PDA

View Full Version : Alliance System - Feature Suggestions



vengefuldeath87
2nd July 2008, 10:57 PM
As the title says really. What things would you like to see in the alliance system?

Don-
2nd July 2008, 11:47 PM
#1) Circular mail, a box u can tick to send the entire chain a msg (war alert, or farm list) *could be a prem acc feature
the feature can only be enabled by the "leader" + whoever she/he nominates to have the priviledge.

Sort by: who was online in the last 10 mins/entire chain/leader group

great for other games ive played. keeps ppl informed.

#2) similarly ^ enable more than 1 "leader", create a group.

#3) Banner or picture in the Alliance profile.

#4) Clan growth/attack/sab stats, viewable by the "leader" group. and ranked against other chains.

#5) War stats, clan Vs Clan, a page accessable by all players, showing sab stats/gold hits/kills between 2 warring clans. (so we can tell who is actually winning)

Enter clan A, clan B, hit go, compares stats against only each clan.

#6) sort by Allaince on the battlefield, (way easier to sab & quicker.)

vengefuldeath87
3rd July 2008, 08:10 AM
messaging the chain could be complex, when its done you will be able to bulletin the entire alliance, will that be enough?

Checkman
3rd July 2008, 10:09 AM
Now maybe I am completely off the mark here but I was thinking of commander changes and alliances.

Surely one of the reasons for commander changes is to promote loyalty, I know that we have unlimited changes here in beta, but I was wondering whether you could do something along the following lines....

A commander move from one alliance to another counts as a change (assuming there is a limit in the full age)
A commander move within the same alliance doesn't count as a change because loyalty still remains

(When I say alliance I mean alliance and not chain)

Just a thought.

somax-
3rd July 2008, 10:58 AM
fix it so we can disband alliances :D

as for Don-, great ideas, though the warring part will be hard

vengefuldeath87
3rd July 2008, 03:52 PM
disband alliances has been there for several weeks, you need to go to edit alliance, then use disband. if that doesnt work, let me know.

good_dog
3rd July 2008, 05:21 PM
How 'bout a couple security features?

Make it possible for the leader/co-leaders to boot people from the alliance and remove access to the alliance page.

Can there be a way for new chain members to need a leader/co-leader to approve their access?

We've had spies sitting in our alliance page on KoC forever... It would be great if there were some way to prevent this or correct it once the player's disloyalty has been discovered.

vengefuldeath87
3rd July 2008, 05:27 PM
alliance leaders can already kick and ban users from joining. i plan to enhance the joining and alliance rankings, so leaders can make co leaders and stuff, and also make alliances accept only, so admins have to approve new members.

good_dog
3rd July 2008, 05:47 PM
Thanks for the clarification...

Santa87
5th July 2008, 07:29 AM
how bout making a ranking system, like most alliances have in KoC...

Like there can be several different ranks of trust, deppending on the size of alliance.. like if its just a 5 person alliance, you have only "leader", and "member" ranks... if it has ten members, there can also be "co-leader", if it has 20 it can have "leader",
"co-leader('s)", "trusted members" and "members"(etc).... the names of the rank, could be altered by the leader...

There could also be different benefits to the different ranks, like on the alliance forums, ie the leader has supreme power of the alliance, co-leader can moderate most things, trusted members can view parts of the alliance page, that ordinary members cannot...

INFERNO.
5th July 2008, 08:45 AM
I agree with many of the things that Don- posted, also I proposed time ago the in alliance ranking, like it's posted here, leaders, members etc. But I believe this should be predetermined ranks, just the important ones, lets say for EG:

Leader
BF Mod
Recruit Mod
Members

Mostly to avoid abuse of this function.

Apocalypse-
6th July 2008, 12:08 AM
That'd be cool but I think it'd be pretty hard to do. :morning:

Hoefder
8th July 2008, 03:22 PM
how bout making a ranking system, like most alliances have in KoC...

Like there can be several different ranks of trust, deppending on the size of alliance.. like if its just a 5 person alliance, you have only "leader", and "member" ranks... if it has ten members, there can also be "co-leader", if it has 20 it can have "leader",
"co-leader('s)", "trusted members" and "members"(etc).... the names of the rank, could be altered by the leader...

There could also be different benefits to the different ranks, like on the alliance forums, ie the leader has supreme power of the alliance, co-leader can moderate most things, trusted members can view parts of the alliance page, that ordinary members cannot...

