Discussion Of The Week #2: Sister Alliances

sploggo

Guest
wxt4l.png


I am going to introduce something new to this forum in order to get more people posting, for any of you that played Phi, you will know that it was very successful. All topics will be about Grepolis and more importantly, world Kappa.

Rules:
Respect is key. Respect everyones opinion, even if you don't agree with it yourself.
Keep on the discussion topic, don't stray.
No egotistical nonsense of any kind, everyone is equal, no matter of in game rank or so.

I will also be requiring some new topics to discuss weekly, so if you have any suggestions, just push them over to me and I'll pick a popular topic to discuss. Oh, and if you plan to use this on another world, please credit Osl112

This weeks question.
What is the role of an academy/sister alliance in Kappa?
So in Kappa lately there has been a huge drop in the number of sister/academy alliances that are around. VRoDII, Crimson Ravens, Oceans Pirates to name but a few. I was wondering why this is. Is it due to a lack of new players or is it for other reasons? What is the role of a sister alliance in this changing world and how is more members better? Equally, how effective is a sister alliance and how comes only some of them work efficiently with their counterpart?

As always answer below with your thoughts, stay on topic (and please, please email me if you have an idea for next weeks discussion).
 

Cauthonus

Guest
I believe the world is mature, there are not enough players for sister alliances. There are only a few, and long term I see them merging with their main ones.
 

LordFDS

Guest
There are many reasons to have a sister alliance, but only one not to... Stigma

You create a sister alliance for many reasons...

1) Overflow
2) Training
3) Security
4) Bulk Numbers

RSII was created to be a proving ground for new invitees. Issues like... Are they active? Do they need training? Will they help or drain our alliance? Are they spies, and do we want them to have access to the mother alliance?

After a player proves themselves, they are transferred, as we have done many times. This allows us to have other alliances merge with us due to space.

Now for the negative...

A "stigma" is attached to sister or academy alliance. I have heard too many times players in the forum say they don't like them, or talk like it is less than.
Its a sticking point for me because my players have "earned" the right to be considered warriors. I would stack up my players against ANYONE on this server. Since RSII has only a minor amount of players on the front line due to geography (we are a rim alliance), we happily accept the support role. Even assuming this role, are attack stats are impressive.

I have no problem stating that I feel confident in the strength of my players, and both czar and I agree that RSII could hold their own against any alliance.
 

dirkkuyt

Guest
There are 2 different kinds of sister/training/academy alliances, the successful ones and the unsuccessful ones. The factors that make a sister alliance successful are most importantly communication and respect. Without these the sister alliance will fail or even sever ties with the 'parent'.

Examples of effective training alliances include RSII and also Phantom Academy, especially when TheBlueKangaru was in charge. These alliances work because the 'bigger' players do not ignore them, help them to grow and learn the game and overall make Grepolis a better game for it. The problem with these alliances is that they are very rare and often the players run away when the parent collapses.

Bad sister alliances unfortunately make up the vast majority of such alliances, so when making this discussion you have to remember this and not only talk about the rare gems. Bad training alliances are not a fluid alliance separated in name only, they can be more likened to two alliances in a loose pact with each other. There is little communication, except perhaps a shared claims forum, so the 'smaller' guys feel isolated from the 'bigger' players and do not receive advice on how to play the game. So when the main alliance is attacked and the sister with it, the 'smaller' players do not know what to do and are rimmed or run away, defeating the purpose of the alliance in the first place.
 

Fell33

Guest
Interesting Thread. I agree with LordFDS on the positives, but RSII is an exception. Look at Oceans Academy.... They've got almost no activity, their frontline cities are empty??-and they don't retaliate when you attack them, they just colonize more cities.

P.S
There is a rumour that Strike Force might be splitting into two sister alliances.
 

DeletedUser15581

Guest
Besides what FDS said, I would like to give a straightforward point which FDS did mention in our internal forums back then when RSII was being created.

We are on the extreme rim, there is no major alliance south of us. So we have very young players, even with just 2 cities around us. Now that RS has become somewhat mature after being into existence for 6 months, we decided to keep it as a more elite alliance. But then, we didn't want to punish players just because they joined the server late, RSII is there to give them an opportunity to grow if they are active and eager to learn.

This move has proved beneficial, 6 players who joined RS II with barely 50k points or less grew in points, either helped players on the frontlines or conquered inactives to be present on the frontlines themselves, were moved to RS and proved to be great assets for the team. We could have chosen to crush them when they were small, but we would have missed something. Then there are dozens of players currently in RS II who are on the same path.

In times when every alliance is complaining about players quitting the game, RS II provides the team with a constant supply of active players to take up the vacancies.

Also, before ridiculing RS II, do check their colonization win-loss ratio in ANY war we were involved in... crimsons, PE to name the main 2. RS and FC have had such high standards that the number doesn't look too good when compared with these 2. They have a decent victory margin if not a 10:1 win:loss ratio. Isn't a good victory margin enough for an alliance against alliances ranked 1 and 4? What does it say about these "losing" alliances if RS II isn't any good?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rudicus

Guest
I have to admit i have always hated the sister alliance thing and when RS2 came around i was unsure about it to say the least but in time they proved their worth and more. RS/FC seem to have a system of getting active players to the front line whilst making sure the less so active do their bit in a war. This has proved more than effective in our wars. If run right i think it does work well, if run badly then you just become another poor MRA.
 

LordFDS

Guest
So maybe we shouldn't look at good or bad sister alliances...

The thread should have be about good or bad founders/leaders.

You can only build your cathedral on a good foundation. The foundation has to supplied by the leader. (I took most of that from the latest Robin Hood)...
 

sploggo

Guest
wow, this thread kind of died, everyone has some really great points, but we just need more forum goers to keep the discussion going.
 

KingOfTheBurbs

Guest
I just dont think sister/academy alliances are good.

They defeat the purpose of having a 100 member limit.

I have been approached numerous times about having a PE 2 or academy and I just dismiss it. There is only 1 PE, plain and simple.
 

Repent

Guest
I just dont think sister/academy alliances are good.

They defeat the purpose of having a 100 member limit.

I totally agree!!

Ways back when Crimsons had just started out with 1 alliance (The Crimson Guard empire),the subject of a sister alliance was brought up and I voted against it,and just look at what it has amounted too,multiple Crimson splinter alliances.
 

sploggo

Guest
in fairness to the crimsons, they weren't as bad as the Tau alliances, when I first joined kappa I believe they were just being finished off and still had over 10 groups.

also there are now only 3 Crimson alliances and I think they are prefering being smaller and more integrated, although I have absolutely no proof of that whatsoever so would need a Crimson member to clarify.

yes I joined VRoD after VRoD II had merged into VRoD so can't really comment on how that worked out and what the flaws/benefits of it were.
 
Top