Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Should The Cost Of Alliances Increase?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Should The Cost Of Alliances Increase?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Poll Question: Should the cost of creating and/or running an alliance be increased?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
4 [23.53%]
0 [0.00%]
8 [47.06%]
3 [17.65%]
2 [11.76%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
eowan the short View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jan 2016
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 560
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eowan the short Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Should The Cost Of Alliances Increase?
    Posted: 05 Apr 2018 at 13:04
What are your thoughts on this to try to make the creation and maintaining of an alliance a more serious thing rather than something almost anyone can do?

#BlameGrom


Edited by eowan the short - 05 Apr 2018 at 13:06
Back to Top
Ten Kulch View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster


Joined: 20 Jan 2017
Location: Fellandire
Status: Offline
Points: 678
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ten Kulch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2018 at 14:38
I voted other. In different games I have played, players could invest in-game currency (gold and prestige types) to increase the benefits of an alliance. I like that system.
Check out my blog, Warmongering in Illyriad for self-defense techniques, military city construction, and PvP strategies.
Back to Top
Bill Cipher View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2016
Location: The Universe
Status: Offline
Points: 180
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bill Cipher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2018 at 14:46
Originally posted by Ten Kulch Ten Kulch wrote:

I voted other. In different games I have played, players could invest in-game currency (gold and prestige types) to increase the benefits of an alliance. I like that system.

A few million or something. I feel like if there was this and it used the prestiged it could become a p2w for alliances depending on when benefits there were.
-
I wouldn't mind an increase cost just to create an alliance but having an up-keep could possibly lead to fewer new alliances and taxes becoming necessary if the price is high 


Edited by Bill Cipher - 05 Apr 2018 at 14:48
d-a-r-o-r-w-o pb wlph kdv frph wr exuq. l lqyrnh wkh dqflhqw srzhu wkdw l pdb uhwxuq
Back to Top
Ten Kulch View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster


Joined: 20 Jan 2017
Location: Fellandire
Status: Offline
Points: 678
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ten Kulch Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2018 at 17:31
There is nothing wrong with paying for minor advantages.

You can already get a 10% bonus for a week for 4 prestige, and everybody accepts that. I think alliances should be allowed to build small, specific advantages. For example, maybe a trade alliance would invest in a boost to caravan speed or harvesting rate.

An example system from an older MMORTS worked like this: alliance skills had 10 levels. Each level provided the same increase as the last level, but cost more. One skill provided a -2% cost reduction to alliance skill investment. Another increased the harvest yield from alliance farms and mines by 5% per level. Investment was purely voluntary (although it did give you alliance ranking points). When the team reached the target amount, the alliance skill leveled up and the next level was unlocked. Investment was in silver, their equivalent of Illyriad gold pieces.

Spending team prestige in that game allowed you to purchase cosmetic alliance items like a cooler banner in battle.
Check out my blog, Warmongering in Illyriad for self-defense techniques, military city construction, and PvP strategies.
Back to Top
General Lacesso View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn
Avatar

Joined: 08 Mar 2018
Status: Offline
Points: 92
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote General Lacesso Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2018 at 17:35
I do like the idea of being able to invest game currency into your alliance for benefits. I don't think that the benefits should be a permanent feature, but a temporary boost that could be activated by the founder or alliance leader. There could also be tiers to the benefits that can increase in cost, but the benefits increase as well

Example: Temporally increase the speed of caravans for alliance member for 8 hours. T1 is 3% increase, T2 is 5%, and so on.

This is just a suggestion and my opinions.
Back to Top
rajput View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2017
Location: Punjab
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rajput Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2018 at 18:24
I choose 'Other'.

I am all for Alliance wide temporary bonus/boast Thumbs Up... Really good idea Ten Kulch and General Lacesso.

This may be outside the scope of this thread, but there need to be something like alliance Campaign option, which is funded by alliance coffer and provide ability to setup something like FBO (Forward Base of Operations) a very important military aspect which is missing from this game. Alliance members can opt-in (participate) or opt-out (run away) from the campaign (for some intra-alliance drama). Member participation can be military (personnel) or support (resources). Instead of a square, FBO can even be any of alliance member city which can fit certain resource profile. I can go on and on let me shut up here! Geek

BTW if the issue is 'Too many alliances', another solution can be to provide option to eliminate alliance... May be by besieging the alliance capital or something is that vein...

Wacko ok zipping it...

Back to Top
AdmiralRage View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2017
Status: Offline
Points: 36
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AdmiralRage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2018 at 19:26
I think a 10 leveled alliance would be helpful. Even like a 1% gold boost per level. Then, to add on to Rajput, I think it should be possible to destroy an alliance. Each level in the alliance gives an objective city. So a large 10 level alliance would have 10 cities to destroy before the alliance was disbanded. The alliance leader could decide an change object cities but put like a 14 day cooldown on it.
Back to Top
eowan the short View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jan 2016
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 560
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eowan the short Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2018 at 20:32
I'll make another poll for levelled alliances
Back to Top
eowan the short View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Jan 2016
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 560
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote eowan the short Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Apr 2018 at 20:37
Back to Top
rajput View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2017
Location: Punjab
Status: Offline
Points: 129
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rajput Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 Apr 2018 at 12:03
Nawice! Thumbs Up

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.