I see things a little more ahead and since I am neither MS nor Renovation I can give an exempt opinion
is natural of any clan / ally seek domination, fun is not the goal itself, but the process
when some ally gets big enough to keep in check this makes new players want to be part of it, increasing inequality (after all everyone wants to be on the winning side and over time I've seen many players change sides to maintain their status)
when to the specific Chronos I have no doubt that there are enough players to bring down the MS, the problem is that they fight each other
but let's say a great alliance happens and overthrow the MS, and then?
Will the server split again?
after some time of reign another covenant would have to arise to repeat the precess?
the problem in itself is the great centralization
1 a strong clan appears - 2 this clan takes power - 3 players wanting status / loot seek to join that clan - 4 the server is dominated - 5 players who are not of the alliance dominant dissatisfied with this get together and take power
I have seen this cycle repeat itself several times, there is no right or wrong side
all clans have a share of players misconduct in the game, with no exceptions
in relation to siege of Chronos
both me and other players like Renovation we stopped participating in sieges (something I realized), MS can have all the castles, let them lose 2 hours alone in the end even if they win they will lose, because the game will not be fun, if someone want to stay 2 hours serving of punching bag for the fun of the MS okay
I like the sieges, but under current conditions it is unfair, I finally showed the cycle, the problems and the solution would be players divided into smaller clans where most castles would have some pvp, but this only lasts until one side lose and seek allies to help and the cycle repeats itself