Playing as a solo

[Yang]

Are most solos at the moment only solo because they:

1) Can't find an alliance(includes not being arsed to apply/not knowing how to apply to one)
2) Don't want to be involved in playing actively in an alliance.

I mean does anyone still play actively as a solo player out of choice now?

Discuss.

 

[Davs]

I've only ever played inactively - so yes, when I play solo it's largely because I cba playing with enough activity to make an alliance worthwhile. That being said, some of my most active rounds have been as a solo. I just generally like the fact that there's less restriction on what you can or can't do and you never have to worry about leaving stuff at home for defence.

 

[Nickk]

Usually to play inactively as it doesn't require the commitment from playing in an alliance. Having tried to play as an active solo before, the activity and effort that is needed for it makes it not worthwhile.

 

[alwaysnumb]

I always play solo as I cba with all the defending

 

[tobapopalos]

Are most solos at the moment only solo because they:

1) Can't find an alliance(includes not being arsed to apply/not knowing how to apply to one)
2) Don't want to be involved in playing actively in an alliance.

I mean does anyone still play actively as a solo player out of choice now?

Discuss.

I do. I played nanos actively a few rounds ago just for fun. Not everyone thinks allied play is zomgsomuchbetter than solo. Solo play has a lot more freedom to it imo.

 

[Yang]

I'm not trying to suggest that alliance > solo player therefore get rid of the solos etc.

I just think solos have a real hard time defending, and also not really interacting with the community ( no alliance politics etc. ) which can be sometimes entertaining/interesting even if in a smaller alliance.

At the moment the game doesn't really offer too much to the solo players apart from get fat from high AR, then die in a few days when AR drops...

 

[Iamsmart]

ive always had success whenever I play solo actively (by choice...I could get in to any alliance i want most rounds), top 15-25 all round the past 2x i did it and another time until i quit a few weeks in

it certainly is challenging though, which is probably why i did it. It usually comes from being burned out of ally play I suppose, carrying alliances for 2 months is a difficult task.

 

[LuckySports]

I usually only play solo when I plan on being inactive or I don't want to worry about my alliance mates all the time.. I'll probably do it next round so I can play vamps.. or join DW and play puppets and keep my bribed units at the HQ so I can get the collector award ^_^

but some people like to play solo actively for the challenge.. - it can definitely be harder, yuo don't potentially have 19 other people watching over you in your sleep.. but AR can keep the worst of it off you with easy..

 

[alwaysnumb]

playing solo and staying high ranked is hard work and impossible someone will eventually get you. What you can do is smash yourslef up alot that way you lose troops on your own terms without someone doing it for you and still gain good ar.

 

[Iamsmart]

meh, i spent a month dodging 5+ different top players sending at me/pnaps 20hrs a day, almost never losing land and doing 50:1 damage. if you play ftw solo with contactability like you would allied with at least 1 ftw pnap its doable to do well, even top player outside of top ally all round. you have to be very careful coordinating and taking strategic sleep modes as breaks, but its doable. And its not like its hell all round, if you make yourself a poor target (which should be your main goal as a solo playing for rank) you wont get attacked until the top ally has been decided and they run out of targets, and even then itll take a dedicated mofo to take you down. most will give up if you stop them a couple times with overwhelming defense/LT'ing. I never had more than 1 proper pnap the rounds i played actively, i can only imagine if I had 2, even better defense power + share the refreshing load a lot more.

 

[Max]

Yang, you make an interesting point, especially ever since Azzer made it quite clear that this game is designed to be first and foremost an alliance based one.

However, I've played solo a lot, because when I played with a limited activity and no contactability it is often too much of a burden to be an allied member at the top.

Whenever I have played solo I've tried to do it with a group of friends to maintain the social interactive element on IRC, but given enough activity I still believe it is more fun to play in an alliance. Especially when the playerbase needs them so badly!

Whilst some players like Iamsmart and Cid thrive off the challenge of active contactable solo play, most would rather play in an alliance given the choice.

 

[Hobo]

i play solo 99% of the time.
if i am active i do reasonably, if i am not i get battered like all the rest.
I like it just as much as allied play

 

[Dax]

I was solo for like, 10 rounds majoritively as P-Solo Prot/TL or Shield route. It was difficult, yes. But I never played anywhere near as much then as I did when I was allied. Less pressure from the majority, thus more fun is really had I guess.
Every alliance has those niggling 2/3 people that wants to do well (even in 'FTF' - /shudder) alliances. Hell, I've been one (Rise Against, anyone?).
In short, simple life with no botherance > Solo
Attempting to achieve things without losing ~20hrs a day of your life > Allied (obviously if you're in a half-competent alliance).

 

[willymchilybily]

If you are asking this to see if any one plays solo just because they cant get an alliance then remeber most people who log and post on the forums are pretty much dab hands with most aspects of finding alliances that want members. I play as solo for the following reasons:

- going semi inactive having a break, almost completely not playing barely care what happens to id.

- trying to achieve a profile award that requires regular and near constant attacking or a selfish play style that i feel would make me selfish to play allied (even if i would be more useful than some members in some alliances)

- not willing to play at a certain level of effort and although that is okay for lower ranked alliances. id rather at that stage put that same effort in as a solo and get far more out of the game. than put that level in an alliance that low down. also id feel bad not being my usual semi active self playing in a decent alliance, and wouldnt want to gain any negative reputation with people i like to play with because im being lazy. (although its more fun being allied in terms of comunity even in low ranked alliances, just less fun gameplay generally, defending 99% of the time attacking 1%)

----------------------
I have never tried to play FTW as a solo. not since ive learned the ropes anyway. when i first started trying out solo, i went solo because i didnt know any one but my one friend so when he left i played solo for a few rouns. luckerly charlie B be-friended me in irc (god bless you Charlie_b)
and i started talking more hanging out more in irc, and when some one spammed who wants to join Discworld/pathosis/disease at one point or another in the channel, i asked to join, and so i did.

 

[LuckySports]

The few rounds I've played solo (and few they are) it was because I didn't feel like playing actively and didn't want everyone and their mother knowing I played at all. Any round I've put any effort into, I was allied.