A pre-made of 5 allainces and 200 players in EN73

DoubleThink

Phrourach
Better still, I should be banned for stating my opinion. Or maybe I should be banned for replying to your post.
No one should be banned.

Though they do have a point. It is a little hypocritical to have an opinion against EN, when you're in fact doing the same thing unsuccessfully. As I said originally, it makes your opinion seem bitter. Which I'm sure you're not.
 

Rosenberry

Chiliarch
The goal of this thread was to try to improve the game for newer players who have not yet established a network of friends. If I've come across as a whiner, then I've failed. I stated an opinion, wrote something controversial enough to attract comments and ideas. I've never founded an alliance, only been a member. I actually only joined AA about 10 days ago, when my previous alliance was in the process of disintegrating. Some good ideas were brought forward. When I filter out all the insults, I can say that I've learned from hearing the other side of the argument. I can appreciate more fully that Grepo is also a social game, perhaps the social is as important as any other aspect of this game.
 
Last edited:

Praehelios

Guest
Of course, to be expected, insults, when this forum is trying to be constructive. I agree that freezing accounts is not a good solution and would ruin the game. Frankly I'm against most bannings, unless for really legit reasons. There have been some good suggestions, and to my surprise they have come from EN members. Obviously EN would like to make Grepo more exciting, current formula can become boring to a powerful alliance. This game is only fun if there is some interesting competition. 10 against 1 can be fun for a while but eventually it gets old even for the victor.
I'm not insulting you. I am insulting your character. Everyone in here slinging mud about our grip on this server are AA members. It wasn't until our recent OP on your alliances that you decided to even give this thought. Before, when we were at war with Just Us, and AA were snagging a city here and there from our coalition, it was just dandy from your standpoint. However now that we can devote attention to your alliances and are finding a ridiculously high succession rate, you want to ask the mods to level the playing field?

Truth be told your alliances hands are just as dirty as ours. You have had how many groups merge into you? Went from one alliance of 30-ish members to a full Main + 2 academies. On top of that we are contending with LOD 1 & 2. Before that, Just Us/Only Us, and before that Virus. Somewhere in that mix 56 forevers were involved. Is that a level playing field? Regardless of your opinion, this isn't the first nor last time cap limits will be exploited to accommodate large groups of friends. A simple fix is to stop making low cap rates. Also, there is a fine line between voicing your opinion, and begging for ease of play. You state ban/freezing is not a solution, but you bring it up in your initial cry for help? That is contradiction.

All in all, there truly is nothing wrong with this server. Our group was set in stone since Myonia was won. It was either wait for another speed 3 world with high cap to accommodate us, or do some maneuvering to make sure everyone gets a chance to play. We took our chance and have coordinated one of the cleanest, error free servers in history. Our numbers have helped us avoid sloppy merges, horrendous recruiting, and all the sours that come with working with unknown parties. There are no simmers, no BOT users, NOTHING. That is why we are successful. Numbers only play a small part in success. You are new. So in future servers, you will see that when you find an alliance you can relate to, win with, joke with, and enjoy the game with... You too might find yourself on our side of the argument perhaps.
 

DoubleThink

Phrourach
That should always have been apparent. The alliances that succeed in this game do so because of their social and, of course, networking ability. The social side is a crucial element.

You stated an opinion. Others stated theirs. It has come across whiny to me. That's my opinion. I don't make apologies for opinions. If you feel insulted Rosenberry, then that's on you, sir. As I haven't seen any real insults towards any one in this whole "debate". Unless I missed some :)
 

Praehelios

Guest
The goal of this thread was to try to improve the game for newer players who have not yet established a network of friends. If I've come across as a whiner, then I've failed. I stated an opinion, wrote something controversial enough to attract comments and ideas. I've never founded an alliance, only been a member. I actually only joined AA about 10 days ago, when my previous alliance was in the process of disintegrating. Some good ideas were brought forward. When I filter out all the insults, I can say that I've learned from hearing the other side of the argument. I can appreciate more fully that Grepo is also a social game, perhaps the social is as important as any other aspect of this game.
War is only half the battle. Politics and relationships are just as relevant in this as war. Most Pacts/NAPS are birthed through familiarity between players. Just as you can tell MRA's from quality groups. Just as you can tell rollovers from experienced players. Grepolis is a network of relationships. You might fight certain players on one server, just to play alongside them the next. The best way to become established especially as a new player, is to play hard, and make friends. The rest will come in time.
 

person67

Guest
is it particular unreasonable that people who can make friends would have an advantage. all this complaining is done by people who would benefit from it because they can't play the game. there is nothing inno can do other than rename the game "farmpolis" and remove troops. Alliances caps should be scarped as clearly they are not effective.
 

GecaKon

Chiliarch
Hmmm,

What to say...

