Merging alliances right at the end of a server to take a win.

  • I think this is a big hole in the Kingdoms game.


    You build your alliance, it takes months of negotiations, trials, errors, more than likely gold. You invest huge amounts of time in your alliance. This is time (and money) spent in the nature of fun but also trying to win a server. No one loves a win more than me BUT... here is a simple way to beat every server in Kingdoms as it stands...


    All you need is a lot of smaller alliances to go about their business throughout the server and be largely mediocre. They're simming. That's not a bother, they'll never be big enough and organised enough to win right? Wrong. The same set of players (their names crop up on various servers) have formed a super alliance but broken it down into smaller alliances that they play just well enough to be mediocre, then, when the last few hours of the server are about to be finished, they merge and voila, one super alliance appears and takes top spot because their VP is through the roof compared to other alliances that have played fairly.


    I think a change needs to be made so that alliances can't be chopped around like this. For example, by the time level 50, or even 75 of the WW is built then an embargo on alliance mergers needs to be put in place. How to do that fairly I don't know but what I do know is a lot of people feel conned by this ploy of winning by super alliance and some would and will think twice about signing up for another server.

  • At the moment the first alliance of the server (COM3) has 3 WW and a 175% bonus, yesterday they had one WW with only 25% bonus. What's even the reason to have a 3 king limit per alliance when you can go around that by just merging everything the last day?

  • You build your ties, it takes months of negotiations, trials, errors, though not likely gold. You invest huge amounts of time in your diplomacy. This is time spent in the nature of fun but also trying to win a server.


    This is how alliances do merge. They don't simply say one day. Hey, let's merge and then merge. Perhaps its possible, but can you be sure that that alliance will stay loyal to you and not to the highest bidder if you delay it like in your example, till the end? Know this. By the start of WW race, you should have known which alliance must you try to woo, which alliance is definitely your enemy etc. If you don't know, then you lack preparation and analytical skill and you will be diplomatically beaten.


    Travian is unique since it is a geopolitical simulation. Its not a simple war game when you charge into the enemy bravely. Here, real politic is simulated. You must be able not to win only militarily, but diplomatically. If you win militarily but everyone hate you, you will lose. If you are likeable but you are weak, you will be bullied and lose anyway.

  • If things are going to be like that from now on, it sounds like it will become a very boring game for simple governors, and, in addition, that beautiful feeling of admiration, pride and loyalty for belonging to a specific alliance will be lost forever if winning is all the thing that will matter now on regardless of the form or the cost to get that win... when your dear alliance will disapear in a blink of an eye, without any notice, at the very end, and that WW you help to build with your team an friends will be swallowed too


    Such a sad way to spoil an excellent game!!!

  • You say it as if the alliance who merged is forced. You obviously cant force unwilling alliances since they have the option to decline your offer.


    Alliance is the equivalent of government in real life.


    You may evoke admiration, pride, loyalty. That is the equivalent of nationalism.


    Say, country A is at war at country B. You see B disadvantaged, do you press to attack or you wait till B have equal footing so you can fight an equal battle?


    Your concept of war is flawed. In a war, you take advantage of enemy weakness, form ties that benefit you and try to achieve swift complete victory.


    If you are in the losing side, you need to find a way to exploit enemy weakness and try to overturn the situation.


    In war you have to expect everything and make plan to anticipate enemy movement. Failure to do so may cost you the game, as simple as that.

  • You build your ties, it takes months of negotiations, trials, errors, though not likely gold. You invest huge amounts of time in your diplomacy. This is time spent in the nature of fun but also trying to win a server.


    This is how alliances do merge. They don't simply say one day. Hey, let's merge and then merge. Perhaps its possible, but can you be sure that that alliance will stay loyal to you and not to the highest bidder if you delay it like in your example, till the end? Know this. By the start of WW race, you should have known which alliance must you try to woo, which alliance is definitely your enemy etc. If you don't know, then you lack preparation and analytical skill and you will be diplomatically beaten.


