0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this board.
- 1701cara
- Irregular
- 22 posts
- Reputation 6
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Galifrey Stands
Jun 20 2014 2:34 am
So there has been talk of reforming the way alliances are done for a while now.
Here are my 2 cents worth. Include alliance relations. Give alliance leaders the option to make an alliance an ally alliance or an enemy alliance. If they are ally, there is no friendly fire but also not the ability to reinforce or break a siege. If they are enemy alliance it is at default or the way the game is played now. Everybody's alliances are defaulted at enemy alliance unless the leader of 1 alliance sends a truce invite to the alliance the want a truce with.
It is just a thought. It may fix some issues, then again it may cause some issues.
Questions? Thoughts? Concerns?
The Doctor
The Only Doctor
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Jun 20 2014 2:40 am
There's nothing wrong with it, but what's the point in it? I'm not going to attack hamiler with or without an ally system. In fact, i think it's better the way it is now because it's more up to the player; if someone wants to break a NAP and shel kree their entire alliance over I think they should be able to do that. It's the best part about this game, that not everything is drawn out for you.
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Jun 20 2014 2:40 am
There's nothing wrong with it, but what's the point in it? I'm not going to attack hamiler with or without an ally system. In fact, i think it's better the way it is now because it's more up to the player; if someone wants to break a NAP and shel kree their entire alliance over I think they should be able to do that. It's the best part about this game, that not everything is drawn out for you.
this posted twice.... that's an annoying glitch :(
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
- 1701cara
- Irregular
- 22 posts
- Reputation 6
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Galifrey Stands
Jun 20 2014 2:50 am
Then could we have the option to attack but a message pop up that says you are NAP with this player are you sure you wish to attack? With the Messy string of NAPS it is easy to friendly fire. I speak from experiance. I had an ally try to take one of my planets one time even though we were NAP. He just forgot about our NAP and retracted his fleet when he remembered and all was good. But I get the feeling that I am not the only one that something like this has happened to.
The Only Doctor
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Jun 20 2014 3:22 am
It's not shadowings place to reinforce NAPs, lol. if your allie wants to attack you they can...
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
- Endersshadow
- Irregular
- 73 posts
- Reputation 51
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Fear the Ashrak
Jun 20 2014 6:10 am
I say the only fix alliances need is a much needed upgrade to how many players are in one. 10 is to small hence the sister alliances. 50 is to big for player base. I say he needs to put it around 25-30. that way it's about right for the number of new player and with the increase the alliances can take in and train some of the new players. also he should maybe put in alliance wars. where alliances can select to declare war on another alliance to encourage them from just sitting around give it like if two alliances are declared at war with each other they gain increased salvage on hits on the other alliance in the war and bonus to status won or something.
Worship the TACO or face it
- Cjamieson99
- Respected
- 640 posts
- Reputation 203
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- LET'S GET THOSE TERRORISTS!
Jun 20 2014 8:07 am
I think it's fine the way it is; I like the idea of having sister alliances that are independent, it makes the game more real and not so already laid out.
Kelac! #1 cheater in the game, but you'll never catch me!
- Joe12
- Irregular
- 38 posts
- Reputation 4
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- I love 26horses Productions
Jun 20 2014 9:59 am
great idea every one is already at peace he dose this and every one makes ally with every one else those that don't get farmed of naq and status by every one else
smeg head
- Hamiler
- Irregular
- 127 posts
- Reputation 77
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Hold Fast
Jun 20 2014 2:18 pm
someone say my name?
Leader of the Asgard Fleet
- 1701cara
- Irregular
- 22 posts
- Reputation 6
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Galifrey Stands
Jun 21 2014 4:49 am
Hi Hamiler, What are your thoughts? I Also like what Endershadow is saying. But at the same time, the independant group idea of sister alliances has its perks as well. That is why I wanted the formal NAP option to lessen friendly fire. Hamiler, How many Allies and NAPS do the Asgard have? Would this provision help keep up with that a bit better? On a seperate note, Alliance wars would be nice though.
The Only Doctor
- Hamiler
- Irregular
- 127 posts
- Reputation 77
-
Honourable
Dishonourable
- Hold Fast
Jun 25 2014 3:35 pm
well i know hes going to add a war system some time soon so there will be that
but it would be cool to mark ally base off of ally NAP or other things
but still you should be able to attack like surpise attacks and such on people
also i think if there is a war system lets say side A vs side B and there fighting and stuff and side A ask for help maybe side C can join side A and then maybe side B will ask for help so side D and E will join them so you could have 5 ally fighting in a big war kinda like what happens in real life
Leader of the Asgard Fleet
26horses Production