Has AtWar lost its skill?

Lately I have notices something which I never noticed before. In the past, allying used to mean something, and the only people who would ally numerous people are the lower ranks. What I have noticed now is that it is upper ranks (As high as rank 7 in many cases but goes higher in some cases) doing the same thing. The issue with this is that it is encouraged and completely suppresses skill in the game. These people will defend it by saying "I have good strategy by allying the right people", when realistically, they are allying everyone, not specific people to their advantage. They will say that people who do not do this are bad at making friends or do not have the skill of "teamwork".

The simply thing is, AtWar has an allyfagging problem which is undeniable by anyone who plays regularly.

Allying has an advantage if your aim is winning, but it provides no additional skill. Consequentially, you will have rank 8's with the skill level of what a rank 5 or 6 should be. Why is this a problem? People who do want to be good at the game and actually want to play without getting rushed by 3 people who have a massive army thanks to not fighting anyone while you have been fighting everyone around you will not be able to win. It suppresses skill and replaces it with friendship, which should not be a factor in this game.

So how do you fix this? There are a few ways to do it:

• Putting people who allyfag on your enemy list so you can fuck them later
  
• Make your game "no alliances"
  
• Make more standard world maps
  
• Discourage it to younger players or demonize those who do it
  

In reference to "Make more world maps", allyfagging is much more common in custom maps than standard world maps. This is probably due to a higher knowledge of the map and more experience with it, while people may not know custom maps as well.

Thanks for reading and please comment your opinion

I don't have a problem with allyfags. What I do have a problem with is turn 1 allyfags. I'll instaquit any game where that happens. Nothing more boring than playing a game in europe and three people choose right next to you, ally each other, then go for you.

There are also the faggots who wallfuck first turn but they arent very common anymore

My way to fix all of that is to place everyone on my enemy list that does these things. And then do my best to make sure there games never get people.

We need a game option that allows you to limits allies. Say, when you make a game, have a little drop box where you can select "Limit: 2" or 1. This forces people to choose their allies carefully rather than just allying everyone in the game, not fighting anyone, then rushing some lone person who just beat everyone around them with their fresh army, and with their allies. This would fix the mass allying problem, and make prominent actual games of skill. It doesn't fix everything obviously, but it would raise the skill level slowly as well.

Napisao Mahdi, 07.06.2013 at 20:52

I don't have a problem with allyfags. What I do have a problem with is turn 1 allyfags. I'll instaquit any game where that happens. Nothing more boring than playing a game in europe and three people choose right next to you, ally each other, then go for you.

Thats wht most noobs like you do all the time: quit. Not only in your games, but you quit at purpose on other peoples games....

A decent player just kills them all, no need to ally, the only problem here is the time.

Napisao Desu, 07.06.2013 at 21:33

We need a game option that allows you to limits allies. Say, when you make a game, have a little drop box where you can select "Limit: 2" or 1. This forces people to choose their allies carefully rather than just allying everyone in the game, not fighting anyone, then rushing some lone person who just beat everyone around them with their fresh army, and with their allies. This would fix the mass allying problem, and make prominent actual games of skill. It doesn't fix everything obviously, but it would raise the skill level slowly as well.

I proposed this

Napisao Guest, 07.06.2013 at 21:34

Napisao Mahdi, 07.06.2013 at 20:52

I don't have a problem with allyfags. What I do have a problem with is turn 1 allyfags. I'll instaquit any game where that happens. Nothing more boring than playing a game in europe and three people choose right next to you, ally each other, then go for you.

Thats wht most noobs like you do all the time: quit. Not only in your games, but you quit at purpose on other peoples games....

A decent player just kills them all, no need to ally, the only problem here is the time.

No, that is the problem. Good players cant play because ultimately, a hoard of shit players is better than one good player.

Napisao Guest, 07.06.2013 at 21:34

Napisao Mahdi, 07.06.2013 at 20:52

I don't have a problem with allyfags. What I do have a problem with is turn 1 allyfags. I'll instaquit any game where that happens. Nothing more boring than playing a game in europe and three people choose right next to you, ally each other, then go for you.

Thats wht most noobs like you do all the time: quit. Not only in your games, but you quit at purpose on other peoples games....

A decent player just kills them all, no need to ally, the only problem here is the time.

Though I admit I could be better. I cant win a 3v1 when three people choose regions NEIGHBORING me.

