Restrict the Alliance Ending and Ally Ring Aspect

Note: We all get 2 v 1'ed to the death or even over 10 people on us. Please put restrictions on alliances and politics so pros who actually know how to win can win without getting attacked by dirty players.

Exhibit 1:


I allied 2 people throughout the whole game. I help them win and fight off all the other people. Then I get betrayed by one of my allies. Its all cool here. I'm going to beat him anyways, at least I thought.

Ideas and Suggestions
Restrict the ending alliance option. Make it so that they cannot betray an ally who they have allied for more than 10 turns. It is very frustrating when allies betray you late game to kill you.

Exhibit 2:


Oh crud a 2 v 1.

Ideas and Suggestions
Make it so that players cannot gang up on players so easily. Implement some restriction on the amount of enemies one can have at once especially if they were allies for more than 30 turns.

Exhibit 3:


They think its okay to betray.

Ideas and Suggestions
Let it be known and discourage dirty playing. Its so cheap its not even funny. I know its common knowledge but some noobs don't get it.

Exhibit 4:


Ideas and Suggestions
Make an SP deduction for betraying allies. Some players feel that it is okay and beneficial to betray allies. Please deduct SP for this because it seems profitable to players who conspire against their allies.

Please give your support to fix these issues with the alliance part of this game.

Absolutely not. Alliances are always of convenience.

Next time don't ally with a player who can obviously back-stab you massively.

Written by International, 04.08.2015 at 04:41

Absolutely not. Alliances are always of convenience.

Next time don't ally with a player who can obviously back-stab you massively.

Should have seen turn 30. I was the master of the northwest and northeast. The main problem is multiple backstabbing on one person.

Written by Diedra, 04.08.2015 at 05:51

Written by International, 04.08.2015 at 04:41

Absolutely not. Alliances are always of convenience.

Next time don't ally with a player who can obviously back-stab you massively.

Should have seen turn 30. I was the master of the northwest and northeast. The main problem is multiple backstabbing on one person.

Isn't that the point of alliances, though? Being able to focus efforts on number of players by not fighting among themselves? In this situation, that "number of players" happened to be you. Possibly unlucky, or possibly you weren't spending enough efforts diplomatically.

I hate people who betray but i don't agree on any of these suggestion because sometimes you have an argue with an ally then end up fighting... punishing the one who ended alliance wont be fair

it would be better:

if they can make 3-4 tuns as cool down after ending alliance with someone so you cant declare war on him unless the 3-4 turns passes..

Add them to your enemy list. Never ally them again. That's what I do. They have proven them not trust worthy.

Now I would support some idea of limiting the number of allies based on the total number of players.

No support

Full support,backstabbing is probably the main reason why atwar community isnt growing (lot of people probably give up after beeing betrayed over and over again) ,i know i nearly quit the game when i got backstabbed a few times when i was still low rank,

Written by jimmynow, 04.08.2015 at 21:16

Add them to your enemy list. Never ally them again. That's what I do. They have proven them not trust worthy.

Now I would support some idea of limiting the number of allies based on the total number of players.

I am the same with the enemy listing but their already is a limit to allying through options. If you dont want unlimited amount of alliances u can propose a change or host a game and change it yourself.

Written by Evic, 05.08.2015 at 00:59

Full support,backstabbing is probably the main reason why atwar community isnt growing (lot of people probably give up after beeing betrayed over and over again) ,i know i nearly quit the game when i got backstabbed a few times when i was still low rank,

Lies. Really the MAIN REASON lol

Written by Creepy2324_deleted, 04.08.2015 at 07:08

I hate people who betray but i don't agree on any of these suggestion because sometimes you have an argue with an ally then end up fighting... punishing the one who ended alliance wont be fair

it would be better:

if they can make 3-4 tuns as cool down after ending alliance with someone so you cant declare war on him unless the 3-4 turns passes..

The cool down is when u end a alliance it goes strait to peace so the turn they end the alliance they cant attack that turn, then next turn they are at peace with each other and he has to declare war so in all its 2 turn peace period.