I think this is a good Idia, but I think there should be passwords for each function witch can be changed at anny time by the leader/co-leader. This so pp will have to mail eachather to get into a allie.

I also think thet pp within a allie should have extra dmg when they atack eachather, this to prevend allies with 200 pp without having anny trust or contact. This also meens the pass should be handeld well, so the annemy wount get it, if they do or youre members betray you there is consequens.

also allies should not be ranked with the # of members, but in 4 catecory's, atack,deff,spy,sentry (counting streangth, not rank). To get on top on the "over all" rankings, you will have to splitt tasks with youre members.

a bit off topic:
Also it would be nice if there whas a bank 4 money so you will be able to transefur it. when you stock it you can for accample give 5 % intrest on it, but to withdraw it you need to pay 10%, you should be able to withdraw it. This will be a nice feacher becouse in this game you wount gaine annything buy stocking up money

srry for the english

KingMello
8th July 2008, 03:52 PM
make sabber, slayer, and clicker rankings affect the alliance's overall ranking... ie. you have a load of sabbers, slayers and clickers who do that all day long, they should be #1. ;)

Hoefder
8th July 2008, 04:41 PM
make sabber, slayer, and clicker rankings affect the alliance's overall ranking... ie. you have a load of sabbers, slayers and clickers who do that all day long, they should be #1. ;)

It might be even nicer, when you take "sabbed valuw" in stead of sabb power, so it will actuly get you some where if you sabb some one.

The same would be nice with players, you might even put "reputations" on them
accample: 10.000.000 rank 1 100.000.000 rank2 enz enz, however there need to be nice names for the ranks, this can also be dan for stolen money or soldiers(recruits) killed. These reps hould be visible to everyboddy wen you get one, but not the progres.

Kyrial
14th July 2008, 04:12 PM
I like most of the ideas here...

-I'm all for the approval being required to join an alliance.

-I think under "top players" there should be a similar thing for "Alliance Achievements" and rank them by best gold steals, cost of sabbed items, members joined/lost, soldiers lost/gained, number of attacks, gold lost, clicks. get it to keep track the whole age...unless you do a top 24 hr one too...which would be neat...just to see if anyone is "currently" outproducing your alliance.

-Since some alliances and some alliance members allow/disallow in-chain hits, put a box on the base page asking if they allow it or not, and if allowed, targeting an alliance member will put a blue box around the capcha when u try 2 attack them, and if disallowed will have a red box. It's fairly simple I think and will keep a lot of people from getting mad.

-Hoefder-you can already bank in the game. Just buy masses of cheap weapons and sell them when you are ready to spend the gold. If they DID incorporate a bank, it'd work the same way anyway, so there's no need to add a function for it. Just...dont get sabbed and attack someone while ur doing it or u might not be happy afterwards...

-I agree that even lower ranked members should be able to send alliance messages to everyone so non-forum users can get in on communication in a timely manner.....but I feel like there should be some way from keeping them from being like "hi guys"...and annoying everyone.

-Along with the Alliance Achievement thing-I think there should be something on the alliance page or wherever the Alliance name is a link-that there should be stats for the alliance there viewable to every1, even if they arent outstanding stats. Gives people something to brag about, and shows people interested in joining that says the alliance is actually good at what they do. Sort of off topic but on that note-what if we could view anyones clicks given? That'd also help officers choose commanders that will give back some stuff. Even if they DONT, it shows potential.

deadly_marshmallow
14th July 2008, 05:38 PM
Don had a lot of great ideas. I personally would love some more information available in the Alliance system..


Alliance-wide growth charts or something of the sort..
A version of the "Top..." Rankings just for the alliance..
Maybe a "Top Recruiters" ranking in there too..
Powerful tools for the alliance leader (discussed below)



By powerful tools, I mean management tools and information that isn't available to everyone else in the alliance. I know some have already been implemented (ability to boot people, etc.) but I think there should be more. This would probably be way too much work, but if the Alliance head could see a detailed report of the activity of each player (clicking, attacking, sabbing, etc.) that would be amazing. It could help with disputes among other alliances over an officers actions- you know how it goes. Your officer does something dumb and pisses off another alliance, and he claims the other started it and so on and so forth.. with this you could have proof. Plus you could keep track of your entire alliance and see who's not doing their job. You could use the tools to reward clan members with clicks by sorting the members by their various stats.

