I and many other players would like a mode where only 1 player can win.
Also all chats would be global.
This would dissuade the mass alliances we see today that lead to boring games.
1 player can win? So you mean, no rank is awarded to second the third places?
I think Misher means a game where you don’t need to work with others to win.
Misher, I’m interested to hear from you what you mean by boring games? If you mean 3+ players that co-ordinate weapons/Terra/Manu research - have you tried locking those tech to a certain level in a custom game?
I played a lot of Conquer Club so I guess thats where this is coming from. Basically a way to ensure that even if an alliance is formed they do need to atk each other at the end to fight for first place. I’m not against awards to 2nd and 3rd place but the 1st place award should be the largest by far.
In a game of 16 you’ll have 6+ man alliances of the top players. Its kind of sad and I’d like some emphasis/reward for being #1.
Ah I see. So you want there to be a larger prize for being 1st place so that allies would betray each other to get the so called grand prize? I can assure you, most people would rather uphold an honor system and let whoever is in first place win when everyone else is wiped out. For example, out of most of my games, only like 10% of them end with someone actually winning by taking the required amount of stars, the rest is won by an organized concession. Most people would probably continue to do the same thing because they don’t want to betray a close ally they have been working together with for weeks or months if it is a 32 player game. I personally would just let my ally win then betray them for first place.
5 Likes
Concur. I don’t betray allies.
Not a betrayal if its understood that there can only be 1 and all alliances are temporary 0.0