Sister Alliances? What is the point?

[DeletedUser43626]

Been getting a few invites from alliances and been keeping an eye on how many are already at cap. Then I started to wonder. I speak under correction, but in my experience, only one alliance can win Victor and Master awards. So how do you chose who takes it and who doesn't?

I understand that some leaders of said "sister" alliances will say, by the time WW comes around we would have sorted out the simmers from the active players. But what if you have 60 very active players all doing their best?

Will you go according to ABP and DBP's? And chose from those, what happens if the top players only got their cause of gold spending. Do you leave out the guy who has sacrificed the most time in the world leading up to WW but couldn't get said high ABP and DBP's cause he was a F2P.

All the examples above are hypothetical, but the point is, is how do you choose. There'll be many unhappy players after two years when the guys up top don't choose them.

Gonna be interesting to see how things progress.

Cheers

Billy
aka ( Moon City Master ) to my previous Triad comrades

 

[DeletedUser21774]

After EN23 (alliance cap 35), many suggested amended rules to the game to acknowledge the absolute team work required with sister alliances. It would have made it a great, totally different flavor of game.

 

[Baudin Toolan]

With the advent of shared alliance forums more and more coalitions/pacts/sister alliances pop up on servers. Basically with shared forums you can circumvent the alliance cap. I'm not sure if alliances with sister/brother/academy partners are planning so far in advance they are thinking of the WW stage. More likely they are thinking of strength in numbers for the immediate future.

 

[DeletedUser46604]

Aside from the True MRA alliances....An Academy Alliance, done properly, can be utilized and implemented in an effective manner. You simply shut down all recruitment half way threw a world and develop the talent. Then bring them in as many Real Life situations pull players from the game. In the End you can complete the world with EVERYONE who has contributed to the Overall success of the organization....Just sayin'.....

Sidenote: A speed One world gives the opportunity for true gamers to eventually game together at a very smooth and low dynamic pace. Honestly I am more concerned with alliances' that have ten or less members in the first month!!!<---Rarely do full crews enter a 35 Cap world.

~A.S.

 

[Ranga1]

One victor (winner) and as many as can be completed master (crown) awards. This is why grepo needs to change the crowning rules, make it only one victor (winner) and one master (crown) then alliances will actually fight for themselves. Until then, its power in numbers

 

[DeletedUser51376]

Yeah, so what you do is you rotate the players around in your sister alliances when you win. Basically, everyone in the sister alliances will get those crowns as well.

I have even seen some alliances give the crown to respected enemies, as they fought so much for so long, they became friends. It is weird, and I do think Inno should change this.

 

[DeletedUser21774]

Yep. It could be called the 'Sister Alliance Award' or "Allies to the End" or something like that. Any alliance still registered as the winners pact at the end would at least have the alliance name recorded in the Hall.

 

[DeletedUser43626]

Yeah, so what you do is you rotate the players around in your sister alliances when you win. Basically, everyone in the sister alliances will get those crowns as well.

I have even seen some alliances give the crown to respected enemies, as they fought so much for so long, they became friends. It is weird, and I do think Inno should change this.

I speak under correction here as I have never been is a given situation where i was a rotating player. But for a wonder to be completed a certain player on a certain island must constantly be in the alliance, rotating said player out will stop wonder construction. ( Or at least delay it )

At the time of completion of said wonder, do you get the award. I'm sure the same applies to Victor and Master awards. They do not get awarded after the deed is done. Otherwise everyone would try to join the winning alliance afterwards just for the awards.

Victor comes with completion of the fourth, so therefore rotating in another player will only get him the remaining wonder completion awards. ( Or am i wrong? Will a person rotated into alliance after Victor has been awarded be capable of getting Master award when all 7 wonders are completed? ) To my knowledge, you have to be present for all completions to get said awards.

 

[DeletedUser51376]

I speak under correction here as I have never been is a given situation where i was a rotating player. But for a wonder to be completed a certain player on a certain island must constantly be in the alliance, rotating said player out will stop wonder construction. ( Or at least delay it )

At the time of completion of said wonder, do you get the award. I'm sure the same applies to Victor and Master awards. They do not get awarded after the deed is done. Otherwise everyone would try to join the winning alliance afterwards just for the awards.

Victor comes with completion of the fourth, so therefore rotating in another player will only get him the remaining wonder completion awards. ( Or am i wrong? Will a person rotated into alliance after Victor has been awarded be capable of getting Master award when all 7 wonders are completed? ) To my knowledge, you have to be present for all completions to get said awards.

ok, so what happens is lets say there is a 50 person alliance cap. But you have 95 players in 2 alliances, 1 is the sister alliance, and has the players who are lower in rankings. The top alliance builds the WWs, they occupy all of the WW islands, and some of the players from the main alliance are not on any WW islands. Then, when the alliance wins WWs, and they get their crown, they leave the main alliance, and let the other 45 people join in, who were in the sister alliance. Then, the alliance destroys 1 of their 7 WWs, but only destroy 1 level of it, and then re finish it. So it goes back down to lvl 9, and then to 10 again. This way, all the players who just joined get a crown as well.

