doc_highlander
10-26-2005, 04:47 PM
... but it seems to be necessary!
First of all I wanted to thank Mickey for this funny game! :kiss:
After my last experiences with alliances (greetings to W_P :dead: ) which cost me all my cities :whine:
I thought about some conceptional changes to make alliances more attractive for the game (and not only for the leaders):
1)
The big alliances are not able to act together. The "Battle of the Blocks" UN contra NAR is boring! New player have no chance to grow up if whole continents are in the hand of one alliance (look at europe). So why not limit the number of members of an alliance to 10 (or so)?
2)
In real life alliances have expenses for administration and so on. In the game this could be a fee that the leader has to pay in the same way as an owner of a city. Lets say betwee 10 and 20 Geos a day for every member of the alliance. Or he pays the expenses of a (new) "Alliance-Army" (see 3). The leader can ask the members of his alliance to pay this costs back to him, if he wants.
3)
Real Alliances mostly have not only their own national armys, but there are also "Allied Forces". So it would be nice to meet them in the game too: In the homebase of someone creating an alliance should be automatically appear an army (100 troops, name of the alliance). Afterward the leader should be able to create more of this allied army if he wants. Every member should be able to arm this allied army/armies (by his own costs), but the leader has to pay for the troop expenses (see 2). If an allied army enters a city, this city does not belong to a special person, but to the whole alliance: the city tax should be divided to all members as same parts.
4)
If the owner of a bonus-city is a member of an alliance the bonus should be divides by all members of this alliance. Or 30% to him and 70% to all members ...
5)
Is it possible to add special colors to show wheter armies on the way to a city or near the city are allied or not?
The same colors could be used as font-color on the city-pages to sign cities of allies or not-allies.
6)
The leaders of an alliance can invite everyone. To ban a member of the alliance he has to ask the other members. Perhaps is it possible to let the leader start a (secret) vote on the forum site? Only if more than 50% of the alliance agree, the ban should be possible.
7)
At last i want to propose a different concept which could replace the alliances at all:
- There could be three states: friend, neutral, enemy (like in AOE).
When the game starts (after a reset) everyones state to everyone is neutral.
- Like in the real world, you cant attack a player without sending a "declaration of war" before: you have to change the status of this player to "enemy" on your site and your new enemy gets a message automatically. Then you can attack him. He has to change you to "enemy" too, before he can attack you.
- Changing the status of another player to "friend" is like a "peace treaty" (replacing the alliances). You can cancel this treaty by change the status back to "neutral", but then you have to wait some time (lets say 2 days) before you can change forward to "enemy". Or if you break the treaty by changing to "enemy" at one step, you should have to pay a tax of 500 Geos (or so) because of this violation of international law. If you have no 500 Geos, you cant change from "friend" to "enemy".
- The change to "friend" is a little bit dangerous, because you do not know wheter your new "friend" will do the same step, but this makes it more interesting and communicative.
- The status should be signed by different font-colors in the player list (green = friend, black = neutral, red = enemy)
Thats enough for today
Thanks for your attention (and for excusing my poor english :slant: )!
First of all I wanted to thank Mickey for this funny game! :kiss:
After my last experiences with alliances (greetings to W_P :dead: ) which cost me all my cities :whine:
I thought about some conceptional changes to make alliances more attractive for the game (and not only for the leaders):
1)
The big alliances are not able to act together. The "Battle of the Blocks" UN contra NAR is boring! New player have no chance to grow up if whole continents are in the hand of one alliance (look at europe). So why not limit the number of members of an alliance to 10 (or so)?
2)
In real life alliances have expenses for administration and so on. In the game this could be a fee that the leader has to pay in the same way as an owner of a city. Lets say betwee 10 and 20 Geos a day for every member of the alliance. Or he pays the expenses of a (new) "Alliance-Army" (see 3). The leader can ask the members of his alliance to pay this costs back to him, if he wants.
3)
Real Alliances mostly have not only their own national armys, but there are also "Allied Forces". So it would be nice to meet them in the game too: In the homebase of someone creating an alliance should be automatically appear an army (100 troops, name of the alliance). Afterward the leader should be able to create more of this allied army if he wants. Every member should be able to arm this allied army/armies (by his own costs), but the leader has to pay for the troop expenses (see 2). If an allied army enters a city, this city does not belong to a special person, but to the whole alliance: the city tax should be divided to all members as same parts.
4)
If the owner of a bonus-city is a member of an alliance the bonus should be divides by all members of this alliance. Or 30% to him and 70% to all members ...
5)
Is it possible to add special colors to show wheter armies on the way to a city or near the city are allied or not?
The same colors could be used as font-color on the city-pages to sign cities of allies or not-allies.
6)
The leaders of an alliance can invite everyone. To ban a member of the alliance he has to ask the other members. Perhaps is it possible to let the leader start a (secret) vote on the forum site? Only if more than 50% of the alliance agree, the ban should be possible.
7)
At last i want to propose a different concept which could replace the alliances at all:
- There could be three states: friend, neutral, enemy (like in AOE).
When the game starts (after a reset) everyones state to everyone is neutral.
- Like in the real world, you cant attack a player without sending a "declaration of war" before: you have to change the status of this player to "enemy" on your site and your new enemy gets a message automatically. Then you can attack him. He has to change you to "enemy" too, before he can attack you.
- Changing the status of another player to "friend" is like a "peace treaty" (replacing the alliances). You can cancel this treaty by change the status back to "neutral", but then you have to wait some time (lets say 2 days) before you can change forward to "enemy". Or if you break the treaty by changing to "enemy" at one step, you should have to pay a tax of 500 Geos (or so) because of this violation of international law. If you have no 500 Geos, you cant change from "friend" to "enemy".
- The change to "friend" is a little bit dangerous, because you do not know wheter your new "friend" will do the same step, but this makes it more interesting and communicative.
- The status should be signed by different font-colors in the player list (green = friend, black = neutral, red = enemy)
Thats enough for today
Thanks for your attention (and for excusing my poor english :slant: )!