But, this may all be far too hard to code, or just simply unnecessary. Just an idea.



Another thing, possibly easier function that I'd like to see in the alliance system is the ability to OFFICIALLY declare war. Lemme take Don's idea and run with it... Something easy, like a "War Mode" radio button that you can push and select the alliance(s) you're warring with. Both alliances would have to engage "War Mode" for it to work I think. Once war was declared, you could see OFFICIAL sab stats and other information. And at the end of the war, an official winner would be declared. Nothing else. Just "XXXXXX Wins the War!!! Click here to see stats."

That would be cool too. Don't get me wrong though, the alliance system is great. There's nothing really wrong with it that I can think of, just a few features that could be added to make it ever better.




I'd love to see the "War Mode" feature or something like it though. :crossfing

Kyrial
14th July 2008, 06:54 PM
Don had a lot of great ideas. I personally would love some more information available in the Alliance system..


Alliance-wide growth charts or something of the sort..
A version of the "Top..." Rankings just for the alliance..
Maybe a "Top Recruiters" ranking in there too..
Powerful tools for the alliance leader (discussed below)



By powerful tools, I mean management tools and information that isn't available to everyone else in the alliance. I know some have already been implemented (ability to boot people, etc.) but I think there should be more. This would probably be way too much work, but if the Alliance head could see a detailed report of the activity of each player (clicking, attacking, sabbing, etc.) that would be amazing. It could help with disputes among other alliances over an officers actions- you know how it goes. Your officer does something dumb and pisses off another alliance, and he claims the other started it and so on and so forth.. with this you could have proof. Plus you could keep track of your entire alliance and see who's not doing their job. You could use the tools to reward clan members with clicks by sorting the members by their various stats.

But, this may all be far too hard to code, or just simply unnecessary. Just an idea.



Another thing, possibly easier function that I'd like to see in the alliance system is the ability to OFFICIALLY declare war. Lemme take Don's idea and run with it... Something easy, like a "War Mode" radio button that you can push and select the alliance(s) you're warring with. Both alliances would have to engage "War Mode" for it to work I think. Once war was declared, you could see OFFICIAL sab stats and other information. And at the end of the war, an official winner would be declared. Nothing else. Just "XXXXXX Wins the War!!! Click here to see stats."

That would be cool too. Don't get me wrong though, the alliance system is great. There's nothing really wrong with it that I can think of, just a few features that could be added to make it ever better.




I'd love to see the "War Mode" feature or something like it though. :crossfing

I like the tools idea

And the war mode would be cool, too. But I think war should be able to be declared even just by one side, at least at first. Ex-someone declares war on someone else. Everyone starts attacking. Other alliance is like...umm...yea they just declared war on us...gets all freaked out and eventually fights back. If nothing else just for the initial shock of "OMG war!!"

deadly_marshmallow
15th July 2008, 10:15 PM
And the war mode would be cool, too. But I think war should be able to be declared even just by one side, at least at first. Ex-someone declares war on someone else. Everyone starts attacking. Other alliance is like...umm...yea they just declared war on us...gets all freaked out and eventually fights back. If nothing else just for the initial shock of "OMG war!!"

Yeah, I see what you're saying. But what would stop people from just declaring war on random people on a whim? Maybe the war would only be official if both sides declared war on each other.



Is anybody feeling this or what? This or the alliance tools, whatever.

Kyrial
16th July 2008, 04:24 AM
of course the war isnt "official" until both sides comply, but who's going to wait for an "ok" if you can get the jump on someone? its realistic to think that whoever attacks first gets the advantage, and really, its going to work out the way I said in most cases anyway.

ex-some people mass sab a chain because some people were dumb or a high up player messed up and made some guys mad. the initial mass sabbing would count as the first wave of attacks, and some people might not have been watching the player responsible for the outbreak so they wouldn't know to prepare a defense.

By the way...if the war thing is put in-I think it should pop up as a bulletin in everyone in the alliances inbox once it becomes offical, and probably send a bulletin to let everyone that "a war declaration request was sent to xxx alliance" before its even accepted to let everyone know whats going on without the need of a forum or mass messaging. and since there are sub clans in chains-possibly make it so that the head alliance in a chain has an option to send stuff to them, too-just for good communication purposes.

