Alliances

I was wondering why the game ends as soon as someone surrenders.

I have had some moments when I had planed on breaking a big alliance, so we could continue the game.
However if the only person who is not in the alliance surrenders,
The game then just ends, giving you no chance to break the alliance.

seeing as its hard to predict if or when the player being attacked will surrender this has cut many interesting games short.

So My Idea is to add one or two turns to a surrendered country's influence.

Lol... Just do what I do.. dont alli.. if you plan on killing people.. I start a game and 90% of the time plan on not allying anyone.. you get more sp and have alot more fun.. dotn be scared just do it.. problem is sometime the game turns to 3 vs 1 but then stick to your guts, go for the kill on one of them ... but im not saying overextend yourself just keep pushing at one.. if something is not working pull back and think how you could go around the current situation.. in the end if you play right you get crap tone of sp and you just won a 3 vs 1 game

That might be true, however its a totally different thing on a 8-10 player Mediterranean map.

If you play 8-10 map, try not to round-ally all but 1 fella and then wonder, why he surrendered and game ends...

? whose wondering why he surrendered? sometimes its best to use a player for a while before turning and claiming lands that would be better suited to your use.

Just because you do not do this. does not mean it is not a valid tactic.

I see most people who play this game stick to their alliance.
I see alliances as an option to prepare forces for attack.

when someone leaves the game it takes 2 turns for them to drop out, taking a cap takes 2/3 turns for them to drop out.
Why is surrender any different?

An option to prepare forces for attack should be considered peace. If an ally of yours is at war with someone and you decide to back out of your alliance while he's distracted that's just dirty.

One thing that is a cheap tactic is players moving their units past your defense lines and then declaring war/breaking alliance.

I'd like to see a civilization like feature where if you declare war (on a former ally), your units are moved to the border of the territory if they are in enemy territory. Thats more realistic in my opinion, but I dont know if this is possible to implement in AW.

I feel like declaring war on an ally can be OK depending on the game. Moving 50 marines to the steps of his capital, or amassing 100 tanks on his border then declaring war is dirty. But, that is why there's the "peace" aka "let's wait and see" option

I say that there's these amazing things called friends and enemies lists. You ally with whoever is on your friends lists, and kill whoever is on the enemy list. As for people you haven't met, peace is the best way to go.

@marcjr remind me to mass about 1000 infantry in my capital if i ever play a game with you...

I haven't really had a problem with an allying declaring war after moving 100+ tanks/marines towards my capital because 1: that's pretty obvious (and his marines are unstealthed for me while we're allied), and 2: it takes 2 turns for him to declare war, so I have adequate time to prepare a defense (or at the very least send enough troops to threaten his capital. My view is that if someone is devoting all their resources to stabbing you in the back, they are not focusing on defense).
I also kind of like the idea of the game ending automatically because 1: it makes it harder for the player who's doing the best to stab everyone in the back at the last moment, and 2: if it looks like someone is about to betray you but still hasn't broken alliance, if you can quickly end the game (usually by begging with the one remaining enemy to surrender), you can avoid defeat.

My point is, you shouldn't be sending out all your army to attack, this is WAR!
everyone should be paranoid.

besides breaking an alliance takes two turns, you have a warning.

I agree with the fact you should not break alliances unless one of these reasons:

1. Your ally does not help with the game at all or help you
2. You are allied with the enemy of your other ally

Well there are probably more but I don't think you should just break one.



However it will always stay a valid tactic, frowned upon by many including me. That's why I usually avoid making too many allies and if I do he will permanently stay that way unless one of the above reasons


I think a game should end the moment he/she surrenders. If you allied someone you both win. That's what an alliance is! Winning together

Plus it would really be annoying knowing the enemy surrendered and having to wait several turns before it actually happens