Allied victory at turn limit

I was just curious why allied victory doesn't come into play when the game ends when you hit the last turn. The last couple of games I played I didn't have the most SP, but due to my actions I essentially won the game for my allies, since if I hadn't acted they'da lost. I don't get why allies don't count as being the winners just cuz the game ended due to a turn limit. Is it suppose to be this way? Cuz it really is quite frustrating to lose half my SP and have a loss marked on my profile when I won the game.

Currently this functionality is only in team games where team with most SP at turn limit wins. In regular games allies only all win if regular conditions are met for victory. If the turns run out the single player with most SP wins alone and his allies lose.

I think I remember a suggestion to change this in regular games to be like team games but it hasn't been done yet.

Well after two frustrating games of having my SP halved, I'd support that addition. It only makes sense for allies to get the rewards for their work. Hopefully one day it is implemented.

While it promotes allyfagging, I believe it would be nice to have this in the game... Many times have I lost due to this, despite doing lots of work.

One simple problem is that not all people will be allied with each other so who's to say who wins and how would it work? Would it be anyone allied with the SP leader? But if that was the case, a player could be part of an alliance and break it before the time runs out.

I don't think this is as easy as you make out.

作者： Tik-Tok, 20.08.2011 at 11:01

One simple problem is that not all people will be allied with each other so who's to say who wins and how would it work? Would it be anyone allied with the SP leader? But if that was the case, a player could be part of an alliance and break it before the time runs out.

I don't think this is as easy as you make out.

if they break alliance it is your own fault for picking bad allies, you would deserve it.

I don't find it fair if, for example, I am playing against 4 players allied and I am top SP because of the number of battles, so, in the end, they will win by the total SP they have?

Or, if it's based on the players that are allied with the top SP, it would be easily exploited in bigger matches, where the players could fight (aka farmn) each other in the americas for the whole game, ignoring others in the rest of the world, and in the end they would ally and win because one of them is top SP.

I think that if you want to play with someone and win as a team you should a) play team games or b) set a higher ending turn. You can, also, always propose global alliance in the end. If you have 200 sp and I had 500, but you were allied with the top SP, what made you deserve to win more then I did?

作者： Pinheiro, 20.08.2011 at 11:32

I don't find it fair if, for example, I am playing against 4 players allied and I am top SP because of the number of battles, so, in the end, they will win by the total SP they have?

Or, if it's based on the players that are allied with the top SP, it would be easily exploited in bigger matches, where the players could fight (aka farmn) each other in the americas for the whole game, ignoring others in the rest of the world, and in the end they would ally and win because one of them is top SP.

I think that if you want to play with someone and win as a team you should a) play team games or b) set a higher ending turn. You can, also, always propose global alliance in the end. If you have 200 sp and I had 500, but you were allied with the top SP, what made you deserve to win more then I did?

but farming is against the rules you just tell a mod (you)

作者： Buah, 20.08.2011 at 15:40

作者： Pinheiro, 20.08.2011 at 11:32

I don't find it fair if, for example, I am playing against 4 players allied and I am top SP because of the number of battles, so, in the end, they will win by the total SP they have?

Or, if it's based on the players that are allied with the top SP, it would be easily exploited in bigger matches, where the players could fight (aka farmn) each other in the americas for the whole game, ignoring others in the rest of the world, and in the end they would ally and win because one of them is top SP.

I think that if you want to play with someone and win as a team you should a) play team games or b) set a higher ending turn. You can, also, always propose global alliance in the end. If you have 200 sp and I had 500, but you were allied with the top SP, what made you deserve to win more then I did?

but farming is against the rules you just tell a mod (you)

I agree that this feature would be highly exploitable. There are private games and the mods are not told everything.

Yes, farming is against the rules (I never said it wasn't), that's exactly what I'm talking about. If this was implemented it would be easily exploited and hard to avoid.

作者： Fruit, 19.08.2011 at 03:25

While it promotes allyfagging, I believe it would be nice to have this in the game... Many times have I lost due to this, despite doing lots of work.

While this is true and frustrating, don't forget that the guy who came out on top also probably did lots of work to get most SP (usually)

作者： BASED Ironail, 23.08.2011 at 09:37

作者： Fruit, 19.08.2011 at 03:25

While it promotes allyfagging, I believe it would be nice to have this in the game... Many times have I lost due to this, despite doing lots of work.

While this is true and frustrating, don't forget that the guy who came out on top also probably did lots of work to get most SP (usually)

that just means they are usually in front swapping countries a lot (usually means low progress forward), the people in back to make stacks and actually win the game usually get screwed by this; they never get as much SP. Aristo has never gotten more SP than me when I play Thailand and him NK or taiwan despite him making big stacks and really winning the game for us, though we have been short on turns to win and he has been forced to let me win SP a few times. While you can say just increase victory turn, sometimes when you join a game you just have to deal with the rules and for big games you usually can't make a new one if one already exists as no one will join it

Can't increase victory turn once game has started anyway. Although, since now we have a voting system, this should be changed.

For the 'increase turn limit' well that's not always possible as mentioned above, but another reason it's not entirely possible is because of scenarios. The particular scenario I play most of the time is 1860 because it's fun and cuts out a lot of the neutral grind you do in vanilla games. But it's turn limit is locked at 50, I can't change that.

Also, you say this could be exploited but it's no easier to exploit then any other method. If you are worried about farmers, what's to stop them from just making their own game, farming endless and then allying in the end? There exists methods to farm SP that are just as easy as what I proposed in this thread. So that's not really a reason to do it.

Also to those who are all "It's my sp, why should I share it", well if it's truly yours then break your alliances if you have any. Nobody is forcing you to be allied when you win after all. However for those of us who work as a team yet prefer to play diplomacy type games (after all, we're not ALWAYS a team), it kinda screws us over when we work together yet only one of us gets the win.