Good job comformists

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

It's the truth, but some rpfag supporter will say otherwise.

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Let me answer you "concern" about the future of custom maps and scenarios. Scenarios like TheGreatWar that me and pistoltr work on, seems to be the most played scenario for august and september such scenarios are not going to disappear anytime soon
Additionally when I am in game I often see veriaty of scenarios, 5 in average with capacity limit of 20/15 players being full
so your argument is literally invalid

Frankly it seems to me that you are just upset people are not playing what you would like them to play.
Just accept and live with the fact that role play map exist and there are people who find it enjoyable to play more than most of the good historical/si-fi maps and scenarios, and move on. Eventually it will lose its spotlight sooner or later.
Until then I would recommend you and other map makers to take the time and make more excellent history related or any sort of maps and scenarios
For the future aW after the RP era


edit: before you quote me, it is my last post regarding RP so don't bother to start a pointless debate with me

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Comnformists?
1 year ago you were SP farming on UN games (as rogue UN) and now I shall listen to your rampage on RP? At that time you even advised me to make a UN version of one of my maps.
Please come up with a proposal, rather than just bitching around! GG to fatalism and dramatization.

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 07:51

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Comnformists?
1 year ago you were SP farming on UN games (as rogue UN) and now I shall listen to your rampage on RP? At that time you even advised me to make a UN version of one of my maps.
Please come up with a proposal, rather than just bitching around! GG to fatalism and dramatization.

And i advised you to ban UN aswell, since mods didn't ban it: i started going rogue non-stop.
You were told by the map making community that UN was gonna fuck atwar, you said the same that you say now "it will eventually die" nope RP is just UN without UN, it didnt die it EVOLVED.

Ignoring the problem is not gonna make it go away.

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 07:56

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 07:51

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Comnformists?
1 year ago you were SP farming on UN games (as rogue UN) and now I shall listen to your rampage on RP? At that time you even advised me to make a UN version of one of my maps.
Please come up with a proposal, rather than just bitching around! GG to fatalism and dramatization.

And i advised you to ban UN aswell, since mods didn't ban it: i started going rogue non-stop.
You were told by the map making community that UN was gonna fuck atwar, you said the same that you say now "it will eventually die" nope RP is just UN without UN, it didnt die it EVOLVED.

Ignoring the problem is not gonna make it go away.

... and the suggestion?

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:07

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 07:56

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 07:51

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Comnformists?
1 year ago you were SP farming on UN games (as rogue UN) and now I shall listen to your rampage on RP? At that time you even advised me to make a UN version of one of my maps.
Please come up with a proposal, rather than just bitching around! GG to fatalism and dramatization.

And i advised you to ban UN aswell, since mods didn't ban it: i started going rogue non-stop.
You were told by the map making community that UN was gonna fuck atwar, you said the same that you say now "it will eventually die" nope RP is just UN without UN, it didnt die it EVOLVED.

Ignoring the problem is not gonna make it go away.

... and the suggestion?

We need something to decrease the SP earned from RP

Napisano przez Guest, 02.10.2014 at 08:08

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:07

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 07:56

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 07:51

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Comnformists?
1 year ago you were SP farming on UN games (as rogue UN) and now I shall listen to your rampage on RP? At that time you even advised me to make a UN version of one of my maps.
Please come up with a proposal, rather than just bitching around! GG to fatalism and dramatization.

And i advised you to ban UN aswell, since mods didn't ban it: i started going rogue non-stop.
You were told by the map making community that UN was gonna fuck atwar, you said the same that you say now "it will eventually die" nope RP is just UN without UN, it didnt die it EVOLVED.

Ignoring the problem is not gonna make it go away.

... and the suggestion?

We need something to decrease the SP earned from RP

Thanks. You probably mean this: https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=15790.
This is what is required and NOT the simplistic whining and self-lamentation.

