Besides! How is it cheating?? It is just strategy... and there isn't anything posted that says you can't unify...and if there is, I haven't seen it...

Silvercobra says "I made up the odds.. but I know it from risk."

This isn't Risk. In risk you place your reinforcements and even somewhat choose your starting territories. Pre-set alliances can mean a lot.

My argument is that the way Dicewars is set up, pre-set alliances are not very beneficial, or at least, not reliably beneficial.

Sure it's beneficial. They know how each other shall play so only five people left to think about. If they're not wasting dice attacking each other (and pruning each other's useless territories) it's easier for them to become two of the top three. Then it's a guaranteed 1-2 victory. Experienced teams let one guy take all the territory except for one eight stack and that's usually enough. It's easy and rewarding to play for second, if two people help each other do it and are guaranteed first and second when they succeed then those are pretty beneficial odds. Sure you can beat them but the odds are not favourable relative to ratings. And if a pre-set alliance isn't favourable 1/5 times then just do it the other 4/5. Both players still benefit.

Well, as Ryan already stated. At the higher ranked tables, this doesn't really happen (alot).

As I see it, pre-game alliances are not too beneficial. If they were, the players mentioned above would be much better than their 1700-1850 points.

That's the point where their reputation gets them slaughtered? Pre-set alliance can be nullified at any time. Therefore there is zero consequeneces of a pre-set alliance (if it's done right). Before each game, no matter who's playing, there is always a possibility of benefit from a pre-set alliance at the expense of your other opponents. It's basically the exact same as having a friend who will always ally with you upon request if it's beneficial to both of you --or possibly just one of you-- in the long run, instead of just thinking about the current game. It can even be as simple as killing the other guy before your friend when eliminating two players in the same round, it's still benefit at the other guy's expense.

Well hi jeesbus.. I didnt even mention u.. but maybe you also have a coupla names??

Ryan, maybe theres a way to help with this... it has happened a few times to me already..

perhaps a table with no names... or not allow players to play together again...

I honestly don't think there is any way around this without compromising important elements of the game. It's human nature to adopt these sorts of ways. Implementing systems to nullify it would render the game very cold imho.

Please support my idea "autoassign". Then this cheaters wouldn't be possible.

I would recommend make 2 ways of playing the game:
a) an unscored just as now is. People choose their tables, their friends they want to play with. Or which cant be hindered their alliances they want to cheat with.

b) a scored one. For this game you only subscribe. Then it will assign you a table with people most possible equally scored. You play for score and fame ;) But you cannot choose who you want battle with. (or cheat with ;o))

b2) another advanced possibility in scored game would be to anonymice during gameplay. You are only a color, not a name. Sure people can tell who they are in chat, but they could just as well lie. b2) is just an idea, im not sure this one is good...

You can't cheat at this game. Is someone is making alliances and breaking the terms, people will remember, and won't ally with them in the future.