Pinned Ruleset for Alliances

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Ruleset for Alliances

      Attention fellow Alliance Leaders. We are introducing a very basic ruleset for alliances going forward. These rules are aimed at ensuring that alliances can participate in and enjoy fair and competitive matches. Fairness is not limited to respecting the below ruleset, but also to ensuring that alliances treat their opponents with courtesy and respect:
      1. Alliances are responsible for honouring any internal rules agreed with other alliances for challenges
      2. Alliance leaders are ultimately responsible for the conduct of their members in alliance challenges
      3. ELO Farming is not allowed and alliances can ultimately be banned if staff suspect such farming took place. This can include:
        1. Challenging or accepting challenges from alliances well below your skill level
        2. Challenging dummy alliances
        3. Other extraneous cases as deemed by staff
      4. Alliances are responsible for managing their own alliances. Alliance members should not request staff to carry out changes, such as changes in alliance leader.
      5. Alliances are expected to join any elite or unranked challenges they request when these are created. Alliances who fail to join a challenge can suffer a penalty of losing out on monthly tokens, either temporarily or permanently, if they do not join these challenges.
      Please let me know if you have any questions.

      Rules are subject to change in the future, but leaders will be informed of such changes over Discord.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Maxim | CM ().

    • Interesting. But how is this different from the current situation? How can an Alliance take action against an opponent when it is the Alliance leader in opposition who is the biggest violator of the rules? What power does this give those who are fighting honourably against scum who won't obey the rules they set and/or agree to?

      There needs to be some mechanism that allows penalties to be applied when clear evidence of breaches can be provided.
    • What this does is gives Dorado the ability to punish an alliance that is breaking the agreed upon rules.(point 1) If the agreement is no golding and an alliance golds I believe this will allow Dorado to step in and punish the alliance that is golding. Point 4 means don't ask Dorado to manage members in an alliance. IE if the alliance leader goes inactive suddenly don't pm Maxim and say he can you make me the leader because such and such is inactive. Your course of action if the alliance leader cannot be replaced is form a new allinace!
    • Nubluk wrote:

      What this does is gives Dorado the ability to punish an alliance that is breaking the agreed upon rules.(point 1) If the agreement is no golding and an alliance golds I believe this will allow Dorado to step in and punish the alliance that is golding. Point 4 means don't ask Dorado to manage members in an alliance. IE if the alliance leader goes inactive suddenly don't pm Maxim and say he can you make me the leader because such and such is inactive. Your course of action if the alliance leader cannot be replaced is form a new allinace!
      Quite the opposite on Point 1. Dorado can only take action if there are clear Terms of Service breaches. If an agreed upon rule is broken, then it is up to both alliances to decide a way forward. Remember we have a close knit alliance community. If an alliance constantly break agreed upon rules, then the community will see to it that it becomes harder for them to get challenges, since others become aware of these issues.

      You are correct on Point 4.
    • This new rules set does nothing new or better. If you want to resolve a large number of agreement disputes, then gold use should be removed from all alliance challenges or add no gold use as a selectable option in the challenge setup (like free or random country selection). Sometimes you have to challenge a lower ranked alliance in order to get the size (number of players per side) that you want for a specific match. Also the only way to train players new to alliance challenges is by playing lower ranked alliances. If we had an easy to access option to play internal matches on the challenge maps, we could train our new members. These internal matches should be unranked and have no effect on individual stats. Also, there should be some way, other then the honor system, to verify match setup options. Gentleman's agreements are hard to enforce, so give us more options in the setup, so that these agreements can be avoided.
    • mgallo2006 wrote:

