MRA or Suck?

HomeGod

Artisan
Ok.. The "noob" is back with another question. What would be the actual definition of an MRA? I know that stands for Mass Recruiting Alliance. But there has to be some finer points to the definition. Maybe not. I don't know. That's why I'm asking all you verterans out there to break it down for me. Thanks a bunch
Signs of an MRA....
1. Inactive players
2. No/very little forum communications
3. Lots of new/inexperienced players
4. Invites to anyone who will accept
5. Terrible ABP
6. Dont defend eachother/ even know the attacks are happening
7. Ask what an MRA is
 

Athanasios

Hoplite
I would classify an MRA as an alliance that invites players regardless of points/position/previous stats/etc. The "Mass" part is probably the most identifying. For example, if you send out invites to anyone and everyone, without even talking to them first, you are probably an MRA.
 

geomancer

Artisan
I would classify an MRA as an alliance that invites players regardless of points/position/previous stats/etc. The "Mass" part is probably the most identifying. For example, if you send out invites to anyone and everyone, without even talking to them first, you are probably an MRA.
This actually sums up an MRA. Though from my experience MRA always only recruited on points basis(if u r high point after 1 or two days u will get an invite).....in earlier worlds where the ratio between new players and experienced is high...the top points alliances were mostly MRA
but since its quite low nowadays .....and most of the players already played with or against other players its actually very hard to find MRA.

Though still if alliance didn't perform majority says its was MRA alliance but in reality....i see very few MRA's these days and if there r any they don't make top spots ....sadly era of MRA's are over :(.
 

rclay321

Lochagos
Signs of an MRA....
1. Inactive players
2. No/very little forum communications
3. Lots of new/inexperienced players
4. Invites to anyone who will accept
5. Terrible ABP
6. Dont defend eachother/ even know the attacks are happening
7. Ask what an MRA is

number 3 isn't a bad thing, you just have to be patient and willing to teach
 

Teter2

Senior Citizen
Ok.. Good answers. Thanks. Here's another. So say you have an alliance going and its going pretty well. I hear everyone talking about "us vs. the server" and that stuff. Which is cool right? You start this world with your group and you say "Hey, we have our guys. We don't need anyone else because we are the best and we are going to prove it. Everyone else is going down" But then other alliances around start falling apart. I would imagine that would make those players in a fledgling alliance easy pickings. In disarray and no organization right? So why would a top butt kicking alliance bring those people in? Take their cities. Grow even bigger with the group you started with no? Or do enemies just get invited into alliances all the time just because its easier not to fight them and hopefully that former "enemy" steps in line. I don't know. Its just confusing is all. I mean crap. If some guy was coming by my house every night and breaking my windows, I wouldn't ask him to join my team a few days later. I'd be pissed at the guy and would never be able to trust him. Just weird stuff is all.
 

HomeGod

Artisan
Ok.. Good answers. Thanks. Here's another. So say you have an alliance going and its going pretty well. I hear everyone talking about "us vs. the server" and that stuff. Which is cool right? You start this world with your group and you say "Hey, we have our guys. We don't need anyone else because we are the best and we are going to prove it. Everyone else is going down" But then other alliances around start falling apart. I would imagine that would make those players in a fledgling alliance easy pickings. In disarray and no organization right? So why would a top butt kicking alliance bring those people in? Take their cities. Grow even bigger with the group you started with no? Or do enemies just get invited into alliances all the time just because its easier not to fight them and hopefully that former "enemy" steps in line. I don't know. Its just confusing is all. I mean crap. If some guy was coming by my house every night and breaking my windows, I wouldn't ask him to join my team a few days later. I'd be pissed at the guy and would never be able to trust him. Just weird stuff is all.
If their alliance is garbage and they want a better place to play and be an active part of a better team, then it only works to your advantage.
Oftentimes its leadership or too many uninvested or inactive players that cause they alliances to fail, the good ones often look for new homes because they are tired of carrying dead weight.
 