Oh I just thought of something..if there is a war request button...what happens if the ones asked to accept the war declines? ;-)

Santa87
16th July 2008, 07:56 AM
Well, in real-life, a country is not always warned, when another country goes to war with them... I don't think it should be "request-approve war"... Though its only fair that members of the alliance being warred, are warned... It could be, so when one alliance declares war against another alliance, the other alliance members will have some big warning on their command center, that they are at war. The attacking alliance will still have the advantage of getting the first blow, though the deffending alliance will still know there is a war, as soon as they login to their account.... Though I think that when a truce is being made, it should be a "request-approve appliaction", else it wouldnt be fair for a strong alliance, if the weak alliance goes to war with them, takes a lot of damage, and then declares truce right after....

deadly_marshmallow
16th July 2008, 05:07 PM
Well, in real-life, a country is not always warned, when another country goes to war with them... I don't think it should be "request-approve war"... Though its only fair that members of the alliance being warred, are warned... It could be, so when one alliance declares war against another alliance, the other alliance members will have some big warning on their command center, that they are at war. The attacking alliance will still have the advantage of getting the first blow, though the deffending alliance will still know there is a war, as soon as they login to their account.... Though I think that when a truce is being made, it should be a "request-approve appliaction", else it wouldnt be fair for a strong alliance, if the weak alliance goes to war with them, takes a lot of damage, and then declares truce right after....


Yeah, you've got a point. I particularly like your idea about having to approve a truce. That would keep alliances from just getting and wars and backing out right away. And yeah, I think alliance members should be warned about a war via an alliance-wide bulletin or something.


Hey venge, fury, you guys out there? What do y'all think of the "War-Mode" idea?

Kyrial
17th July 2008, 08:17 PM
Yea...ur prolly right. If war is declared it should just be random and without warning, and then just inform the ones being declared on. Sounds good.

New idea I think...at least I havent seen it yet...

Can you make it so that commanders can edit/delete bulletins given to their officers? And upon being edited, will appear as being a new bulletin? That way, there only really needs to be one bulletin of just random info, and it'll keep from clogging up the officers inbox (even though it stays at the top). But I mean-this way a commander could make a bulletin for war stuff, 1 for gold hits, and 1 for general advice-and that would keep down the confusion and spamming of bulletins, when really all the new ones were for was adding to an old one.

Kyrial
18th July 2008, 02:46 AM
New Idea -

Same alliance recons have greater chance of success (or at least show more info with less spies), and less chance of spies being killed.

griffey95
18th July 2008, 06:27 PM
an alliance click list (which one could go through every 24 hours) to give everyone in the alliance a click per day...maybe 2?

joly
20th July 2008, 01:52 AM
How about some kind of Stock Market feature, where people can trade clicks for weapons and vice versa, limited to chain/alliance members only?

I think this would enhance the Alliance feature a lot, because in real life tribes did the same.
Transfers outside alliances could perhabs be approved by alliance admins only.

Kyrial
20th July 2008, 04:39 AM
jolys idea is kinda cool. I've been trying to think of a fair way to do gold/weapon transfers for a while but it all ends up with me thinking "then it'd be too easy for people to play 2 accounts and just trade. at least sell offs have the chance to be intercepted"

If there was any transfer system beyond simple credit transfers, maybe put a fair sized "% based transfer fee" on the whole thing.

joly
20th July 2008, 11:47 AM
Well, maybe only credits can be exchanged at a fixed pricing, eg. 50.000 gold/weapon value for 1 click, so people can't give like entire inventory for 1 click.

1 clicks -> 50.000 gold worth of armory
10 clicks -> 500.000 gold worth of armory
100 clicks -> 5.000.000 gold worth of armory
1000 clicks -> 50.000.000 gold worth of armory

And only allow clicks the player did himself, not the ones other gave to them, and limit amount of transfers to max 1/10th of netvalue?

Kyrial
20th July 2008, 03:40 PM
Well, maybe only credits can be exchanged at a fixed pricing, eg. 50.000 gold/weapon value for 1 click, so people can't give like entire inventory for 1 click.

1 clicks -> 50.000 gold worth of armory
10 clicks -> 500.000 gold worth of armory
100 clicks -> 5.000.000 gold worth of armory
1000 clicks -> 50.000.000 gold worth of armory

And only allow clicks the player did himself, not the ones other gave to them, and limit amount of transfers to max 1/10th of netvalue?