      This new rules set does nothing new or better. If you want to resolve a large number of agreement disputes, then gold use should be removed from all alliance challenges or add no gold use as a selectable option in the challenge setup (like free or random country selection). Sometimes you have to challenge a lower ranked alliance in order to get the size (number of players per side) that you want for a specific match. Also the only way to train players new to alliance challenges is by playing lower ranked alliances. If we had an easy to access option to play internal matches on the challenge maps, we could train our new members. These internal matches should be unranked and have no effect on individual stats. Also, there should be some way, other then the honor system, to verify match setup options. Gentleman's agreements are hard to enforce, so give us more options in the setup, so that these agreements can be avoided.
      Apologies but we are already providing alliances with gold free matches once every month through elite challenges. This is already a unique feature we provide because you won't find any games that disable their premium currencies for their players. Remember that our alliance communities are very close and intertwined and any agreement breaks ultimately punish the offending alliance to become obsolete with the rest of the community.
    • Maxim | CM wrote:

      Attention fellow Alliance Leaders. We are introducing a very basic ruleset for alliances going forward. These rules are aimed at ensuring that alliances can participate in and enjoy fair and competitive matches. Fairness is not limited to respecting the below ruleset, but also to ensuring that alliances treat their opponents with courtesy and respect:
      1. Alliances are responsible for honouring any internal rules agreed with other alliances for challenges
      2. Alliance leaders are ultimately responsible for the conduct of their members in alliance challenges
      3. ELO Farming is not allowed and alliances can ultimately be banned if staff suspect such farming took place. This can include:
        1. Challenging alliances well below your skill level
        2. Challenging dummy alliances
        3. Other extraneous cases as deemed by staff
      4. Alliances are responsible for managing their own alliances. Alliance members should not request staff to carry out changes, such as changes in alliance leader.
      Please let me know if you have any questions.

      Rules are subject to change in the future, but leaders will be informed of such changes over Discord.
      Great update. Just asking a question is about Number 3. "Skill level" for alliances not in the CAC or CON league, how should the average alliance gouge the skill of other alliances?
      "Le patriotisme, c'est aimer son pays. Le nationalisme, c'est détester celui des autres."-Charles De Gaulle, Leader of Free France in World War 2.
      English: "Patriotism is to love your country. Nationalism is hating that of others."
    • ewac123 wrote:

      Maxim | CM wrote:

      Attention fellow Alliance Leaders. We are introducing a very basic ruleset for alliances going forward. These rules are aimed at ensuring that alliances can participate in and enjoy fair and competitive matches. Fairness is not limited to respecting the below ruleset, but also to ensuring that alliances treat their opponents with courtesy and respect:
      1. Alliances are responsible for honouring any internal rules agreed with other alliances for challenges
      2. Alliance leaders are ultimately responsible for the conduct of their members in alliance challenges
      3. ELO Farming is not allowed and alliances can ultimately be banned if staff suspect such farming took place. This can include:
        1. Challenging alliances well below your skill level
        2. Challenging dummy alliances
        3. Other extraneous cases as deemed by staff
      4. Alliances are responsible for managing their own alliances. Alliance members should not request staff to carry out changes, such as changes in alliance leader.
      Please let me know if you have any questions.

      Rules are subject to change in the future, but leaders will be informed of such changes over Discord.
      Great update. Just asking a question is about Number 3. "Skill level" for alliances not in the CAC or CON league, how should the average alliance gouge the skill of other alliances?
      I would say, "use the elo" but lmao

      but yeah im pretty sure he refers to elo, even if its hardly a good measure of skill with the current system (if not then challenging some of the top 10 would run you risk getting banned for challenging them lol)
      I am The Baseline for opinions
    • ewac123 wrote:

      Great update. Just asking a question is about Number 3. "Skill level" for alliances not in the CAC or CON league, how should the average alliance gouge the skill of other alliances?
      First give yourself a rating and announce it somewhere/everywhere. Use any ranking system you like. For example your alliance might claim to be a shirt-level alliance in a system that uses jackets, shirts, pants, ear rings, hats, and shoes to identify skill levels.

      Then ask another alliance to rank themselves in that system or any other.

      If they agree that their claimed rank is similar to, or better than, your alliance's claimed rank you may challenge them.

