At-War's 1st Royal Rumble

Overall I think this tournament was a complete fail because of the setting. I plan on remaking same rewards but with a different setting.

Well Group A is down to 11 players excluding Meester. It only requires one more player to die for the remaining ten to move onto finals. I hope our efforts are for not. Other than one real peace treaty between Terminal and Egg, and the now Africa peace "broken" there is few amounts of secret alliances as in Group B. I hope that Chess and Meester can come up with some sort of solution.

Regardless our rather entertaining match is coming to the very last straws. ~Spart is closing in on Anthrax, while Mauzer is seiging Ankara to take Turkey and then Ukraine, my cap. I push further into the DBacks southern front. And if MOU is lucky he might kill ~Spart. I again wish luck to all my counterparts who ascend to the finals (if there is one).

Hopefully things are fixed for finals and we do not see these bullshit secret alliances other then the teammate we choose...

Kirjoittanut Meester, 20.01.2014 at 07:40

Overall I think this tournament was a complete fail because of the setting. I plan on remaking same rewards but with a different setting.

The tournament is fine and good fun, the only flaw it has is you as the event host. Make your decision to disqualify or let them be, then we can carry on. It's not a hard decision to make and personally I don't even care if you decide for either. I only gave my thougts on the matter.
Now make your decision, then clarifiy your rules for the finals, then let us play on.

First of all thx for hosting Meester even if some alliances slipped this is taken out of your personal time and I'm sure everyone is appreciative. But, remaking the whole thing isn't the best solution as many people pointed out. At the beginning of the tournament you said you would disqualify any clear secret allies, as we have seen some yet you still haven't disqualified them. Games are almost finished and the final is coming, disqualify secret allies and move on.

Kirjoittanut learster, 20.01.2014 at 10:32

Kirjoittanut Meester, 20.01.2014 at 07:40

Overall I think this tournament was a complete fail because of the setting. I plan on remaking same rewards but with a different setting.

The tournament is fine and good fun, the only flaw it has is you as the event host.

that is rude to slam him so harshly for human error, especially when he has took the time to organise this tourney, the first of its kind on aw. its not as black and white as you so clearly think or would like to make it. in our group alone theres evidence of secret alliances in both europe and asia, even with our esteemed player of the year. however its impossible to prove, and the rules werent clarified on this.

im going to make things easier and resign as with college starting up today i doubt my ability to consistantly log daily over a period of a few weeks. give tact my spot

gg all and hf

Kirjoittanut learster, 20.01.2014 at 10:32

Kirjoittanut Meester, 20.01.2014 at 07:40

Overall I think this tournament was a complete fail because of the setting. I plan on remaking same rewards but with a different setting.

The tournament is fine and good fun, the only flaw it has is you as the event host. Make your decision to disqualify or let them be, then we can carry on. It's not a hard decision to make and personally I don't even care if you decide for either. I only gave my thougts on the matter.
Now make your decision, then clarifiy your rules for the finals, then let us play on.

This ^^ altho maybe not as harsh, just get rid of the most blatantly obvs shit (you all know what I'm referring to).

Kirjoittanut Chess, 18.01.2014 at 06:52

Kirjoittanut Meester, 26.12.2013 at 06:24

Will try my best to distribute the players away from their coalitions as much as possible but overall there really isn't any way to stop them from having secret peace deals. Though if it really is very obvious that both players are having a secret peace deal i'll disqualify both of them from the tournament.

Multiple Players have been reporting secret alliances in their groups, however you arent responding Meester.
I can see that you are trying to protect some ex-/Coalition Members from getting disqualified since you are now yourself in Syndicate.

A Noble Gesture to your coalition mates, but this tournament is far from beeing fair if you continue this.
There are obviously secret alliances in Group A + B, it cant be denied.

I propose that the two games will be rehosted so everyone gets equal chances again, with same picks,
or that the players who had advantages through secret alliances should be automatically eliminated from the tournament.

Srlsy Chess idk what your up to but blaming on meester and saying he is protecting ex coalition members is just sad -.-.. Because I choosed to not thin my self out and fight and die fast u guys call it ''secret ally'' Please -.- me and laochra fought plenty of times and being this rude against meester is just sad and disrespectfull. Funny thing is chess talking shit about us? but his ''clan member'' death as russia aint attacking him either and same counts for chess. So how dare you even saying this? Only because im obviously not a rusher player like you are nor skilled doesn't mean im secret allying -.- grow up dude.