That's better, but maybe move all of those factors up a decimal point or two. One click naturally gives 50 gold income (xcept humans/goblins), so for 1 mil income, it takes 20,000 credits. When you look at it that way, the list you have set up makes it a little too easy to do large transfers. Remember-clicking goes way faster in here and w/out a cap. Make it something u gotta work for! ;-)

Try this one-just changing the amount of clicks needed for the prices you set by two decimal places:

100 clicks -> 50.000 gold worth of armory
1,000 clicks -> 500.000 gold worth of armory
10,000 clicks -> 5.000.000 gold worth of armory
100,000 clicks -> 50.000.000 gold worth of armory

Even mine isn't sitting well with me but eh...if it's gonna get put in, I'm sure they'll get the ratio's right better and faster than what we will.

le magnufique
31st July 2008, 02:23 PM
So i have a question...When i set someone in my alliance to Admin what are they allowed to do? I have set several people to ADMIN and they dont seem to be able to get to the EDIT page to be able to approve anyone. Did I do something wrong or is it a bug

wangster1
6th August 2008, 10:34 PM
Ive noticed somthing that could be changed. In the chain that I'm in it's a mixture of several allainces, too many tbh. The problem is it's not under 1 allance, it's kinda hard to tell if you're doing in chain hits when there is no permanent way to tell besides going up in it. Could you make somthing like an * next to the names of people in the same chain as you?

joly
11th August 2008, 06:22 AM
Does any of our suggestions get a chance, or did we just waste precious keystrokes?

Are there any updates we can except ?

vengefuldeath87
11th August 2008, 12:29 PM
wait and see, all feasable and viable suggestions i plan to implement.

sh4d0w_aLch3mis7
11th August 2008, 03:31 PM
how about putting intel files of a person somewhere on their stats page? that way we see what their most recent stats are without having to search through the intel page

o, and lower the strengths/cost of the lower weapons. that should help balance the new strength ratios

*nb
11th September 2008, 02:49 AM
how about putting intel files of a person somewhere on their stats page? that way we see what their most recent stats are without having to search through the intel page

This is a very good idea. And also spy/sab operations and attacks against that user. You could immediately tell if the 24 hr limit is up and you can start sabbing again.

iNTERNET
14th September 2008, 06:49 AM
Customized Ranks: :P

make your own ranks, like pay xxx gold to make a rank

also, how does merging work?

KyleCias
22nd September 2008, 10:24 PM
My ideas for alliance system:

*Allaince banner section
*Alliance growth
*Alliance sab amount
*Alliance top Clicker
*Alliance top sabber
*Alliance legend
*Alliance description/War notices
*Alliance newbie
*Alliance top donators
*Alliance credits donation box(Alliance donation can be spreaded out equally to the lowest rank to top rank players.)
*Alliance top donators 1-10 ;)

i can go on!! but i stop.

btw alliance should be enabled only if a member in chain. if the person leaves the chain. the alliance should be removed as well.

felixv1990
24th September 2008, 12:22 PM
donate for alliance UP !

KyleCias
24th September 2008, 09:44 PM
donate for alliance UP !

donation for that is just silly since all the noobs will be having big TFF

felixv1990
28th September 2008, 02:38 AM
donation for that is just silly since all the noobs will be having big TFF

mega farms :D

SonataArctica
1st November 2008, 11:44 PM
On ruinsofchaos.com/sendcredits.php there is currently a "show officers only" button. Make a "show alliance only" button too. There will always be people in chain that arent set as alliance, but it'd be handy to see all the alliance members and who needs help on credits.

Vrasp
2nd November 2008, 12:44 AM
Ive noticed somthing that could be changed. In the chain that I'm in it's a mixture of several allainces, too many tbh. The problem is it's not under 1 allance, it's kinda hard to tell if you're doing in chain hits when there is no permanent way to tell besides going up in it. Could you make somthing like an * next to the names of people in the same chain as you?

Well, make a "ally" command, much like the "war" command, and then each alliance can set whether or not they allow alliance hits, and it can do the red/blue captcha thing that other guy was talking about, or what have you.

And on the notion of "wars" -- DO NOT MAKE A BIG NOTIFICATION ON THE COMMAND CENTER, AND DO NOT SEND INBOX MESSAGES!

People will just war other alliances to spam them. Instead, have three sections on each alliance's page:

Enemies (those who we have declared war against), Alliances who have declared war against this alliance (self-explan), and Allies.
-- Since 'alliances who have declared war against this alliance' is a bit verbose...maybe instead, just have "Enemies" and it'd show up like this, using alliance names as examples:
---- Elite Sabbers (We request peace)
---- Relentless Family (They request peace)
---- Phoenix (Mutual)

This way, you can just check your alliance page (need a link in the CC to this, btw) every day to see if there's a new war.