Napisao Mahdi, 07.06.2013 at 22:18

Napisao Guest, 07.06.2013 at 21:34

Napisao Mahdi, 07.06.2013 at 20:52

I don't have a problem with allyfags. What I do have a problem with is turn 1 allyfags. I'll instaquit any game where that happens. Nothing more boring than playing a game in europe and three people choose right next to you, ally each other, then go for you.

Thats wht most noobs like you do all the time: quit. Not only in your games, but you quit at purpose on other peoples games....

When i was germany i beat france,italy and ukraine
A decent player just kills them all, no need to ally, the only problem here is the time.

Though I admit I could be better. I cant win a 3v1 when three people choose regions NEIGHBORING me.

Napisao Desu, 07.06.2013 at 21:33

We need a game option that allows you to limits allies. Say, when you make a game, have a little drop box where you can select "Limit: 2" or 1. This forces people to choose their allies carefully rather than just allying everyone in the game, not fighting anyone, then rushing some lone person who just beat everyone around them with their fresh army, and with their allies. This would fix the mass allying problem, and make prominent actual games of skill. It doesn't fix everything obviously, but it would raise the skill level slowly as well.

This

Napisao Dbacks, 07.06.2013 at 23:53

Napisao Desu, 07.06.2013 at 21:33

We need a game option that allows you to limits allies. Say, when you make a game, have a little drop box where you can select "Limit: 2" or 1. This forces people to choose their allies carefully rather than just allying everyone in the game, not fighting anyone, then rushing some lone person who just beat everyone around them with their fresh army, and with their allies. This would fix the mass allying problem, and make prominent actual games of skill. It doesn't fix everything obviously, but it would raise the skill level slowly as well.

This

Exactly this!

Napisao Desu, 07.06.2013 at 21:33

We need a game option that allows you to limits allies. Say, when you make a game, have a little drop box where you can select "Limit: 2" or 1. This forces people to choose their allies carefully rather than just allying everyone in the game, not fighting anyone, then rushing some lone person who just beat everyone around them with their fresh army, and with their allies. This would fix the mass allying problem, and make prominent actual games of skill. It doesn't fix everything obviously, but it would raise the skill level slowly as well.

It sounds nice but maybe a button to propose ''draw''. When everyone agrees with ''draw'' the game will be like an ally end.

Napisao KYBL, 07.06.2013 at 20:41

...

Allyfagging is part of the game and it has been for some while. It can be beaten though, without flaming that player lol. Having 1-2 allies is enough, and try to hold out until the end, taking out 1 cap by the other, or just hold out against the allyfags until the game ends (most of the time it's turn 50). Only flaw is, you probably will buckle down at the might of 6+ players or won't have time to play until turn 50. Like the suggestions you have added above, I'd like to add, as rare as they get you might want to play 3v3s (europe or of any other sort) to get the full non allyfagging experience.

Yes have the option to cap the amount of allies to a percentage of those in the game. The cap being set at 50% of the players would be a suggestion for this. Obviously for a new player diplomacy is great, imo after rank 6 you should be trying to challenge yourself more and limit your alliances, saying that skill and rank really are losing meaning.

Napisao Unleashed, 08.06.2013 at 02:15

Napisao KYBL, 07.06.2013 at 21:43

No, that is the problem. Good players cant play because ultimately, a hoard of shit players is better than one good player.

No they're not, Dbacks won 6v1.

I once won 5v1, I had USA and they had everything else, I successfully defended untill all the 50 turns passed. I had highest SP ofc trolololol. If they wanna allyfag they can do it it's not against any rules. What's up with these noob threads. So many rank 9 noobs


Allyfag is just an opportunity to kill them all and get a ton of SP. If you care about SP that is, I stopped caring long time ago

Good for you and good for Dbacks, but for you, I have one question. What turn did this start? turn 38 as USA could have easily defended everyone else for enough time. If you had to win in the end, that would be a bigger problem for you.

Dbacks must have been playing crappy players. I was playing a 3v1 yesterday (Not that they were allyfagging, I was just in between three empires larger than me) and lost, but I did very well against them even though I shouldnt have. It was an ancient world. Judaea (Me) vs Carthage, India and Europe. The fact is that while you can do well in these, it is unlikely you will win.

Still people care about winning just because of the SP everyone wants to level up and have a amazing skull on there shield. so instead of just winning the game to get the SP it should be about how good you did in the game so even if you lose you will get all of your SP depends on how good you did like fighting off 3 players and at the end you get lot of SP from fighting and losing while they cut there SP between there ally's and have less then you and they will still know that they suck.

