The one ally and no ally thingy

Here you can find, hints, strategies and other info for VGA Planets, PHost and it's many addon's and utilities.

Moderators: BitMask, Havok

User avatar
Donovan
Posts: 354
Contact:

The one ally and no ally thingy

Post#1 » Sun Mar 27, 2011 2:50 pm

After all the debate on the matter, I decided to scour the forums for the views of our esteemed hosts, Havok and Bitmask. I know everyone and their mother has an opinion on these things, and although I love discussion, there are only two opinions here that matter. So although there are a couple more threads on the subjects and ofcourse many more people to quote, you won't find any of them in this post.

The views on no-allies and one-ally changed throughout time, no doubt because of the many discussions and different interpretations on any gray areas between players. The following list is not to demonstrate that the rules are not clear, but merely to sum them up in one handy place. You will actually find that at the end of the day, the rules on no allies or one ally are perfectly clear.

From the thread "no allies" (game unknown)

Havok, september 8th, 2008
Havok wrote: The noallies host addon prevents any kind of alliance via in game commands.

In the spirit of the game, I would request that players don't try to find a way around that. There can be only 1 winner, (via tonnage) and anything other than first place is loosing.

This doesn't mean you can't talk to each other, trade, etc... But everyone's primary concern should be winning.
From the thread "no ally interpretation" (game unknown)

Havok on october 21st, 2008
Havok wrote:There can only be 1 winner in this game, that's why I'm using the No Ally feature. No teams, etc... It doesn't work that way.

This doesn't prevent everyone from talking amongst themselves, trade ships, etc. It just means no alliances. Each humanoid or creature unto himself.
Havok on october 24th, 2008
Havok wrote:
Siberian Snake wrote:I suggest the following interpretation:
- no concerted actions
- no trade
- NAP and any information exchange is OK
Everyone follow SS's example.

Problem solved.
Havok on NAPs, on january 28, 2009
Havok wrote:The NAP establishing a recognized border between SS and Gavan does not vilolate the No Allies rule of the game.

It's like 2 neighbors building a fence on the property lines of their homes. It's a non-issue.

Problem resolved. Let's move on.
From the thread "Confusing Dark Sense" (from Che'ron)

Havok, february 24th, 2011
Havok wrote: (...) you're touching on the literal sense of the No Allies addon. That addon is there to enforce my No Allies rule and remove alliance friendly codes should they be entered. It's ability is limited. However when I say no alliances on this game or any other this is what I mean.

In this game there are no alliances, there is no co-operation of any kind, no ship trades, no non-aggression pacts, no laying mine fields for your friends, etc. This is a war and there is only one winner. Fight to win.
Bitmask, feb 25th, 2011
Bitmask wrote: This issue also came up in the UnNatural series games. UnNatural are also a every man for himself scenario, so the rule was then put in that a NAP is allowed until turn 20 and then it is all open season.
From the thread "having problems counting?" (from The Pit)

Bitmask, march 23rd, 2011
BitMask wrote:The game description pages are limited to 256 characters, so we try to be as descriptive as possible in those limited space, but we cannot say everything in all detail.

One-Ally not only say the add-in is used, but also that you should have only 1 ally. (or less)
Same goes for No-Ally. You should have no ally.

You should read this post if you are still unsure of what you need to do. The host standing on the issue is very clear. viewtopic.php?t=4267
Bitmask confirmed BANE's question that he was referring to the following statement by Havok, from which No Ally could be easily exchanged with "One Ally":
viewtopic.php?p=56909#56909
Havok wrote: That addon is there to enforce my No Allies rule and remove alliance friendly codes should they be entered. It's ability is limited. However when I say no alliances on this game or any other this is what I mean.

In this game there are no alliances, there is no co-operation of any kind, no ship trades, no non-aggression pacts, no laying mine fields for your friends, etc. This is a war and there is only one winner. Fight to win.
So at the end of this list of postings, the hosts' views on this are pretty clear. Throughout a few years of discussion, with prettymuch everyone asking for the exact interpretation, loopholes and grey areas, and just as many people complaining about the existence of a gray area, the rules have become very strict: no or one ally, and simply no interaction other than war with other races. You might hope your neighbor doesn't attack you, while he hopes you won't attack him, but that is about it.

PS: If I missed one ore more posts by Havok or Bitmask, feel free to quote them!

User avatar
albatross
Posts: 412
Contact:

Post#2 » Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:13 pm

Hehe.. Donovan, your last quote is about 'no ally' only, expansion into 'no or one ally' is made by yourself. So what.. in the end it's not on us players to give the final judge on rules.

I think it was Bane who mentioned lately that it is long overdue for sorta 'addon-for-addon' with one-ally (or no-ally, brrr.. confusing). If it was someone else, my apologies both ways. I'll make some free time to put together a bit of code for such a thing... for my part, going throu one discussion of this kind is enough.

Possible restrictions (known from other threads) amongst non-allies:
- ship trades
- other than own minelaying
- (put in here your suggestion)

Restricting the 'minefield travel with proper fcode' is tricky, as there is no obvious way to know if one actually got the fcode from a non-ally, or just had a lucky guess. If someone has a brilliant idea here, I'll put it in.

User avatar
Donovan
Posts: 354
Contact:

Post#3 » Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:34 pm

albatross wrote:Hehe.. Donovan, your last quote is about 'no ally' only, expansion into 'no or one ally' is made by yourself.
Sorry for the confusion. The expansion from no ally to one ally was BANE's suggestion, which was confirmed by Bitmask.

http://www.circus-maximus.com/forums/vi ... 7465#57465
B A N E wrote:BM,

Did you mean this specific post?
viewtopic.php?p=56909#56909

I would assume that Havok's POV regarding "One-Ally" is a simple
exchange of "No-Ally" in that post.

Correct me if I am wrong.
and

http://www.circus-maximus.com/forums/vi ... 7466#57466
BitMask wrote:Yes, that is correct.
Last edited by Donovan on Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
albatross
Posts: 412
Contact:

Post#4 » Sun Mar 27, 2011 4:35 pm

Ok, sorry about that :).

User avatar
BitMask
Site Admin
Posts: 2318
Contact:

Post#5 » Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:06 am

Just to clear things up for everyone:

We have created new diplomatic rules with which all new games will be set up in future. These rules will tell you how many allies are allowed (0, 1 or no limit) and if any NAPs are allowed. These will become live after we have tested a new host addon that would assist with some of these rules.

Until that page and rules are live, you should consider all games as follow:
No Ally games having No Allies at all and at most One NAP.
One Ally games having only One Ally at all and No other NAP.
All other games are open but try to keep away from those super alliances (e.g no more than 3 allies in any alliance)

I hope this helps.

Return to “Intel”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron