Alliance debate

[highlander]

Once game has started there's not much you can do , unless organise allies to fight the allies .Also as host you add them to your ban list so you know if the trouble-makers try to join again , then kick them.

[Froggy618157725]

Alliances are fine if they're done in intelligent ways.

The dumb thing is unconditional alliances. People should expect allies to turn on them on any given turn, and play accordingly. Alliances should always be based on the immediate situation. For instance, if two people are next to eachother, and everyone else has a long time to spread without resistance, it makes sense for them to ally for the start of the game, since otherwise they'll both be too weak to do anything mid-game. Also, if one player is much larger than the others, they should join forces against the main power until it is reduced to the same level as other players. At no point should you be allied against a weaker player. That's just silly.

Alliances should only remain in the case that it's self destructive for either of them to attack the other. When the reason for the alliance disappears, the alliance should as well. It's also reasonable to have an alliance of the form of not fighting over a particular tile. You could fight elsewhere on the map, but leave a certain region alone. I've definitely had games like that, where we both leave a 1 border all game, while fighting elsewhere.

On the other hand, I auto-ally against anyone who forms an alliance before placing, or at start of game before anything is done. That's just silly and game breaking, and not behavior that should be rewarded with the possibility of winning.

[Autumnwolf17]

All that's needed is a simple understanding by everyone of set requirements.
1. If the host or half of the players are against an alliance, there should be no alliance. This should be decided at the beginning of match for a true alliance game.
2. Later alliances shouldn't be made between more than two players, and neither of those players should be the most powerful.
3. Not all focused attacks involve alliances, for instance, if I was finishing game, I would go for at least disabling the strongest opposition first.
4. No secret allies and obviously no double PC.
5. Alliances are not nessesarily permanent, but if you want to break, you cannot do so after your ally's turn, you must do so after your own turn.
6. If a draw is agreed upon when alliance is made, then both players are in perminant alliance. (terms could be used, perhaps markers to remind you that red for instance is a permanent ally or that you agreed to try to save yellow, even at your own expense, I sometimes play with a cease-fire between I and another)
7. Alliances should be even.
8. No one is forced into and alliance.
There could be more rules, all I am saying is that there should be set rules for alliances so that we don't have all there complaints. I am not trying to set up official rules, just how I feel.

[highlander]

The point being no-ones likes allies ,why should a player who got lucky placement or battle wins be suddenly attacked by bullies who are nothing more than jealous.
Poor excuse's ALLIES use.
1.Your a Higher Level
2.Your Rating is Higher
3.You have more land , hence your too big
4.Your a low level and weaker
5.Greed , the need for more ratings ,xp's and achievements plus getting on the leaders board

[hicksy17]

A good idea to make alliance rules.

A list could also be made of those who do not wish to play games with alliances so people could know which games they could possibly make alliances in.

[highlander]

All that's needed is a simple understanding by everyone of set requirements.








There could be more rules, all I am saying is that there should be set rules for alliances so that we don't have all there complaints. I am not trying to set up official rules, just how I feel.

There are no rules and vortex-wars official stance is there is no ruling against it.

Making rules for allies to cheat more , is just making a mockery of what once was a brillaint game.
The debate is about whether you approve or disapprove.Not making a new set of rules.

[highlander]

A good idea to make alliance rules.

A list could also be made of those who do not wish to play games with alliances so people could know which games they could possibly make alliances in.

there is a list for those not wishing allies , IT'S CALLED THE GAME RULES.

[hicksy17]

All that's needed is a simple understanding by everyone of set requirements.








There could be more rules, all I am saying is that there should be set rules for alliances so that we don't have all there complaints. I am not trying to set up official rules, just how I feel.

There are no rules and vortex-wars official stance is there is no ruling against it.

Making rules for allies to cheat more , is just making a mockery of what once was a brillaint game.
The debate is about whether you approve or disapprove.Not making a new set of rules.

A debate can have ideas put forward and the rules idea is a good one. If the idea can cause a solution to future alliance dilemmas it should be considered.

[hicksy17]

A good idea to make alliance rules.

A list could also be made of those who do not wish to play games with alliances so people could know which games they could possibly make alliances in.

there is a list for those not wishing allies , IT'S CALLED THE GAME RULES.

Still it could help those who are new to this game.

Don't get me wrong a fully understand what you mean, but some things should be considered not ignored no matter how silly the idea is.

[highlander]

Check under FEATURE REQUEST'S - Game ideas that will NOT be implemented! Please don't ask !

5. TEAMS\ ALLIANCES