Napisao Goblin, 08.06.2013 at 07:17

And it's not the worst thing to lose huge sp, worst thing is losing a few hours of your life to be betrayed then gangbanged and mocked by idiots ...where the hell is fun in that?

Napisao Desu, 07.06.2013 at 21:33

We need a game option that allows you to limits allies. Say, when you make a game, have a little drop box where you can select "Limit: 2" or 1. This forces people to choose their allies carefully rather than just allying everyone in the game, not fighting anyone, then rushing some lone person who just beat everyone around them with their fresh army, and with their allies. This would fix the mass allying problem, and make prominent actual games of skill. It doesn't fix everything obviously, but it would raise the skill level slowly as well.

I support this 100%. People have been bringing this up for a while now. Needs to be implemented.

Napisao Spart, 08.06.2013 at 18:55

Napisao Desu, 07.06.2013 at 21:33

We need a game option that allows you to limits allies. Say, when you make a game, have a little drop box where you can select "Limit: 2" or 1. This forces people to choose their allies carefully rather than just allying everyone in the game, not fighting anyone, then rushing some lone person who just beat everyone around them with their fresh army, and with their allies. This would fix the mass allying problem, and make prominent actual games of skill. It doesn't fix everything obviously, but it would raise the skill level slowly as well.

I support this 100%. People have been bringing this up for a while now. Needs to be implemented.

Same.

I support za wize wurds of za desu.

Napisao Goblin, 08.06.2013 at 07:17

This all is why i play 1vs1, 3vs3, and no alliances games.

And it's not the worst thing to lose huge sp, worst thing is losing a few hours of your life to be betrayed then gangbanged and mocked by idiots ...where the hell is fun in that?

This. This right here.

Napisao tophat, 09.06.2013 at 14:59

I support za wize wurds of za desu.

of course u wud u buttlickin'z

Napisao Pinheiro, 09.06.2013 at 12:30

Napisao Spart, 08.06.2013 at 18:55

Napisao Desu, 07.06.2013 at 21:33

We need a game option that allows you to limits allies. Say, when you make a game, have a little drop box where you can select "Limit: 2" or 1. This forces people to choose their allies carefully rather than just allying everyone in the game, not fighting anyone, then rushing some lone person who just beat everyone around them with their fresh army, and with their allies. This would fix the mass allying problem, and make prominent actual games of skill. It doesn't fix everything obviously, but it would raise the skill level slowly as well.

I support this 100%. People have been bringing this up for a while now. Needs to be implemented.

Same.

this will really make Afterwind sexier

Just limit possible alliances...



And, there should be an option for "Ally End". A player can choose to click (and un-click) the option of "Ally End". If all players click "ally end" the game finishes.
In this case, the diplomacy map could represent 4 types of relations: (1) players in state of war (as enemy), (2) players signed peace treaty, (3) players are allied and (4) player willing to "ally end".

Napisao Columna Durruti, 12.06.2013 at 08:49

Just limit possible alliances...

[image]

And, there should be an option for "Ally End". A player can choose to click (and un-click) the option of "Ally End". If all players click "ally end" the game finishes.
In this case, the diplomacy map could represent 4 types of relations: (1) players in state of war (as enemy), (2) players signed peace treaty, (3) players are allied and (4) player willing to "ally end".

4th option should be draw.

Napisao Meester, 12.06.2013 at 08:58

Napisao Columna Durruti, 12.06.2013 at 08:49

Just limit possible alliances...

[image]

And, there should be an option for "Ally End". A player can choose to click (and un-click) the option of "Ally End". If all players click "ally end" the game finishes.
In this case, the diplomacy map could represent 4 types of relations: (1) players in state of war (as enemy), (2) players signed peace treaty, (3) players are allied and (4) player willing to "ally end".

4th option should be draw.

Or World Peace for the sake of humanity... huehuehue!

Yeah I really know what you mean Franco, so many people allyfag these days. And the problem is that allyfagging begets more allyfagging because it forces the people without many allies to ally people or die (ie: everyone in the allyfag alliance gangbangs them) Its a really bad problem and as a new subscriber I hope that atwar moderators will make the diplomacy their number 1 priority to fix.

Durruti's solution is fine, anything is better than right now.

We need a new option in teamgames
"join team 1"
"join team 2"
"join no team"

Hmmmm