Currently, we have an unpleasant situation in this game.
The top alliances are ruling the game and bullying the smaller alliances. They can do this because they don't fight each other.
Before we had 2 big parties, which were enemies. That was much better for the smaller alliances.

Ideas to solve the problem:


-  the top 10 alliances are not allowed to have NAPs or PACs with each other. Existing NAPs are automatically canceled by the system each day when both alliances are in the Top 10.

- each alliance is limited to a maximum of 5 NAPs and 5 PACs


-  the server should charge a tax on production from each member of an alliance, depending on how big the alliance is.
   for example:

   0 - 100 members:   no tax
   101 - 200 members:  5% tax
   201 - 300 members:  10% tax
   301+ members:  15% tax

This would limit the power of the big alliance and provide a fairer game.

ADDON:
 

I would also propose these changes:
 

- players cannot change alliance every 7 days, but only every 6 months


-  all 3 accounts of one player ( Terran, Xerj and Toss ) must be in the same alliance  or cannot be in different alliances.

As you know? it's a Russian game. 100 Russian powerful players have a player council. They are pushing for changes that are being introduced into the game. All are designed to strengthen their position, and increase income from the game. The game loses playability, and is concreted.
Small players can only grow by paying more and more hydarians...

Hi,
I doubt its gonna help to small alliances much.
1. Big alliance can split on smaller alliances and continue bullying. They may even split to an alliances smaller than the one they are going to attack.
2. NAPs and PACs - it may limit amount of alliances performing joined attack, so it may help to a single target, i.e., player without alliance. And even in case of single player, smaller alliances without NAP still can target different planets.
3. Taxes - again, alliances can split, so it does not matter.
4.

Some people are not even playing so long. Let's say, you are not satisfied with your current alliance. Instead of waiting for 6 month, one will start the game ab ovo, or quit it completely.
5.

In which way it is going to help to small alliances?

Reimund, I see plenty of small alliances popping up everywhere? Where is the evidence that the larger alliances are bullying them? Their networks are growing and many are alongside large alliance networks, there is bound to be conflict sometime...

----I mean no offense at all, but here is why I personally don't agree with your suggestions:
 
 Freedom of the players choice shouldn't be restricted in any way, and the benefits / outcomes of those choices should not be restricted either.
No-one should be told which alliance they can or cannot join, regardless of accounts or otherwise. And why should members of a big alliance have to pay more in tribute? New players join alliances too. So they would then have to pay 15% because they choose to join a large alliance? More cuts to resources for those players to make it even harder to get going??? They don't need to buy crystal to grow, they need to make good choices. The alliances are not stopping the growth of small players. ( In fact, the big alliances have joined together in the past against administrative changes to bring benefit to ALL players here... not just for themselves. So there is power in the players hands via large alliances)
 
 Freedom to choose and act is what makes this game fun. Alliances should be allowed to benefit themselves and their members; to pact with whomever they wish. There are still many large alliances that have no pact with other big alliances, and lots of disputed territory. And players whom choose not to join a large alliance or to fly solo, that is their choice too and they will learn and play the game accordingly. It's more about what we do with our situation, how we adapt and learn, not whether a big alliance is friends with another big alliance... who cares about that? We have what we have, and they have what they have... no matter the benefits or otherwise. 
  It doesn't have to be 'Fair'...nothing is fair. Some of us like it that way.  ;)
 
They are just my own thoughts on it, though.