Neltronluur Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 This is very clean cut Alliances, YAY or NAY: I will abstain
Aurbere Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 NAY Especially considering my apparent reputation. It could just turn into a large group ganging up on a single person. Doesn't leave much room for debate. However, I am not fully opposed to Alliances. I believe that they will just make things overly complicated, and the right alliance could make this heavily one-sided.
Wolfninjajedi Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 Nay, though you coulda just asked for a vote in the main thread. XD
ArcherlordCP Posted May 9, 2013 Posted May 9, 2013 Nay. I agree with Aurbere that they could be complicated.
Selenial Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 Am I the only one whose saying yes? Lol Whilst we shouldn't gang up on people.... I think alliances are chances for the people who came in late to actually have a shot at winning, but meh, your descision.
tunewalker Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 (edited) yes please but I think to lessen the complexity and make it fair we can only team with 1 other person. Also here is the issue how do you not team with people simply by having some one attack some one first means if multiple of you decided to attack the same person just because that's what you always planned to do then essentially you have teamed the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Edited May 10, 2013 by tunewalker
October Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 (edited) Dunno if my vote even counts lol but as a spectator I think it'd be cool to allow alliances at first, let them work together at their discretion, before ultimately betraying one another and going all out in an only one team is left standing. I reckon it'd be fair if some people find one person unfairly overpowered or whatever. Besides, would be awesome if one of those in the 'alliance' was plotting the other's downfall the entire time. Edited May 10, 2013 by October
Selenial Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 Aubere, now that 2 want to ally with you.... Gonna change to a yes?
Aurbere Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 Aubere, now that 2 want to ally with you.... Gonna change to a yes? I would, but I feel that the concept of Alliances may be too complicated. However, I am not opposed to making alliances. I would rather see the rules first. But if the vote goes through, I will reap the benefits of joining an alliance. So for those reasons, I change my vote to neutral.
Selenial Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 I would, but I feel that the concept of Alliances may be too complicated. However, I am not opposed to making alliances. I would rather see the rules first. But if the vote goes through, I will reap the benefits of joining an alliance. So for those reasons, I change my vote to neutral. Imo it wouldnt be too hard... You can stay on each others planets... Call on Alliances for Reinforcements... You can turn on them and invade from their own world... Couple more rules and you're dandy ;p
LadyKulvax Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 I would suggest something like no more than three per alliance.
Selenial Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 I would suggest something like no more than three per alliance. Then you still have room in yours Girl power? Lol
LadyKulvax Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 We will have to wait until the OP or boss should I say of the whole original thread in the first place allows alliances. Also, don't be thrown by a possible alliance between me and the 'lorekeeper' do they call him now? there are plenty more excellent debaters in the thread, this is going to get messy. Which is why I believe alliances would be a good idea, primarily due to the fact that if it is an FFA, it's going to be utter chaos, where as multiple alliances with up to three members each would make it more centralised and debatable.
bionamaster Posted May 10, 2013 Posted May 10, 2013 I vote yes. With some rules and restrictions, alliances could add even more excitement to this.
Recommended Posts