      In case anyone cares to cry "Shenanigans!" later, save a screenshot or other record of the exchange you have with each other alliance. Keep that record for the longer of 6 months or until Yak's birthday.
    • Maxim | CM wrote:

      mgallo2006 wrote:

      This new rules set does nothing new or better. If you want to resolve a large number of agreement disputes, then gold use should be removed from all alliance challenges or add no gold use as a selectable option in the challenge setup (like free or random country selection). Sometimes you have to challenge a lower ranked alliance in order to get the size (number of players per side) that you want for a specific match. Also the only way to train players new to alliance challenges is by playing lower ranked alliances. If we had an easy to access option to play internal matches on the challenge maps, we could train our new members. These internal matches should be unranked and have no effect on individual stats. Also, there should be some way, other then the honor system, to verify match setup options. Gentleman's agreements are hard to enforce, so give us more options in the setup, so that these agreements can be avoided.
      Apologies but we are already providing alliances with gold free matches once every month through elite challenges. This is already a unique feature we provide because you won't find any games that disable their premium currencies for their players. Remember that our alliance communities are very close and intertwined and any agreement breaks ultimately punish the offending alliance to become obsolete with the rest of the community.
      Trying to arrange an elite match is practically impossible, it seems. so many hoops to jump through, and little to no response from the mods (sorry if that's harsh, but it's true). I have a lot of respect for the mods. You're volunteering (presumably) to help coordinate a game we love. No disrespect intended.


      A question... What would it take in Alliance matches for a Newspaper article to be system-generated anytime e a player used gold? It doesn't have to be too specific; just ""Argentina used 2500 gold". That way, it's very clear to every player that gold has been used (and, presumably for Alliance matches, that a rule has been violated). Dorado still gets the gold use income, and the community gets to identify the cheating scum who make this game barely playable.

      Another option (as my teammates and I have been advocating for years) is to make Alliance membership Security Council-only (therefore paid), and disable gold use in ALL aAlliance games. Dorado still gets income from SC membership, and you get a lot more happy players, and the Mods get far fewer headaches from people wanting records showing so-and-so must have used gold. Elite matches become a thing of the past.

      Just my 30 gold's worth.
    • Beecee wrote:

      Maxim | CM wrote:

      mgallo2006 wrote:

      This new rules set does nothing new or better. If you want to resolve a large number of agreement disputes, then gold use should be removed from all alliance challenges or add no gold use as a selectable option in the challenge setup (like free or random country selection). Sometimes you have to challenge a lower ranked alliance in order to get the size (number of players per side) that you want for a specific match. Also the only way to train players new to alliance challenges is by playing lower ranked alliances. If we had an easy to access option to play internal matches on the challenge maps, we could train our new members. These internal matches should be unranked and have no effect on individual stats. Also, there should be some way, other then the honor system, to verify match setup options. Gentleman's agreements are hard to enforce, so give us more options in the setup, so that these agreements can be avoided.
      Apologies but we are already providing alliances with gold free matches once every month through elite challenges. This is already a unique feature we provide because you won't find any games that disable their premium currencies for their players. Remember that our alliance communities are very close and intertwined and any agreement breaks ultimately punish the offending alliance to become obsolete with the rest of the community.
      Trying to arrange an elite match is practically impossible, it seems. so many hoops to jump through, and little to no response from the mods (sorry if that's harsh, but it's true). I have a lot of respect for the mods. You're volunteering (presumably) to help coordinate a game we love. No disrespect intended.

      A question... What would it take in Alliance matches for a Newspaper article to be system-generated anytime e a player used gold? It doesn't have to be too specific; just ""Argentina used 2500 gold". That way, it's very clear to every player that gold has been used (and, presumably for Alliance matches, that a rule has been violated). Dorado still gets the gold use income, and the community gets to identify the cheating scum who make this game barely playable.

      Another option (as my teammates and I have been advocating for years) is to make Alliance membership Security Council-only (therefore paid), and disable gold use in ALL aAlliance games. Dorado still gets income from SC membership, and you get a lot more happy players, and the Mods get far fewer headaches from people wanting records showing so-and-so must have used gold. Elite matches become a thing of the past.

      Just my 30 gold's worth.
      I honestly don't understand what the issue is here. Mods are always receptive to elite challenge applications and I personally oversee challenge applications and with some very rare exceptions, I do get the matches generated as soon as I possibly could. If you had any particular issues, please do get in touch with me and I would be happy to help you out and listen to suggestions.

      Your point on gold precisely outlines why we can never implement such a system. Gold is a legitimate resource in the game and the rule that gold is not used in challenges is a rule created by alliances, not by Dorado as a company. We have no problem providing each alliance with a monthly match where a gold free game is possible, but we cannot implement this for normal alliance challenges. At the same time, you use the term 'cheating scum', which already tells me that you will have no issue harassing users who use gold, which is ultimately a Terms of Service violation.
    • Beecee wrote:

      Maxim | CM wrote:

      mgallo2006 wrote:

      This new rules set does nothing new or better. If you want to resolve a large number of agreement disputes, then gold use should be removed from all alliance challenges or add no gold use as a selectable option in the challenge setup (like free or random country selection). Sometimes you have to challenge a lower ranked alliance in order to get the size (number of players per side) that you want for a specific match. Also the only way to train players new to alliance challenges is by playing lower ranked alliances. If we had an easy to access option to play internal matches on the challenge maps, we could train our new members. These internal matches should be unranked and have no effect on individual stats. Also, there should be some way, other then the honor system, to verify match setup options. Gentleman's agreements are hard to enforce, so give us more options in the setup, so that these agreements can be avoided.
      Apologies but we are already providing alliances with gold free matches once every month through elite challenges. This is already a unique feature we provide because you won't find any games that disable their premium currencies for their players. Remember that our alliance communities are very close and intertwined and any agreement breaks ultimately punish the offending alliance to become obsolete with the rest of the community.
      Trying to arrange an elite match is practically impossible, it seems. so many hoops to jump through, and little to no response from the mods (sorry if that's harsh, but it's true). I have a lot of respect for the mods. You're volunteering (presumably) to help coordinate a game we love. No disrespect intended.

      A question... What would it take in Alliance matches for a Newspaper article to be system-generated anytime e a player used gold? It doesn't have to be too specific; just ""Argentina used 2500 gold". That way, it's very clear to every player that gold has been used (and, presumably for Alliance matches, that a rule has been violated). Dorado still gets the gold use income, and the community gets to identify the cheating scum who make this game barely playable.

      Another option (as my teammates and I have been advocating for years) is to make Alliance membership Security Council-only (therefore paid), and disable gold use in ALL aAlliance games. Dorado still gets income from SC membership, and you get a lot more happy players, and the Mods get far fewer headaches from people wanting records showing so-and-so must have used gold. Elite matches become a thing of the past.

      Just my 30 gold's worth.
      Beecee quit being a tight wad and buy some gold. Cheating scum like you are always trying to take advantage of free2play games buy not purchasing premium currency!!!
    • Nubluk wrote:

      Beecee wrote:

      Maxim | CM wrote:

      mgallo2006 wrote:

