P&F: Politics and Farmville

[Insert Name Here]

So, imagine you had your own AA.

Then some guy applies to join it.

You go check his nation and you see they just deserted an alliance involved in an AA war.

Would you let them in?

Edited June 27, 2016 by Insert Name Here

[Buorhann]

Sure.  I just wouldn't trust that kind of person with an official position with sekrit info.

[Insert Name Here]

Sure.  I just wouldn't trust that kind of person with an official position with sekrit info.

 

 

Fair enough!

But just picture the following scenario:

Your AA provides aid such as grants.

Would you feel comfortable knowing that the deserter would benefit from said aid and would ditch your alliance when the 1st AA war occured?

Edited June 27, 2016 by Insert Name Here

[Buorhann]

If my AA had such a policy, then yes.  However, once they ditch/abandon a war, they're never welcomed back.

 

Face it, most players are tax farms for alliances.  The loyal few will stick it through.

 

However, sometimes a deserter just doesn't like how an alliance is organized.  While you can argue that maybe they should speak up, some people just don't like conflict or don't know how to speak up.  So they just bail when the pressure is too great for them to stay.

Edited June 27, 2016 by Buorhann

[Woot]

In most cases if they left during a war, I'd consider them untrustworthy.

 

It seems logical in theory to let untrustworthy players in because they can still serve as meat shields and tax farms for no cost.

 

But in practice, it seems like the alliances who inflate their stats like that without the real power to back it up get crushed every time.

 

Maybe it's because they look much more threatening than they really are and get ganged up on. Maybe having so many bad members just breeds malaise inside the alliance and drives good members away.

 

If I had an alliance and my only goal in this game was to get the most cities for me and my friends, only then would I do it.

[Vanek26]

I suppose it depends on the circumstances. If the person was the only one fighting back effectively. and they were upset with their leadership, I'd probably let them join up or something, but if they had just fled without fighting or anything, then hell no. Mensa is super picky in general in any case. We've only let in 2 people our entire time. 

[Jodo]

So, imagine you had your own AA.

Then some guy apllies to join it.

You go check his nation and you see they just deserted an alliance involved in an AA war.

Would you let them in?

No. I'd kill them, and send my regards to the AA they left.

[Ogaden]

I know everyone will say deserters should be shot, but TBH I am a firm believer in people should be able to leave the alliance at any time if they don't like it there anymore, even in wartime.

 

That said, a sissy joining Arrgh is going to be in for a rough ride.  Talk about out of the frying pan and into the fire.  I subscribe to the Darwinian theory of member selection.

Edited June 27, 2016 by Ogaden

[Ole]

Tbh i dont see many sitiations where a deserter is worth having. Im sure we can all cook up a few but thats a minority, and keeping them as meatshields or tax farms are pointless imho. 

[Boony]

Depends on their reason for leaving. If their reason for leaving is to save pixels then !@#$ em. If they have some other reason then I'm fine with it.

[Fraggle]

Sure.  I just wouldn't trust that kind of person with an official position with sekrit info.

 

 

That's how you treat me? Fine..I didnt want into your alliance.

 

And a hello to you Buorhann....it's been a while. Get a chance to check out Deadlock? You should.

[Buorhann]

I'd take all you guys in.

That's how you treat me? Fine..I didnt want into your alliance.

 

And a hello to you Buorhann....it's been a while. Get a chance to check out Deadlock? You should.

 

 

I'd trust you.  Honest.

 

On one hand, you could be a very loyal person and we'd kick ass together.

 

On the other hand, you'd cause some delicious drama here on the OWF and it'd spice the atmosphere up.

 

EDIT:

 

And not yet!  It's still on my To-Do list though!

Edited June 27, 2016 by Buorhann

[Dillon A McCann]

If I had an alliance we would avoid war at all costs

[Guest Rin]

Shoot all deserters IMO.

 

I've poached people during war in another game. Terrible idea because all of them desert the alliance when the next war gets tough. These are not simply pixel huggers, they are people who leave their allies when times get tough.

 

Sure they deserve a second chance, but changing allegiances should happen after war ends. If the war is already lost, then they need to pressure gov to surrender. If they think that gov is dragging everyone into a war they cannot win, they should leave before the war starts.

[Dillon A McCann]

I would say I am a pixel hugger but I would never desert my freinds or allies during war if things got tuff.

[Aisha Greyjoy]

 

Face it, most players are tax farms for alliances.  

I would never belong to an alliance that saw most of its members as tax farms.  Unless I was the leader, doing the farming.

[Dillon A McCann]

Who tax farms?

I know BoC doesn't be cause I can see their bank records.

[greatkitteh]

Eh, I would keep them in for the heck of keeping them in. Then I would merge right back into UPN.

[Vellocet]

Yes.

[Spooner]

"Would you let in deserters?"

"Yes."

 

Signature:

 

Lol, NPO. You crack me up.

[Azaghul]

Probably not, unless they had other very good reasons for leaving.

[Prezyan]

I agree with the people saying that it depends on the reason. Obviously if someone left their alliance during a war without a proper reason (proper reasons being; fought the good fight and decided to leave after there was no point/express permission from their gov/etc) then I would definitely deny them entry. While I do believe in second chances, the odds that someone who just leaves their alliance during a war without putting up a valiant fight is just unreliable. While yes, they could serve as a tax cow, yes they could serve as a score bolster or as a meat shield. But these things don't mean anything when the alliance is getting hit. I'll go for member quality over quantity any day.

[LordRahl2]

I agree with the people saying that it depends on the reason. Obviously if someone left their alliance during a war without a proper reason (proper reasons being; fought the good fight and decided to leave after there was no point/express permission from their gov/etc) then I would definitely deny them entry. While I do believe in second chances, the odds that someone who just leaves their alliance during a war without putting up a valiant fight is just unreliable. While yes, they could serve as a tax cow, yes they could serve as a score bolster or as a meat shield. But these things don't mean anything when the alliance is getting hit. I'll go for member quality over quantity any day.

"Meat shields" do mean something though. They take up an offensive war slot or 3. Then you expend some of your daily rebuy smashing them down.

[Roquentin]

Probably not. There'd have to be extenuating circumstances.

[Ole]

"Meat shields" do mean something though. They take up an offensive war slot or 3. Then you expend some of your daily rebuy smashing them down.

 

Yes and no, i've gone to war with meatshields, and they'r usually alot more trubble than worth.

 

the constant crying on the forums, the desertion, the not attacking the targets theyr asigned and so forth.

 

15 good, active players are worth 100 meatshield/Tax Cows.