I was actually going to suggest something else (mentioned below), but I see a similar idea, Flexible Alliance, in the Rejected list. I can't tell why it was rejected, so:
I think it would be useful if mods could give a short explanation for why an idea is rejected. "Short" could be something like 5 words, and the mod would just have to make a single post in the thread for the rejected idea.
I think I've seen this mentioned before, but I don't see it on the To-Do List under any of the categories.
The original suggestion I was going to make - Dynamic Team Assignment: I've seen suggestions for "scenario" maps, as well as having taken an interest in mibi's Siege map in the Map Foundry. It occurred to me that it would be interesting if a game on that map could start off Free-for-all (Standard), but once a few players gain control of the fortress, they might want to form a team (not just an alliance, but a permanant Team, as in they'd win or lose together from that point on). That would really drive the gameplay towards a defense/siege feel, while allowing for the players to fight for the role they'd like to have. I see "Flexible Alliance" in the Rejected section of the To-Do list, but that topic has just one post, a vague description of the idea, and it doesn't seem to be quite what I'm thinking of.
I can think of several reasons why Flexible Alliance might have been rejected, some of which might be:
-Lack of interest from other players
-Vague description (i.e. unclear as to what the topic creator was thinking of)
-Difficult to implement
-Unwilling to implement
If the mod could've just made a quick post giving the actual reason for it being rejected, I'd know whether it was worth the time to make a formal suggestion for my idea.
Again, the point of this topic is just that it would be nice to know why some ideas are being rejected. I included my original idea to point out why the reasons would be worth knowing.