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:14

Napisano przez Guest, 02.10.2014 at 08:08

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:07

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 07:56

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 07:51

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Comnformists?
1 year ago you were SP farming on UN games (as rogue UN) and now I shall listen to your rampage on RP? At that time you even advised me to make a UN version of one of my maps.
Please come up with a proposal, rather than just bitching around! GG to fatalism and dramatization.

And i advised you to ban UN aswell, since mods didn't ban it: i started going rogue non-stop.
You were told by the map making community that UN was gonna fuck atwar, you said the same that you say now "it will eventually die" nope RP is just UN without UN, it didnt die it EVOLVED.

Ignoring the problem is not gonna make it go away.

... and the suggestion?

We need something to decrease the SP earned from RP

Thanks. You probably mean this: https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=15790.
This is what is required and NOT the simplistic whining and self-lamentation.

It has already been suggested early to remove SP from RP and UN, and it has gotten overwhelming support.
What makes this one different?

Removing SP from UN and RP maps have been suggested since last year:

Napisano przez Guest, 24.08.2013 at 20:02

Why not just make a new Gametype called "RolePlay" (What UN is based off of), and SP is cut in half at the end? Or something like that, where SP is deducted drastically in this "fun" gametype. Hell, we could just have two sections of gametypes: Ranked and unranked, if it would mean keeping the game in everyone's best interest, and V stated previously. Anyways, i personally find the idea behind UN games fantastic, though the SP output and skill involved degrade the game for anyone playing, it seems.

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 08:19

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:14

Napisano przez Guest, 02.10.2014 at 08:08

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:07

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 07:56

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 07:51

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Comnformists?
1 year ago you were SP farming on UN games (as rogue UN) and now I shall listen to your rampage on RP? At that time you even advised me to make a UN version of one of my maps.
Please come up with a proposal, rather than just bitching around! GG to fatalism and dramatization.

And i advised you to ban UN aswell, since mods didn't ban it: i started going rogue non-stop.
You were told by the map making community that UN was gonna fuck atwar, you said the same that you say now "it will eventually die" nope RP is just UN without UN, it didnt die it EVOLVED.

Ignoring the problem is not gonna make it go away.

... and the suggestion?

We need something to decrease the SP earned from RP

Thanks. You probably mean this: https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=15790.
This is what is required and NOT the simplistic whining and self-lamentation.

It has already been suggested early to remove SP from RP and UN, and it has gotten overwhelming support.
What makes this one different?

Nothing. Just stop being like...

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:28

Nothing. Just stop being like...

You are bias, because you use to be an active UN player, and currently you probably play RP with alts.

So what is your reason to defend RP? income for atwar? Take in mind that most premium players are competitive high ranks or map makers.

The map making community dislikes RP, because it takes away all the possible new players, it forces us to dumb down our games in order to appease the masses, most map makers don't even try making new maps because the player-base is shit and doesn't appreciate the maps.

Scenarios are no longer a game, but a waiting screen, people only join them to pass time until a RP is hosted, and then leave in masses.

This casual community is not big enough to be divided between RolePlay50k and scenarios,it becomes a fight for players that scenarios can't win, when a scenario gets full the issue above happens: everybody quits when a RP is hosted.

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 08:44

You are bias, because you use to be an active UN player, and currently you probably play RP with alts.

Played UN but, contrary to you, I didn't farm as rogue UN.
Wrong, ranked 9 with my alt and only played 1 RP to test (mea culpa!).

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 08:44

So what is your reason to defend RP? income for atwar? Take in mind that most premium players are competitive high ranks or map makers.

Possibly wrong. Most premium players (60%) are rank 5-8. 30% of premium players are rank 5.
Have a look at: http://atwardatabase.weebly.com/community.html. The only problem with these figures is that they include Beta Players (possibly over-represented in rank 5-8).

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 08:44

The map making community dislikes RP, because it takes away all the possible new players, it forces us to dumb down our games in order to appease the masses, most map makers don't even try making new maps because the player-base is shit and doesn't appreciate the maps.
Scenarios are no longer a game, but a waiting screen, people only join them to pass time until a RP is hosted, and then leave in masses.
This casual community is not big enough to be divided between RolePlay50k and scenarios,it becomes a fight for players that scenarios can't win, when a scenario gets full the issue above happens: everybody quits when a RP is hosted.

