2 v 2 War

[digvijay]

Hi Utopians!
Recently, I have been quite intrigued by alliances. And how important they were (and maybe still are) and how they used to be quite integral part of the game. Alliances would have surely been a lot of fun, having inter-alliances wars, and so on.

I was getting an idea on what the current feelings of people are are on alliances in my KD and my friend's KD. Generally everyone agrees that they are more trouble than fun. So everyone prefers simple 1 v 1 wars.

However I can imagine how fun it would be to have 2 v 2 KD wars, or even more. These wars can be as "decent" as the 1 v 1 right now, and yet be more fun because of the need for inter-KD co-operation.

Right now if we were to play, 2 v 2, then we would have to have lots of communication before we could actually start the war. Maybe if it there was a way to do so like as part of the game itself, it would be much easier.

Anyways, would like to know thoughts of people on this. Maybe this has been discussed before, in which a link to the previous post will be useful (and everyone can ignore this one, if it is not relevant anymore).

If I find people are generally interested, maybe I could ask my monarch, and other KDs who are willing to have such a 2 v 2 war :D

Peace,
Dig

[Bukharistan]

Good idea!

+1.

[Shockwave]

Alliances were a cancer to the game.

[munk]

while an interesting thought I think it would be hard to line up a fair 2v2 -- it's hard enough to line up a fair 1v1 as it is.

[Sheister]

wow, getting chained by 16-17 hitters is bad now, imagine if they could draw on the NW spread of TWO kingdoms to perfect the chains.........

/me shudders......

Or picture it somehow working to pair some KD with massive cows with some higer level war KD that still has smallish bottom provinces........ so where I chain would take someone from 4K acres to 1500 acres, now it takes them 400...........

hard for me to imagine these things as "fun"

[StratOcastle]

I'm interested in 2 vs 2 wars by current mechanics.

Alliances have a bad name because most were based in offensive goal objectives. Defensive objectives are probably better for the game. Even so, the damage is done and the erratication of known alliances was like cancer treatment. This MFr is almost dead, lol.

The shame of the game is players not willing to reinvest in the roots of the game. It's easy to blame top players because you see so many drop out once they reach has-been status. But I feel the problem is more cultural in that there aren't many players who are ambitious, organized and team oriented enough to reinvigorate fundamental competition.

The OP is about having fun and I'm all in on that.

[Sheister]

Oh strato, I can see how in many situations it would be fun....... the problem is I have seen enough to know of all the ways it will be turned into not fun.

[StratOcastle]

My intuition tells me these would be isolated affairs. I've been dropping by irc and it's generally a mausoleum, so I can't see any of the in crowd getting anywhere near 2 vs 2.

Most of the heritage kingdoms are in a perpetual dream state which has much to do with their longevity. Thus, they would pass on the grounds that they like the game the way it is.

This would probably involve pair offs of newer war kingdoms. I've been around a few and this really comes down to their active core players enthusiasm for testing game mechanics. Since Bukharistan seems interested there might be some veteran guidance. So it'd be cool to have Spartans and a newer kingdom vs some other veteran and new kingdom.

[Sheister]

in that sense, it would allow for more direct teaching....

[vir]

I think that if such a thing ever would be implemented there first would have to be a change in kdsize. In my view kds are to large vs playerbase and to make more people able to compete kds would have to be smaller so that more kds can be full.

If kds were maybe 15 players having a 2v2 would not be so bad actually. Maybe it could work for ghettos even with 20 playerkds doing 2v2, but with 25 players in each kingdom a 2v2 would just not be fun for any of the involved kds.

[Thunder TA]

When the game was large and had thousands of players,yes we had alot of fun and met lots of people. Some good to meet some you hated to see pop up.Now with the limited number of players the game has, alliances declined as did the need for protection and such from others.The days of Hall trying to power play,early days when Rat used to hunt players down who left them to pk them for it are sadly long gone.If the game ever gains back the player base the alliances will return.Whether good or bad it would happen.

[goodz]

moar like 2v1 the point of alliances was to gain an advantage!

[peppie]

Alliances were a cancer to the game.

this.

[Thunder TA]

Not near as much as scrypting, and abusing loop holes were.They were a product of the environment.Game base left as did the alliances.Could just aswell say that alliances and friends in them kept the game populated as it was a added completion between alliances that the game doesnt have anymore.

[DM_Benjamin]

this.

Free were in the Lotus alliance weren't they?