    Travian is unique since it is a geopolitical simulation. Its not a simple war game when you charge into the enemy bravely. Here, real politic is simulated. You must be able not to win only militarily, but diplomatically. If you win militarily but everyone hate you, you will lose. If you are likeable but you are weak, you will be bullied and lose anyway.


    You are right. Need time to make the political ties and plan a merge.
    But you have to choose: you focus on victory or you focus on your team. If You can do both you really win. As king (or leader) you responsibility for your team is the first. (would be the first).
    We had the chance to invite other alliance same as you, but with what cost? Throw out our loyal teammates? Never! Teamwork and loyal friendships are why this game (or any social game) worth to play. The victory is come after.


    And back to the original topic.
    This mechanism is completely wrong. Welcome the metas in TK!

    The post was edited 1 time, last by verify ().

  • You are right. Need time to make the political ties and plan a merge.
    But you have to choose: you focus on victory or you focus on your team. You cant do both. As king (or leader) you responsibility for your team is the first. (would be the first).
    We had the chance to invite other alliance same as you, but with what cost? Throw out our loyal teammates? Never! Teamwork and loyal friendships are why this game (or any social game) worth to play. The victory is come after.


    And back to the original topic.
    This mechanism is completely wrong. Welcome the metas in TK!


    That is because you dont see your allies who have worked together with you as part of your team? Hahaha.. then it is your fault for failing to do so?


    We see them as part of our team. We value our allies and respect them. We honor them by sharing victory, which they democratically agrees on. If you are condemning our way of treating of our ALLIES which is PART OF OUR TEAM, I have no comment.


    And hey.. your propaganda kinda fail. since I know you tried to ask some particular alliance to merge, which they overwhelmingly reject.


    Anyway, it is the duty of the leader of the losing side to discredit the winning side in order to justify their losses, so I will leave you to do your job.

    The post was edited 3 times, last by M.E.V ().

  • And back to the original topic.
    This mechanism is completely wrong. Welcome the metas in TK!


    TK has been all about the metas since it was in closed beta. Every server i have been on has been won by the biggest alliance with most friends. That's the way this new game works, in T4 you didn't even get on an alliance if you weren't experienced and now you'll get on any ally because you're paying taxes. Stolen goods also give most resources (crop) on biggest kingdoms so why wouldn't you join them? People love using kingdoms as safehavens so they can sim in peace, troop amounts on most people is pathetic. Last speed some people made around 500k troops whereas most governors had like 3k troops and when a proper player attacked them they were just "pls send def ty". If they get defended they don't realise how much troops people really should have at that point and he can't feed 100k def with lvl 6 cropfields. (Which he left there because he didn't need more crop for his troops) Some people have less troops than population, i always have atleast 10x it.


    King is supposed to protect governors, or that's how the tutorial explained it to me, but it is totally not worth it. Only reason king wants governors is to get resources as taxes for building a massive hammer. Why? Because most of the governors are inactive and you need to be the one clearing enemy treasuryvillages everytime.


    If you want a succesful alliance it has be to among the biggest in the server and has to accept everyone in or you will not produce as many treasures as other alliances and get left behind in VP. TK has gone too far with being noob-friendly. Still, i like TK better than T4 which was all about being preformed and making a superhero with gold at the start to win the earlygame. In the end, it's the current VP system that makes metas work.

  • Please Jallu, let the past stay in the past, metas sucks, COM2 the first and the second one too actually lol were a failure because of it, last COMx3 was laughable aswell. Metas ruin the game, or rather all this stupid diplomacy ruins the game, no one has the guts to fight another alliance for real because they might lose.
    I've been part of metas so I can't judge anyone from doing it aswell but I've accepted my mistake and I'm trying to do it differently now.
    This COM3 was different though, it was a quite equilibrated server and I wouldn't call Empire a meta, they fought against everyone else, so did BS and UNDO. I havn't followed the server enough to give a proper opinion but I know people that worked hard to win just like everyone else did.


