Alliance Loyalty Perks

And there’s nothing wrong with that. Player mobility is a good thing

If you want to really upend the system, you take the total gem prize for each league (so titan league would be 8000x50 players=400,000 gems) and allow the the alliance to spend that on contracts for their players. When you recruit a player, you offer them a guaranteed contract to play with you for a period of time. The player can see all the offers available and make the best decision for them. For example, Alliance A offers a contract for 1 season for 15k gems, alliance B offers a contract for 6 seasons for 6k gems per season. Maybe the player wants the stability of a long term contract, maybe they want the big pay day and chance to be a free agent again after a season. The alliance can cut the player before the contract expires, but they owe the player the whole contract. The player cannot leave the alliance without breaking the contract and giving back gems. An alliance who spends all their budget on a few high priced free agents might find themselves in cap he’ll and unable to fill up their roster with quality players.


This will help larger alliances keep up with players but will keep the bottom alliance from growing. You will have the Yankees vs your daughters softball team.

1 Like

In our current system, it hurts to have a high jump rate. I’ve noticed that the Alliance War matchups are equal from the last couple of battle but get shifted to an advantage to the Alliance that recruited more in the off season. If we keep the Alliance War matchups like it is, we will need less movement in Alliances. Otherwise, we need to match up to a closer Power Ranking System. This I will have to go into detail on another thread.
Open system needs little movement
Open system needs better balancing

It is very hard to rise the ranks while keeping up blessings, keeping up ranks, and recruiting. The top Alliances have it made. The only time I see the top fall is when there is a rebellion inside a top alliance that breaks up the elites. This goes for any game.

I don’t think it would ever be implemented, don’t get me wrong, but at least it lets the player and the alliance each set the terms for how long a player stays with an alliance and at what cost. I also disagree that it helps larger alliances. Each alliance in a league would have the same budget to sign free agents. If you spend your whole budget on 15 blue chip players the rest of your roster would have to be made up of lower quality talent. It might help to walk back the consolidation of power in a handful of top alliances.

1 Like

There will be no handcuffs that restrict movement. There will only be incentives to those that stay will an Alliance. It would be nice if Alliances could offer more to players that would make the want to stick around and get to learn and grow with that alliance. I understand there are toxic alliances that need getting away from. The alliances that are just starting have a hard time keeping players and growing.
what is your forwards suggestion?

Why is that a bad thing? If your alliance is losing players or can’t recruit as well as others, buy more blessings or network better!

1 Like

Any incentive that a player earns through time served, and that disappears when they leave the alliance, is a handcuff. It makes the player who wants to leave less attractive to good alliances who might otherwise be willing to take a chance on a player they don’t know. The whole concept is great for alliance leaders (especially of bad alliances) and bad for players.

Player hoping, is actually simpler than what you are describing and there is nothing we can do about it 80% of the time.

80% of the time a player quits (or plays less time), and therefore gets kicked from the top alliance. That alliance then sends invites, naturally to top players and get them for the simple reason of competitiveness/rewards/prestige. That goes down the ladder so much, that the whole game is affecfed. Ive experienced this from alliance 130th to 1st.

For the other 20% Its just a matter of the person, there are loyal people and non loyal. Hoppers and non-hoppers. Again, nothing much you can do about them. Most people play the game to progress, besides the founder/general and “a few good men” everyone eventually moves “up” or his game time changes/quits.

Thanks for these ideas and the discussion. We are currently actively looking at dissuading players from constantly hopping between Alliances (not necessarily loyalty bonuses, but potentially other methods of dissuasion), so any fuel for discussion is useful. We hope to introduce something in the not too far future, but most likely not in the next version.


What is the main motivation for this?

hi Capitano :slight_smile: - is it possible to lower the% of the bonuses that are added up during the season? - there are alliances with very high bonuses - I will send you a copy of the screen shot

kiss kiss Artemus <3

1 Like

I can see that helping balance all the alliances.

I really hope it’s incentive’s for loyal players and not punishment to hoppers. If it is punishment, eventually we all could be punished for hopping on good reason.

1 Like

this is true.
imho some players (ofc not all) never have the goal to stay loyal with you. they just want raise up fast their account and head for either titan or their preverred top team. some are also just double accounts with either the same goal or to mess arround other alliances in titan (and even gods league) since nowadays you have to bring up 2nd or 3rd allies beside your main into titan s.t. the polictical system works to your favour. personally i dont like this, but other players do and also like the political aspect/tactics/negotiations/… what ever.

regards alli hoppings: why not implement something like fury during war: you can have up to max 3 (or 4) hopping points and you gain 1 a year, and start with 2. (maybe max and gain also also league dependent). someting like this, using one fantasy might help.

What happens if you choose a bad alliance with your last “hop” and you’re stuck in a place you hate? How do you know a good alliance from a bad one? Restricting player mobility is terrible for the game.


as said, max amount and regneration can be discussed and may vary from league to league (allow more in lower leagues when you have not found your alli you want to stay yet).
and in addition: maybe consider a rebuy of a hooping point. maybe 4000 gems in titan, 2000 in gos league and so on.
imho there has to be done something regarding extensive use of hopping (circulation in cartels, “recruiting”, looking/spying, …)
if you play seriously there is no need for that. i play more than 3 years and i changed 2 times.

just a suggestion, i am waiting for suggestions of flare

Couldn’t you end up in a situation where a player gets kicked and finds themselves unable to join an alliance through no fault of their own?

that could happen, true. but maybe on lower leagues it is free or hopping cooldown is shorter. and again: max. allowed changes can be made higher - only flare can decide what is healthy for the game. maybe you can also enter a league one step lower to your last one for free. use imagination to make it work (ofc it is also important to point out weaknesses). maybe it is also a motivation not to get kicked.

but as i would also prefer a free movement of players, it would be great if FG finds another soultion. e.g. more stats and informations from players (like which allies he has been and where did he leave from its own will and where he got kicked.). but watching how often some players hopp around feels very strange. multiple merges, cartel rotations, kicking players for better ones is just sad.

Q: do you kick a player that is polite and active (i assume you do not kick for island VP cancelation) or do you kick a player that is trolling or inactive or does not follow major rules of your alliance. or do you rather kick to be a troll. maybe if a player gets kicked or leaves from his own will, people have to enter/select a reason for this.

I don’t see player mobility as a bad thing so we’re never going to see eye to eye on this issue. In my opinion, most calls for “loyalty” bonuses come from alliance leaders who “draft and develop” players and want to throw up obstacles to keep them in their alliance indefinitely, even if they player had a better opportunity somewhere else (or even just the perception of a better opportunity. The grass isn’t always greener).

I understand the impulse to want to keep players you feel you trained —I’ve lost more players than I can count who I feel I helped develop, and it always hurts at the time when they move on to another alliance. But I don’t think loyalty is something that can be imposed. It has to be earned.

Why do I kick players? The criticism I hear more often is that we don’t kick players often enough. Maybe it’s right and we’d win more often if we kicked players who didn’t score max spoils or follow orders perfectly. Who knows? But inactivity and low score is the number one reason. Sometimes players want to try out wars in Titan league and find themselves outclassed, too. It happens. Or real life happens. It doesn’t make the player a bad guy. I can sometimes offer those players a lower alliance to play in. You do that too, or at least you used to. I don’t know how active GA’s feeder alliances are these days.

1 Like