As far as other suggestions, one like I said for officers: a way to sort sending credits by 'all alliance members' (like Sonata said), but with the ability to send to each person at the same time, and maybe add max/average functions, too.

I also suggested on IRC for an alliance CC bank, but I see that Kyle already suggested that on here.

So now onto the idea of 'alliance banks' -- okay, that's cool. But only if you add alliance armories, too! Maybe add a cap to what can be deposited, 40% of all the gold you have on-hand, or something? The alliance bank cannot be withdrawn or distributed, only saved or used for armory items, then the alliance can have its own attack/defense/spy/sentry rating, and you (admin/leader+?) can physically attack alliances once a day (or whatever the admins deem fit), maybe alliances can steal other alliance's armory too, instead of simply sabotaging it (since no player can benefit from it, only the alliance). I don't feel like developing this any further because I don't like wasting my time coming up w/ things I don't think will see the light of day :-P

And..that's all I have for now.

btom4
7th November 2008, 04:24 PM
i'm not sure if the idea was mentioned but i would like to see the alliance system measusre a total value of weapons sabed when war is declared. This would really show who wins, and who loses big. People make threads and post sabs but that can all be altered by a simple edit. This would be concreate evidence of which alliance has done the most damgae

iNTERNET
7th November 2008, 08:12 PM
hmm
does the war thing work now?

SonataArctica
7th November 2008, 08:29 PM
i'm not sure if the idea was mentioned but i would like to see the alliance system measusre a total value of weapons sabed when war is declared. This would really show who wins, and who loses big. People make threads and post sabs but that can all be altered by a simple edit. This would be concreate evidence of which alliance has done the most damgae

Alliances with more people can have more sabbed by them by a small number of people, and pure sab accounts at this point can always sab more than they can have sabbed off of them.

EG-if I went solo and warred PHNX, Each 200 members could maybe sab 4-12 mil off me in one go, so that would be 4-12 mil times the number of people in the alliance. By myself, I could probably at least sab 2x that from each of them. So I'd win just because I had more targets and weren't balanced.

That would be a bad way to judge how wars are won. Technically I dont think wars CAN be "won" here. There is no nation to be taken over, its usually over an issue, and it only stops when the issue is resolved or people get bored. Even when one side asks to end it, it can be a sign of forfeit, or it can be a "hey, ur getting annihilated, are you sure you want this", and theres no way to tell on either side in most cases.

btom4
10th November 2008, 02:29 PM
Alliances with more people can have more sabbed by them by a small number of people, and pure sab accounts at this point can always sab more than they can have sabbed off of them.

EG-if I went solo and warred PHNX, Each 200 members could maybe sab 4-12 mil off me in one go, so that would be 4-12 mil times the number of people in the alliance. By myself, I could probably at least sab 2x that from each of them. So I'd win just because I had more targets and weren't balanced.

That would be a bad way to judge how wars are won. Technically I dont think wars CAN be "won" here. There is no nation to be taken over, its usually over an issue, and it only stops when the issue is resolved or people get bored. Even when one side asks to end it, it can be a sign of forfeit, or it can be a "hey, ur getting annihilated, are you sure you want this", and theres no way to tell on either side in most cases.

I can see a bit of where your coming from. A smaller alliance could sab more of a bigger alliance, however perhaps a percentage loss is a more efficent to way to measure wars. They're should be a critera to measure the results of wars though, it would make the game a lot more exciting than who can flame who the most on gua. If this was implemented it could increase the various play styles availble to people. For instance an alliance would be able to have a record of wins and losses resulting in more activity in a chain then how many clicks you send out. Also a great option would be to have a tournament, Where you pit one alliance against another and the winner would recieve some special in game prize.

wangster1
10th November 2008, 02:45 PM
I can see a bit of where your coming from. A smaller alliance could sab more of a bigger alliance, however perhaps a percentage loss is a more efficent to way to measure wars. They're should be a critera to measure the results of wars though, it would make the game a lot more exciting than who can flame who the most on gua. If this was implemented it could increase the various play styles availble to people. For instance an alliance would be able to have a record of wins and losses resulting in more activity in a chain then how many clicks you send out. Also a great option would be to have a tournament, Where you pit one alliance against another and the winner would recieve some special in game prize.