geomancer

Artisan
Ok.. Good answers. Thanks. Here's another. So say you have an alliance going and its going pretty well. I hear everyone talking about "us vs. the server" and that stuff. Which is cool right? You start this world with your group and you say "Hey, we have our guys. We don't need anyone else because we are the best and we are going to prove it. Everyone else is going down" But then other alliances around start falling apart. I would imagine that would make those players in a fledgling alliance easy pickings. In disarray and no organization right? So why would a top butt kicking alliance bring those people in? Take their cities. Grow even bigger with the group you started with no? Or do enemies just get invited into alliances all the time just because its easier not to fight them and hopefully that former "enemy" steps in line. I don't know. Its just confusing is all. I mean crap. If some guy was coming by my house every night and breaking my windows, I wouldn't ask him to join my team a few days later. I'd be pissed at the guy and would never be able to trust him. Just weird stuff is all.
So from my observation this is how a typical grepo world plays out.
A number of premades start the world and pick off some good guys nearby to start the alliance as all the other premades do.
1.A number of alliances(typically 3-5) who r stronger than there nearby crushes them and few good alliances emerge(here i mean that its not like loosing alliance don't have good players its just that either that there position is not good or there leadership or they have less active members or gold users etc).
2.Then when the alliance collapse nearly all high point and also good players join top alliance in the area to strengthen the parent alliance even more.

At this point the other alliance members curse inno for gold abuse or how the top alliance don't deserve it cause they have no skill etc etc.....
which is not true cause for being on top u definitely need some skill. ........the top alliance brag as no one is near them in points,abp and dbp cause they pick up all cream layer players from falling alliances....

After three-four month
scenario 1:-if the top alliance becomes too big 3-4 alliance pact together and try to fight off the top alliance cause its only chance they can fight off with 3 or 4 times bigger top alliance (in point) .If they start winning.

Then they start bragging like how the top alliance was trash (which in my view wasn't the case) and the top alliance start blaming mass coalition and stuff like that... and why inno is not taking aby action against these things.. etc.. etc.

Scenario 2:- If the other top alliances r not far off and are comparable in sizes then they fight off with each other
(this is the best case scenario )
(again win not depends only on good player but other factors too)

In my view its the fault of both.
Top alliances recruiting the big players as well as
Big players moving to top alliance instead the closest other alliance
but hey... its war game which alliance won't want big players(high point players) and which players don't want to be in big alliance(top point alliance).

These r just my views so some of u may disagree.
 

HomeGod

Artisan
So from my observation this is how a typical grepo world plays out.
A number of premades start the world and pick off some good guys nearby to start the alliance as all the other premades do.
1.A number of alliances(typically 3-5) who r stronger than there nearby crushes them and few good alliances emerge(here i mean that its not like loosing alliance don't have good players its just that either that there position is not good or there leadership or they have less active members or gold users etc).
2.Then when the alliance collapse nearly all high point and also good players join top alliance in the area to strengthen the parent alliance even more.

At this point the other alliance members curse inno for gold abuse or how the top alliance don't deserve it cause they have no skill etc etc.....
which is not true cause for being on top u definitely need some skill. ........the top alliance brag as no one is near them in points,abp and dbp cause they pick up all cream layer players from falling alliances....

After three-four month
scenario 1:-if the top alliance becomes too big 3-4 alliance pact together and try to fight off the top alliance cause its only chance they can fight off with 3 or 4 times bigger top alliance (in point) .If they start winning.

Then they start bragging like how the top alliance was trash (which in my view wasn't the case) and the top alliance start blaming mass coalition and stuff like that... and why inno is not taking aby action against these things.. etc.. etc.

Scenario 2:- If the other top alliances r not far off and are comparable in sizes then they fight off with each other
(this is the best case scenario )
(again win not depends only on good player but other factors too)

In my view its the fault of both.
Top alliances recruiting the big players as well as
Big players moving to top alliance instead the closest other alliance
but hey... its war game which alliance won't want big players(high point players) and which players don't want to be in big alliance(top point alliance).

These r just my views so some of u may disagree.
Sounds pretty close to how worlds go, in my experience Coalitions fail most the time.
BTW nice defense last night
 

DeletedUser10554

Guest
I know in marathon it was funny, every three months alliances changed. egos would clash, alliances change names, a new academy would pop up. merges would happen. one alliance would nap with everyone and that is bad. If a alliance has more then 2 naps, more then likely they fail.
 

Noob From Ro

Messenger
I hate coalitions and I hate pacts or naps. It's useless to say, but you must play smarter than that to win a world. Helorus was a big fail. GOAT lost because of inactivity and indifference. You did it well.
 
A lot of changes in Grepo since the 3 years I been away, but nice to see some old timers still kicking around, and shooting the breeze with the newer to Grep players.

I see a lot of good/decent players, only a few truly skilled like less than 100 tops, I find it ridiculous how many players boast about awards, abp counts, city counts, or servers won, when the game has become a pay to win and with WW's a sim to win scenario.

if this was stripped back to a fixed aliance cap 75 memebrs, no academies, no gold burning only advisor perks, and nothing else to spend gold on, youd find skill players who know every single aspect of the game inside out,

teamwork, skill and activity though can always break even the largest teams, but the amount of alliance jumpers when their teams get hit hard, and people bail to survive or get a WW victory near the end ruined a truly great fighting game, you can still get some good scraps in it though and the banters always good.

