Most major leagues will have already set up the "terms of engagement" with it's allies, including what is and isn't deemed OK on hamlets.

I have seen people want to go for hamlets being fair game, because people want to PvP and their view is that people know what they are getting into when they put stuff on hamlets and settlements. They don't want to interfere with people's ability to "have fun".

And I have seen people want to agree to no PvP on hamlets on the basis that massive fights between allies are counter productive. 

I am personally in the later camp. Also it's just less hassle as a captain to go down the no PvP route wth allies, because even if you set PvP as allowed with your allies, some people are always going to get upset when the PvP happens and try and drag you into the slanging match. And unless you ally up half the server, there are still plenty of PvP opportunities to be had outside of your allies.

But I don't think there is a right and a wrong, just personal preference.

Sounds like you got a bit of a keyboard warrior though - lol

DJ Moody said:

Most major leagues will have already set up the "terms of engagement" with it's allies, including what is and isn't deemed OK on hamlets.

I have seen people want to go for hamlets being fair game, because people want to PvP and their view is that people know what they are getting into when they put stuff on hamlets and settlements. They don't want to interfere with people's ability to "have fun".

And I have seen people want to agree to no PvP on hamlets on the basis that massive fights between allies are counter productive. 

I am personally in the later camp. Also it's just less hassle as a captain to go down the no PvP route wth allies, because even if you set PvP as allowed with your allies, some people are always going to get upset when the PvP happens and try and drag you into the slanging match. And unless you ally up half the server, there are still plenty of PvP opportunities to be had outside of your allies.

But I don't think there is a right and a wrong, just personal preference.

Sounds like you got a bit of a keyboard warrior though - lol

I totally agree. It will be a hassle to deal with aggressions between leagues. My take on this is that if you kill my units at any location, then I can kill your units at whatever location. 

Its counterproductive to have your ally kill your own units. And then you are not allowed to kill his. Fair game must be defined as, doing what you expect your ally to do. If you want to kill your allies units, then why are you allied with them in the first place. 

My view on Hamlets has always been that they are too beneficial as farms to even PvP on them. When you PvP you need at least 50K points to earn something decent. The reward you get for 50K PvP points is way less than the benefit of earning 3000 sapphires for 7 hrs of play. The amount of unit you lose from 50K points will take weeks if not months to rebuild. 

DJ Moody said:

Most major leagues will have already set up the "terms of engagement" with it's allies, including what is and isn't deemed OK on hamlets.

I have seen people want to go for hamlets being fair game, because people want to PvP and their view is that people know what they are getting into when they put stuff on hamlets and settlements. They don't want to interfere with people's ability to "have fun".

And I have seen people want to agree to no PvP on hamlets on the basis that massive fights between allies are counter productive. 

I am personally in the later camp. Also it's just less hassle as a captain to go down the no PvP route wth allies, because even if you set PvP as allowed with your allies, some people are always going to get upset when the PvP happens and try and drag you into the slanging match. And unless you ally up half the server, there are still plenty of PvP opportunities to be had outside of your allies.

But I don't think there is a right and a wrong, just personal preference.

Sounds like you got a bit of a keyboard warrior though - lol

I totally agree. It will be a hassle to deal with aggressions between leagues. My take on this is that if you kill my units at any location, then I can kill your units at whatever location. 

Its counterproductive to have your ally kill your own units. And then you are not allowed to kill his. Fair game must be defined as, doing what you expect your ally to do. If you want to kill your allies units, then why are you allied with them in the first place. 

My view on Hamlets has always been that they are too beneficial as farms to even PvP on them. When you PvP you need at least 50K points to earn something decent. The reward you get for 50K PvP points is way less than the benefit of earning 3000 sapphires for 7 hrs of play. The amount of unit you lose from 50K points will take weeks if not months to rebuild. 

BiohazarD said:

Oracle said:

DJ Moody said:

Most major leagues will have already set up the "terms of engagement" with it's allies, including what is and isn't deemed OK on hamlets.

I have seen people want to go for hamlets being fair game, because people want to PvP and their view is that people know what they are getting into when they put stuff on hamlets and settlements. They don't want to interfere with people's ability to "have fun".

And I have seen people want to agree to no PvP on hamlets on the basis that massive fights between allies are counter productive. 

