WTF BASED

I'm not convinced this is a good idea:

- If nations can't ally, they would be encouraged to merge with each other. Nation merges almost always negatively impact player activity.

- It doesn't stop people *truly* being allies. They will still be allies informally, so unnaturally stopping that from being reflected ingame doesn't make much sense, partially because..

- People will still join a nation to fight for them if they can't be allies. The only fix for that is loyalty, but that has its own issues.

Might have been better to ask for some "underdog buffs"

This is very based suggestion, remove the ally option so people stab each other more

I agree this is a good idea , it would stop the server from being 2 sided and less world wars would happen and not everyone would go to 1 siege rather they d be more scattered across the map

zaify i feel the same man..... I love having 0 allies when the entire coalition pulls up team. Japan will never be sieged because of its 492 allies. without an enemy to fight the coalition will either have a civil war on it wil kill the server,

As zaify said, removing in game alliance wouldnt quite brainwash them into saying "oh why dont I just attack them". Preventing them from being ally with restrictions would hardly be possible. Instead of that it should be better and easier to instead motivate them to fight eachother by giving the weaker side some bonuses.

Basically trying to make the game more of "the bigger team you have the less advantages you have" kind of thing. Some games I played would give players +50% rewards if they continue to play when outnumbered. If the rewards of swapping a side for those "underdog bonuses" is worth same or more than the risk of you being occupied we might see more nations swapping sides perhaps.

At this point people just care about not being occupied more enjoying the fair game even if losing. Might as well go back to N1 when everyone was allied and no one was doing wars

Aliitsme just so u know Japan will never be sieged bc we actually have good forts

"we actually have good forts" big does not equal good. full stop. your massive fort would have been murdered by bombers before the nerf.

i personally would siege it if it was thracian but my love for xtinct will stop me from sieging japan,

i dont even care if i win or lose. if the fort wasnt japanese i would siege it.

"We have really good forts" who is we? you do nothing for your nation team

Aliitsme thats too cold bro, ended his whole career

darius black when someone doesnt no life the game for 200 hours straight (will go into japan slander video)