I think that would be interesting and make the game more fun. Have it where it's not all about size but spirit.

SonataArctica
11th November 2008, 01:30 PM
I can see a bit of where your coming from. A smaller alliance could sab more of a bigger alliance, however perhaps a percentage loss is a more efficent to way to measure wars. They're should be a critera to measure the results of wars though, it would make the game a lot more exciting than who can flame who the most on gua. If this was implemented it could increase the various play styles availble to people. For instance an alliance would be able to have a record of wins and losses resulting in more activity in a chain then how many clicks you send out. Also a great option would be to have a tournament, Where you pit one alliance against another and the winner would recieve some special in game prize.

% loss would be more fair, I agree

Smitty
13th November 2008, 10:16 PM
Allow unlimited sending/receiving of PMs from within your alliance.

pastol
16th November 2008, 12:08 PM
Allow unlimited sending/receiving of PMs from within your alliance.

Oh yeah, PA-LEEEESE! Damn the flood!

midnight_sun_banned
16th November 2008, 01:09 PM
Oh yeah, PA-LEEEESE! Damn the flood!

:groovy2: Funny as hell and couldn't agree more. :groovy2:

iNTERNET
29th November 2008, 11:42 AM
hmm
does the war thing work now?

???:confused:

KyleCias
11th December 2008, 05:38 AM
My ideas for alliance system:

*Allaince banner section
*Alliance growth
*Alliance sab amount
*Alliance top Clicker
*Alliance top sabber
*Alliance legend
*Alliance description/War notices
*Alliance newbie
*Alliance top donators
*Alliance credits donation box(Alliance donation can be spreaded out equally to the lowest rank to top rank players.)
*Alliance top donators 1-10

i can go on!! but i stop.

btw alliance should be enabled only if a member in chain. if the person leaves the chain. the alliance should be removed as well.

SonataArctica
11th December 2008, 07:07 PM
My ideas for alliance system:

*Allaince banner section
*Alliance growth
*Alliance sab amount
*Alliance top Clicker
*Alliance top sabber
*Alliance legend
*Alliance description/War notices
*Alliance newbie
*Alliance top donators
*Alliance credits donation box(Alliance donation can be spreaded out equally to the lowest rank to top rank players.)
*Alliance top donators 1-10

i can go on!! but i stop.

btw alliance should be enabled only if a member in chain. if the person leaves the chain. the alliance should be removed as well.

i agree with pretty much all of this. I think it'd be cool to put an alliance banner at LEAST on their section of the alliance page. And definitely make it so that alliances are chain oriented, and that leaving a chain means leaving the alliance (unless of course the leaving member is the head of another alliance)

this would make it easier for new players 2 find alliances that suit their needs, as well as serve as a better competition factor for alliances. good ideas ;-)

as for the alliance credit donator thing...thats the only thing im a little iffy on. give alliance leaders and really anyone ranked above "newbie" some control over how it is distributed. that way its more of a team thing, and not something that can easily taken control of. send a message to alliance leaders every day there is an increase in credits so that they dont forget, and so that mass credit dumping wouldnt clog their message box.

iNTERNET
10th January 2009, 09:18 PM
Just a question : Are any of these going to be coming soon?
I Hope :D
Also,
Are the admins going to be able to do the same as owner soon? or can you allow owner to give members certain permissions that only the owner can do? say that one person is allowed to send bulletins etc.
Because i often have alot of problems in my alliance while i'm not there, and we need to send a bulletin to get it under control...

SonataArctica
7th February 2009, 06:10 PM
what if u clicked on an alliance under the alliance section, it would show you not only the total number of players, but also the races, and a % of the distribution of races just for people wearing that alliances tag. nothing more than information, but i think it would be interesting and relatively easy to add in.

heck, it would even give some alliances bragging rights for "biggest population of X", making it easier for players to pick an alliance.

R1DD1CK
19th May 2009, 01:48 PM
My ideas for alliance system:

*Allaince banner section
*Alliance growth
*Alliance sab amount
*Alliance top Clicker
*Alliance top sabber
*Alliance legend
*Alliance description/War notices
*Alliance newbie
*Alliance top donators
*Alliance credits donation box(Alliance donation can be spreaded out equally to the lowest rank to top rank players.)
*Alliance top donators 1-10

*Alliance affiliation? "alliance is part of several other alliances" should be shown.