    TK can stay as it is, with metas, sim the whole server and throw everything at each other at the end or you can chose the hard and fun road, stay as one alliance, fight the whole server, and try to win alone, and so should try everyone else in the server. The unseen beauty of this version is that anyone, literally anyone can win if they play it correctly, an alliance with 2kk VPs advantage can lose that advantage in one night and it can all come down to the winning strategy rather than who has the most people. What you say about accepting everyone, producing VPs etc.. is true if all you do is simming and if your governors don't have a lot of troops it's because they are new to the game and you didn't push them to have more troops. You can't expect them to start a game and be perfect right?


    EDIT: by "fight the whole server" I meant the whole server duration obviously.

  • If things are going to be like that from now on, it sounds like it will become a very boring game for simple governors, and, in addition, that beautiful feeling of admiration, pride and loyalty for belonging to a specific alliance will be lost forever if winning is all the thing that will matter now on regardless of the form or the cost to get that win... when your dear alliance will disapear in a blink of an eye, without any notice, at the very end, and that WW you help to build with your team an friends will be swallowed too


    Such a sad way to spoil an excellent game!!!


    I'm going to reply to this while trying to stay out of the larger debate. For anyone who doesn't see the naming resemblance, I am Barfight on com3.


    1. C2H5OH had options, it was our own choice who to cooperate with, when that choice was made we stayed loyal, which is an important point to me.
    2. This was quid pro quo, Empire shared VP victory with us, we sharedWW victory with them. And while we built WW mostly with our own res, Empire what must've been providing 8-900k standing def towards the end (I don't have exact figures) and in my opinion that ENTITLES them to share WW victory. They even sacrificed their own WW for C2H5OH's to be able to finish.
    3. The merge didn't just happen without warning. There was a post about it in C2H5OH ally chat prior to victory being secured(for what I was aware of anyway), where anyone with an opinion had a chance to voice it. And while there were some players who weren't overly happy about abandoning C2, every single one who disagreed finished by saying they would follow me where I decided to end up. Not a single player came forward and asked to remain (which would have been respected), and the number of player who expressed concerns weren't that many either (not that every opinion doesn't matter). I posted this by mistake on wrong server, in my ally on com4, so both players in UNDO and 1 saw it there, and can confirm that I didn't just move everyone With no warning, or chance to express opinions. The fact that everyone came with me again has something to do with loyalty, in the same way that I wanted to bring everyone along.
    4. At no point have we been forced by Empire to do anything. What has been done, has been done in total agreement between leaders of respective alliances.


    I'm done, let META-argument continue.


    - Arclight/Barfight/Farsight

  • Please Jallu, let the past stay in the past, metas sucks, COM2 the first and the second one too actually lol were a failure because of it, last COMx3 was laughable aswell. Metas ruin the game.


    Lets add "for me" to that quote. They ruin it for you. They dont ruin it for others. You make these blanket statements Mayo but there is no blanket in this game. If you dont like it you dont have to play that way but clearly they dont ruin the game for everyone right?


    M.E.V I couldnt have said everything you said better myself. Great posts and great job. You win in this game how you win. Some of you want this game to be nothing but a war game. I suggest FPS for you. This is a game of strategy and that includes diplomacy and that includes merging alliances and secret confeds and on and on.

  • Wait Marius, why do you think on the first COM2 there was a rebellion against you (xTools), and that most of xTools went inactive? You went inactive/quit aswell. Why? No action -> Why? Everyone was allied -> Fun yay


    You're a great player no doubt on that, you're just not able to win on your own with your alliance, you need to get everyone to be on your side so you're sure you will win without having to actually fight for it. Too bad that everyone will be bored to death.
    There is no strategy at all in allying the whole server together against one guy and make him look like the bad guy and that no one can win if they don't play all together against him. If we want to be all winners let's play sim city 4 all together, it's really similar :D

  • COM2. I don't really know the situation in the enemy camp. (xtools)


    What I know is at start of WW race, one WW seems to have changed hand and suddenly all SAMURAI leaders deleted? Hence, not much opposition for xtools. This is mainly the reason the server is kinda boring.


