Conquer Club

Hey all, I am playing with a group of people who insist on playing with the option of alliances. I have generally never liked the idea of playing that way because I think it puts other players at a disadvantage and doesn't really show that you are skillful in your play of the game. But that's another subject.

My question is: How do you approach game play in a game where alliances may be formed and you have decided to play without them?

Of course I am playing to win.

BTW: This is the board game version.

Thanks,

Rich

Does anyone have any thoughts on the subject? Anyone at all? Hello, mic check. Is this thing on?(tapping on the microphone)

manipulate the other people. if anyone is getting strong, try to ally against them, whilst amassing your own army. whilst you have them fighting amongst yourselves, go quick to break up alliances. when you announce alliances, say how many turns you will be keeping it. choose someone good and say 5 turns eg, then use those turns to your advantage by getting your partner to take the others out whilst you do practically nothing. if you partner ever gets weak, just eliminate them.

Kemmler wrote:manipulate the other people. if anyone is getting strong, try to ally against them, whilst amassing your own army. whilst you have them fighting amongst yourselves, go quick to break up alliances. when you announce alliances, say how many turns you will be keeping it. choose someone good and say 5 turns eg, then use those turns to your advantage by getting your partner to take the others out whilst you do practically nothing. if you partner ever gets weak, just eliminate them.

Thanks Kemmler, i appreciate the input. I will do my best.

personally when i offer alliances i offer them when 1 person/team is too strong. I will say i would like to offer you an alliance with 2 turns notice of breaking.

ie. announce alliance in round 10, 5 turns later you have managed to even the game up a bit (or your allied partner has become too strong) anounce in round 15 you want to break the alliance. Round 16 you are still allied/can't attack each other/NAPed. Then in round 17 you can both go at each other. (I do usually play unlimited which makes this more fair.)

In a "live" game i have not encountered alliances too often (except of the "all beat up Gareth first cos he's good). But you do get something that doesn't happen so much in CC - real chat.
"I wouldn't do THAT mate, you'll leave yourself open over there. Now if you do THIS you'll put yourself in a position to..." and so forth. Of course, sound as the advice may be, "THAT" usually means "Attack me", and "THIS" usually means attack someone else.
IN CC most people are playing a number, perhaps a vast number of games, and there's less time for this. Actual formal agreements can work.
There is of course the other factor - "live" games tend to be one-off affairs, and breaking an alliance at a dastardly point may win the game for an unscrupulous player (while annoying the ally). It'll be forgotten by the next time you play. Doing the same thing in CC will lead to neg feedback and a bad name.
I find that the most useful agreements are not alliances, but pacts such as "I won't attack from x to y if you won't attack from y to x - agreement to last 3 turns/until another player is eliminated/all game"

If you hate alliance you might want to take a look at joining XIgames here in CC. PM me if you want and I'll send you our code of conduct. It just might be what your looking for.