Re: feature request againts pubserver cheats

>> d, is there a need for feedback/suggestion for rethink the ranking
>> system to reflect the fact of alliances/gangs? (so if 8 player kills a
>> good one in agangbang the 'winner one' wouldn't get even more points
>> for this than if he'd do it in a duel...which would be MUCH harder and
>> worth of reward than a stupid gang)
>
>Teams members get their scores averaged. We could do the same for
>alliances. This would mean that if you endyear when you are obviously
>outgunned but the enemy alliance consists of many weaker players, you
>could still win...
>
>=3D2E..I guess this does not solve the problem, however. Suggestions on =
how
t=3D
>o
>solve this are welcome.

  A limitation of alliance size can be a good. For exampe the number of
alliance members can not exceed the half of all civilisations. Then the
ratio
1:8 can not occur. The  maximum would be 5 against 4, which is more
treatable. A similar system works in hodito.hu online game, there the max
size can be only 4 (there are mostly 400+ players in 1 continous game).

But an explicit alliance have to offer more advantages (knowledge exchang=
e,
allied units can step on the same square) than secret pacts (communicatio=
n,
attac coordination).

Zolt=E1n Lakatos