Quark Games forums

Allies can betray one anther to need the ability to steal cities.

I had allies steal cities from our guild and then jump alliances (accompanied by a guild name change)

A player in an allied guild (teal color)

Destroyer, you brought up a valid point. I forgot to ask Johnny, what kind of Ally?

Ally as in Player in the same guild, Player in a allied guild through diplomacy (teal color), or player who verbally is an ally?

But ocham what if the game didn't know they were allies and it's just doing it's job

My apologies, but that's a cop out, TT. If everyone wants to sit around and pretend that it is intended for this to occur and as such only this or that class of people can survive, then yippee, whatever. A jar of cookies for all you war winners. Meanwhile, the game mechanics could still use a little tweaking.

The truth is, it works the way it does because there's no code to make it work any other way. And there ought to be if this is to be a robust war game. Not only should ally scholars turn supportive, but so should any extras you send to insure a take-over that wind up not being needed but are already on their way. I.e. If a scholar of yours takes a city, and one you sent right after takes it a second time. I'm sorry - that isn't a "game mechanic," it's just something that is probably scheduled to be added but hasn't made it up the priority list, yet.

There is a major emphasis on prior planning and coordination. Guilds with these skills win wars.

My ally and I were working together conquering a city, I ended up taking it over. However my ally still had 2 scholars coming in afterwards.
The end result was me losing my scholar/city and a major setback.
Is this intended in the game? should the allies attacks not turn into support after the city switches over?