Yes, this is a good point.
Like when MCD entered some Latin-American markets and traditional small restaurants went bankrupt. After a while, the "taquerías", "pupuserías", "cantinas", etc. came back with strength and vigor and they are competing with MCD and BK face-to-face.
What to do?

• Implement max SP/turn ratio
  
• Create a map/scenario crew with the purpose of evaluating the quality of maps/scenarios (beyond the trolling mechanism of rating and the popularity that reflects only partially the quality) and, possibly, assign high quality maps/scenarios a SP % bonus. Meaning: if a map has been reviewed and considered of high quality, then games played on this map will be boosted with 10% of the obtained SP... or quality good gives 5% more SP etc.
  
• Etc.

Again, stop the whining and lamenting and blaming everybody else. Suggestions and discussions are required.
Like I said before, RP players will get bored of playing RP (like given a cheat for a game). Some will leave AW completely others will start playing scenarios and custom maps... some will even evolve to competitive players. No drama.

It's the goddamn truth that roleplay is ruining this game for what it was intended - strategy.
Just kill the map off and everything will go back to normal.

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:14

Napisano przez Guest, 02.10.2014 at 08:08

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:07

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 07:56

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 07:51

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Comnformists?
1 year ago you were SP farming on UN games (as rogue UN) and now I shall listen to your rampage on RP? At that time you even advised me to make a UN version of one of my maps.
Please come up with a proposal, rather than just bitching around! GG to fatalism and dramatization.

And i advised you to ban UN aswell, since mods didn't ban it: i started going rogue non-stop.
You were told by the map making community that UN was gonna fuck atwar, you said the same that you say now "it will eventually die" nope RP is just UN without UN, it didnt die it EVOLVED.

Ignoring the problem is not gonna make it go away.

... and the suggestion?

We need something to decrease the SP earned from RP

Thanks. You probably mean this: https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=15790.
This is what is required and NOT the simplistic whining and self-lamentation.

That's exactly what the suggestion does, decrease the amount of SP earned in RP and other games.

Napisano przez Guest, 03.10.2014 at 00:02

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:14

Napisano przez Guest, 02.10.2014 at 08:08

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 08:07

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 07:56

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 07:51

Napisano przez Tundy, 01.10.2014 at 23:04

"rp doesnt affect anybody"
Well, gg scenarios (including ww2 and ggg) are completely dead.

I log in to see like 8 RPs and 15 50k world maps, and 0 scenarios.
Its over scenarios are dead.

Comnformists?
1 year ago you were SP farming on UN games (as rogue UN) and now I shall listen to your rampage on RP? At that time you even advised me to make a UN version of one of my maps.
Please come up with a proposal, rather than just bitching around! GG to fatalism and dramatization.

And i advised you to ban UN aswell, since mods didn't ban it: i started going rogue non-stop.
You were told by the map making community that UN was gonna fuck atwar, you said the same that you say now "it will eventually die" nope RP is just UN without UN, it didnt die it EVOLVED.

Ignoring the problem is not gonna make it go away.

... and the suggestion?

We need something to decrease the SP earned from RP

Thanks. You probably mean this: https://atwar-game.com/forum/topic.php?topic_id=15790.
This is what is required and NOT the simplistic whining and self-lamentation.

That's exactly what the suggestion does, decrease the amount of SP earned in RP and other games.

Being worked on.

Honestly something that ive never understood is why ww2 and those maps arent played, i mean honestly, the majority of players in RP would never play in a 6-15 ultimate ww2 competitive scenario. I mean there is the occasional player who used to play ww2 but it just feels like the player base kinda disappeared, the rise of RP and other things probably played a role in their leaving, but I just think that RP isnt really affecting the whole ww2 community, i guess we just killed ourselves in the end?

