I've been thinking about this a lot recently, reading War and Diplomacy threads and I see that, lately, the one MOST hated thing imo is the so-called "battlehugging". And by that I mean subbing, promising top 3-5 spots, and nearly (if not everything) that gets an ally on your side. Honestly, although I do share some of the points of anti-"battlehuggs", I don't share some of them either. First of all, that's a nice play of words, but I'd like to remind everyone of something with another play of words: BattleDawn is a MULTIPLAYER game, this isn't SOLOPLAYER. And of course, "soloplayers" are those games you don't play with other people. You see, when you play in a multiplayer game, you HAVE to expect people teaming up, because this is the one most useful tool to become more powerful. You see it everywhere: numbers matter, just as much if not more than quality.

So, if there's a point in which I agree on with anti-battlehuggers is that it's ridiculous that 5-7 alliances join up against a much smaller number of alliances in a severe case of overkill, bullying and bootlicking. I know this is highly subjectively, and depends on the situation though. And here's part of the battlehugging I'm against: sure enough you are entitled to help your friends. You find them on a world or on skype, you don't got anything better to do on the world so you give them a hand, I don't really see anything against that. But to expect that, because that person's your friend, you should do anything and everything for him on that world is just BS. That's my shoutout to those who backstabb for friends; if that's your choice then fine by me, but it's just BS that "they're my friends so I've got the right to backstabb you for them" and so they're exonerated from being called cheap, lying rats. Big news: this game's main goal isn't to make friends. When you commit to something, you go through with it; you find out you're fighting friends along the way, well that's your own damn fault pal. Either you should've seen it coming or you just need to get through it, but if you loose a friend simply because you have to war them on a world then I'd question how the hell you even called him friends in the first place. Hell, sometimes having a war with friends is the most fun you can get in this game, but if you commited to something you should see it throug to the end. If they're true friends, they'll understand; after all, they're on the same position as you are.

So I bet there's been quite some discussions about this already, but these are some of my 2 cents. What's your thoughts on battlehugging? What should be battlehugging, and just how "wrong" is it to do battlehuggs? Let's kick out a good discussion here, heated up or toned down I don't really give a darn, but I feel this is an important and interesting discussion, let's get it up some pages! Plenty of opinions out there!

I have a feeling this thread was for someone;) lmao.. I'll throw my 2 cents in a little while..

Well to counter your argument in your first paragraph, you are playing the game with multiple players when you have your one alliance since that alliance is made up of multiple people. Yes it is required to have some allies to survive a round but a sub and an ally is a completely different thing in my opinion. I have despised subs since I started playing this game and I still do, that is what kills a game like bd. Why play a competitive game but then eliminate competition by making everyone your sub or placing 5 alliances on a world.

It wasn't for anyone specifically. Inspired maybe, but not directed towards.

And yes Korupt, subs and allies are different things. However, if you can somehow get competition reduced to a sub, either you did something incredibly well or they did something incredibly wrong. If I was going to compete for an era and I sub for someone, it's kinda contradictory. Placing multiple alliances that have a pact with each other to help each other isn't basically a bad thing. The bad thing is, they often hide that fact from others. Just trying to get multiple alliances in such a pact is quite difficult though, and then having all of them stay active and dedicated, as well as not backstabbing you or not helping you as much as they could, now that's a near impossible feat. And then again, if it is somehow accomplished, then you might want to look into gathering enough allies, or somehow topping them with sheer individual power, and if you can't do that... well you were bested. Nobody said the road to victory was fair, that's why you have to knuckle your own road to it. If they had a better path then they just did, nothing you can do but try to knuckle your way into a better path.