Concerning FFAs

Alright, so this is a phenomenon I've been noticing for a while, and something I finally want to understand.

You are here:


More specifically, you are the little blue-green-whatever colour country in the right.

As we can all see, you only have a single enemy. As one would naturally think, it'd be best to attack said player, and have a fun atWar game where you and your allies, the black player's other enemies, try to defeat him and win the game. The frontline is well-designed to give you an interesting war, where your goal is to advance northwards while guarding from black's attacks from beyond the mountains and protecting your cap.

Therefore, it begs the question...

Why the fuck do approximately two out of every three player choose to ALLY the black player, instead of fighting him? I'm not kidding, it happens all the fucking time, and when one brings it up, they reply with some dumb excuse like "there's no rule that says I can't do it". Putting aside how you're ruining the game by having black focus their entire, enormous strength on a single other enemy (and making 4nic leave because of it...), therefore ruining other people's playing experience, why in the world would you do this to yourself? What in the world are you going to do in this hypothetical game? Sit back and watch until the "you won" banner flows into the screen? This is not even a phenomenon exclusive to the specific map, you have no idea how often Ptolemies and Parthias ally Seleucids in Rome Political. I just want to be enlightened on why in the world people so often make such a cancerous decision.

That was fast

Black is big n fat, prolly need to incentivize that player to actually want to fight em

Meaning no offense but this might bust some scenario balls, but this is verry ironic coming from a scenario player. Imo scenarios is what caused all of this.

Before scenarios, FFA's were most of the times actual FFA. Sure some people just simply do not want to understand the concept of FFA and it will always be like that, but for a long time FFA principles were actually respected.

The reason I reffer to scenarios as the reason for all of this, is because of how most scenarios are basically made. Most of the times the map is dived in two sides/teams. 1 or 2 countries from each side that are usualy the mainbattles of the game and alot of little countries/allies doing the work around it. Ofcourse from all the rankism within that community, those big countries only get played by ''strong and muscled high ranks!!1!' and the little countries, whom are most of the times connected from most sides to allied territory, are played by the 'weaker and less masculine' low ranks. Most of those games contain literally no expansion experience whatsoever, since there is most of the times no neutral place to expand to, no economizing, no strategizing, yada yada yada, just a bunch of people spamming in the allychats.

Tho don't get me wrong, I do like some scenario games, from time to time, though if you play it day in, day out, and never explore other maps, the standard maps, other gametypes etc., you'll stay in this cocoon of allied-scenario teamgames, and base your whole gameplay upon this illusion of 'succesful gaming'. And like said, millions of times from your side, that the scenario community is the biggest community in this game and basically attracts and lures lower ranks into that type of gameplay, causes this kind of behaviour in games. People are being afraid to play a game out, seek for close-territory fights and just like too turtle-mode.

So the type of advise i'd like to give to you guys is: convince your friends/clanmembers/lowranks to play some ''boring'' standard worldmaps, do FFA, play with friends or enemies whatever, and just explore and try out new things.

Geschrieben von Waffel, 25.03.2019 at 18:24

Meaning no offense but this might bust some scenario balls, but this is verry ironic coming from a scenario player. Imo scenarios is what caused all of this.

Before scenarios, FFA's were most of the times actual FFA. Sure some people just simply do not want to understand the concept of FFA and it will always be like that, but for a long time FFA principles were actually respected.

The reason I reffer to scenarios as the reason for all of this, is because of how most scenarios are basically made. Most of the times the map is dived in two sides/teams. 1 or 2 countries from each side that are usualy the mainbattles of the game and alot of little countries/allies doing the work around it. Ofcourse from all the rankism within that community, those big countries only get played by ''strong and muscled high ranks!!1!' and the little countries, whom are most of the times connected from most sides to allied territory, are played by the 'weaker and less masculine' low ranks. Most of those games contain literally no expansion experience whatsoever, since there is most of the times no neutral place to expand to, no economizing, no strategizing, yada yada yada, just a bunch of people spamming in the allychats.

Tho don't get me wrong, I do like some scenario games, from time to time, though if you play it day in, day out, and never explore other maps, the standard maps, other gametypes etc., you'll stay in this cocoon of allied-scenario teamgames, and base your whole gameplay upon this illusion of 'succesful gaming'. And like said, millions of times from your side, that the scenario community is the biggest community in this game and basically attracts and lures lower ranks into that type of gameplay, causes this kind of behaviour in games. People are being afraid to play a game out, seek for close-territory fights and just like too turtle-mode.

