Effectiveness of forming alliances?

In-depth tactical discussion on how to lose the least

Moderator: Defcon moderators

Bunnet
level1
level1
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: Scotland

Effectiveness of forming alliances?

Postby Bunnet » Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:53 pm

Is there any real point in joining an alliance in 6 player games standard scoring game?

Almost every 6 player game I play now, the same thing always happens 2 people form an alliance, then another 2 follow, then inevitably the last player sends me an invite, but I almost always reject.

I really don't see the point, surely you are just limiting yourself on points and giving away your installation locations. Take Europe as an example, typically Europe will ally with either Russia or Africa. In a 100pop. game you can get 50 points easy from Africa, and about 100 from Russia. That seems a lot of points to leave to someone else, and if you're thinking about backstabbing early, then why ally at all?. Thinking about backstabbing at the end? well most of the points are going to be already gone. Also when there are 2 alliances and 2 single players, most of the time the alliances are going to be more threatened by each other rather than the little guys.

And as you could backstab them they could easily backstab you, meaning you will have to watch what your ally is doing, so again what's the point in them being an ally.

Now I'm not saying this always happens the same or that joining alliances is always a bad thing but this has worked for me in the last 5 or 6 games that I've played.

What does everyone else think?

BTW, I'm talking about games with people you are unfamiliar with, as in people you don't know and that you couldn't trust in an alliance.
User avatar
Ace Rimmer
level5
level5
Posts: 10803
Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 pm
Location: The Multiverse

Postby Ace Rimmer » Wed Jun 13, 2007 9:57 pm

I join most of the time because I pick a specific "first strike" territory and want to be left alone for a while (from my "ally") whilst reigning destruction on the aforementioned first strike target.
Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast...
User avatar
Smiling Buddha
level3
level3
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:35 pm
Location: Omnipresent Occupation: Supreme Buddha

Postby Smiling Buddha » Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:19 pm

If Africa and Asia ally, they don't have to worry about the India ocean, or can use it to launch at EU/Russia. The EU and Russia will generally destroy most of each others fleets, so allying can prevent this, and allow you to focus on other point scoring areas.
MikeTheWookiee
level4
level4
Posts: 657
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:58 pm
Location: Kashyyyk / Cambridge (commuting)

Postby MikeTheWookiee » Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:21 pm

I like to form non-standard alliances. Allying with your neighbour is, we all know, very risky. One of you is always going to be thinking of the big stab, or you'll both be so paranoid of it happening anyway you won't launch at the right time.

Think of this though: as Europe, what are the immediate drawacks of allying with Asia? or South America? Apart from lucky sub trickshots which rely on non-standard silo placements, you can't really expect to get anything meaningful out of SA near the start of the game. Same goes with Asia x 100. So you're not missing out on many points. They are both in a slightly better position to gain from nuking you, but they should have more pressing concerns than stealing London and Kiev.

The benefits are real. So, Russia stuck his silos out of reach. With the Asian radar, you should have a very good idea of where he put them. Similarly with North America. You start blind on his buildings, but with Mexican radar, you'll know a good deal on where his stuff is. [These are easy if you can see them, but you can also deduce their position from where they AREN'T].


Of course, forming unofficial alliances with your neighbours is where it's at in survivor scoring. Pass intel, co-ordinate strikes, and use them to their full 'meatshield' potential. How many times have you ended hostilities in the EU/RU/AS/AF battle because the americas are allied and out of it in the lead and you all feel the need to blast them?
However, if they are enemies, you're much more likely to ignore them and let them duke it out amongst themselves while you take care of more immediate matters. So if you're one of them, wait and laugh. Same goes for the rest really. (OK, it may be tricky as Europe).
User avatar
Smiling Buddha
level3
level3
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:35 pm
Location: Omnipresent Occupation: Supreme Buddha

Postby Smiling Buddha » Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:52 pm

MikeTheWookiee wrote:I like to form non-standard alliances.


Same here.

I find that allying with NA as EU as very beneficial, since instead of attacking you with his fleet, NA serves as a buffer to the south. Africa-Russia allows almost complete radar coverage of the EU (including fleets).
Bunnet
level1
level1
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 6:48 pm
Location: Scotland

Postby Bunnet » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:26 pm

yeah i know what you mean by non standard alliances, but it's hard to get a far away continent to agree to ally, most people playing 6 player games these days still feel the need to protect thier population so want an ally close by. But I still feel you don't have much to gain from any sort of alliance. As for EU allying with the US. I would still feel I'm missing points from NY and Chicago. SA would probably go for US in that set up anyway whether you ally with it or not and by the time Americas fleet meets your land you should have enough points to ride it out anyway.
User avatar
caranthir.pkk
level3
level3
Posts: 265
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 2:03 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Postby caranthir.pkk » Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:37 pm

When I'm Europe I usually ally with Africa so I can comfortably backstab him at defcon 1, hard. :)
User avatar
KingAl
level5
level5
Posts: 4138
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2006 7:42 am

Re: Effectiveness of forming alliances?

