Hi there,
I'm on game 37 and really enjoy the game, especially the social and cooperative aspect of coalitions.
i see coalitions form early, break apart as players get crushed or turn inactive, and so on. Such is life, obviously.
The one thing that really turns me off a game however, is the creation - usually mid-game or sometimes later, of "super-coalitions". In public games, it seems there are maybe 10-15 players who continue to play, with maybe 4-5 who really know what they are doing. Sure enough, the 4-5 join up and at that point are pretty much unbeatable. If you're not part of that coalition, you can fight the good fight and try to stay interested until the legend of doom shows up at your door. If you're part of the coalition, the battle chat seems to go quiet as the five mostly go through the motions, invading inactive countries.....what a bore. Imagine a card game where the other three at the table are allowed to work together to beat you. I would say see 'ya after one round.
I wondered if anyone thought it a good idea to discourage mid to late game super-coalitions, in order to keep the gameplay fresh. Maybe making it inexpensive or free to join a coalition early in the game, but have it grow increasingly expensive to join as the days go by. For example, make it more expensive not only by number of game days, but also by size of the coalition you are joining. Make it a cost huge cash or combination cash/supplies/components "tribute" to join another coalition. That might keep the behemoths apart, unless they see it worthwhile to invest in a coalition. Experienced players could still team up early, of course.
Your thoughts?
I'm on game 37 and really enjoy the game, especially the social and cooperative aspect of coalitions.
i see coalitions form early, break apart as players get crushed or turn inactive, and so on. Such is life, obviously.
The one thing that really turns me off a game however, is the creation - usually mid-game or sometimes later, of "super-coalitions". In public games, it seems there are maybe 10-15 players who continue to play, with maybe 4-5 who really know what they are doing. Sure enough, the 4-5 join up and at that point are pretty much unbeatable. If you're not part of that coalition, you can fight the good fight and try to stay interested until the legend of doom shows up at your door. If you're part of the coalition, the battle chat seems to go quiet as the five mostly go through the motions, invading inactive countries.....what a bore. Imagine a card game where the other three at the table are allowed to work together to beat you. I would say see 'ya after one round.
I wondered if anyone thought it a good idea to discourage mid to late game super-coalitions, in order to keep the gameplay fresh. Maybe making it inexpensive or free to join a coalition early in the game, but have it grow increasingly expensive to join as the days go by. For example, make it more expensive not only by number of game days, but also by size of the coalition you are joining. Make it a cost huge cash or combination cash/supplies/components "tribute" to join another coalition. That might keep the behemoths apart, unless they see it worthwhile to invest in a coalition. Experienced players could still team up early, of course.
Your thoughts?
And if you havnt formed / joined a winning coalition by day 37 thats on you.