Instead of disqualifying Laochra, go ahead and disqualifying me, sad thing how people just talk like this. Choosing germany and than crying around being attacked from all sides? No shit sherlock.

Kirjoittanut Waffel, 20.01.2014 at 16:03

Because I choosed to not thin my self out and fight and die fast u guys call it ''secret ally'' Please -.- me and laochra fought plenty of times [...] but his ''clan member'' death as russia aint attacking him either and same counts for chess.

That's a bit too much dude... Both Acqui & Laochra admitted there was an agreement. Now you just flat out deny it?
And yes, you fought plenty of times with Laochra, but no one was fooled by those 2-3 unit skirmishes. And not one battle between you and Acqui. Your statement about Chess not fighting Death is also wrong. There were at as many battles as between you & Laochra as far as I can tell. I didn't see the unit counts though as I was out of visual range. Anyway, Chess' priority isn't advancing into Northern Russia. You, on the other hand, we would expect to attack France & England. But instead of "thining yourself out" in Europe, you decide to thin yourself out in Africa... moving a bunch of troops out of range of your cap I might add.

Anyway, the question isn't "were there agreements?", it is "what is to be done about these agreements?".

Royal Rumble game I am in is freezing every time I try to access it, so I cannot continue my turn. Not sure if anyone else is having the same issue...

I had some issues too,took like 5mins to load the game,but in the end it worked

I can't seem to get in the game so I am unable to end turn. I'll try again next turn and hope I don't get kicked.

@leaster,Chess
The only reason i plan on remaking this is because of the setting. The problem with an FFA world game is secret alliance will form even if it was not intended to happen and I can't force a player to attack another player if it will put him in a disadvantage.

You don't have to make players attack each other, you just disqualify them if common sense tells you that they deserve so. Others will then think twice before entering a secret alliance. It's an easy decision and I do not understand why you chicken out on it.
But then I don't have to understand it, after all it's your tournament and if you deem it a failure then be it so. If you remake it please unsign me, I'm entering my exams period and won't be able to play another of such games.

Kirjoittanut learster, 22.01.2014 at 06:56

If you remake it please unsign me...

Me too.

Kirjoittanut Mauzer Panteri, 22.01.2014 at 07:11

Kirjoittanut learster, 22.01.2014 at 06:56

If you remake it please unsign me...

Me too.

Ditto.

Kirjoittanut Meester, 22.01.2014 at 05:39

I can't seem to get in the game so I am unable to end turn. I'll try again next turn and hope I don't get kicked.

@leaster,Chess
The only reason i plan on remaking this is because of the setting. The problem with an FFA world game is secret alliance will form even if it was not intended to happen and I can't force a player to attack another player if it will put him in a disadvantage.

Yes you cant when a super power will kill them....then if they dont 'peace' they are dead but when you being sandwich from 2 players,they kill you and then atack each other in only only one city with 3 units you can take them off of turnament

So what we will do in the game is going to end or we continue

Kirjoittanut Chess, 20.01.2014 at 16:20

Kirjoittanut Waffel, 20.01.2014 at 16:03

Srlsy Chess idk what your up to but blaming on meester and saying he is protecting ex coalition members is just sad -.-.. Because I choosed to not thin my self out and fight and die fast u guys call it ''secret ally'' Please -.- me and laochra fought plenty of times and being this rude against meester is just sad and disrespectfull. Funny thing is chess talking shit about us? but his ''clan member'' death as russia aint attacking him either and same counts for chess. So how dare you even saying this? Only because im obviously not a rusher player like you are nor skilled doesn't mean im secret allying -.- grow up dude.

Don't throw bricks when you live in a glass house.

I have attacked Death1812 multiple times and he attacked me as well.
Besides that I was busy with expanding in middle east and india till turn 10, giving me not the oppurnity to start any heavy attacks on anyone.

omg Chess please don't kill me

Kirjoittanut Waffel, 20.01.2014 at 16:04

Instead of disqualifying Laochra, go ahead and disqualifying me, sad thing how people just talk like this. Choosing germany and than crying around being attacked from all sides? No shit sherlock.

