Abuse of Alliance flag

The way I see it, since Rare has decided that only 4 friends can play on a server at once and have made no motions to allow more than that to happen, unless I'm missing something somewhere that says otherwise which is entirely possible, it makes sense to have better structure for the alliance system that what it currently has. I'm consistently read and have been told that they limit friends playing together so that a supper alliance doesn't rule a server. That is a valid point but how real a threat is that in this game. Players don't have any respect for the alliance flag now. Any attempts would crumble before it happened because the individual crews would get greedy, as they already do, and start attacking one another. I think there is no way to ignore both the heavy limitation of friends sailing together and the problem with the alliance system without there being losses from doing so. Games need players to keep on going and it seems that while keeping their veteran players that have been with it from release they are going to lose many new players in the process. I would think game developers would want to build a game that was fun for all not just those who got there first. I think the opposition that met my suggestion speaks for itself as to where the rest of you will stand.

@danfox90 said in Abuse of Alliance flag:

The way I see it, since Rare has decided that only 4 friends can play on a server at once and have made no motions to allow more than that to happen, unless I'm missing something somewhere that says otherwise which is entirely possible, it makes sense to have better structure for the alliance system that what it currently has. I'm consistently read and have been told that they limit friends playing together so that a supper alliance doesn't rule a server. That is a valid point but how real a threat is that in this game. Players don't have any respect for the alliance flag now. Any attempts would crumble before it happened because the individual crews would get greedy, as they already do, and start attacking one another. I think there is no way to ignore both the heavy limitation of friends sailing together and the problem with the alliance system without there being losses from doing so. Games need players to keep on going and it seems that while keeping their veteran players that have been with it from release they are going to lose many new players in the process. I would think game developers would want to build a game that was fun for all not just those who got there first. I think the opposition that met my suggestion speaks for itself as to where the rest of you will stand.

So now you are jumping from the fact that you can't lock people up in an unwanted alliance to the fact that you can't easily get more than 4 friends together on a server?

You can already get more than 4 friends with a bit of diplomacy and parlay with another crew to friend and invite someone from your group to their ship.

As to the fact you can't force people to stay in your alliance, you'd sing another tune if former allies turned nasty and used the alliance system to troll you everywhere you go on the map and it were you who'd want to leave them.

The system works fine as it is, and it's up to player to chose to gamble or not on the intentions of their potential allies and whatever ensue.

If you can't prepare yourself, stay alert, have a plan B in case things go south, leave the alliance system alone and don't use it.

@bloodybil
In no way am I trying to "lock players in an alliance". I am advocating for more structure for a broken system. Many of you have already stated something to the effect of being more hostile to those flying the alliance flag than those who don't. I don't contest this being a pvp game because that's exactly what it is. I'm not saying to remove from the game being able to betray players. What I am suggesting is for the developers to balance out the alliance system. Right now a player flying the alliance flag has more chances of getting robbed or sank for no other reason than they are flying a flag that no one trust. If they are lucky they can get half the rewards and rep associated with anything cashed in by alliance members. So over all, there is little incentive for using the alliance feature save for a handful of commendations. The new players joining are quitting after a while because the game now becomes more frustrating than enjoyable. For sake of argument, say 200 new players join. 50 leave because they can't play with all their friends that play. A third leave because they get frustrated from getting sink by other players and when they fly the alliance flag looking to join another crew they just get shot down so they rage quit and uninstall the game. Another 20 leave just because they got bored of it. That leaves 80 players that become regular players out of 200. You all seem content to leave it as is and see no problem with it. So what if adding more structure to the alliance system means you have to work harder to get the drop on another player. That should just make it more worth while. Many people have mentioned the need for risk as this is meant to be a high risk game. While that is true this game still needs to be gaining players faster than it is losing them. I'm not the only one that feels that the alliance system has room for improvement.

@danfox90 dont place trust in a flag, place trust in people you communicate with.

@danfox90 said in Abuse of Alliance flag:

@bloodybil
In no way am I trying to "lock players in an alliance". I am advocating for more structure for a broken system.

Ok, I thought you meant you wanted both crews to vote on one of them to leave the alliance, which would indeed be ridiculous. Even if a whole crew needs to vote to betray the other, what does it change? When a crew plan to backstab the other, do you not think they all agree on it?