I have wrote a summary argument of why banning RP is a pointless move. I shall quote it below:
(note: square parenthesis indicate edits that I've made to the original text.

Napisano przez International, 01.10.2014 at 04:10

[introduction removed]

[Banning RP] is, in my opinion, pointless and impractical. Since all games are either RP or non-RP (since any games that are not RP will be non-RP), all players can be categorized into three. Players who almost exclusively play RP, players who almost exclusively play non-RP, and players who play significant amounts of both. In the first case, players who hardly play any non-RP games likely don't play non-RP games because they don't find non-RP games enjoyable, for whatever reason. These players will not suddenly switch to non-RP games when RP is removed. They'll stop playing AtWar in general, likelier than not, and will not like this measure (they can't play RP anymore). In the second case, the players don't play RP anyways, so they're not affected at all by the measure, and they won't enjoy new players from the first case, as those players will, as seen above, likely leave the game outright. In other words, players of the second case will remain completely unaffected by this measure, with no benefits or drawbacks. Then there's the third case, of players who play significant amounts of both. The motivations of these players are a little more difficult to determine. As far as I know, these players play both types because they find both types of games enjoyable and/or wishes to supplement their slow SP-gain from non-RP maps with several windfalls from RP maps. This does highlight the problem of players playing RP gaining too much SP, but this problem can be solved without banning RP (see my comments for [SP-reductions]). If RP is banned, the players who find both types enjoyable will suffer from this measure. In short, banning RP has a neutral or negative effect for everybody involved, with nobody benefitting from the measure, for no purpose other than those that can be accomplished by other means anyways (such as SP-adjustments).

[irrelevant points removed]

Why do people jump to extreme measures?

[conclusion removed]

Napisano przez International, 05.10.2014 at 06:22

I have wrote a summary argument of why banning RP is a pointless move. I shall quote it below:
(note: square parenthesis indicate edits that I've made to the original text.

Napisano przez International, 01.10.2014 at 04:10

[introduction removed]

[Banning RP] is, in my opinion, pointless and impractical. Since all games are either RP or non-RP (since any games that are not RP will be non-RP), all players can be categorized into three. Players who almost exclusively play RP, players who almost exclusively play non-RP, and players who play significant amounts of both. In the first case, players who hardly play any non-RP games likely don't play non-RP games because they don't find non-RP games enjoyable, for whatever reason. These players will not suddenly switch to non-RP games when RP is removed. They'll stop playing AtWar in general, likelier than not, and will not like this measure (they can't play RP anymore). In the second case, the players don't play RP anyways, so they're not affected at all by the measure, and they won't enjoy new players from the first case, as those players will, as seen above, likely leave the game outright. In other words, players of the second case will remain completely unaffected by this measure, with no benefits or drawbacks. Then there's the third case, of players who play significant amounts of both. The motivations of these players are a little more difficult to determine. As far as I know, these players play both types because they find both types of games enjoyable and/or wishes to supplement their slow SP-gain from non-RP maps with several windfalls from RP maps. This does highlight the problem of players playing RP gaining too much SP, but this problem can be solved without banning RP (see my comments for [SP-reductions]). If RP is banned, the players who find both types enjoyable will suffer from this measure. In short, banning RP has a neutral or negative effect for everybody involved, with nobody benefitting from the measure, for no purpose other than those that can be accomplished by other means anyways (such as SP-adjustments).

[irrelevant points removed]

Why do people jump to extreme measures?

[conclusion removed]

Do you have proof that people will quit after RP is removed?

There is many surveys that prove a inverse relationship between skill and enjoyment of RP, aka the higher the skill: the more stupid and boring RP becomes to the player.

low ranks play RP for a determined amount of reasons: Easy SP (me and other high ranks can get up to 20k sp per day if we play only-RP).

No strategy or economy management, this reduces the amount of skill needed to perform good in RP, so it makes it easier for low ranks to play.

It facilitates ally-fagging and leads to high ranks getting gang-bang.

