Puppet States

if player accepts i will get all of his land except his home country and he will be my permanent ally

You get literally nothing out of this.

All his land ;3

Eh

I like the idea of puppet states. It is quite cool to own an ally, but the con is that the puppet state would eventualy get bored and quit thus making this impratical to apply to the game. Tunder if you want puppet states join a UN game.

I like this idea.

I don't know. A puppet state is cool, but it sounds boring for the submissive party. Not only that but it's easily abused.

"oh hey John wanna pwn some n00bs todai?"
- rank 4 john replies hurriedly -
"totes kk"
- the two butt buddies join a world game -
"ok okok wer going to both expand w/ blitz in two corners of the world, then u do the puppet st8 trick and leev ok ?"
"totes"


And there you have it. One example of two lowly players abusing a feature of the game =/

Написао Dr Lecter, 07.08.2013 at 23:22

I don't know. A puppet state is cool, but it sounds boring for the submissive party. Not only that but it's easily abused.

"oh hey John wanna pwn some n00bs todai?"
- rank 4 john replies hurriedly -
"totes kk"
- the two butt buddies join a world game -
"ok okok wer going to both expand w/ blitz in two corners of the world, then u do the puppet st8 trick and leev ok ?"
"totes"


And there you have it. One example of two lowly players abusing a feature of the game =/

this could be a option only allowed in scenarios

Написао Tundy, 08.08.2013 at 00:14

Написао Dr Lecter, 07.08.2013 at 23:22

I don't know. A puppet state is cool, but it sounds boring for the submissive party. Not only that but it's easily abused.

"oh hey John wanna pwn some n00bs todai?"
- rank 4 john replies hurriedly -
"totes kk"
- the two butt buddies join a world game -
"ok okok wer going to both expand w/ blitz in two corners of the world, then u do the puppet st8 trick and leev ok ?"
"totes"


And there you have it. One example of two lowly players abusing a feature of the game =/

this could be a option only allowed in scenarios

It's still not very appealing to the submissive partner in my opinion. And it maintains its openness to being abused.

Besides, alliances in game are already sort of like this. This actually means 1 guy is heading 2 armies and potentially in totally different areas of the globe. That's more stress, less time, and all in all it means that it is appealing to neither party.

Написао Guest, 07.08.2013 at 20:40

Написао Tundy, 07.08.2013 at 19:29

if player accepts i will get all of his land except his home country and he will be my permanent ally

Before you post you should think and check to see if anyone else has already posted about the same thing. This has already been talked about and discussed. It is always more logiacal to post on that thread then create a new thread. You can easily find them using a thing called a search function.

Older Threads about this...

http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=7221&topicsearch=&page=1

http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=4666

The second which you yourself have before commented in...


Also no support go play HOI instead

http://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=4815
I dic this before all of them

Now tell me why you don't support?

Написао Dr Lecter, 08.08.2013 at 00:22

Написао Tundy, 08.08.2013 at 00:14

Написао Dr Lecter, 07.08.2013 at 23:22

I don't know. A puppet state is cool, but it sounds boring for the submissive party. Not only that but it's easily abused.

"oh hey John wanna pwn some n00bs todai?"
- rank 4 john replies hurriedly -
"totes kk"
- the two butt buddies join a world game -
"ok okok wer going to both expand w/ blitz in two corners of the world, then u do the puppet st8 trick and leev ok ?"
"totes"


And there you have it. One example of two lowly players abusing a feature of the game =/

this could be a option only allowed in scenarios

It's still not very appealing to the submissive partner in my opinion. And it maintains its openness to being abused.

Besides, alliances in game are already sort of like this. This actually means 1 guy is heading 2 armies and potentially in totally different areas of the globe. That's more stress, less time, and all in all it means that it is appealing to neither party.

Well, you do not need to make everyone your puppet, if you somehow got someone from the other side of the globe to be your puppet, it was your decision.

But for example there is this guy that owns part of europe, and i just steamrolled everyone from china to ukraine, it would be better to make someone in euro my puppet rather than killing him and i may give him some land back.

Dear god, people are supporting this?! What's the point in being a puppet if your superior takes everything you've earned, and you're locked with him?

You can already do this by just asking the player to ally you & let you take all his countries.