Truces and alliances

Talk about all things related to Conquer Club

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the community guidelines before posting.
Post Reply
User avatar
Star_BuRiT
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:10 am
Location: ???

Truces and alliances

Post by Star_BuRiT »

hi all.. need ur thoughts on this matter.. just wanted to know is it ok to make truces or alliances in a game with only 3 players?

if announced in chat is it legal?

thanks just wanted to know bout this...
User avatar
panicker
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 3:34 pm
Location: NE seaside paradise UK

Post by panicker »

dont think its judged as illegal in any sense but i dont agree with them , i tend to stray away from alliances as a whole.

what i will say is i tend to think that in a 3 player game if one player is overrunning its natural for the other 2 to both concentrate on him to even things out

but alliances from the start? thats just not cricket :D
Time is never wasted when your wasted all the time -
User avatar
gavin_sidhu
Posts: 1428
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 6:16 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia

Post by gavin_sidhu »

Its allowed but not looked upon in a nice way. And take ur turn in the rt.
Highest Score: 1843 Ranking (Australians): 3
User avatar
Star_BuRiT
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:10 am
Location: ???

Post by Star_BuRiT »

well if its allowed .. then just have to stay away from such players.. thanks for ur opinions..
User avatar
MeDeFe
Posts: 7831
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Follow the trail of holes in other people's arguments.

Post by MeDeFe »

If it's to keep the one strongest player from winning I don't see a problem, but alliances from the start in 3 player games (or any games for that matter) is complete bullshit.
User avatar
Star_BuRiT
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:10 am
Location: ???

Post by Star_BuRiT »

MeDeFe wrote:If it's to keep the one strongest player from winning I don't see a problem, but alliances from the start in 3 player games (or any games for that matter) is complete bullshit.


well it was keeping the third player from winning but even so i dont see a need for an alliance or truce.... it should be common sense, or is common sense not too common.???
User avatar
Fireside Poet
Posts: 2671
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:49 pm

Post by Fireside Poet »

Just my worthless .02, but when you play with experienced players who understand the big picture, they tend to recognize who is the threat and govern them accordingly without even having to acknowledge that there needs to be something done or that there even needs to be a temporary alliance.

I don't make truces or alliances.
Image
Click this logo for more information on joining!
User avatar
KoolBak
Posts: 7414
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2006 1:03 pm
Gender: Male
Location: The beautiful Pacific Northwest

Post by KoolBak »

Aaaahhhhh...that post was a balm to the bruise I got from my knee-jerk response...Thanks FP!!
"Gypsy told my fortune...she said that nothin showed...."

Neil Young....Like An Inca

AND:
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
User avatar
RobinJ
Posts: 1901
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:56 pm
Location: Northern Ireland

Post by RobinJ »

MeDeFe wrote:If it's to keep the one strongest player from winning I don't see a problem, but alliances from the start in 3 player games (or any games for that matter) is complete bullshit.


I agree with this as i have made these sort of alliances in 3 player games but it is not fair to ally from the beginning to make it a two player game.

However, I also agree with this:
Fireside Poet wrote:Just my worthless .02, but when you play with experienced players who understand the big picture, they tend to recognize who is the threat and govern them accordingly without even having to acknowledge that there needs to be something done or that there even needs to be a temporary alliance.

:)
howie
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:01 pm

Post by howie »

I've done truces rather than alliences, would never allie, it was only a truce over one border. And only done it the once.
User avatar
KidWhisky
Posts: 405
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 5:55 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Under A big W

Post by KidWhisky »

Isnt table talk part of the game. And arn't truces, pacts and alliances a part of that. Its a strategy game and allying as well as backstabing when it is in your best interest is all part of the game. You do what you do to win and if making a pact with someone is going to help you win then i say do it up. A good player will be able to compensate for a pact againt him by offering a better deal, fortifying differently or just killing one of the conspiritors off. There are ways to beat the pact and thats a fun part of the game in my opinion.
Baby, When You Look This Good, You Don't Have To KNOW Anything.

"You? Whats To Know? Your A Punk, A Rank Amature...Still If It's A Whoopin Your A Wantin!
Image
User avatar
macwin
Posts: 66
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:31 pm
Location: Cairns, Qld

Post by macwin »

Fireside Poet wrote:Just my worthless .02, but when you play with experienced players who understand the big picture, they tend to recognize who is the threat and govern them accordingly without even having to acknowledge that there needs to be something done or that there even needs to be a temporary alliance.

I don't make truces or alliances.


Ditto

Well said
User avatar
Star_BuRiT
Posts: 59
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:10 am
Location: ???

Re: Truces and alliances

Post by Star_BuRiT »

well guys has there been a poll on for this.. i mean how many players would, would not at all, or would some times... Well if can some one can set one just for the sake of knowing, it would be nice.

Happy CC - ing all
User avatar
MeDeFe
Posts: 7831
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 2:48 am
Location: Follow the trail of holes in other people's arguments.

Post by MeDeFe »

there have been countless polls on and discussions about this topic, and we never agree.
Post Reply

Return to “Conquer Club Discussion”