Kirjoittanut Meester, 22.01.2014 at 05:39

I can't seem to get in the game so I am unable to end turn. I'll try again next turn and hope I don't get kicked.

@leaster,Chess
The only reason i plan on remaking this is because of the setting. The problem with an FFA world game is secret alliance will form even if it was not intended to happen and I can't force a player to attack another player if it will put him in a disadvantage.

IMO, the problem with secret alliances applies to the qualification round only. In a qualification round, it makes sense to form a secret alliance to move on to the finals. On the other hand, in the final game, you don't gain an advantage by making secret alliances since you will have to fight your ally in the end anyway.

To remove the problem with secret alliances, I'd suggest making a larger number of smaller qualification team games. Only the winning team makes it to the finals. The final game could be FFA or 2 player teams. To spice things up, you could make a final where players have to choose a different partner than in the qualifications!

We are down to 11 players. One of which is Meester, who was already elimanated... What happens now? Does the game just End?
Are there going to be finals? If so, is it going to be like this again... I worked hard with no allies and multiple enemies to make it to this top 10 in the Group A game. I would find it midly depressing if we had to restart this entire mess due to some people getting slam by multiple people. Truly there is only one alliance in this game. Though there are secret peace deals, in Group A the people who have peaced others do not target the same opponent as the person they peaced did. Spart attacked Anthrax, MOU attacked Happy New Years and Mauzer. Terminal attacked Desu and Egg relatively stayed out of the fight. Supersniper never attacked anyone. The peace deals where not as they seemed in Group B I guess. Yet what happens to this competition. If we have to re do this I really do not wish to re-play this game. I am happy with saying I fought with some of the best AtWar-ers I know.

On that same note, you must be willing to define this secret alliance shit. Are you implying that they are not attacking each other to just continue wars on others? If so I'm just as guilty by letting Mauzer take my cities without resistance. The truth is, I cannot stop him because I was busy with DBacks as an oppenent. I can't attack him because I'll lose against DBacks (or would, he quit as of last turn). Some players are just unable to fight everyone.

However, if they are not attacking each other and it is completely evident they are focusing their main efforts on one player, that is wrong. I think its up to Meester and Chess to decide who is really the problem in these games and move on. Meester makes it sound like we are all complete and untrustworthy criminals. Some are, there are those who are just attacking individuals together with another player...

Now what we will do and waiting for

Meester then 20 payers have been now will you host final or we dont continue the turnament?

If theres a remake or i can help in anyway pm me

Due to lack of time I'v not been able to answer or even think of a new setting for the tournament. I'll most likely host this again coming March but with a different setting. If anyone wants to host this earlier they can PM me and I'll be glad to sponsor the prizes.

Kirjoittanut Meester, 01.02.2014 at 02:16

Due to lack of time I'v not been able to answer or even think of a new setting for the tournament. I'll most likely host this again coming March but with a different setting. If anyone wants to host this earlier they can PM me and I'll be glad to sponsor the prizes.

I see 1 way with current settings: Everyone joins during t1 but no moves allowed.

There's no other way to get casuals started effectively otherwise. Not until the admins change the casual lobby system.

Kirjoittanut Grimm, 01.02.2014 at 16:39

Kirjoittanut Meester, 01.02.2014 at 02:16

Due to lack of time I'v not been able to answer or even think of a new setting for the tournament. I'll most likely host this again coming March but with a different setting. If anyone wants to host this earlier they can PM me and I'll be glad to sponsor the prizes.

I see 1 way with current settings: Everyone joins during t1 but no moves allowed.

There's no other way to get casuals started effectively otherwise. Not until the admins change the casual lobby system.

We already did that the problem is secret alliances.

Kirjoittanut Meester, 01.02.2014 at 23:02

We already did that the problem is secret alliances.

Kirjoittanut Grimm, 22.01.2014 at 18:56

To remove the problem with secret alliances, I'd suggest making a larger number of smaller qualification team games. Only the winning team makes it to the finals. The final game could be a FFA or 2 player teams. To spice things up, you could make a final where players have to choose a different partner than in the qualifications!

For the casual game creation problem, check my post in the ideas & suggestions forum: http://fr.atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=12090&page=