So RP is a easy to play, easy to ally-fag against high ranks, and it gives you a shitload of SP. What do you think the low rank will choose? That or a hard to play, easy to die, that gives you few sp if you win.

Napisano przez Tundy, 08.10.2014 at 09:44

Napisano przez International, 05.10.2014 at 06:22

I have wrote a summary argument of why banning RP is a pointless move. I shall quote it below:
(note: square parenthesis indicate edits that I've made to the original text.

Napisano przez International, 01.10.2014 at 04:10

[introduction removed]

[Banning RP] is, in my opinion, pointless and impractical. Since all games are either RP or non-RP (since any games that are not RP will be non-RP), all players can be categorized into three. Players who almost exclusively play RP, players who almost exclusively play non-RP, and players who play significant amounts of both. In the first case, players who hardly play any non-RP games likely don't play non-RP games because they don't find non-RP games enjoyable, for whatever reason. These players will not suddenly switch to non-RP games when RP is removed. They'll stop playing AtWar in general, likelier than not, and will not like this measure (they can't play RP anymore). In the second case, the players don't play RP anyways, so they're not affected at all by the measure, and they won't enjoy new players from the first case, as those players will, as seen above, likely leave the game outright. In other words, players of the second case will remain completely unaffected by this measure, with no benefits or drawbacks. Then there's the third case, of players who play significant amounts of both. The motivations of these players are a little more difficult to determine. As far as I know, these players play both types because they find both types of games enjoyable and/or wishes to supplement their slow SP-gain from non-RP maps with several windfalls from RP maps. This does highlight the problem of players playing RP gaining too much SP, but this problem can be solved without banning RP (see my comments for [SP-reductions]). If RP is banned, the players who find both types enjoyable will suffer from this measure. In short, banning RP has a neutral or negative effect for everybody involved, with nobody benefitting from the measure, for no purpose other than those that can be accomplished by other means anyways (such as SP-adjustments).

[irrelevant points removed]

Why do people jump to extreme measures?

[conclusion removed]

Do you have proof that people will quit after RP is removed?

There is many surveys that prove a inverse relationship between skill and enjoyment of RP, aka the higher the skill: the more stupid and boring RP becomes to the player.

low ranks play RP for a determined amount of reasons: Easy SP (me and other high ranks can get up to 20k sp per day if we play only-RP).

No strategy or economy management, this reduces the amount of skill needed to perform good in RP, so it makes it easier for low ranks to play.

It facilitates ally-fagging and leads to high ranks getting gang-bang.

So RP is a easy to play, easy to ally-fag against high ranks, and it gives you a shitload of SP. What do you think the low rank will choose? That or a hard to play, easy to die, that gives you few sp if you win.

Now, is does have little strategy, I just want to say it does have a lil strategy in it. Such as your picks, countries contain unique (poorly executed idea) units so you can have priotised attacks and even when to declare war.

Nice flam war here

Napisano przez Columna Durruti, 02.10.2014 at 09:20

Napisano przez Tundy, 02.10.2014 at 08:44

Yes, this is a good point.
Like when MCD entered some Latin-American markets and traditional small restaurants went bankrupt. After a while, the "taquerías", "pupuserías", "cantinas", etc. came back with strength and vigor and they are competing with MCD and BK face-to-face.
What to do?

• Implement max SP/turn ratio
  
• Create a map/scenario crew with the purpose of evaluating the quality of maps/scenarios (beyond the trolling mechanism of rating and the popularity that reflects only partially the quality) and, possibly, assign high quality maps/scenarios a SP % bonus. Meaning: if a map has been reviewed and considered of high quality, then games played on this map will be boosted with 10% of the obtained SP... or quality good gives 5% more SP etc.
  
• Etc.

Also please take this part to ideas and suggestions, gr8 idea.

Napisano przez Tundy, 08.10.2014 at 09:44

Do you have proof that people will quit after RP is removed?