Written by Emperor Lelouch, 05.08.2015 at 01:20

Written by Evic, 05.08.2015 at 00:59

Full support,backstabbing is probably the main reason why atwar community isnt growing (lot of people probably give up after beeing betrayed over and over again) ,i know i nearly quit the game when i got backstabbed a few times when i was still low rank,

Lies. Really the MAIN REASON lol

in begginers room most players dont even know about e list and after beeeing backstabbed on ffa games over and over again they will probably leave,i almast left myself when i was r4,game simply stops beeing fun

Written by Evic, 05.08.2015 at 01:31

Written by Emperor Lelouch, 05.08.2015 at 01:20

Written by Evic, 05.08.2015 at 00:59

Full support,backstabbing is probably the main reason why atwar community isnt growing (lot of people probably give up after beeing betrayed over and over again) ,i know i nearly quit the game when i got backstabbed a few times when i was still low rank,

Lies. Really the MAIN REASON lol

in begginers room most players dont even know about e list and after beeeing backstabbed on ffa games over and over again they will probably leave,i almast left myself when i was r4,game simply stops beeing fun

Then they will learn that Aliances dont make friends. Anything can be a lie in war. And ffa means Free for All theirs not a rule u will see any where in AtWar discouraging Backstabbing unless in some RP.

No support

I support, its unfair to be winning a match, helping your allies, destroying everyone in yours and ally way, and all of a sudden they back stab you to get more sp, even after everything u have done for them. Count me in as an advocate of your ideas and suggestions. -Some Guy.

No support. Host of the game can decide how many alliances allowed during the game, and can even make it no alliances. And as jimmynow said, if you betray me once, 'BAM' you're on my enemy list, and I know not to trust you. It really is another part of multiplayer strategy games, who do I trust? Who do I not? Adds an element that I feel shouldn't be removed. If you don't like the way other players are setting the games up, I suggest you host your own.

Written by Warmonger Dak, 05.08.2015 at 22:20

No support. Host of the game can decide how many alliances allowed during the game, and can even make it no alliances. And as jimmynow said, if you betray me once, 'BAM' you're on my enemy list, and I know not to trust you. It really is another part of multiplayer strategy games, who do I trust? Who do I not? Adds an element that I feel shouldn't be removed. If you don't like the way other players are setting the games up, I suggest you host your own.

Coming from you, this response is pretty much expected. Host half the time rigs the game in his favor or the game gets rigged against the host. My enem list should have like almost 100 people if you counted RP. I already use my banlist but if you can't trust anyone on AtWar, who can you trust? here should be a cool down or some kind of restriction to the evilness of players ganging up on you after they use you. Now lets give a few examples.

Example 1:
You are allies with 4 people. They all decide you are weakest link judging by your land mass. You have 400 troops and they all have 500 each. They all refuse diplomacy and you fought real hard earning over 1000 SP. Its not worth forfeiting so much SP. Would you feel like banging your head against the wall?

Example 2:
THE MOST HATED MOVE IN ATWAR: Your ally takes your capital while its empty or being attacked and betrays you.

I do like the principle of alliances but alliances should be nicer to former allies. I know many newbs who graduate to r5 just because they sneak their way through diplomacy and dirty playing. They usually get wrekt or team up on high ranked players for SP.

Summary: This isn't dungeons and dragons. Alliance part is good but former alliances should restrict both former allies for a few more turns before they war. Alliance system needs to become smarter. Capping me while I'm your ally is a big issue. I hope you aren't another everyday newb who gangs up on players to farm SP although player groups are good. I actually think that players should play more team games. No crud and you can play fair. Team games are good.

btw... I'm a solo player. Most of my games I win were on my own abilities.

[td]
[/td]

Coming from you? Exactly what does that mean. Do I know you? You don't know me so you can't go off spouting what can be expected from me. And how the hell does a host rig a game? I sure would like to know. And just so you know my friends list, players I trust, is bigger than my enemies list. I'm not going to sit here and defend my game play to you, because I know I play an honest and honorable game. And for me it's more about playing the game and learning how to be better without being dirty, than gaining Sp. To me SP is just a bonus and really only numbers on a screen, it is how you play that makes the difference. And if your allies are capping you, well you can prevent that by keeping a least 1 troop in your city and as well, they aren't really your allies if they are doing that.

There should be like 50% cut on SP for breaking alliances!!!

Written by Warmonger Dak, 07.08.2015 at 16:59

Coming from you? Exactly what does that mean. Do I know you? You don't know me so you can't go off spouting what can be expected from me. And how the hell does a host rig a game? I sure would like to know. And just so you know my friends list, players I trust, is bigger than my enemies list. I'm not going to sit here and defend my game play to you, because I know I play an honest and honorable game. And for me it's more about playing the game and learning how to be better without being dirty, than gaining Sp. takes no skill at all.

And if your allies are capping you, well you can prevent that by keeping a least 1 troop in your city and as well, they aren't really your allies if they are doing that.

SP is what many players crave for to show up on the leader boards, rank up, or buy upgrades. How can you not understand this fact? Some players just plainly will do anything to win the game. Yet again, what is there to not understand? Now its pretty understandable that you would not understand why people commonly wall their capitals and leave 0 troops there. More experienced players do this on turn 1 to maximize their expansion. It is also necessary when you need all your troops to defend yourself. It also happens when an enemy players bombs your capital or takes it. When your ally captures your capital, half the time you can't trust them since an ally cap is an unbeatable thing. Now how, you may ask does a host rig a game? Have you not seen it? A host can /pr multiple players into a complex ring of betrayal. Once, I saw this host reveal his whole plan to me while him and his ally were ganging up on me. With so much dirty play, who can you trust? A host can also host a map with a "shogun" or "king" and rally every one through the rules of the game to kill one player. Some hosts will even threaten players to kick them if they don't save them a selection side they want. Honestly, the enemy list is not useful at all. You can't have a good revenge if you can't play or hear them. What I do is I make them duel me or 1 v 1 so that they see how poor their game play is. Like I said You can't stop being newb if you depend so much on allies or ally[bleep] people! Corruption is the path of many players. Playing a clean game is becoming harder to find. My advice is to play solo games. I almost never lose nowadays thanks to solo play. Now how you ask I expect things from players?
I know a ton of players and stats as well as reputations and connections. Through research you can figure out what kind of players they are and all sides of the argument/politics as well as knowledge of the game and common courtesy.

WOW! Love how you edited my statement to misconstrue me, not much but enough for me to ask you, now who's being dirty? Again I'm not going to debate nor defend my game play with you, I have no reason to. We are of two opinions. Mine is the game is the game, either learn how to play it with all of it's faucets in place, or don't. As I stated to begin with I don't support removing alliances from the game, I believe they add a realistic element to this game of war. Which if you truly understood war, you would know deceit, paranoia, and even trust play integral parts in it. What you failed and most likely should have asked, if you really wanted an open, honest discussion, is "Why?" But you didn't. Just for the record, I have never been capped by an Ally of mine, and nor do I need alliances to win a game, but I still feel they have their place in this game, just as they do in the real world. Now you may keep up your little tirade if you want, but as for me, I'm done, and will not make another post on this thread. If for no other reason than I see it as a pointless discussion. You appear to me to see things very one sided and only seem to want to "vent" your frustrations. Oh and by the way, I understand what Sp is for, I merely said it's not the driving force behind why I play this game, winning and becoming a better player is. I still have to wonder though, why do you keep playing games with players who play that way? If you don't like those types of players, don't play games with them.

Written by Warmonger Dak, 09.08.2015 at 22:23

WOW! Love how you edited my statement to misconstrue me, not much but enough for me to ask you, now who's being dirty? Again I'm not going to debate nor defend my game play with you, I have no reason to. We are of two opinions. Mine is the game is the game, either learn how to play it with all of it's faucets in place, or don't. As I stated to begin with I don't support removing alliances from the game, I believe they add a realistic element to this game of war. Which if you truly understood war, you would know deceit, paranoia, and even trust play integral parts in it. What you failed and most likely should have asked, if you really wanted an open, honest discussion, is "Why?" But you didn't. Just for the record, I have never been capped by an Ally of mine, and nor do I need alliances to win a game, but I still feel they have their place in this game, just as they do in the real world. Now you may keep up your little tirade if you want, but as for me, I'm done, and will not make another post on this thread. If for no other reason than I see it as a pointless discussion. You appear to me to see things very one sided and only seem to want to "vent" your frustrations. Oh and by the way, I understand what Sp is for, I merely said it's not the driving force behind why I play this game, winning and becoming a better player is. I still have to wonder though, why do you keep playing games with players who play that way? If you don't like those types of players, don't play games with them.

Hope you have yourself a nice day now.

Glad to here that even if you did misunderstand what the topic even was. It was on restricting the ability of an ally not completely junking it. Now this isn't venting either. You play with those players to beat them which improves your skills at fighting dirty play. ↖(￣▽￣")

Play competitive games
No backstabbing

Thumbs down, the game is about realism, not so much skill

Written by MrPhobos, 28.08.2015 at 15:26

Thumbs down, the game is about realism, not so much skill

That is your opinion which of course you are welcome to, I think you are mistaken though. 1v1 me or clovis on africa 3k and I will show you why skill is important in this game. As for the realism.... drawing lines across a screen is not a realistic replication of war.

On-topic:
Choose your allies very carefully.

At the risk of sounding repetitive, I will repeat my point.

Diplomacy is an integral and inherent part of AtWar skills.

If you get massively backstabbed, well, that's unfortunate. Next time, handle your allies better.