    It was an unexpected development though I do not know the full detail. (so I may not be fully qualified to comment)


    A leader duty is to stand until the very end. You can still fight back. That is simply handing the enemy victory. War is also a battle of willpower. To weaken the resolve of the enemy so overwhelmingly is a way to win the war and xtools have done a magnificent job of doing so even though they use strategy that I dont see as a very good thing to use.


    I can see that many still want to fight though. At the end, we still have some good fight with xtoolsies even though win is almost impossible. :)

    The post was edited 1 time, last by M.E.V ().

  • The server was boring because there were 10 wings of xTools and every other alliance was allied with xTools except a few. WW appeared, the guy who chiefed the WW in SAMURAI switched alliance so SAMURAI couldn't take it back for three days. False info were given to SAMURAI which led to everyone deleting and those who didn't delete tried to bother as much as possible xTools.
    United and Co rebelled against xTools, closed the VP gap without any response from their hand, Creeck went afk, Ankur1 went afk, they won because Heartagram switched alliance and back stabbed everyone who worked hard to bring that WW lvl 100, i.e. TEAM and their leader Daniel Hart, along with a lot of United people.
    I think we discussed this enough and bringing it back up for glorifying their moves and backstabs all around the server is just sad for everyone that got backstabbed for the interest of a few guys that used a lot of people.
    Congrats to them for their hardwork.
    Let's not mention that all their WWs(3) got cleared back then. Even people in xTools hated that move and to be associated to it, Sad to see this..


    What happened happened, let's go next but let's try to do something better maybe.


    Quote

    We see them as part of our team. We [B]value our allies and respect them. We [B]honor them by sharing victory, which they democratically agrees on. If you are condemning our way of treating of our ALLIES which is PART OF OUR TEAM, I have no comment.
    [/B][/B]


    How can you say this and praise xTools, I have literally no idea.

  • Well, my knowledge of xtools internal is limited. I dont pay attention to endgame since im occupied and have no internet access.


    Early mid im mostly allianceless and pay no attention to faraway politic.


    As ive said. Im not the most qualified to comment on that. So if I miss few details then im sorry.


    My knowledge is limited to ESAMURAI in particular and what I and one king feel there.


    My only point is you must keep fighting and dont surrender That is what im trying to convey. I wont debate other stuff in com2 case. Im not trying to glorify xtools. You focus on the wrong part of my words.

    The post was edited 5 times, last by M.E.V ().


  • My only point is you must keep fighting and dont surrender That is what im trying to convey. I wont debate other stuff in com2 case. Im not trying to glorify xtools. You focus on the wrong part of my words.


    Yes agreed, except that the xTools leaders left aswell shortly after the WW appeared and left all governors and duke alone. So maybe SAMURAI leaders shouldn't have deleted and should have kept fighting, I even tried to convince them, but xTools aren't better from this point of view.


    EDIT: Ok let's go next, this has nothing to do with the discussion. I understand your point of view and share it but conveying it through COM2 wasn't the best choice imo :P


  • Point me plz Baguette, where i said anything about you? i shared my opinion, what im thinking different.
    I dont know, why You took my words personally when we talked this things over in private.
    And I don't care you believe me or you agree with me after your arrogant and offending style here.
    We are completely different persons.
    You think everyone have a backdoor intent when say something.


    Maybe i used wrong word. my team=my alliance. Who with worked together for months under one name. (sorry, my english is not as good as i'd liked it)


    Im not talking on behalf of my alliance, this is only my thoughts. (under my player name)


    And hey... show me anything, i tried to invite any other WW owner. You cant. This is a fact.




    Game mechanism.
    There are limits how many kings and how many dukes can be in an alliance in the same time. I think, this is not a coincidence.
    Esprit des lois...


    - - - Updated - - -



    This COM3 was different though, it was a quite equilibrated server and I wouldn't call Empire a meta, they fought against everyone else, so did BS and UNDO. I havn't followed the server enough to give a proper opinion but I know people that worked hard to win just like everyone else did.


    Not Empire was the meta. They was a big (and great) alliance. The meta was:
    Empire, beerboys, WW's, armory, fire
    'Independent' alliances under one leadership for one goal.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by verify ().