And about having a delay or whatever to give a change for the other crew to react, that is just as laughable. It's an ambush, there shouldn't be a signal that says "Ok guys, you are about to be betrayed, you have 5 minutes to react, good luck!!!" If you can't be prepared to all eventualities, again, don't use the alliance system. The tool is there for people to use however they like.

Many of you have already stated something to the effect of being more hostile to those flying the alliance flag than those who don't. I don't contest this being a pvp game because that's exactly what it is. I'm not saying to remove from the game being able to betray players. What I am suggesting is for the developers to balance out the alliance system.

You keep talking about balance, what is not balanced exactly?

Right now a player flying the alliance flag has more chances of getting robbed or sank for no other reason than they are flying a flag that no one trust.

I don't believe so, those who get attacked while flying it would probably have been attacked regardless of their flag.

If they are lucky they can get half the rewards and rep associated with anything cashed in by alliance members. So over all, there is little incentive for using the alliance feature save for a handful of commendations.

So you mention the gold and rep gains, and right after say there is no incentive besides commendations? Because you don't see the incentives doesn't mean there isn't any. Don't get me wrong, I am not a fan of alliance myself and very very rarely do I get into one, but I have witnessed moments where other crews allied against mine, whether because we were doing the FoTD, or because we were tailing a crew doing an Athena and asked help from another crew. The tool is there for people to use however they want. Each crew has their goals, and if the end justifies the means for them they can chose act how they see fit.

Some alliance goes well, some don't. There are plenty of ways to keep your precautions to ensure you don't get backstabbed, and if people can't manage to protect or prepare themselves, they shouldn't put all their trust into people external to their crew.

The new players joining are quitting after a while because the game now becomes more frustrating than enjoyable. For sake of argument, say 200 new players join. 50 leave because they can't play with all their friends that play. A third leave because they get frustrated from getting sink by other players and when they fly the alliance flag looking to join another crew they just get shot down so they rage quit and uninstall the game. Another 20 leave just because they got bored of it. That leaves 80 players that become regular players out of 200. You all seem content to leave it as is and see no problem with it. So what if adding more structure to the alliance system means you have to work harder to get the drop on another player. That should just make it more worth while. Many people have mentioned the need for risk as this is meant to be a high risk game. While that is true this game still needs to be gaining players faster than it is losing them.

I'm gonna go right ahead and dismiss this whole pile of empty assumptions.

I'm not the only one that feels that the alliance system has room for improvement.

The only improvement I see is that loot should be split equally between crews, if anything.

Our last alliance on thieves haven digging with 4 boats all was friendly until one crew proudly announced "protect me" " got the chest of legend" 🤦‍♂️

So we ask where are you?

On the boat they say...

So we hurry to the outpost and leave one camping the tavern and we leave...

The galleon comes to deliver and our crew took over the legend chest..

🤷‍♂️ we betrayed our ally but i think they just asked for it..

@bloodybil

"Ok, I thought you meant you wanted both crews to vote on one of them to leave the alliance, which would indeed be ridiculous. Even if a whole crew needs to vote to betray the other, what does it change? When a crew plan to backstab the other, do you not think they all agree on it?"

Not at all. The reason I suggest a crew vote like with voyages is that I'm played open crews before, probably my first mistake in this instance, and have had one of the randoms start going rogue and causing mayhem on our ship because we weren't doing what they wanted with the loot we were going to cash in that they spawned in just in time to get a reward. Had we been in an alliance and banking on how most would likely react, if he had ended the alliance without warning after we had finished the voyage and were heading to cash in we likely would have been seen as betraying the alliance and trying to keep winnings and rep to ourselves and get hunted down. As mentioned before, some players just want to watch the world burn. I'd be a hypocrite if I said I never attacked other ships for the hell of it when I don't have enough time to dedicate to a mission but want to play for a while. That's what this game is. Changing how many crew members are needed to make/end and alliance changes nothing about how players use it. They will use it to fake comradery as long as they are able to. I do feel that a majority's vote to make or end and alliance is a step in the right direction though.

@danfox90

had one of the randoms start going rogue and causing mayhem on our ship because we weren't doing what they wanted with the loot we were going to cash in that they spawned in just in time to get a reward. Had we been in an alliance and banking on how most would likely react, if he had ended the alliance without warning after we had finished the voyage and were heading to cash in we likely would have been seen as betraying the alliance and trying to keep winnings and rep to ourselves and get hunted down.

I mean you already have a tool to prevent this, Vote to Brig. I find it rather silly to add all of this red-tape over Alliances when you already have a tool to deal with this Rogue.

