alliances i think they should be stopped

[megarman1]

a truce im ok with but when people gang up on other players thats a big disadvanage and its unfair what you think?

[Rocketry]

deal with it

[Dancing Mustard]

Risk all your armies on a daring continent grab. Use diplomacy to coordinate a group assault on the game leader. Feel the thrill of victory as you eliminate your last opponent.

Seriously, somebody brings this up at least once a month.
Deal with it as a part of the game. Or else find some other players who don't like alliances, and only play with them.
But most of all, remember it's just a game.
Good luck with it.

[detlef]

a truce im ok with but when people gang up on other players thats a big disadvanage and its unfair what you think?

What the hell is the difference between a truce and an alliance?

Deal with it little man.

[Colossus]

why is there no GFY option? This poll definitely calls for one. I think that in most instances, alliances are bush-league crap, but they are a part of the game. Suck it up and, like DM said, find people who don't engage in them. And put your ignore list to good use.... add people who engage in what you think are unfair alliances, then you won't have to play with them again.

[KennyC]

One of the nice things about this site is alliances are grounds for negative feedback if you don't like them, and you can add players to your ignore list that use alliances.

I personally do not mind them at all, I've been on just about every side of them. I do not offer them any more, and I see very few offered among higher ranked players. I think they all learned the lesson I learned pretty quickly...

[megarman1]

truce means you cant attack each other alliance is when you team up to kill (normaly to kill a certain player)

[civver]

If you complain about a game over a silly detail, then don't play. No need to whine on the forums anymore.

[Anarkistsdream]

If you complain about a game over a silly detail, then don't play. No need to whine on the forums anymore.

Amen, bro

[MikeFromLux]

Alliances are a substitute strategy for solid play. With that being said - I know they are a part of the game, so I deal with them.

[TipTop]

The most fun ffa game I have played to date involved lots of diplomacy. Truces and alliances were made and broken by almost every player. Everyone played the game in good spirit and enjoyed themselves.

Ultimately all players will act in their own best interest, your enemy in one round could become your friend in the next. The most important thing to remember is none of this is personal, so there is no need to be offended. It is just a game so have fun with it!

[KennyC]

megarman1, the other thing I would suggest is joining more games with higher ranked players, rather than starting your own games which invites new players that tend to test the waters with alliances.

[detlef]

truce means you cant attack each other alliance is when you team up to kill (normaly to kill a certain player)

Actually, you are wrong. They're the same thing. If two people team up to kill a player, that is what is referred to as an "unfair alliance". If that is your problem, then avoid those players. However, an alliance simply means that two players agree not to attack each other.

However, it is a very fine line between "not attacking each other" and "only attacking another player". This often happens without announcement when one player pulls way ahead in a game. Everyone gangs up on him. If they're honorable, they pull off and go about their business once he's brought back to the pack. If they continue this group attack, they suck and should be caned.

Frankly, aside from the unspoke, "we need to work on player x before he runs away with this thing", I typically only like to engage in cease fires on specific borders if it seems like both myself and another player are going to beat up on each other to the extent that we lose ground on the rest of the board.

[RobinJ]

I have argued for alliances so many times that I'm bored. Therefore I will say only this - your poll is rather comprehensive - no-one seems to agree with you!

[richnpoor]

rules say as long as they are announced in open chat and in english then they are legal......just part of the game

the only problem arises when people form alliances outside these rules. I have had newer players pm me and ask me to ally with them against another player I usually respond by pm them back as to what the rules regarding alliances are and ask them not to pm again during the game

I also sometimes state the rule in the chat section when this happens especially if there are several new players in the game.

Truces and or alliances have been around as long as the board game and arent going away. just part of the game

[AAFitz]

in other sites, the alliances dont even have to be announced....this game is not just clicking some armies here and there to see if you can get a bonus...it is a game of psychological warfare...you have to get the other players to attack each other so you can win...its that simple...now anyone just entering into a kill the other guy first pact isnt really a player, but using an alliance to win the game is all part of the fun..

use the chat, use the alliances, use your fortifications all to get your opponents to fight each other...its the only way to win...

and dont worry about those who abuse it, because they arent worth your effort...just enjoy the good games with the good players

[Chalupacabra]

I find that alliances made through chat make the game much more enjoyable. It can be a lot of fun to wage psychological warfare against your opponents and turn them against each other. Some of my most memorable games had hundreds of lines of chat dedicated to making, breaking, twisting, and whining about alliances. I can't count how many times I prevented a player from winning a game when they are way ahead just by rallying the rest of the players against them.

Use it to your advantage!