There is many surveys that prove a inverse relationship between skill and enjoyment of RP, aka the higher the skill: the more stupid and boring RP becomes to the player.

low ranks play RP for a determined amount of reasons: Easy SP (me and other high ranks can get up to 20k sp per day if we play only-RP).

No strategy or economy management, this reduces the amount of skill needed to perform good in RP, so it makes it easier for low ranks to play.

It facilitates ally-fagging and leads to high ranks getting gang-bang.

So RP is a easy to play, easy to ally-fag against high ranks, and it gives you a shitload of SP. What do you think the low rank will choose? That or a hard to play, easy to die, that gives you few sp if you win.

First of all, congratulations and thanks. You are one of the first person to actually read my argument and respond with a relevant point.

I shall try to respond below.

"RP is an easy to play, easy to ally-fag against high ranks, and it gives you [expletive removed] of SP."
Easy to play is really a difficult conclusion to draw. It is very true that many RP maps give players some very overpowered units, but it is also true that every other player will have similar overpowered units. So wars against players are not any easier than they would be in other games.

What you probably meant, and I do agree here, is that RP games require close to no skill, as defined as good knowledge of the details of game mechanics and how to exploit it, because many units have very large ranges, and money is almost a non-issue for most European countries. But RP players are generally not looking for a strategic and balanced match of skills, as defined above. What we are looking for in RP games is some semblance of negotiations and diplomacy, and the skill set needed in those areas. This is precisely why I have said that banning RP will likely cause some RP players to leave AtWar. Players who exclusively play RP are just looking for a different type of game than others are, and probably don't see much of an appeal in highly competitive situations. No, I do not have any proof for this, and nor do I believe that this surely will be the result. I just think that that would be the most likely result. In addition to that, RP games have their own sorts of strategy. Just as in non-RP games, playing styles in RP games vary slightly from map to map. A player who tries the same sort of tank spamming that works excellently in Tempted's RP (where tanks are overpowered to high heavens) in Adog's RP (where there is a very effective anti-tank unit) will likely find himself losing very quickly.

I personally would like more realistic RP maps and rules (in real life, countries do not have bottomless sources of money, nor do we often see half the globe allying with each other for no good reason, artillery aren't that fast and infantry really isn't that weak), but that is just my preference, and other players may disagree.

It is also easy to form large alliances in RP, I've personally seen some with over ten players. On the other hand, whether they form against high ranks is highly doubtful. Rank is almost completely irrelevant to RP gameplay (at least, in the couple hundred games I was in), except for the slight exception of some hosts refusing to let lower ranks play large countries. I have yet to see a single game, where over two players allied against a high ranked player, for the sole reason that said player is of a high rank. Large coalitions form, mainly, for one of two reasons. First, a player has attacked a nearby player, and has failed to adequately justify said attack before the war, in which case a coalition is likely to form against this attacking player (the usual jargon used to describe those players is "rogue"), or second, several players band together in an alliance for the purpose of committing unprovoked aggression against nearby players, in which case a counter-alliance is likely to form. As I have said before, players who don't play RP for the insane amount of SP (which I'll get to later), play RP for the diplomatic situations it creates, and these two cases of why large alliances form suit that need just fine.

RP does give insane amounts of SP. I agree that this is a problem that must be redressed as soon as is possible, but this problem can be solved without banning RP (some forum topics are already discussing SP-adjustments to rich or highly-populated maps, such as most RP maps). In fact, in my personal opinion, this measure will be a boon for the RP community -- no more players who play RP just for the large SP gain.

This has been another very long post, and thanks for reading.

Tank spamming is only good for expanding even in Tempted's RP. TRP also has AT infs. Infs should be used for combat. Just throwing that there.
Also, from what I have experienced ''counter'' coalitions aren't formed all that much. I almost died from a gangbang, but it was cap home country and the idiots didn't take my last cities topkek even though I couldn't do anything. Btw, I can't remember but it may have been a 4v1 or a 3v1. Happened a looong time ago.

I doubt I played this game, but a guy says me and him fended off a 8v2. Now wtf?