It's easier done than said.

 

[DeletedUser39822]

Just like youth sports nowadays, everybody gets a participation trophy. Total devaluing of the product.......I used to be wary of players that had a crown in their profile, now I just laugh.

 

[DeletedUser21774]

Like it was said. Between Conquest and Revolt, morale / no morale, 250 player cap vs 35 player cap, these make for totally different games.

Last I heard on Victor: No one gets it but the first completer. Master: Currently and prior, all completers get it but I also heard that the game bosses were planning adopt the first completer only approach.

What constitutes a 'win' should vary based on the type of game. If the game specialists were familiar with it at the level skilled players were, they'd readily understand.

 

[DeletedUser42043]

I understand that some leaders of said "sister" alliances will say, by the time WW comes around we would have sorted out the simmers from the active players. But what if you have 60 very active players all doing their best?

Does that actually happen all that often?
because it usually kind of seems to go like this:

1. The active fighters duke it out amongst themselves and carry the alliance forward.
2. Hierarchy of alliances is established (which pretty much stays the same)
3. A lot of fighters eventually get tired and quit halfway through.
4. Game moves on to Sim + defense mode
5. Whoever is left logs in just to send in resources for WW
6. One alliance gets all WWs and The End?

I've never made it to the end of a world though, so maybe I'm wrong

 

[DeletedUser44027]

Played on a Hermonassa for a bit (speed 1, cap 400) and what happened (from what I gather, I didn't stay until WW) was that there eventually were two big alliances, WRECKLESS and ZT, and although WRECKLESS (and eventually ZT iirc) went under, it was still pretty much the same players in the new alliances that formed after. I think there were some later starting guys on the rim who also made something happen, but in the end it's the same players playing under different names, and the biggest of them can usually sim WWs and that's that (on speed one, at least, where a lot of people quit. I'm sure it'll happen here as well, especially b/c morale is active... )

 

[DeletedUser42043]

I see Well, I'm gonna enjoy the here and the now, since this will be the fun part starting soon hehe
Never cared much for the awards and stuff anyways, so even if I stay on this world until sim stage, I wouldn't mind not being in the alliance that gets the end game awards.

That said, it would actually be more interesting if we saw a world where people would actually keep to a low member cap instead of resorting to sister alliances..

 

[DeletedUser46315]

Yes I remember you from that world, stoats of fury right? Or was that Mochlos? I forget.

On topic: worlds like this I have no problems with sister alliances (well no more than 1)

 

[DeletedUser42043]

Indeed, I would have to agree with you
Although my alliance did end up forming two sister alliances
we'll have to deal with any issues concerning this as they come..

But assuming that all of us can find enough enemies to fight with, and that we're selfless enough in the later stages to be satisfied with staying in the "sister" alliance, there isn't really a demerit is there?

 

[DeletedUser46315]

If you can't find enemies make them much more fun.

Being in a top 10 alliance on this server gets me plenty of enemies so I'm happy.

 

[DeletedUser44027]

Indeed, I would have to agree with you
Although my alliance did end up forming two sister alliances
we'll have to deal with any issues concerning this as they come..

But assuming that all of us can find enough enemies to fight with, and that we're selfless enough in the later stages to be satisfied with staying in the "sister" alliance, there isn't really a demerit is there?

Well, I honestly find that smaller alliances function better, and the leadership works better in single alliances. GOD, for example, has just made a third sister alliance. Now, with a cap of 35, that's still less than 80 people in GOD as a whole, but as this trend continues that's more and more leaders of GOD, each with admin perms in their own subsection. Chaos is a lot larger in bigger alliances, particularly those that have multiple "founders". I don't see any logical problem with MRAs as long as said MRAs are fine with losing a few bottom-feeders along the way to other alliances, but the dead weight isn't really is the issue, it's the backroom politics and inflated egos that cause many to fail.

 

[DeletedUser42043]

Well, I honestly find that smaller alliances function better, and the leadership works better in single alliances. GOD, for example, has just made a third sister alliance. Now, with a cap of 35, that's still less than 80 people in GOD as a whole, but as this trend continues that's more and more leaders of GOD, each with admin perms in their own subsection. Chaos is a lot larger in bigger alliances, particularly those that have multiple "founders". I don't see any logical problem with MRAs as long as said MRAs are fine with losing a few bottom-feeders along the way to other alliances, but the dead weight isn't really is the issue, it's the backroom politics and inflated egos that cause many to fail.

Those are some sharp assessments, and yes I can see that happening
I guess we gotta watch out for them then wish us luck!