And for the record, I very much agree with the proposed change (i.e. just b/c I tell ya the rules, doesn't mean I agree with them). So sorry guys, no fighting here. Twill can't even smack a flea...
Twill wrote:I love how I get a couple IM's when someone calls me out.
Rule 2: NO Secret Diplomacy
Any and every form of diplomatic talk between players should be open and posted in game chat in a language that all players in game understand. This includes (but is not limited to) Alliances, attack coordinations, truces etc.
Thank you.
I'll never pay for another Premium on ConquerClub.
Any and every form of diplomatic talk between players should be open and posted in game chat in a language that all players in game understand. This includes (but is not limited to) Alliances, attack coordinations, truces etc.
I just started here, and already this rule looks like a vast improvement to me.
(the above is only the opinion of the writer and is therefore not valid in the continental united states unless accompanied by a notarized document in triplicate which absolves the writer from any responsibility whatsoever, not void where prohibited, cave canem, sic post hoc in absurdum non compos mentos, etc.)
I live for this rule really I think all alliances suck thats what team games are for. But some like them and thats fine. I can't wait till this rule comes into effect. I might even play more public games.
Herakilla wrote:all alliances have to be made publicly but the details of which can be secret between the members
thats my thoughts and i am very opposed to any sort of alliance in a standard game barring the fact that there is a clear game leader who would automatically win unless every1 teams up on him/her
Xi members are Not allowed to alliance at anytime. makes for a better game.
Herakilla wrote:all alliances have to be made publicly but the details of which can be secret between the members
thats my thoughts and i am very opposed to any sort of alliance in a standard game barring the fact that there is a clear game leader who would automatically win unless every1 teams up on him/her
Xi members are Not allowed to alliance at anytime. makes for a better game.
i dont think ive ever seen a decent player have an alliance except for in tournaments, or battle royales. alliances are a crutch for the weak
Herakilla wrote:all alliances have to be made publicly but the details of which can be secret between the members
thats my thoughts and i am very opposed to any sort of alliance in a standard game barring the fact that there is a clear game leader who would automatically win unless every1 teams up on him/her
Xi members are Not allowed to alliance at anytime. makes for a better game.
i dont think ive ever seen a decent player have an alliance except for in tournaments, or battle royales. alliances are a crutch for the weak
Wrong, you made an alliance with me in the game that just finished. We agreed about ganging up against team 2 in our doubles game! (and no we are not weak )