So the type of advise i'd like to give to you guys: Convince your friends/clanmembers/lowranks to play some ''boring'' standard worldmaps, do FFA, play with friends or enemies whatever, and just explore and try out new things.

This Persia is a rper like many others Ally fags and tf are you talking about,main countries,wut,maybe I should start making up random facts about eu without thinking as well,teach how

Geschrieben von Waffel, 25.03.2019 at 18:24

That makes sense in part but not really, in the sense that it is not just low ranks that act like this, the most recent example was a r8 premium which I guess you could call a low rank but I've seen plenty r10+ players do much of the same.

Also, "whom are most of the times connected from most sides to allied territory", this is actually wrong, most often small factions stick out like a sore thumb, take WW1 for example, the most popular scenario, much as I loathe to admit it, its small factions, Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria have most of their borders exposed to enemies, and infact are the ones most commonly getting bumrushed

Geschrieben von Zephyrusu, 25.03.2019 at 18:37

Geschrieben von Waffel, 25.03.2019 at 18:24

That makes sense in part but not really, in the sense that it is not just low ranks that act like this, the most recent example was a r8 premium which I guess you could call a low rank but I've seen plenty r10+ players do much of the same.

Also, "whom are most of the times connected from most sides to allied territory", this is actually wrong, most often small factions stick out like a sore thumb, take WW1 for example, the most popular scenario, much as I loathe to admit it, its small factions, Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria have most of their borders exposed to enemies, and infact are the ones most commonly getting bumrushed

Tbh ranks have no meaning ever since those sp-farming maps. I see rank 14's still play like a rank 6 on average. You seemed to missed the point in that.

As for WW1, I knew this scenario was going to be mentioned, but lets be honest. its a map on a tiny continent called Europe and contains a number of 11 players on it with 5v6, ofcourse most of those sides are going to be bordered to enemylines, though, the example of the clog of alliedborders I meant, is kinda representative in that map aswell with east germany/hungary and prussia(?, grey) basically protecting eachothers back, making it easier for atleast 2/3th of them being protected from behind.

Tho im not going to further discuss about that map on this matter, since it diminishes the seriousness of this subject.

Yep, thanks for making this thread zeph.

Pretty much the most disgusting way of allyfagging possible, the blue country also has strong chances of beating him if played correctly, ive thought about it and the solution would be telling people they cant ally or peace black country before the game starts or else it will result in a ban for both players.


And to waffel: Tldr its probably some bitchy cry text downvote

Geschrieben von 4nic, 26.03.2019 at 13:48

Yep, thanks for making this thread zeph.

Pretty much the most disgusting way of allyfagging possible, the blue country also has strong chances of beating him if played correctly, ive thought about it and the solution would be telling people they cant ally or peace black country before the game starts or else it will result in a ban for both players.


And to waffel: Tldr its probably some bitchy cry text downvote

Waffel's Tldr is right on point, and in this case, worth the read ... he describes the mindset of the player who would ally up in the situation described by Zeph, and how this has been 'normalized' by the game play of low to mid rank players as they optimize SP gains in search of upgrades.

Geschrieben von brianwl, 26.03.2019 at 13:55

Geschrieben von 4nic, 26.03.2019 at 13:48

Yep, thanks for making this thread zeph.

Pretty much the most disgusting way of allyfagging possible, the blue country also has strong chances of beating him if played correctly, ive thought about it and the solution would be telling people they cant ally or peace black country before the game starts or else it will result in a ban for both players.


And to waffel: Tldr its probably some bitchy cry text downvote

Waffel's Tldr is right on point, and in this case, worth the read ... he describes the mindset of the player who would ally up in the situation described by Zeph, and how this has been 'normalized' by the game play of low to mid rank players as they optimize SP gains in search of upgrades.

I read it, and i can pretty much say with confidence that hes wrong.
Im sorry but i think neither you or waffel know the depth of scenario games or played many of them. (at least judging from more recent game history)

The mindset of the average scenario player is NOT to farm as much SP as possible or look for a cheap victory by allyfagging or other dirty tactics, in fact similar to competitive atwar they push eachother to get better and better on these maps, thats why you sometimes see expert ww1 players who are low ranked but play as if they had an r13 alt account.

You can judge that from zephs current thread, this type of allyfagging is frowned upon and players who do it will most likely be excluded from the next game untill they get better/learn from the mistake.