      This new rules set does nothing new or better. If you want to resolve a large number of agreement disputes, then gold use should be removed from all alliance challenges or add no gold use as a selectable option in the challenge setup (like free or random country selection). Sometimes you have to challenge a lower ranked alliance in order to get the size (number of players per side) that you want for a specific match. Also the only way to train players new to alliance challenges is by playing lower ranked alliances. If we had an easy to access option to play internal matches on the challenge maps, we could train our new members. These internal matches should be unranked and have no effect on individual stats. Also, there should be some way, other then the honor system, to verify match setup options. Gentleman's agreements are hard to enforce, so give us more options in the setup, so that these agreements can be avoided.
      Apologies but we are already providing alliances with gold free matches once every month through elite challenges. This is already a unique feature we provide because you won't find any games that disable their premium currencies for their players. Remember that our alliance communities are very close and intertwined and any agreement breaks ultimately punish the offending alliance to become obsolete with the rest of the community.
      Trying to arrange an elite match is practically impossible, it seems. so many hoops to jump through, and little to no response from the mods (sorry if that's harsh, but it's true). I have a lot of respect for the mods. You're volunteering (presumably) to help coordinate a game we love. No disrespect intended.
      A question... What would it take in Alliance matches for a Newspaper article to be system-generated anytime e a player used gold? It doesn't have to be too specific; just ""Argentina used 2500 gold". That way, it's very clear to every player that gold has been used (and, presumably for Alliance matches, that a rule has been violated). Dorado still gets the gold use income, and the community gets to identify the cheating scum who make this game barely playable.

      Another option (as my teammates and I have been advocating for years) is to make Alliance membership Security Council-only (therefore paid), and disable gold use in ALL aAlliance games. Dorado still gets income from SC membership, and you get a lot more happy players, and the Mods get far fewer headaches from people wanting records showing so-and-so must have used gold. Elite matches become a thing of the past.

      Just my 30 gold's worth.
      Beecee quit being a tight wad and buy some gold. Cheating scum like you are always trying to take advantage of free2play games buy not purchasing premium currency!!!
      so im cheating for play a free to play game, for free
      I may or may not exist
    • A_Talking_Crab wrote:

      Nubluk wrote:

      Beecee wrote:

      Maxim | CM wrote:

      mgallo2006 wrote:

      This new rules set does nothing new or better. If you want to resolve a large number of agreement disputes, then gold use should be removed from all alliance challenges or add no gold use as a selectable option in the challenge setup (like free or random country selection). Sometimes you have to challenge a lower ranked alliance in order to get the size (number of players per side) that you want for a specific match. Also the only way to train players new to alliance challenges is by playing lower ranked alliances. If we had an easy to access option to play internal matches on the challenge maps, we could train our new members. These internal matches should be unranked and have no effect on individual stats. Also, there should be some way, other then the honor system, to verify match setup options. Gentleman's agreements are hard to enforce, so give us more options in the setup, so that these agreements can be avoided.
      Apologies but we are already providing alliances with gold free matches once every month through elite challenges. This is already a unique feature we provide because you won't find any games that disable their premium currencies for their players. Remember that our alliance communities are very close and intertwined and any agreement breaks ultimately punish the offending alliance to become obsolete with the rest of the community.
      Trying to arrange an elite match is practically impossible, it seems. so many hoops to jump through, and little to no response from the mods (sorry if that's harsh, but it's true). I have a lot of respect for the mods. You're volunteering (presumably) to help coordinate a game we love. No disrespect intended.A question... What would it take in Alliance matches for a Newspaper article to be system-generated anytime e a player used gold? It doesn't have to be too specific; just ""Argentina used 2500 gold". That way, it's very clear to every player that gold has been used (and, presumably for Alliance matches, that a rule has been violated). Dorado still gets the gold use income, and the community gets to identify the cheating scum who make this game barely playable.

      Another option (as my teammates and I have been advocating for years) is to make Alliance membership Security Council-only (therefore paid), and disable gold use in ALL aAlliance games. Dorado still gets income from SC membership, and you get a lot more happy players, and the Mods get far fewer headaches from people wanting records showing so-and-so must have used gold. Elite matches become a thing of the past.

      Just my 30 gold's worth.
      Beecee quit being a tight wad and buy some gold. Cheating scum like you are always trying to take advantage of free2play games buy not purchasing premium currency!!!
      so im cheating for play a free to play game, for free
      So glad you finally realize that.
      I am The Baseline for opinions