The core problem with Alliance (and it's cousins) won't change without serious intervention.
That is, it wasn't designed, at it's heart, to deal regularly with large numbers of higher-level characters, and it starts to break down around 15th-20th level or so. Well, it was- but that was by killing them off before they stayed there too long.
It works great up to then. After that, between the effective level-up of mass magic item production and the stacking effects of so much build on a character...things get overloaded. We're in a system where death is a slap on the wrist, the rate of characters perming drops off as a chapter gets more experienced characters (rather than risk increasing with level, it tends to -decrease- on average).
Give me a game where the first death is free, the second one hits a floor of 5% survival at 20th+, and start burying more PC's in the graveyard. The game will scale itself back down by high-level attrition and the "power gap" will become a far lesser problem.
Give me a game where they aren't afraid to obliterate magic items and rip rituals to bits, along with dropping the number of "damage by magic only" NPC's to needing nearly all silvered weapons instead. The game is full of economic inflation. Destroy more stuff and get the economy back to more coin and less magic item trade. There should be cases where PC's are afraid to pull out the magic, instead of magic being the be all and end all. When we have a system where people would fear an effect that destroyed all their magic items more than obliterating the character, something has gone very wrong.
My first event had ONE, count it ONE magic-to-hit monster in it. The BBEG lich that was the main baddy of the entire weekend. While I don't think we'll ever get back to that...having a system that requires a huge array of defenses, immunities, and what not on NPC's to provide a challenge to equally or more so blinged-out PC's tells me that the overwhelming pile of said magic bling is part of the problem, and that actively destroying parts of that pile on a regular basis is part of the solution.
Give me a game where the chapter runs multiple campaigns rather than one, where characters in one campaign cannot be run in the other unless a month of "travel time" occurs (in which case the character is unable to play in either game until they elapse), and a similar effect happens if the character travels out-of-chapter. It'd encourage people to play events with more, different characters rather than concentrating them all on a single one- along with concentrating all of their build and blankets on a single PC, also. Characters wouldn't have a massively accelerated gain from chapter-hopping, while ones that stuck to a single campaign would be unaffected. Likewise, with multiple campaigns you'd have people using multiple characters even at the same chapter over a given course of time- again, reducing the rate of gain and splitting extra build across multiple characters for a lower APL.
Honestly? It's the fear of destroying things that is a huge part of the "Why does this suck?", and the system that gets over that fear is the one that's going to take that step ahead. When NERO had it's latest convulsion of chapter losses (WAR and Cinci, plus North Coast), WAR went to Accelerant's rules system, Cinci is building their own from scratch, NC simply closed...and I see that as a sign that they not only thought the organization was bad, but the rules as well.
And Alliance isn't too far from it's pre-split roots.