| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
dunnoob 
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Location: Elijal
Status: Offline
Points: 800
|
 Posted: 10 Jun 2012 at 02:11 |
 Binky the Berserker wrote:
Some alliances survive, some don't. either way players can learn from it. I say: don't change a thing.
|
I have no problem with small players starting small alliances to learn how stuff works before they join a bigger alliance, especially anything they couldn't do as members of a peaceful training alliance.
But it gets messy when a pop 200 "leader" recruits pop 50 newbs in GC, and has neither resources nor insights to share with newer players. 
|
 |
Zork2012
Wordsmith
Joined: 16 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 135
|
Posted: 10 Jun 2012 at 00:49 |
|
I had to look it up - I was wrong, BlackJack & Hookers - silly me
|
|
Zork2012
Wordsmith
Joined: 16 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 135
|
Posted: 10 Jun 2012 at 00:45 |
ok maybe its just me that wants to join that one
|
|
Zork2012
Wordsmith
Joined: 16 Jun 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 135
|
Posted: 10 Jun 2012 at 00:44 |
I am in favor of smaller alliances and cheaper charters, also please eliminate some of those inactive alliances. There are some inactive alliances that have such great names, such as Hookers & Beer. You know you want to join that one huh?
|
|
Binky the Berserker
Forum Warrior
Joined: 19 Jul 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 257
|
Posted: 10 Jun 2012 at 00:12 |
|
I think the cost is right as it is. You need to have played for a while to start an alliance, but not too long. New players don't need a real long time before they can start an alliance, but at least long enough to know something about the game. Some alliances survive, some don't. either way players can learn from it. I say: don't change a thing.
Edited by Binky the Berserker - 10 Jun 2012 at 00:14
|
|
invictusa
Forum Warrior
Joined: 16 Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 488
|
Posted: 09 Jun 2012 at 23:55 |
Ander wrote:
What is the rationale in increasing it more? |
To decrease the over abundance of alliances, to make care-a-vaneers think twice about funding a newby to make an alliance, and decrease the amount of trolls that create an alliance and then declare war on every one.
|
|
...and miles to go before I sleep.
|
|
Subatoi
Forum Warrior
Joined: 01 Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 380
|
Posted: 09 Jun 2012 at 23:19 |
Ander wrote:
500,000 is just right. If a player has made that much money without begging, he has understood the basics of the game.
|
Who's to say the player made the money without begging though? selling off basic resources they receive through caravans would eventually get enough money.
|
|
Ander
Postmaster General
Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269
|
Posted: 09 Jun 2012 at 23:01 |
I'm all for encouraging new alliances.
500,000 is just right. If a player has made that much money without begging, he has understood the basics of the game.
What is the rationale in increasing it more?
|
|
Subatoi
Forum Warrior
Joined: 01 Mar 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 380
|
Posted: 09 Jun 2012 at 21:09 |
moe money, thats what was set up before and when too many allainces were being founded, went from 5k or something to 500k. now lets hit 5 mil.
and i wouldnt mind an update for more members to an alliance, we've seen that alliances will just add more members one way or another to their *alliance* aka CROW.
|
|
dunnoob
Postmaster
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Location: Elijal
Status: Offline
Points: 800
|
Posted: 09 Jun 2012 at 20:57 |
abstractdream wrote:
Going to 50 will only effect the larger alliances and especially the training alliances. It doesn't seem like a good idea to me. |
+1, actually that limit could be changed in the opposite direction, why not allow 250 members?
The costs can be raised to 5M, because that's more than folks might be willing to give away just for the giggles of watching yet another failing alliance. After all 5M is more than 5555 cows... 
|
|
Tweet
Alliance Establishment Cost Increase