First, this is your first server and you are now expert of Grepo. I play against EN in other server (Myonia), they have more members, but we (Wargasm) fight against them vary good. Yes, they win that server, but we all have good time and good fight. This is not Monopoly, this is WAR Strategy game.
When AA start on this server (Ialysos) they destroy some little alliances. In that time you do not have problem with that (when you win). Now, when better alliance bit you, you start to talk about pre-made. Try to play this game few years, play few server and then we can talk. Until then, keep crying about the evil EN...

GecaKon
 

nanatea

Phrourach
Letter sent to Grepolis support, anyone else feel the same, that this is unfair?
I suggest that you "freeze" cities owned by these 5 alliances for several weeks, to allow other players/alliances a chance to regroup and
make it a fairer war.
A very concerned customer,
xxxxxxx
Not sure how cities can be frozen, but might be easier solution if they freeze oceans until global warming melt it.
 

2Xtreme

Guest
And once a city has been revolted, then the attacker who revolted should be the only one to be able to finish the attack. I hate when these cowards need 15 people to take down one city. This way it is one on one and may the best player win or lose the contest.
This would only work if only the player who owned the city could defend. But if a whole alliance defends then a whole alliance needs to be allowed to attack. Saying this I have seldom asked for outside help on my claims except in the early game.
 

Awesomeness.

Phrourach
Perhaps a simple solution is best.

1) Do not allow the formation of alliances until halfway through the game. Even the premades will have a a difficult time of communicating with that in place.

2) Limit the alliances to 10 members. Guess that will mean that even these sister premades will have to agree on who is going to win the game. Maye even set them against each other.

3) A 10 member alliance means they will have to own more than one city on an island thus decreasing their "DEMAND" rights on the villages. And make it more challenging to build the wonders.

4) Remove the alliance label from the cities. A little confusion never hurts. Better, don't allow for listings of the actuall membership in the alliance. Just the score.

5) Limit the number of attacks from an alliance to two members per cycle. Cycle to be determined. Day two days, 12 hours, ...
And once a city has been revolted, then the attacker who revolted should be the only one to be able to finish the attack. I hate when these cowards need 15 people to take down one city. This way it is one on one and may the best player win or lose the contest.

Yes. I did say these are simple solutions. All you have to do is implement them.

Maria

These are absolutely horrible ideas, not only would they take away the teamwork aspect of the game for me, but also for everyone else.

:D

If any of these ideas were implemented, I among thousands of other players, would quit the game.
 

Rosenberry

Chiliarch
is it particular unreasonable that people who can make friends would have an advantage. all this complaining is done by people who would benefit from it because they can't play the game. there is nothing inno can do other than rename the game "farmpolis" and remove troops. Alliances caps should be scarped as clearly they are not effective.
I agree the caps are never going to be effective anyways.
 

Rosenberry

Chiliarch
War is only half the battle. Politics and relationships are just as relevant in this as war. Most Pacts/NAPS are birthed through familiarity between players. Just as you can tell MRA's from quality groups. Just as you can tell rollovers from experienced players. Grepolis is a network of relationships. You might fight certain players on one server, just to play alongside them the next. The best way to become established especially as a new player, is to play hard, and make friends. The rest will come in time.
The players who I thought were serious Grepo players have been ghosting, so I agree, I need to make a network of serious players/friends who don't ghost as soon as a fight is upon them. It is pathetic. I want to thank everyone who answered me in this forum, and although the criticism towards me was harsh at times, it did make me rethink a lot of things. One thing experienced players need to understand, is that new players are "indoctrinated" into believing that EN is evil etc. It's become obvious to me that it is sour grapes. Sour grapes over the fact that an alliance can be well organized, have very active players who love to play together. I've had a small taste of that in 56 Forever, and it was great while it lasted. I'm not cowardly enough not to admit that my opinion was wrong when I started this forum. I want to thank everyone who participated, especially those who had constructive comments.
 

person67

Guest
yes people obviously ignore them. so what can inno do stop create the thought police and have a new mod called big brother.
edit: i am talking about caps post
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DoubleThink

Phrourach
Rosenberry, not many people admit they're wrong. You'll find a good bunch of people, just keep playing, network on here.
 

Zero Point

Phrourach
not many players can join this game and have a deap understanding of its mechanics in 4 years ive seen loads of moans like the ones voiced hear.
fact is new players should realise they are not going to do as well as players with vast experiance and the same goes for alliances made up of vet players.
life is not fair and nither is grepo but as with life if you work hard and put in the effort eventualy you get to the top of the food chain.
 
You don't need to have a deep understanding of the game to know that it's just stupid when guys have 5 alliances put together before the world starts.

Just like comparing the Broncos and their free agent additions and the Bengals who still haven't picked anyone up that comes even close to compensating for their losses.
 

Zero Point

Phrourach
rick ive played with you you should not talk about things you dont under stand, like in depth understandings.:p

seriously though ive played some awsome premades and even some awsome mra's but one thing ive lernt is that low member cap alliances may be fun and have a family feel but its very hard to be less that a 120 member alliance and have a viable chance of dominating a server.
so a coalition of 5 alliances that total 200 members seems like a sencible choice if you actualy want to be competative long term.