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



108 people like this idea

I'm not talking about simply being ganged up on. I'm talking about particular situations where 2 players are acting extremely illogically. Such as they align themselves perfectly so that one can kill a few territories of no significance in one area so the other can sweep me from the board on the other side that it has access to. There are times when it's obvious that a player is using two devices / accounts at the same time as you can see the attacks being coordinated perfectly. And it's always a case where the lesser ranked one is thrown away so that the higher rank account can harvest in the end.

It's very difficult to call out cheaters on here because you'd have to watch the whole game straight through to see it. If it mattered enough, they could watch to see how many times accounts play together and what the results are. But ideally all I want is a way for me to label players myself as cheaters so I can remember them. Not everyone that beats me is a cheater. Sometimes others just get heated and go all out on me. But one guy destroying himself to partially eliminate me so the other can just sweep the rest and win the entire game? No way. There are definitely some games where there's pawn accounts used to help aid a cheating player.

2 people like this
Okay to most of what you said except for disliking being ganged up on. You are going to lose games. Somebody always does. Being ganged up on means you were either easy pickings or a threat that could not wisely be ignored. I shrug off the first and scream "Battle!" at the second situation.

1 person likes this
Alliances, in principle, are a great idea. But as they are currently handled in the game, they absolutely take the fun out of it. Too many times I've had people make an alliance with me just to put me at ease and them to plow through me within a turn or two. That's silly. Alliances that create 2 or more players ganging up on you, are also silly. IMO alliances need to last a maximum of turns. The computer must prevent allied players from attacking each other. Risk, as the name implies, is about strategizing without knowing exactly how events will shape up, the dice will roll, or whether or not it pays to leave a section unguarded to take out a giant block of armies. Risk is not about having to guess if your ally is honorable. I've been burned enough that now I NEVER accept requests and I immediately leave a game when it becomes obvious I'm being ganged up on. I'm pretty sure that is not the intent of them.
Reliance on false alliances to win means you are playing a game called suckers. It is not fun. I like a strategy game where people would rather win on skill instead of being a complete pile of rot. It is a leveller to have effective alliances as a strategy. One player should not be able to run the board if other players are awake. That is part of the challenge. I do not want to make a notebook. It is a computer game and creating stats is what computers do. I try to play with honour and appreciate that being a badge that other players can see. The ones who are saying this is a terrible idea are the reasons this stat is important and they hate it because it ruins their chances to ruin other peoples day. If I am playing tabletop I soon know who can be trusted and chances are we will play often. I will remember. Sorry but I do not want to go through that learning process with hundreds of players. I tend to ignore all and will until there is a stat to show who might be worth giving a chance.

3 people like this
Live chat is a great idea now you talking real strategy. It would make the game more interesting.

2 people like this
The name of the game is called Risk.keeping stats on players that turn or break the alliance take away part of the risk factor. Usually the player that request alliance with you before the game get started is the manipulator this is one that will turn and betray the alliance attack that Person first.
Not a good idea. As far as I'm concerned, the alliance option is a form of communication, basically saying I'm not after you and breaking an alliance is usually your way of saying "I'm angry and coming after you." Since there is no actual communication within the game aside from this and smile icons, it really shouldn't be treated as anything official that needs to be followed.

 


1 person likes this
This needs to be done perfectly in order for it to be good. Sometimes an ally wouldn't mind you taking one of their territories that they don't care about. There needs to be a way that you can do that without breaking an alliance. Also, all alliances are eventually broken. There needs to be a set number of turns or when there's only two players left when you can break in alliance without it affecting your stats. If it isn't done exactly this way it could be very very bad.

1 person likes this
Wow - you keep a log! Whenever I break an alliance, I let them know on MY turn and don't attack them that turn. That is the most honorable way. But mostly- don't make alliances unless you're desperate. In fact, I wish you could have the option to disable this for a game you are creating. I've been ganged up on too many times!

1 person likes this
Dishonourable players like velasco the nineth; martin fernstrom; louis odom; lew cliche 3; ismash5; flora rougarou
What is more annoying than breaking alliances is when there are only 3 of you left and 2 obviously have an alliance to gang up on you. I know there is nothing that can be done and it is "part of the game" but I've had this happen so many times lately. No matter how strong I am, it is very difficult to beat 2 other players that are only intent on attacking you.

5 people like this
It's impossible to keep a alliance whole game for one but also there's other ways you can betray by simply moving all your troops to their border in prep for attack and if they attack you the next turn, it would count as them being the betrayer. Would be cool but wouldn't really work

1 person likes this
PLEASE DO NOT DO THIS! THE WHOLE POINT OF THE GAME IS BETRAYING PEOPLE, DONT MESS WITH A CLASSIC GAME.

1 person likes this
What's the point of that? If I tell him before or he just see that I do the attack. Same thing. And do I tell and not attack that player, he can attack me afterwards. It's so stupid to even think this uncertainty isn't meant to be a dimension in the game. It's what makes it a war/strategic game. Don't trust anyone to much. I also often see alliances between lower ranked players against me as a master, and sure one of them wins over me, but I can always see who are the one that benefits. If the alliance between them was broken it could be an open game.

1 person likes this
We allknow eventually analliance will be broken because the aim is to win. The point is to tell your ally you are breaki g the alliance BEFORE YOU ATTACK. there are far toomany players with no honour. Ive even had one player who offered me an alliance which i accepted and then he immediately tried to wipe me out so he obviously had no intention of having an alliance at all!

10 people like this
Login or Signup to post a comment