Im proud to say I never gave a toss about WW's, when they were forced into the Alpha servers when 80 thousand signed ingame petitions to keep our fighting servers, they ignored it and rolled it forced it in anyway, the players i played with and against back then agreed to build 1 WW each of the top 7 alliances who were all at war as a huge North V south server epic, and my team of 50 members finished our WW first, many of they players are well known in Grepo EN & US, & some are still on these forums I see :)

but only the Honey Badgers had the balls and integrity to say we wont do WW's, we just came to fight and earn our reps. not too many servers we played where the top dogs got to finish that way once theyd picked a fight with HB, the only reason we were so strong was good recruitment,

you dont mass recruit, you find players on the battles and make sure their worth having as a team mate. there is very little team work in the majority of teams on servers these days.

If I can make 4 suggestions to keep a server entertaining,

1, limit your pacts to 2 max,

2, don't do academy's (like HB never had one anywhere in any server) break your enemies and let whats left regroup or quit. (WW's though make MRA's)

3, don't pay to win, players spending a £100 bucks a week to be rank 1 or burning gold to buy their takes doesn't make them good players, just means your innogames best customer lol)

4, Keep in mind its just a game, enjoy it, we stick around mainly because of the people we get to know the game itself isn't that great, but it is still one of the better team games going.
 

kings33593

Hekatonarch
I hate coalitions and I hate pacts or naps. It's useless to say, but you must play smarter than that to win a world. Helorus was a big fail. GOAT lost because of inactivity and indifference. You did it well.
So you hate coalitions and naps hmmm interesting coming from an Antiquity player lol....
 

Mole Man 420

Peltast
A lot of changes in Grepo since the 3 years I been away, but nice to see some old timers still kicking around, and shooting the breeze with the newer to Grep players.

I see a lot of good/decent players, only a few truly skilled like less than 100 tops, I find it ridiculous how many players boast about awards, abp counts, city counts, or servers won, when the game has become a pay to win and with WW's a sim to win scenario.

if this was stripped back to a fixed aliance cap 75 memebrs, no academies, no gold burning only advisor perks, and nothing else to spend gold on, youd find skill players who know every single aspect of the game inside out,

teamwork, skill and activity though can always break even the largest teams, but the amount of alliance jumpers when their teams get hit hard, and people bail to survive or get a WW victory near the end ruined a truly great fighting game, you can still get some good scraps in it though and the banters always good.

Im proud to say I never gave a toss about WW's, when they were forced into the Alpha servers when 80 thousand signed ingame petitions to keep our fighting servers, they ignored it and rolled it forced it in anyway, the players i played with and against back then agreed to build 1 WW each of the top 7 alliances who were all at war as a huge North V south server epic, and my team of 50 members finished our WW first, many of they players are well known in Grepo EN & US, & some are still on these forums I see :)

but only the Honey Badgers had the balls and integrity to say we wont do WW's, we just came to fight and earn our reps. not too many servers we played where the top dogs got to finish that way once theyd picked a fight with HB, the only reason we were so strong was good recruitment,

you dont mass recruit, you find players on the battles and make sure their worth having as a team mate. there is very little team work in the majority of teams on servers these days.

If I can make 4 suggestions to keep a server entertaining,

1, limit your pacts to 2 max,

2, don't do academy's (like HB never had one anywhere in any server) break your enemies and let whats left regroup or quit. (WW's though make MRA's)

3, don't pay to win, players spending a £100 bucks a week to be rank 1 or burning gold to buy their takes doesn't make them good players, just means your innogames best customer lol)

4, Keep in mind its just a game, enjoy it, we stick around mainly because of the people we get to know the game itself isn't that great, but it is still one of the better team games going.
A year ago I would of agreed on you with the pay to win thing
But I disagree now. I used some gold in beginning of this world to have an early edge. But haven't had any gold since week one of the Easter slinger event
I ran out than and haven't bought any since.

The newer heros like Chiron and Aristotle for one give non gold spenders who play in game way more than most a huge advantage.. you can now build full LS nukes within 48 hours ( not even including these epic recruitment bufss because with those nukes can be build in 3 hours no gold needed )

Let's also take In all those new items their giving .. with Democritus doubling tjemm your getting 1200 +OLU / DLU for free within 24 hours
Use a hero like Chiron and spells and you can have a full 3k hop nuke in less thM 24 hours ( AGAIN with no epic recruitment buffs )

Now let's take those eoic recruitment buffs into play
Stock up a bunch of em and yoi can literally build a 3k hop nuke in less than 4 hours with those.

