Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Next Round
Starts in 2 weeks. I'd like to throw a theory out there. A system where we get 4 capable and experienced leaders to come to an agreement where one leader will take sectors 1-5, the next will take 6-10 etc. Obviously a few kinks will need to be worked out depending on where the leaders drop, but in theory this could work out to a slightly different round of SK. Hopefully with more balance, less stacking (with honest agreements) and people playing with others they don't usually play with.
I'm willing to lead one alliance and if I get a decent response of interest in at least trying this out, I'll hunt down 3 other great leaders (unless volunteers stand up) to give this a try for some fun.
I, for one, am kinda tired of the old "only one good leader, join or suffer, then gangbang or get farmed" routine. So why not?
Good idea? Bad idea? Any theories on improvements/change to the theory?
I'm willing to lead one alliance and if I get a decent response of interest in at least trying this out, I'll hunt down 3 other great leaders (unless volunteers stand up) to give this a try for some fun.
I, for one, am kinda tired of the old "only one good leader, join or suffer, then gangbang or get farmed" routine. So why not?
Good idea? Bad idea? Any theories on improvements/change to the theory?
Comments
Might as well just make 4 alliances who are napped all rd long
imagine this worst case scenario for the losing alliance
One alliance, A4, falls behind the other 3.
A1, A2, A3 are equally strong.
Neither will risk siding with one other to beat the third top alliance, but they can try to use A4 to weaken one of them.
Assuming we're talking about experienced leaders, A4 can make use of this situation...
No al would be stupid enough to switch their best sector with a crappy one
Socialism on paper as karl marx wrote is pretty decent in theory but greed and personal gain wins in the end thus capitalism thrives
This isn't about perfectly levelling out the scores all round, it's about giving everyone the opportunity to play the game with good leaders, no domination, and letting diplomacy and war rule the game like it should.
But to me its like u want picks of sectors when sectors should be able to choose which alliance they want to go to.
Sure u can refuse sectors and take in the crappier ones and but really nah...
Just try and find 3 other als willing to do this
But its gonna be the same picture after 4 weeks
you cant have pure water out of poison without burning the entire thing out and distiling the water
i dont see how socialism doesnt work because they try to change capitalism into what it's not unless ur refering to socialism and changing it into i dont know...communist dictatorship. Anywho...
well i'll go on and think about it
Considering the player base has dropped so much over the years shrink the amount of kingdoms that can be build in one sector that way players are more spread out creating more sectors and more alliances....Make an APP for the game? The potential to grow this game is there both for improving the game experience and new players joining....
The game wont grow and will not receive support from SK community if no changes are made to the actual game...
Obviously you couldn't anti-turtle to win, b/c you'd be hit and knocked out right away. IDK I think it could be fun
Give it a week or two though for people to start complaining and warring over trivial things.