Personally, I don't favour the limits imposed on us to maintain. I feel less and less of a clan founder and more as a member of my own clan. If I'm not allowed to manage my own clan in the hierarchy that I want, that's unacceptable. Many people approach me on this topic with reasonable misconceptions, to which they usually assume that once large clans arrive small clans will dissipate. This is never the case, and I hope people stop arguing that small clans will not exist. If you want to make a small clan you can, even if the number is unlimited or larger. My clan for example is stopping at 150 members, and we arranged this number before the limit was set. This is set in stone, we can be intimate in the same regard if we chose to. We have the freedom to do that, and if big clans exist you may still have your intimate ones. Clans have different purposes though, some are matchmaking, some are for PvE and some do tournaments. Each clans should be different and not be normalized, give more freedom to the owners so that we may. Firstly, I fully understand Bungie's argument to keep clan numbers low, it isn't an awful argument, they say they want members to know each other. Even with 100 members I find it difficult to know each one and be a close knit like they say. This is possible but I still see little difference when you compare it to big clans. In big clans you will find friends too, and make your small groups within that big group. This is very similar, I can be friends with 100 out of 500 in my clan and still be happy. So, with that, Bungie's only argument thus far, I see broken. Secondly, "I don't know why you would need 500 people all to play with at the same time" - I've gotten this response many times. Well to that I parallel, why would you desire to play with 100 at the same time? We both know it's impossible in Destiny. On my Xbox 360 friendlist, the maximum is 100. I have 100 friends right now, and usually 20 are online at peak, and 0-5 during sleeping hours. They're playing different games, but the way I see it with 100 you wouldn't have a huge selection of friends to play with. Would you rather have 100 or 10 people? Sometimes those 10 might not even want to do matchmaking, they might want a strike. Not everyone's needs can be met, although with more people this seems simpler. Additionally, private lobbies have been hinted to be evolving into Destiny. Will tournaments be easier to prepare for and have more participants with more or less members? To which I would assume, more. What about weekly training? What about clan battles? What about any mode in general? You guessed it. Thirdly, "Large clans would dominate PvP" - How is that possible, my good friends, when only 5 of your friends can be in matchmaking at the same time? I would rather think the members are the ones who dominate rather than the clan, as it should be. I might have a different opinion if, for example, there were a clan leader board. If there were a clan leader board then still I see no difference, personally. 500 members maximum vs 100 would still be scored the same, just more members to incorporate. As a last reminder... This isn't a battle of which is better, but different clans have different purposes. If I wanted to host tournaments, it would be more ideal for my clan to have a larger active player count. Also, be a little empathetic. I don't want to have to kick 50 members from my clan personally, and my alliance owner has 1,500 members. He will have to end up kicking 1,400 members or end up having to personally message 1,400 of them to leave main clan and join subclan #9, #13, #2. That's an extreme amount of work just to begin with, also personally I wouldn't enjoy being told to leave and join the secondary clan.

Your purpose for a clan may not be the same as everyone elses, so while the limitation may not be restrictive to you it is to other people. In essence all it is doing is splitting clans into groups with different clantags. We have 260+ members and one forum. why should we be forced to wear different tags, and split into different groups for something that was advertised as a social game from day one? Long story short, just because its something that doesnt negatively affect you is no reason to deny change to people who are impacted by it. What difference would it make to you if the clan cap is raised? None. What difference would it make to social clans with higher member counts? A world of difference.

"Your purpose for a clan may not be the same as everyone elses, so while the limitation may not be restrictive to you it is to other people." What purpose would require a clan of ridiculous size?

Again your view of "ridiculous size" may be different to other peoples views, and your view is in no way more or less valid than anyone elses. I cant speak on behalf of others, but in our particular case we're focused on bringing a set of players from a specific age group, region and platform together. We aim to give them a social hub where they can find like minded players and form fireteams on the fly, or plan out strikes/raids etc in advance. Its a place to share strategies, media and war stories. For those reasons if nothing else more is indeed merrier. Again should you choose to keep to a small group of clan members well known to each other, more power to you. A change in the clan member cap would impact you not at all. I dont expect this to have any affect on you at all by the way. You seem to be set in your views, and utterly unwilling to see this from anyone elses perspective. Thats fine. Im not seeking your approval. Bungie on the other hand have a large diverse community and lone wolf, fire team or "ridiculously sized" alliance, our voices all carry the same weight within it.

I'm (clan admins) not trying to create the strongest clan, we want to play with people from our time zone, a nation of australian guardians is just what I want