The place i mostly see allyfagging happening is world games and these FFAs that waffel mentioned specifically for the reason of gaining as much as SP as possible, a thing that scenario players dont do, but waffel accuses them of.

Geschrieben von 4nic, 26.03.2019 at 14:22

...
...
The mindset of the average scenario player is NOT to farm as much SP as possible or look for a cheap victory by allyfagging or other dirty tactics, in fact similar to competitive atwar they push eachother to get better and better on these maps, thats why you sometimes see expert ww1 players who are low ranked but play as if they had an r13 alt account.

i can't speak for waffle, but i wasn't generalizing this to the 'average scenario player' as you presume in your quote (and i don't think he was either). Simply saying that there are a subset of players who play a certain style of game to gain the SP needed for upgrades, and i have observed this personally. In fact, if you've never observed a bunch of low/midranks in a game with a high rank playing the main 'power' country (Germany in WW for example) i'd say you probably haven't watched a lot of scenarios.)

It is these players (not the average scenario player, but a small subset of them) that would ally the 'black' player Zeph describes, throwing the game and making it unbalanced.

Geschrieben von 4nic, 26.03.2019 at 14:22

I read it, and i can pretty much say with confidence that hes wrong.
Im sorry but i think neither you or waffel know the depth of scenario games or played many of them. (at least judging from more recent game history)

The mindset of the average scenario player is NOT to farm as much SP as possible or look for a cheap victory by allyfagging or other dirty tactics, in fact similar to competitive atwar they push eachother to get better and better on these maps, thats why you sometimes see expert ww1 players who are low ranked but play as if they had an r13 alt account.

You can judge that from zephs current thread, this type of allyfagging is frowned upon and players who do it will most likely be excluded from the next game untill they get better/learn from the mistake.

The place i mostly see allyfagging happening is world games and these FFAs that waffel mentioned specifically for the reason of gaining as much as SP as possible, a thing that scenario players dont do, but waffel accuses them of.

Excuse me?

You really need to improve on your reading skills because now you're just putting words in my mouth and draw up conclusions that are incorrect. I didn't even mention SP, so I have no idea how you've come to this.

Looks like brian has alrdy set the record straight.

Dont try to start a flame war now, with your hostile behaviour, your last sentence in your first comment already shows that it seems to be your intention.

Geschrieben von Waffel, 26.03.2019 at 15:14

Geschrieben von 4nic, 26.03.2019 at 14:22

I read it, and i can pretty much say with confidence that hes wrong.
Im sorry but i think neither you or waffel know the depth of scenario games or played many of them. (at least judging from more recent game history)

The mindset of the average scenario player is NOT to farm as much SP as possible or look for a cheap victory by allyfagging or other dirty tactics, in fact similar to competitive atwar they push eachother to get better and better on these maps, thats why you sometimes see expert ww1 players who are low ranked but play as if they had an r13 alt account.

You can judge that from zephs current thread, this type of allyfagging is frowned upon and players who do it will most likely be excluded from the next game untill they get better/learn from the mistake.

The place i mostly see allyfagging happening is world games and these FFAs that waffel mentioned specifically for the reason of gaining as much as SP as possible, a thing that scenario players dont do, but waffel accuses them of.

Excuse me?

You really need to improve on your reading skills because now you're just putting words in my mouth and draw up conclusions that are incorrect. I didn't even mention SP, so I have no idea how you've come to this.

Looks like brian has alrdy set the record straight.

Dont try to start a flame war now, with your hostile behaviour, your last sentence in your first comment already shows that it seems to be your intention.

Not rlly that was trolling but youve no idea what u talking about scenarios ''scenarios is what caused all of this'' meanwhile 90% of scenarios are with preset teams

Geschrieben von 4nic, 26.03.2019 at 15:19

Not rlly that was trolling but youve no idea what u talking about scenarios ''scenarios is what caused all of this'' meanwhile 90% of scenarios are with preset teams

> first says tldr
> then proceeds to read afterall
>says:

Geschrieben von 4nic, 26.03.2019 at 15:19

no idea what u talking about scenarios ''scenarios is what caused all of this'' meanwhile 90% of scenarios are with preset teams

This escalated fast.

Geschrieben von Zephyrusu, 26.03.2019 at 16:08

This escalated fast.

Such an instigator ♥

Trick is to make the big guy who get ganged on not ally the small people around