I am personally in the later camp. Also it's just less hassle as a captain to go down the no PvP route wth allies, because even if you set PvP as allowed with your allies, some people are always going to get upset when the PvP happens and try and drag you into the slanging match. And unless you ally up half the server, there are still plenty of PvP opportunities to be had outside of your allies.

But I don't think there is a right and a wrong, just personal preference.

Sounds like you got a bit of a keyboard warrior though - lol

I totally agree. It will be a hassle to deal with aggressions between leagues. My take on this is that if you kill my units at any location, then I can kill your units at whatever location. 

Its counterproductive to have your ally kill your own units. And then you are not allowed to kill his. Fair game must be defined as, doing what you expect your ally to do. If you want to kill your allies units, then why are you allied with them in the first place. 

My view on Hamlets has always been that they are too beneficial as farms to even PvP on them. When you PvP you need at least 50K points to earn something decent. The reward you get for 50K PvP points is way less than the benefit of earning 3000 sapphires for 7 hrs of play. The amount of unit you lose from 50K points will take weeks if not months to rebuild. 

But what if your league allies every idiot on the map and they're sitting on all the hamlets around you when you want one?  :P

Why are you in a league that you don't agree with its vision and objective. Won't it benefit you to be in a league that doesn't have many allies? 

Most players who hit hamlets are usually freeloaders who ride on the league name, farming millions of units without ever wanting to put up a good fight. So they hit hamlets knowing that their leagues will protect them. 

And it's not like there aren't other hamlets in the game. There are plenty, They just want "Safe PvP"

Oracle said:

BiohazarD said:

Oracle said:

DJ Moody said:

Why are you in a league that you don't agree with its vision and objective. Won't it benefit you to be in a league that doesn't have many allies? 

im happy to see ur point of view of the reason to stay in a league.

its a nice perspective i could stand behind too.i mean i wouldnt leave my league,but its quite logical.

This is a war game, if you attack anything with my name on it, you are waging war on me, and I MUST attack you back. Who made this stupid rule anyway?

Constantin Catalin said:

Oracle said:

This is a war game, if you attack anything with my name on it, you are waging war on me, and I MUST attack you back. Who made this stupid rule anyway?

Best statement... you kill one single troop of mine you ll be my target.No excuses..unless you take a hamlet in same time with other player.In latest brawl we were 3-3 and lead with more than 1,5 mil points.We lost because two players attacked in same time same hamlet..one from my team one from other team ,,,and we are ally.The other player sent more attack troops and he took the hamlet and they scored few points more than us.We did nt took back points ..basically was impossible to equalize so we lost the brawl even we did more points.What i m trying to say ..a deal is a deal and should be respected.You attack my troops you broke that deal.

rules are not always game rules constantine 

in royal league brawl u might lose even if ur higher in points but lose in category << game rule ! can not be changed or meddled with

u can or can not attack ally hamlets << intergame rules ! can be meddled with ! or be broken or played on

but u can make sure u dnt lose too 

knowledge is power in a strategic game

Constantin Catalin said:

Oracle said:

This is a war game, if you attack anything with my name on it, you are waging war on me, and I MUST attack you back. Who made this stupid rule anyway?

Best statement... you kill one single troop of mine you ll be my target.No excuses..unless you take a hamlet in same time with other player.In latest brawl we were 3-3 and lead with more than 1,5 mil points.We lost because two players attacked in same time same hamlet..one from my team one from other team ,,,and we are ally.The other player sent more attack troops and he took the hamlet and they scored few points more than us.We did nt took back points ..basically was impossible to equalize so we lost the brawl even we did more points.What i m trying to say ..a deal is a deal and should be respected.You attack my troops you broke that deal.

There is a growing trend in server 1 where enemies put alts in leagues that are allies and attack hamlets. This is a coordinated effort to cause discord amongst friendly leagues, and break coalitions. This is done to jeopardize the league's growth. 

MauiSon said:

I don't get it - if you want to mine a hamlet, send 5 billion (with league help) and don't worry about those attackers. That is the danger for those attacking hamlets. 

I don't have to put 5 billion on my Hamlet, I only put enough to collect what I need. But that does not give you a right to attack it. 

 But if you do attack me, then make sure that you put 5 billion defence on your castle, because a seige will be upon you to slay your spirit wardens, and 100 Fireballs will fall upon your army. And if you do have those fancy castles, then no problem, you league members, especially your captains and Marshals will take your sins. 

This is a war game, and wars must be fair. You attack me, I attack you. Fair.