You may have better luck campaigning for a Vote to Kick rather than this.

@nabberwar
Silly or not I think it still shows there is room for improvements within the alliance system. Most of you don't like or wish there was no alliance system anyway, so I find it interested that there is such opposition to improving it. A tool the system may be and players will use it however they choose but it does not mean it is incapable of becoming better. A screwdriver is no prybar but people still use it as such.

@danfox90

Silly or not I think it still shows there is room for improvements within the alliance system. Most of you don't like or wish there was no alliance system anyway, so I find it interested that there is such opposition to improving it.

The simple answer is this, we don't think your idea improves anything, it just adds a layer of annoyance on a functioning product. We are all for improvements, we just don't think this does improve things.

Your making a lot of assumptions on our opinions about Alliances which is blatantly wrong. Not everything requires bureaucracy and having to vote over every detail is annoying. You know what this needs? More bureaucracy, said no one ever.

Need I remind you that your opening statement contained this little nugget

A secondary change should be that there is a window of peace between ships that have left an alliance. This way one ship cant leave an alliance and then sink your ship right after.

Most of us here are against this little nugget. We don't want artificial rules dictating our betrayals, which as explained to you is what Rare wants to happen as well. Its rather simple, we don't want protections like this.

I will even throw you a bone, this was a post I made a while back on an attempt to rework the Alliance system. I am not against improvement, but what you suggest I don't see as an improvement.

https://www.seaofthieves.com/forum/topic/106799/rework-alliance-system

And what about those in the alliance and still wants to sink u

I get your frustration, I really do. I have joined alliances where they have payed off and some that have stabbed me in the back. Unfortunately it's just the nature of the beast and you have to go with your gut when it comes to forming alliances. Myself I don't offer them much and I don't join them much. I tend to live by the shoot first and ask questions later mentality, keeps me alive longer and my pockets full. My advice to you is if you keep getting the short end of the stick, then don't form an alliance, and if you do form an alliance, don't do it without taking your time and feeling out the other people your in an alliance with. One other thing I suggest and this may sound mean but don't be afraid to be the one doing the back stabbing. After all it is a pirate game and it sounds like there are a few pirates out there in dire need of some payback.

@nabberwar
You are actually the first to pinpoint specifically what what it is about the proposal that you think is counter productive to the game. That serves better use than nay saying against the whole idea.

As I have played and try to work through my commendations there are some that are only obtainable through a functional alliance. If most players see that alliance flag as a target rather than a means of easy coin and rep and I cannot alliance with friends then it makes those commendations all that much harder to get and the payout for the risk is nowhere near worth it. I can get dubloons easier with a Reaper Chest. If Rare doesn't want to improve the alliance system to make those achievements easier to get because of how players use the system then make the payout match the risk. The times I've found favorable alliances are vastly outnumbered by the players using it for nothing more than sinking a ship.

To those who have said a little diplomacy goes a long way in terms of alliances and other players, I have this to say. More times than not I have cleaned out my ship of loot and have no valuable items to note on board when other players roll in. When they are close enough for chat I let hem know my intentions or that I have nothing on ship. They still open fire or block me between them and the island and start attacking. I stand there and watch or even repeat I'm friendly. They have been told there is nothing to gain yet they continue. Clearly diplomacy is a valid tool in this game. This same scene plays out with other ships come in with the flag up saying let's make an alliance. If players want to sink ships for the sake of sinking ships outside of arena the they only hurt the game itself. Multiple friends I have chose to remove the game altogether for that very reason. That is why I say abuse. That is why I ask for and suggest structure for the alliance system. If you are taking out a threat to your winnings that's one thing. But to use the alliance flag to track targets for the sheer sake of it is what I would like to weed out.

I feel players that actually want to be productive with the alliances and use them to gain as a whole should be able to do it without having to deal with the problematic players ruining it. Some achievements are gained through matching lantern colors, all colors, sinking skully ships, finding thrones and whatever else i'm missing. I'm sure you nall already know of them since you play as well. Answer me this though. How does one accomplish those things if 1 out of every 10, or whatever number you want to plug in, end in being sunk because players don't like alliances and there is poor structure in the alliance system? If I could have my friends sail on the same server in another ship there would be no problem. That is not an option because, as many of you have shared, other adopt a shoot first ask later policy and a general hostility toward anything pertaining to alliance.