  • Wait Marius, why do you think on the first COM2 there was a rebellion against you (xTools), and that most of xTools went inactive? You went inactive/quit aswell. Why? No action -> Why? Everyone was allied -> Fun yay


    You're a great player no doubt on that, you're just not able to win on your own with your alliance, you need to get everyone to be on your side so you're sure you will win without having to actually fight for it. Too bad that everyone will be bored to death.
    There is no strategy at all in allying the whole server together against one guy and make him look like the bad guy and that no one can win if they don't play all together against him. If we want to be all winners let's play sim city 4 all together, it's really similar :D


    I left for a completely different reason than boredom actually. But thats neither here nor there, Nothing you said changes anything I Said. For you its not fun. For others it clearly is rewarding since they stayed and won. So all your blah blah blah is nothing but self serving nonesense. You didnt win the way YOU WANT TO PLAY and that upsets you so you have to discredit peoples play style to sooth your own ego Mayo.


    You lost, deal with it. You were not as good of a politician as we were (in terms of com2 as Jallu was). Deal with it.

  • Yes agreed, except that the xTools leaders left aswell shortly after the WW appeared and left all governors and duke alone. So maybe SAMURAI leaders shouldn't have deleted and should have kept fighting, I even tried to convince them, but xTools aren't better from this point of view.


    EDIT: Ok let's go next, this has nothing to do with the discussion. I understand your point of view and share it but conveying it through COM2 wasn't the best choice imo :P


    Now that is something that I don't know. Yes, maybe com2 is not the best example.. but hey, how much travian kingdom server have existed? I don't have much choice :P



    To verify:
    Perhaps because your tone is sometimes confusing verify. Most of the time its polite, which is good. Sometimes I see it become accusing and offensive. (not here in forum) If that is unintended, do forgive me for my tone to you last time then. I'm just somewhat pissed.


    Ok, lets go back to the discussion.


    You said your team = your alliance. This is true for UNDO case I believe.


    For Empire, our team = our alliance and allies.


    This is the only difference. Why is our team our alliance and allies? Because we have worked together closely. We're one, and hence the final merge to appreciate everyone who have helped us to victory :) Its just that verify.


    It's like BS & Daeva's who slowly merged. Its just we do it in last minute? At the end the same result is achieved.

    The post was edited 3 times, last by M.E.V ().


  • Not Empire was the meta. They was a big (and great) alliance. The meta was:
    Empire, beerboys, WW's, armory, fire
    'Independent' alliances under one leadership for one goal.


    Please read my earlier post. "Beerboys" made their own choices. There was no pressure to merge. As for leadership, I was relieved to hand over as much of that as I could. In fact, I think Empire would've appreciated C2 taking more initiative on that part, not less, but my home situation leaves me playing by phone app a lot of the time while doing other things, which makes efficient leadership vitrually impossible. As a small alliance smack in between WL (who were big at the time) and Empire, I was writing small essay collections of ingame messages daily, trying to balance the situation. Time spent just tending to diplomacy was no good for neither my family life nor work. When some communication hickup in WL made it shine through that their intention with C2 was to integrate the entire alliance into Sirdreads kingdom, possibly only for his own ambition, choice became simple. And I then tried to push as much leadership over on Empire as I could, but still had to deal with most things myself for a long time.


    Giving Empire early sitter access was also my initiative in order to gain trust fast, and skip all the usual trust issues when people you don't really know in this game are going to cooperate. And from there I, and some others in C2, were added to Empire leadership communication channels. Timing, and a very hurried and sloppy planning of the first attack on UNDO WW also came from me, Empire followed up by attacking BS. I was losing hammers to impatient players sending them off on their own, and decided it could not wait any longer, so first opportunity where I knew I had all the people I needed online was set. I didn't have time to organize fakes and such. Empire wanted to wait still, but moved up their timetable on attacking BS.


    As for FIRE, they were allied to WL, then WLR, then C2. They helped with res and def, but were never ordered to do anything. And their attacks were done on their own.


    Please get over this idea of Empire allies being their puppets.