Skip to main content

Topic: alliances (Read 2381 times) previous topic - next topic

Re: alliances
Reply #15
Actually remove Alliance system then you achieve exactly the same result without needing to code anything new! The population will never be high enough to justify the need for an Alliance system.
Very bad idea, would remove large portion of political game. Nothing stops you from merging now if you want it.

@Ub3rgames will you respond to the thread? Looks like there are quite a lot of people asking for something to be done with alliance system and vcp captures.
Wouldnt count on it as after launch they dont have to communicate actively anymore (their words)
Azmoodeus Barnmere
Garbage Men

Re: alliances
Reply #16
Merging is not a solution. The vulnerability window alone makes this a terrible idea.

If merging is an option to maximize gains from a village then arguments against an alliance all benefitted has no ground.

Wildnothing's second post is accurate to what is needed. Alliance leaders, clans brought into the alliance can only be allied to clans inside that alliance (not this 6 degrees of Kevin bacon alliance system).

Since it takes two clan to create an alliance, the name is picked at that time. The two SG's who created the alliance have permissions over the alliance. New clans brought into the alliance from there on have the sg's come in at a lower rank but can be promoted.

Vcp's are captured by alliance.

Holdings say alliance and clan that owns it.
Vulnerability windows per holding are based on the owning clan.
Holdings can be transferred between clans within an alliance for the same fee it would cost to siege.

There are obviously more details to be worked out but the main point is this is incredibly doable.
85% /s

Re: alliances
Reply #17
Merging is not a solution. The vulnerability window alone makes this a terrible idea.
Good point.
  • Last Edit: June 24, 2018, 02:55:24 pm by wildNothing

Re: alliances
Reply #18
Why work on alliances and clan based content when obviously "race wars" are what we should all be doing.  Thank you ub3rgames for the brilliant game design, these "race wars" are incredibly fun.

Re: alliances
Reply #19
Why work on alliances and clan based content when obviously "race wars" are what we should all be doing.  Thank you ub3rgames for the brilliant game design, these "race wars" are incredibly fun.
I understand this was meant to be a joke but currently we do not have neither fully functional - nor clan based content/alliances nor race wars. And BTW there is no reason for them to be mutually exclusive as they both can coexist with no problems. So your "joke" makes little sense.

Re: alliances
Reply #20
bump

Re: alliances
Reply #21
Some clans do not want to war deck, for example smaller clans in alliances, why force them to be in your war if they choose to just support you for example in defences rather than offence etc.

Clans should be the main focus not alliances. This is a sandbox game.

If alliances were forced to be the main focus everyone would just allie up and create mega zergs to win at every village, sea tower and other reward activities, the game would become stale.
  • Last Edit: July 03, 2018, 10:25:54 am by xzxDJxzx Terrorize

Re: alliances
Reply #22
Some clans do not want to war deck, for example smaller clans in alliances, why force them to be in your war if they choose to just support you for example in defences rather than offence etc.
Suggestion deals with it. They can ally you for defence only for example. But such shift in allied forces will cost both sides something, as it should, and also would immediately change their status to war with attackers - again - as it should be. I see no problem here.

Clans should be the main focus not alliances. This is a sandbox game.
No problem, no one will force any clan to ally with anyone.

If alliances were forced to be the main focus everyone would just allie up and create mega zergs to win at every village, sea tower and other reward activities, the game would become stale.
Well, people that want this have already done it. Lux + BDW merged into Tard Dominion for example. So there is no way to prevent it, with the suggestion implemented or without it.

Also if you perceive village wins as a goal of ally, villages already work that way. Alliance fights together against everyone else present at a village. The only difference is, that game mechanics do not work with alliances. So there is no way of meditation points going equally to all that participated in a fight they won.

You also have to take into consideration, that I suggested village rewards to be shared between clans in alliance present at VCP. Shared, not multiplied. Shared like chaos chests are. So it's not like alliance will bring only benefits. There will be a cost too.

But good interesting arguments DJ, wish you used arguments more often in discussions like this.

  • Last Edit: July 03, 2018, 11:00:31 am by wildNothing

Re: alliances
Reply #23
If this gets done, then the game needs defensive pacts where you can fight ffa at village, not help in offensive sieges, but only be allowed to kill without turning grey on defensive sieges.

Also needs similar options for mercs as UW had. You can sign up for mercenary duty for an amount of gold, but not necessarily a fracture of the siege cost. If the siege is won, mercs get the payment, else they don't. It's mercs problem if they turn grey/red by this or not.

UW had that mechanic half assed, because they didn't want to implement an extra menu where the sieging clans can set up a payment option for mercs. This could be done properly, using any market to set up siege contracts. Mercs offer, hosts accept.


Re: alliances
Reply #24
If this gets done, then the game needs defensive pacts where you can fight ffa at village, not help in offensive sieges, but only be allowed to kill without turning grey on defensive sieges.
I don't understand. What do you mean? Sounds like the same thing DJ said and I just answered. So you ally only for defensive siege, then de-ally. You don't need any additional mechanic (defensive pact) for that. But cost of allying and de-allying should be significant enough to prevent people from abusing this.

Also significant cost of allying and de-allying will make sure that alliances actually mean something and are rather long term and not just a tool to exploit game mechanics (avoid consequences of actions, quickly allying to capture a village, etc). TBH yours and DJ's example look a little like that. Would still be possible though. For a solid price.

Mercs mechanics are a separate topic. I would like to see it implemented at one point too.
  • Last Edit: July 03, 2018, 11:40:26 am by wildNothing

Re: alliances
Reply #25
bump

  • SoethThoth
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: alliances
Reply #26
can I join one of these alliances?

                                                      And Ub3rgames said; It is the way it is, and it was. 8)

Re: alliances
Reply #27
I would like to see Enclave vs Server (insert your clan here). Would be neat. Shadowbane did it as well. Did it do it first?

  • SoethThoth
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: alliances
Reply #28
I would like to see Enclave vs Server (insert your clan here). Would be neat. Shadowbane did it as well. Did it do it first?

did you just ignore my question?

                                                      And Ub3rgames said; It is the way it is, and it was. 8)

Re: alliances
Reply #29
I would like to see Enclave vs Server (insert your clan here). Would be neat. Shadowbane did it as well. Did it do it first?

did you just ignore my question?

I must have, but not in order to hurt you. Which clan are you with?