Start a new topic

TURNCOAT - player statistic to show % of alliances broken

IDEA: A player statistic visible to other players that shows your % of alliance broken before <x> number of turns.

[Note: exact number of turns to be defined.]

HOW TO VOTE FOR THIS FEATURE? Tap the 'Do you like this idea?' below

106 people like this idea

Very good idea ! But I think that the best solution is to delete all the concept of the alliances ! I

its one thing breaking an alliance with a player...  its another thing to make the alliance for the sole purpose of deceiving bhy allying with them just see their positions and use it to attack them the very next turn   thats BS  in the real world, any country acting in such a manner would have harsh world wide reaction, up to and including war      its not hard to have integrity people    integrity leads to honor      youll never had either by deceiving those closest to you   

I have yet to see a game without some type of bugs or problems. Most of the time, this game is just fine. But there's a lot of idiots who come here to whine about mostly arbitrary issues. I think the company does a reasonable job in the programming as I have witnessed over the last 4 years or so. The cheating is still an issue but there is only so much you can do for a rather inexpensive game.

I thought you would deny that, given that you began your interaction with me by calling me a moron for using incorrect grammar. Its a stupid username. I accept your surrender. In the future, don't block complaints intended to create positive change, especially when you're siding with incompetent tyrants. People who side with tyrants are dishonorable, and weaklings who block complaints intended to encourage positive change are the lowest form of scum.

lol.  It's my first name followed by last name initial.

There. That's two of us now who have a problem with bad grammar. Briand is clearly a moron who uses the bastardised American version of our language, but that woman clearly cares as much as me. Briand must be an Elvish woman's name. Nobody in the human world would call their child that unless they hated them.


Proper grammar would be:

"Please replace all of your staff."

Please don't hire Paul to the new programming team; he's clearly a moron.

 How is 'Do you like this idea?' a Yes button? The programmers of this game are absolute morons. Here is the sentence that appears after you click 'Do you like this idea?':  You and 100 others like this idea unlike!

If I was in charge of this company I would replace every single one of these morons. Programming is ALL about LOGIC. If your brain can't structure a sentence, it sure as hell isn't competent enough to program a game with hundreds of thousands of players. There are so many logic errors in this game, its unbelievable. PLEASE REPLACE ALL YOUR STAFF.

There are a lot of great ideas Here but I’m seeing too many alliances made behind the screens I watched as a spectator while Orange with 157 troops LET red with only 73 troops Win because orange wouldn’t attack red I watched as orange let red build up enough troops to defeat him. The Victor was “Cottonwood_hill” Expert. Well I know why he is an expert now I love this game as a kid but playing online has been disheartening
I support an idea like this (or the one I just suggested) completely! When I enter an alliance I intend to be in it for the rest of the game. But so many people attack you without any warning once the alliance doesn't suit them anymore. But then other people are really good! Please add a feature like this.
In game chat would essentially remove the need to have alliances. Alliance is just a form of communication without having to actually type out anything. People take it way too seriously to think we need a rating system based on alliances broken.

The cheater aspect is a whole other dog in the bunch. I think we should have player profiles where we can look and see games player and who they played against. Put a bio in there. Log IP addresses used, especially displaying it in game. Make it more personal. Give reasons for someone to not just create another random character and think he can play both at the same time and cheat. SMG seems to think it's ok for friends to play in games where they don't know anyone else and there's a ranking system. I strongly disagree with this. If I see someone join my game with the same IP address or always plays together with that one other guy, I'm booting him.


Allow group chat amongst everyone during games but no solo chat. Allow people to rank other players conduct/honor/playing style after game. How many alliances did they break how many times did they die saving another player...etc. I get the feeling that players are being very dishonest. Perhaps even using two players at once or only playing games in which they know the other players involved. Visible stats should decrease these issues
Risk would have to create sum sort of means to decide whether or not an action is honorable or not. Rather. Did an alliance break have good reasoning or was it treacherous. This could be judged based on positioning and solider count. Shouldn't be that hard to do.
Alliances should automatically be broken if only 3 people remain. And should only be formed when it makes most sense. Yes it is a game of war and ultimately u will have to break the alliance but One should be able to see the big picture of positioning on the board. Too many are petty and want to persist in small battles while another dominates the rest of the playing field. Itz pure stupidity.

I'm for a very rough score, say a 3-level system with a relatively short memory span.

1 person likes this
Login or Signup to post a comment