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

[DeletedUser22217]

Actually there is a simple think that could be done.
If you make a world with low ally cap, where battles should be a lot and people join to fight against everybody....forbid pacts and shared forums.
If 4 alliances can share forums and act like one- ally cap is useless and should be removed as not affecting the game.

 

[DeletedUser5819]

I thought you would turn up here.

If you read up you would know that the players who beat you are friends and friends of friends. It would be possible to disable formal pacts, but not possible to prevent players who trust each other pacting informally.

Similarly, although the shared forum helps, of course, the serious players in any team will be communicating by skypechat or similar anyway.

Finally, the ally cap does affect the game, since WW cannot be shared between alliances, so only the number in the alliance cap can build together and win.

 

[DeletedUser]

I thought you would turn up here.

If you read up you would know that the players who beat you are friends and friends of friends. It would be possible to disable formal pacts, but not possible to prevent players who trust each other pacting informally.

Similarly, although the shared forum helps, of course, the serious players in any team will be communicating by skypechat or similar anyway.

Finally, the ally cap does affect the game, since WW cannot be shared between alliances, so only the number in the alliance cap can build together and win.

There is a loophole in this system which is being abused regularly... it's good that only a few of us know this loophole

 

[DeletedUser]

There is a loophole in this system which is being abused regularly... it's good that only a few of us know this loophole

I know this loophole too I think I have read it on the forums. Never experienced it though.

The original question asked here will be debated over for a long time (if you class Should premades be allowed as the question).

I think that without ruining the game you will never stop premades. You can limit pacts that one alliance has, and you can limit shared forums, however I have already spotted loopholes here. It will never be stopped, so quit whining and get on with the game! If you cannot beat them, then you just join another world. Simples

 

[Noz The Greek]

It is clear that the EN strategy continues to be successful and I agree there are many who aren't part of it, and thus are whining and are against it - at a level EN have developed a strategy that gets them the win. I have played with and against many of the players involved in EN x5 - I have no issues with any of them, I don't begrudge them for doing what they have done, its clever, if winning is the point, and let's be honest with ourselves that is the point isn't it (oh stop with the "I play because it is fun" line - course we do....not fun being rimmed though is it)? If you believe there is no win possible, then up and leave and hand EN the server and move on. However stop harping on about how unfair it is because on the next server you are in and you are in an alliance that is winning, you going to protest to your founder that what you are doing is unfair???

Yeah right.

 

[DeletedUser33512]

Believe it or not, people can simply play for fun.

 

[Noz The Greek]

Believe it or not, people can simply play for fun.

like people who say its the taking part that counts.....blah

 

[DeletedUser33512]

LOL,

But, yes, that's true, too

 

[DeletedUser]

like people who say its the taking part that counts.....blah

Would you rather have fun killing stuff and wrecking lives and becoming infamous on a server? or would you just sim for a year or so and be the average joe and win WWs with an alliance composed of a few heavy lifters and fillers?

I know I personally would choose the first anyday, everyday. ^___^

 

[DeletedUser43011]

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

Just wanted to remind you this is Grepo (a war game) ..... Just saying !

 

[DeletedUser]

After reading this WHOLE THREAD, the only point I have not heard is this-Maybe, just maybe, it would be good for Inno to put some sort of caution on Speed 3 no-morale worlds such as this like "Not Recommended for Beginners." I do feel bad for those unfortunate few that join grepo for the first time, end up in this world in NE ocean, and before they can figure out which end is up, they die on first day after protection ends.

 

[DeletedUser33512]

That isn't the point of this thread though. The OP has 25+ cities too, and didn't start complaining until EN started to welcome them. Newer players who join and get rimmed, if they're serious, will try again, on the rim, or in a new world.

Generally people learn, so the experience of losing makes people better. We've all lost to become better. Unless you're Kronnoss.

 

[DeletedUser46442]

Wow, that is just sad, The whining people do these days.

 

[DeletedUser]

To be honest this thread does raise for me an interesting point. I personally wouldn't mind a world with an insanely low alliance cap say 5 people. Without formal pacts too and shared forums to make it a massive free for all of course you wouldn't be able to stop informal pacts but would be interesting

 

[DeletedUser24626]

This is the funniest forum thread I have ever read (well read some of it). It was interesting reading, until I read that this was a revolt style server. Then I just laughed myself silly, that people actually think they are good, when they play a revolt world.

Kids have fun, more power to ya to be able to play a boring game play style.

 

[DeletedUser33512]

This is the funniest forum thread I have ever read (well read some of it). It was interesting reading, until I read that this was a revolt style server. Then I just laughed myself silly, that people actually think they are good, when they play a revolt world.

Kids have fun, more power to ya to be able to play a boring game play style.

In your opinion.

I enjoy both conquest and revolt. Both are fun.

 

[DeletedUser24626]

Another pathetic remark added to this thread. -rep you njub

This is the #1 kid, dave "inator""007" What a name. Got -rep returned just for the name.

 

[DeletedUser]

I haven't really been playing grepolis intensely lately but popped on the forum to see what was new. No real surprise that I see this thread as it was something I addressed before the world began, and no I don't play Ialysos.\

For those interested:

http://forum.en.grepolis.com/showthread.php?51464-Alliances&p=860034#post860034

 

[DeletedUser42857]

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.

People will still form alliances, through skype or pm

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.

Skype, pacts, shared forums

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.

Makes no odds, how many players once they hit 20-25 cities actually bother demanding regularly. by 20 cities it becomes a drag, maybe once a day, and it in no way balances the game when those cities have resource level 40 anyway.

a few thousand resources per day is not going to balance the game.

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.

Thats just dumb

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.

What? Thats the whole point of being in an alliance, co-ordination, teamwork. The defender also has the option of calling on support from his alliance members, it becomes a battle between alliances to attack and defend.

Are you suggestion that in a real world situation, and entire nation would sit back and watch one of its cities get attacked and leave them to it saying "youre own you own mate", or that attackers would choose for only one army to attack the opponent to "keep it fair".

Maybe thats where the greeks got it wrong. While the romans were organising multiple legions to hit a target en masse the greeks were trying to keep it fair.

apart from anything else, you fail to spot the flaw. People would just dodge all revolt attacks, and then knowing on one player could do the final clear and cs, would turtle.

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

Maria

 

[DeletedUser5819]

Its funny how the silliest posts get the most responses