Change to Domination end game

Urope

Hekatontarch
Proposal: forbid alliance changes 30 days before the beginning of Dom era

Why? Would make this end game more team oriented. Alliances would have to constitute their final dom team 30 days before dom era, and in the end an alliance with a team that has fought together would win and not a last minute set up alliance . Would encourage to build up a good and reliable team from the start and to hold together the team for a final common win with a crown for all those who participated .
 

HarleyMatic

Hipparchus
Proposal: forbid alliance changes 30 days before the beginning of Dom era

Why? Would make this end game more team oriented. Alliances would have to constitute their final dom team 30 days before dom era, and in the end an alliance with a team that has fought together would win and not a last minute set up alliance . Would encourage to build up a good and reliable team from the start and to hold together the team for a final common win with a crown for all those who participated .

I actually like this idea and have actually been thinking the same thing myself, but I do find it odd coming from someone who jumped ship on his own alliance to do exactly what you're advocating against.
 

Urope

Hekatontarch
We played the world respecting the existing rules and we all play for a win and to defeat the ennemy . To build this last stand alliance was the only way to defeat Venom at this stage of the game and it allowed several of my original alliance to win a crown . It wasn't a personal jumping ship since the last stand alliance was open for competition to all our players and last not least it allowed to defeat the common ennemy.
Venom had plenty of time to get up to 40% before dom era started and as experienced players they should have known that there was a serious risk that the ennemy alliances will form an last stand alliance.
All this doesn't mean that I find it the best way to determine the winner / winners of a Dom world. Therefore I suggested this modification.
If somebody of Venom would have made this proposal you would have said that they are bad losers so I thought I would make it .
 

HarleyMatic

Hipparchus
I'm in no way saying you were wrong for what you and others did, just found it surprising I guess would of been better wording to use rather than odd.

Venom was actually the first to make the move, but it didn't work in their favor and that could be because it wasn't a well thought out move at the time. Funky had more space to make the move in a proper way and it payed off. So my hat goes off for Funky.

I'm all for doing what's within the rules and would never fault anyone to using the rules in their favor, anyone saying other wise has never filled out a tax return lol

Personally, would I of made that move, hard to say for sure but I'm thinking I would of stuck to my principles and fought for that 3rd spot, but again that don't make what happened wrong by no means. So yeah, this to me is a perfect example where a rule change is much needed.
 

Shuri2060

Phrourach
The Dom endgame mode can be improved, yes, but one has to be careful with how.

If you put a 30 day no switch restriction like this, for example, it would be bad if:

- your alliance had kicked you out due to VM before. Now you can't join any alliance and might as well just quit.
- you have members quitting/unable to play any more after the lock. Now you can't replace with new people and are some members down for endgame.
- you need to kick someone/break the alliance apart. Eg. internal conflict, someone uncovered to be a spy, someone banned
 

Urope

Hekatontarch
For sure if the dom endgame mode is to be changed it needs a more detailed review of the rules and the impact of the rule changes

If there is a 30 day no switch rule, which rules could/have to be established about creating / disbanding alliances ?
To avoid any bypass of the no switch rule , alliances would have to stay the same during this end phase

and indeed it would change a lot the mentality of the game and the teams .
Now it's open, dynamic, the link between the players and the alliance is often not very strong.
If there is a lock period the alliance would be much more dependant of their players, so it would be very important to select the players in the alliance very carefully to have a very stable and reliable last stand team .
Probably this doesn't correspond to the state of mind of the players of this kind of game and is too restrictive.

Somebody has other ideas to make this endgame more team friendly than it it now and how to ensure that there will be a fight between the alliances for domination ?
 
Top