities over the years (for example, by eliminating requirements for pack sites and encouraging leaders to delegate some tasks to members), but the most integral parts of leadership will always be time-consuming. We're not sure there's much we can do to make things easier, but as always we welcome feedback from past and current leaders if they have input or suggestions. :>