Thoughts on teams (what works, why randomizing teams probably wouldn't work)
Spoiler :For a team to work well together, there has to some common expectation of the type of playing/planning the team will do. Or at least a willingness to learn and adapt to the group's expectations. This develops over time and thus it is somewhat hard to just scramble the groups up as someone suggested. I made the same suggestion when I was getting involved with sgotm, but since then I think part of the fun is working with people you know, respect, and enjoy playing with.
Of course I'm not against having different teams, since learning from others and helping others in the team learn the game is also part of the sgotm experience. There is always a need for more players as people move on to different games or real life demands.
I think having too many people on the team is difficult since it really is hard to get that many people to agree or play with a reasonable understanding of a coherent strategy. And too few loses the richness of the experience.
That makes a lot of common sense.
@ Neil - I think it is up to the captain of each team to control it and direct discussion and ensure deadlines are met. For me 10 or so players is quite manageable as long as you have some kind of direction and follow it through to the end.
@ Grifftavian - I like the culture/conquest idea. The capital cities idea could be an issue if any of them got razed or destroyed before we reached them. Also you can't control Ai wiping out other Ai before you reach them and or capturing their capitals.
My main concern would be that our capital would reach legendary status before the captured Ai cities. This would need some game testing! Interesting concept though.