Re: team victory conditions
 

The problem is that the way it is now you can't fight together, whereas if alliances were implemented, you could fight together. It's more than preventing accidental encounters.

Not to mention that you could script in advantages for the alliance players (shared vision, etc.).

Yup. It's bending the rules slightly. But I can live with that. Just pretend they're fighting together temporarily for the time being or something.

Then don't set up an alliance with Ermor. Just that you can, doesn't have to mean you have to. It's like Age of Empires II: You CAN have the Aztecs fight the Chinese, but you don't have to if you're into realism.

(As a side note, it's funny how alliances and teams are in every RTS game, but when it comes to 4X, suddenly no one wants them)

Re: team victory conditions
 

I didnt say I didnt want them. I just dont want the game deciding what they are, and enforcing them unrealistically. I love alliance options with AI's (because I abuse them to death) but in a game like this I like the flexibility which automatically happens by creating your own alliance rules.

I know the game allows AI to ally with AI but Im not sure if it works for AI to player. In the AI-AI version they wont actually attack each others province but if they both attack someone elses province on the same turn then their armies will fight.

Re: team victory conditions
 

Nothing would keep you from breaking an alliance - you'd simply get a warning that you'd be breaking the alliance, and the other player (and possibly _all_ players in the game) would get a notification that a treaty/alliance has been broken by so-and-so.

And again : the even more important aspect is that when someone goes AI, the AI could know about treaties, alliances, as opposed to completely trashing a MP gamer as often happens now.

( And yes - I would say it ruins a game at least for the person who had a treaty, their armies on the other side of their empire, and gets rolled over when the other player goes AI. )

Re: team victory conditions
 

I see no thematic problems with firm alliances. Most religions that have existed up to date have more then one god.

Even the jewish religion (which later spawned cristianity and Islam) may have it roots in Polyteistic faith. The bible have referenses to a fertility god worshiped by semitic people in Syria. I do not know the exact name. Could be Belzebub or Belial. If anyone is intrested I can look it up .

I think it would also be a very intresting feature for SP as you may set up thematic senarios for AARs or if you want a challange.

Re: team victory conditions
 

You can set them up in SoloPlay. At least as an opponent. In fact I did that in my WEvsTHEM scenario where Rlyeh, Atlantis, and Ermor were ruled by 3 sibling dragons. With boosted gods, selected starting positions, extra castles, etc its a pretty good scenario for cooperative human players to tackle.
www.Dom2minions.com

Its not my place to explain this but did anyone notice this on the developement page?
* Support for > 30 nations at once.

Gandalf Parker

Re: team victory conditions
 

Multiplayer alliances would be excellent... especially if armies could cross provinces of allies.

Re: team victory conditions
 

Crossing allied provinces can be done now.
For one thing its one of the benefits of allying with certain nations. And even if they dont have some basic ability to do it you can always setup a castle to let them thru.

I dont think Ive ever really liked games that allowed allies to cross too easily. It tends to get abused.

Re: team victory conditions
 

Well I think MP allieances should allow joint attack on provinces, if there will be something like diplomacy/alliance in the game sometime.
I think that would be the most important part of the alliance system.
Just imagine, 2 or even more players could attack the same province...what a great addition for the strategical part of the game. Like I said this system worked flawlessly in the RotK games, I loved it so much. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/cool.gif