i do play to win too - it is when you have won the problems starts
zhay
i do play to win too - it is when you have won the problems starts
zhay
thanks milly for the sig
I don't support mergers... people are too needy for them.. its pathetictheres more posts for mergers on this forum then there are people on this planet
![]()
By the amazing Luda
I think alliance merges can be a good thing, but can work out disastrous as well. On the previous server, we had half an alliance merge into ours and then later a whole alliance and both worked out fine.
Both started out from a friendly position, we did not take in an enemy alliance.
I think the biggest problem in alliance merges are the clashing ego's. People who once were the boss, are no longer boss and need to face that. Perhaps because I am a woman, I don't suffer that much from an ego and things go smoother that way.
I agree with BarrenMan I've been through a few alliances, and am coming out of 1 as of a few days. Alliances that have been sisters or have been working together to take on a strong alliance seem to last longer then those who just got 2gether to be the strongest in the server. My alliance use to be blue with another strong alliance. We didn't work together much just had a common enemy who was is many states. But then we turned red and entered a mech war. Well we ended up merging (against my wishes and I was VH). Left alliance a few days ago and im red 2 them ^_^
The only mergers that work are for players that are willign to adapt to eachother, to respect the new teams goals and ideas and to leave the old team behind. The other key is that i am a firm believer in a team will not be successful if it is spread too thin. The power of a team is in working together, defending eachother and having fun.
JP i have a few things to say
1) a small alliance can be just as strong as a large alliance. Before my team expanded we held Saxony with about 20 people for many months. And to this day i would rather have a team of 20 players who know what they are doing then 100 bumbling idiots. It takes only one player who has a decent understanding of mechanics to teach the rest. To this day we sit comfortably at 40 members with 2 states and we rock out to "Cant Touch This"
2) If you merged a weak alliance with a strong established alliance- the strong players would resent the weak players. A strong team doesnt play to defend it's weak members. It plays to kill or to win or as you put it "dominate" That one of the reasons it's a strong team.
3) I created my alliance on the third day of 138 (somewhere in april). Since then we have had various teams merge wtih us, i actually attempted to merge us twice (lasted 2 weeks and we reformed). Most of the teams who have joined us were other small intimate alliances like us. Some stuck, some didnt. You dont merge a team because of strengths and weakeness, you merge a team if it makes sense. If your goals are similar, if your personalities are similar. If a team isnt compatible with another, a merge will just failits hard to shove 100 strangers together and make it work
Evony at the end of the day is survival of the fittestit's something i feel you know and choose to ignore just to make arguements. Age 1 age 2 its all the same in that aspect.
Plenty of small alliances on our server go under the radar and they are able to grow and thrive. The focus of a top alliance is typically top 10 - 20 ranked alliances with bad attitudes and red flags. There's enough meat out on the battlefield to shred without trying to host recess on the playground after nap time. And when those alliances fall, the ones that were given time to grow will be ripe for picking.
I would say that this is less like basketball and more like wrestling. It's a soap opera + fighting. There are good guys and bad guys. Grudges and egos. Challenges. Drama. Wailing and gnashing of teeth. Farts. It's more complex than two teams on a field trying to grab each others' balls.
retired to farming
Bookmarks