Special penalty units for allies

Right so this will take a bit of explaining so bear with me please.

At the moment we have a chance to get special rare units at random as we cap towns.

I propose to balance out people making allies there should be a random chance that people get a special penalty unit. The chance would depend on the amount of allies you have. More allies the more likely you find these units.

This unit would be something like refugies, foreign business partners, economic spies, foreign contractors, nationalist rebels and so on.

This unit would have a high upkeep, most of the upkeep would go to an ally every turn out of your own cash flow! There is room for other ideas also, maybe a unit would decrease defence in a certain town... Hell they could even have stats and help in some way, the important thing is they cost the player some penality for his alliance in the long run.

You can disband these units but it breaks your alliance with a player. Prehaps this unit should have stealth and a very slow movement speed. (or no movement to advoid players just useing the units as kamikaze)

If you lose the ally then the units disband.

There would also have to be some penality for sending gold to an ally, prehaps 25%... Or they could just send it back to each other every turn.
I realise people could just break alliance, then remake the alliance but this might make one player mad and attack because he lost some income.. Prehaps a delay before you can ally again is needed...

Or you could just make it so allying has a up front cost, that would be allot easier haha....


Who else likes overly complicated and probably unworkable ideas?

There needs to be some sort of penalty for allying.

More times than not, when I join a game and view diplomacy, I see a solid green polygon of some sort.

Don't even get me started on games with 3 people.


You're right though, it'd probably be better just to have people pay a massive upkeep for an alliance. Of course, this wouldn't apply to team games.

I'm not opposed to money sending penalties at all, as long as it's reasonable. I think a 25% tax is fine. This way people will be discouraged from sending weakened allies and newcomer allies massive amounts of cash.

I'm not sure if the tax should exist for teams, perhaps just make it lower? 15% tax?

I see people starting in europe allying with australians on the very first turn. It's retarded. They usually end up allying with 90% of the other players too, at some point.


I'm thinking the alliance upkeep would be something between 500 to 1000? Perhaps it'd be different depending on your home country/the map you're playing. (An upkeep of 1 thousand might be fine for some of eurasia, but not for someone who started in south africa)

I think some sort of upkeep is the easiest way but I really dont find the idea much fun nor very inspiring.

Pure evil!!!! this is a great idea! you might even be able to do some thing with inflation? eh? (mabey too realistic) btw I am wondering why two players would send money back and forth?

Well my idea which is really over complex etc. Is that the upkeep for these special units would go to your ally.
You can disband them but you lose your ally and as your ally would also lose money he migth get mad and attack to make up for the loss.

But the whole idea breaks if you just send that money back to your ally.

Oh lol! That makes much more sence.

That sounds better, King Cow.

Two people are allied, they pay for each other's alliances.

But if A has an alliance with B, and B has an alliance not only with A, but with C D and E, then B will have to pay for the 4 alliances that A has. In return, A would have to pay for all the alliances that each of HIS allies had.

Instead of having units, we should just have an alliance upkeep, where each player pays for the alliances of their allies (but not for their own alliances). This way, nobody in hell would dare to make 10 alliances. Similarly, nobody in hell would want to ally someone with 10 alliances.

The game then becomes people having 2 player and sometimes 3 player alliances, which is a lot better than what I see in a lot of games now.

This should really at least be tested, imo.

This is funny and not hard to her around... hell having people allied up makes my job easyer I just kill them all and get 2 k sp in the process.. I don't know how many world games I have played and have beaten people 2 vs 1 or my last one was even 3 to 1... the sp is great and it makes the game more fun also I often times don't even ally with my ally and at one point once people are tired of us killing everyone and there frustrated that were not killing each others then we ally up and its just funny... it the people that ally up that don't get the sp.. last person I remember got 18 sp and I got over 2k its just funny to me...

Wr1tt3n by MarcJr, 06.03.2011 at 23:28

This is funny and not hard to her around... hell having people allied up makes my job easyer I just kill them all and get 2 k sp in the process.. I don't know how many world games I have played and have beaten people 2 vs 1 or my last one was even 3 to 1... the sp is great and it makes the game more fun also I often times don't even ally with my ally and at one point once people are tired of us killing everyone and there frustrated that were not killing each others then we ally up and its just funny... it the people that ally up that don't get the sp.. last person I remember got 18 sp and I got over 2k its just funny to me...

I totally support this statement... there is nothing wrong with alliances atm. Everyone that is allying the whole game puts themselves at a severe disadvantage if the game ends and SP decides the winner. It's all a matter of staying alive and fighting as many other players as possible to rack up the highest SP... I won my last 10 out of 10 games... the last game had 8 players and I was the only one with no allies... I won with 2k+ SP while the runner up had 700(before splitting). The rest of them all had less than 200 SP

Mass allying is a novice player's tactic.

Frankly if you do not think alliances are a problem in this game you must be playing a different game than I am.

I feel this is a Straw man saying that you have won games in the past does not mean its not a problem, also you sort of counter your point by admitting you are of much higher skill than average. What if the two people who ally are of the same skill as you? What about the majority of players who can not fight 2+ people on their own at the same time?

80% at least of my game are decided by people allying up. (and it's inevitable I have to make counter alliances) But at least people have gotten good at doing this by now. If one block of alliances has been made it's not normally long before a counter block is formed.
It's just boreing this happens almost every game now. It's also annoying to rely on other people so much.

Kink Cow this is an easy thing to fix... dont ally.. with anyone.. I go in games it seems every time and say no.. no... no... then one buy may talk to me then I might say yes... and if I do I tell him" You have to unally everyone else.. and if you with me there is no turning back.. and thats how I play and will play... LOVE IT like I said before 2 vs 1 or 3 vs 1 is more fun... I do see that if its 2 people like me and sificvoid or most of the Rank 8 and up people are allied together and your that 1... its gg... because your going to get attack every way that we can think of and it will be a fun game but you wont win.. but if this rare thing does happen have fun and enjoy.

I'm a rank 10, but i still kind of agree with King Cow.. The only thing in this game, that can make me not playing atWar an entire month, is one of those games where i have EU, a guy has asia and a third guy has US - i feel like im the strongest, but then the other two guys just ally.. So afterwards, i can say that i was clearly the best player, but still i didn't stand a chance..

On the other hand, if i'm beaten by a player who's just better than me, that doesn't make me mad.
So i totally support the idea of penalties for people with many alliances!

though i do think that the idea of being forced to have an ekstra unit is just retarded.. if x is my expecens (which will vary) and y is my number of allies, the upkeep penalty could be something like y/10 * x - this way, the more expences you have, the bigger the penalty will be. x could also be income instead (: that might be better, actually..

That doesn't really work, cause then you don't have to have many alliances before your expences will be bigger than your income.. but that doesn't matter, some genius can work a system out, we just have to have a penalty system for alliances! :-D

Yea, but sometimes i would also like to join a game i didn't make myself.

Wr1tt3n by Guest, 23.08.2013 at 06:37

DOn't like alliances and allyfags? Turn off alliances in game settings.

Do the translation man!

Wr1tt3n by Paag, 23.08.2013 at 06:12

That doesn't really work, cause then you don't have to have many alliances before your expences will be bigger than your income.. but that doesn't matter, some genius can work a system out, we just have to have a penalty system for alliances! :-D

And like with all ideas, secret alliances can bypass any idea and there is no solution but to play a bit diplomacy yourself.

Yea, secret alliances are there not much to do about.. but those are not the worst.. and at least we can do something about the ones which aren't secret (:

No support i want to ally as many people as i want ;^)