Postby KingAl » Thu Jun 14, 2007 8:59 am

Bunnet wrote:And as you could backstab them they could easily backstab you, meaning you will have to watch what your ally is doing, so again what's the point in them being an ally.


Part of the fun is convincing people that you won't backstab, that others are a greater threat etc. Alliances are an important part of this.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here: this is the War Room!
Ultimate Uplink Guide
Latest Patch
User avatar
torq
level3
level3
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia

Re: Effectiveness of forming alliances?

Postby torq » Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:29 am

Bunnet wrote:Is there any real point in joining an alliance in 6 player games standard scoring game?

Almost every 6 player game I play now, the same thing always happens 2 people form an alliance, then another 2 follow, then inevitably the last player sends me an invite, but I almost always reject.


The most typical reason for me to form an alliance is to concentrate on one player while feeling relatively safe about my back. Take Asia and Africa for example - If they are allied they don't need to place fleets in Indian Ocean so Africa can concentrate on South America while Asia - on defending it's Pacific coast or even on offense against Americas.

They can backstab each other later but they feel relatively safe at the beginning when naval battles are usual.

The same with Europe - Russia - when they're allied they have a common ABM system when European silos protect Russian west while Russian does the same with European East. When they are at war - usually the first exchange with volleys from subs and bombers effectively reduce the ABM capabilities of each other leaving other player a perfect opportunity to level them both completely.

The same with Americas - when they're allied they can defend themselves more effectively, not to say that silos in USA will shoot down nukes from the south launched at someone else.

I really don't see the point, surely you are just limiting yourself on points and giving away your installation locations. Take Europe as an example, typically Europe will ally with either Russia or Africa. In a 100pop. game you can get 50 points easy from Africa, and about 100 from Russia.


You forgot to mention that risk of your own silos being destroyed right after Defcon 1 sounds also increases that way. You may not live long enough to take that 100 points you wrote about.

Now I'm not saying this always happens the same or that joining alliances is always a bad thing but this has worked for me in the last 5 or 6 games that I've played.

What does everyone else think?


Well, I've played over 300 games already (according to screenshots piled in my defcon folder) and I think that strategic alliances ARE useful. Of course there's always a chance to be backstabbed but I can accept those risks. Usually I keep 4 subs near my so called 'ally' to ensure that backstabbing will cost him. Trust your ally but watch him closely. Usually there will be signs that he's about to backstab you. Unusual bomber or fleet movements, subs being spotted near your coast, and of course - if your ally CAN win by backstabbing you, most probably he WILL backstab you.
Always watch your allies. They are not friends, they just happen to have common interests with you.
User avatar
creator
level3
level3
Posts: 294
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 10:57 pm
Location: Cornwall, England

Postby creator » Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:47 am

With Europe i find you almost have to ally with africa or russia as you can't hind your silos fom both.(well three silos on iceland might work) so if you ally with africa you sacrifice cairowhich is either going to be hit by russia or asia. You can hit russia hard enough to negate that advantage...asia you have to be mnore careful about. Once you know where all of africa's silos are it leaves you free to betray them if you want.

Africa and asian allience is strong as well. Im not if anything else iks worthwhile...i love it when north america allies with south america...means you can grab all those juicy points from north america and mexico.
OAM
level2
level2
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:31 am
Contact:

Postby OAM » Thu Jun 14, 2007 3:19 pm

Fighting a one front war is preferable, so if you can close off as many sides as you can, you can focus your arsonel and do more damage, and hopefully, have few enough causalties to take out some of those allies later :lol:
Sardonic
level0
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 10:59 pm

Postby Sardonic » Thu Jun 14, 2007 11:25 pm

I form alliances for the purpose of a defensive buffer, and then break them later for a good source of points, usually with subs.
OAM
level2
level2
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:31 am
Contact:

Postby OAM » Fri Jun 15, 2007 12:01 am

Sardonic wrote:I form alliances for the purpose of a defensive buffer, and then break them later for a good source of points, usually with subs.


Yes, I couldn't have said taht any better. Best explenation of it I have seen.
mrobertsonesq
level1
level1
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:33 pm
Location: London, UK

Postby mrobertsonesq » Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:23 pm

I typically form my alliances for the purpose of getting a proxy. Slipping 1-5 warheads towards a target then holding back (i.e sacraficing a sub or two) if often enough to get some novice players thinking "right, he's going for it, lets goooooooooo!" and launching everything the've got against my target, trying to follow in my slipstream.

Of course, I can then safely hang back, watch the target knock back my initial nukes (possibly) and launch at me, only to be shot down by full AA cover, and my alliance mate do the dirty work (thus disarming himself ready for my nukes when ready :twisted: ).

Phew.
User avatar
Koba
level1
level1
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Oct 17, 2006 12:29 am

Postby Koba » Wed Aug 15, 2007 4:47 pm

I actually tend to win a diplomatic victory if I play as Russia. If Russia can get Asia and Europe on it's side, it is easily shielded from attack from any other power.


Alliances are more useful for survivor gameplay, I guess.

Return to “Strategic Air Command”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest