pre game alliances...

[parone]

been in 4 MP games. two had pre existing alliances b4 the games started(and in one i accused two guys of it, but i was totally wrong...)

anyway, wondering how prevalent this is? seems like a lot of players are trying to work this angle. asking around the forums, the guys i have run into doing this have done it long before i came along(which is also odd, since i am a newbie, and they are in newbie games)

not bitter. just wondering.

[Legendary League]

How does one create an alliance before the game, when starts are random?

As for in-game alliances and coalitions, they form naturally, and are common pretty much everywhere as a natural extension of power politics (only difference is that these alliances will almost never last till the end of the game).

In the same game you've talked about, BSoD, I started out trying to organize a coalition against Bogarus, before having the same treatment served back to me as Pangaea and Bogarus tag-teamed me as an extension of their own geographic location and strategic interests (for Pangaea, he could either go for me or Midgard, and I offer no strategic overstretch [plus Marignon is a bummer for Pangaea later on anyways[, while Bogarus caught wind of my attempts at preemptively halting his insane gold/research curve from curving, and so was able to organize his own alliance against me (whilst his neighbors were busy with you to the south). Meanwhile I convinced Midgard that a Pangaea who took all of my lands would have only one other target to go after, and thus formed a pseudo-alliance with hi, (it was never formalized or vocalized, but we maintained our NAP and both fought Pangaea).

Fighting multiple nations at once will happen, and I will say without a doubt that none of them are ever formed before the game starts, since no one knows where everyone will start to begin with, and who they're facing. You can't forge an alliance between Vanheim and Helheim against Niefelheim pre-game, say, because chances may be that all three nations start at opposite corners of the map (or, say Vanheim would benefit greatly from attacking Helheim if they were neighbors).

This is coming from an International Relations major, and someone who's played thus far some MP games.

[earcaraxe]

parone, would u tell if u consider me and legowarrior in the "giants and dwarves game" being in a "pre-existing" alliance?

[Legendary League]

In general, there is no way to avoid fighting multiple nations at once besides shrewd diplomacy and good risk management. That is, don't get into a war if you don't think you can win (and win fast, with the least amount of casualties possible]). In the BSoD game, I believe you were willing to spark a war with Abysia over a common indy-battle over a province, without securing your flanks, which lead to Ulm falling on you some turns after. You did miscalculate with your pretender, as Cradle as a map is very much slanted towards defensive play (with the mass chokepoints and difficult terrain), but others capitalized on your weakness.

I'll use my PowerBeyondComprehension game as an example of what I mean by risk management. As Helheim, I located C'tis on an isolated peninsula as a start location with myself as the only land connection. I examined the matchup to determine that I would win handily before he hit major battle magicks, so I intensified my efforts to secure my other borders and neighbors with NAPs, while lulling C'tis into a slightly more relaxed position with an NAP-1 (i.e. warning the turn before troops march to occupy), and baited out information like research goals from PM conversations, in addition to drawing his army into disadvantageous positions and losses with unfavorable (for me) border delineations, which all added up to me being able to cripple C'tis in such a fashion that he couldn't contest my thugs and eventual army. That and (publically) whoring my svalts off for several turns forging items to fund the whole venture.

[parone]

LL, i have no prob with in game alliances. im in the north on bsod, far to the east, and was wrong about what i said with hooley and shard. their alliance was not prearranges, and i have no prob with it. just made sense for them to team up and eliminate the corner guy.

on the other hand, i'm told certain players consistently join games and never fight with one another. since you seem like an experienced player(im not) and don't seem to think that this is a major problem, i take that as an encouraging sign.

happy gaming.

[Legendary League]

Originally Posted by parone

LL, i have no prob with in game alliances. im in the north on bsod, far to the east, and was wrong about what i said with hooley and shard. their alliance was not prearranges, and i have no prob with it. just made sense for them to team up and eliminate the corner guy.

on the other hand, i'm told certain players consistently join games and never fight with one another. since you seem like an experienced player(im not) and don't seem to think that this is a major problem, i take that as an encouraging sign.

happy gaming.

Well, I don't think experienced is a good word for it. Say, someone whose wasting his college education studying diplomacy, so he has a few insights relative to his skill level to make.

I don't think such alliances exist, or at least I haven't heard of them. There are team games (but that's part of the objective), but ultimately only one person can win the game in the end, so no alliance can really last (unless they agree upon a joint win, but that's unlikely), or have benefits to being made before the game itself.

Take me and matty for instance. Our first game together, I'm busy throwing everything and the kitchen sink at him to defend my land tooth and nail, my next game its the opposite and have nearly reduced him to his capital, and now my newest game we're off to a less conflict-ridden start. Now, I didn't plan on any of these scenarios pre-game (besides an analysis of my rival nations before the game), but that's the cards and chain of events the game dealt me. Conditions change every game, so its impossible to plan diplomacy pregame (besides things like maybe anti-Ermor coalitions, but those tend to be tenuous at best). Or at least, I'd imagine.

[parone]

i wasted my college education studying economics. still can't figure out why i went to college. it was fun, though.

[JonBrave]

Originally Posted by parone

i wasted my college education studying economics. still can't figure out why i went to college. it was fun, though.

• I have oranges. You want oranges. So I put the price up.
• If there are other suppliers of oranges, we get together, burn the excess oranges, and put the price up.
• So the Government nationalises orange growing. Now there are no oranges available. But the important thing is, the orange growers are looked after.

Can I have my economics degree please? No offence intended

[elmokki]

Originally Posted by JonBrave

• I have oranges. You want oranges. So I put the price up.
• If there are other suppliers of oranges, we get together, burn the excess oranges, and put the price up.
• So the Government nationalises orange growing. Now there are no oranges available. But the important thing is, the orange growers are looked after.

Can I have my economics degree please? No offence intended

You do have an interesting view of economics.

[Torin]

I have seen the pre game alliances before. Its a risk you take when you create a new game. You dont know exactly who the players are.