Inno has made efforts to help grep addicts with no money
 
A year ago I would of agreed on you with the pay to win thing
But I disagree now. I used some gold in beginning of this world to have an early edge. But haven't had any gold since week one of the Easter slinger event
I ran out than and haven't bought any since.

The newer heros like Chiron and Aristotle for one give non gold spenders who play in game way more than most a huge advantage.. you can now build full LS nukes within 48 hours ( not even including these epic recruitment bufss because with those nukes can be build in 3 hours no gold needed )

Let's also take In all those new items their giving .. with Democritus doubling tjemm your getting 1200 +OLU / DLU for free within 24 hours
Use a hero like Chiron and spells and you can have a full 3k hop nuke in less thM 24 hours ( AGAIN with no epic recruitment buffs )

Now let's take those eoic recruitment buffs into play
Stock up a bunch of em and yoi can literally build a 3k hop nuke in less than 4 hours with those.

Inno has made efforts to help grep addicts with no money

I agree about the new heros helping non premium players, but what I was getting at is innogames continually release Events where perk wheels can be exploited heavily by those prepared to pay the extra to abuse them, (they used to only run them for specific holidays, now you get them for any reason almost every month or other month) plus gold players can buy extra resources if they are inclined to for faster rebuilds.

what really pd me off about innogames was if you have ever looked at their other range of titles, such as the West, forge of empires, elvenar, and such you'll notice not one of them has as many exploitable premium features, and if you've been in Grepo since it launched way back, you know the story of how they milked Grepo fans for every cent they could to fund making all those other titles at the expense of Grepolis fanbase in a literal sense, we were heavily exploited to fund them, and Grepo is still being used as the cash cow game for anything they continue working on elsewhere. and I have that from the horses mouth as I played alongside a couple devs on some EN servers who said the same thing I observed.
 

geomancer

Artisan
A lot of changes in Grepo since the 3 years I been away, but nice to see some old timers still kicking around, and shooting the breeze with the newer to Grep players.

I see a lot of good/decent players, only a few truly skilled like less than 100 tops, I find it ridiculous how many players boast about awards, abp counts, city counts, or servers won, when the game has become a pay to win and with WW's a sim to win scenario.

if this was stripped back to a fixed aliance cap 75 memebrs, no academies, no gold burning only advisor perks, and nothing else to spend gold on, youd find skill players who know every single aspect of the game inside out,

teamwork, skill and activity though can always break even the largest teams, but the amount of alliance jumpers when their teams get hit hard, and people bail to survive or get a WW victory near the end ruined a truly great fighting game, you can still get some good scraps in it though and the banters always good.

Im proud to say I never gave a toss about WW's, when they were forced into the Alpha servers when 80 thousand signed ingame petitions to keep our fighting servers, they ignored it and rolled it forced it in anyway, the players i played with and against back then agreed to build 1 WW each of the top 7 alliances who were all at war as a huge North V south server epic, and my team of 50 members finished our WW first, many of they players are well known in Grepo EN & US, & some are still on these forums I see :)

but only the Honey Badgers had the balls and integrity to say we wont do WW's, we just came to fight and earn our reps. not too many servers we played where the top dogs got to finish that way once theyd picked a fight with HB, the only reason we were so strong was good recruitment,

you dont mass recruit, you find players on the battles and make sure their worth having as a team mate. there is very little team work in the majority of teams on servers these days.

If I can make 4 suggestions to keep a server entertaining,

1, limit your pacts to 2 max,

2, don't do academy's (like HB never had one anywhere in any server) break your enemies and let whats left regroup or quit. (WW's though make MRA's)

3, don't pay to win, players spending a £100 bucks a week to be rank 1 or burning gold to buy their takes doesn't make them good players, just means your innogames best customer lol)

4, Keep in mind its just a game, enjoy it, we stick around mainly because of the people we get to know the game itself isn't that great, but it is still one of the better team games going.


welcome @Highland Wolf
I agree but since i use gold just for premiums and very little gold elsewhere.
and I am doing ok so someone can still play ...just some1 shouldn't quit when loosing cities and sim little.
 

Mole Man 420

Peltast
I mean, at the end of the day Inno is in It for money, and any free to play game gives incentives of power or easiness to those who spend money, regardless what game or business it is, if it's free to play money gives you an edge. ... So to me I'm not as bothered by money spenders having advantages
.. a year or more ago I was upset about how much of an advantage their was it was impossible to fight off big money spenders .... Now... Not so much with a good team and time put in