Originally Posted by Zoro (Post 3168597)

I aint gonna be so nice.

You are ruining the game - too many good players I one place.

3 on the run has nearly been 5. AND i'm sure u'll win the next one too.

alliance limits should be seriously cut if this game is to survive

Originally Posted by Zoro (Post 3168597)

I aint gonna be so nice.

You are ruining the game - too many good players I one place.

3 on the run has nearly been 5. AND i'm sure u'll win the next one too.

alliance limits should be seriously cut if this game is to survive

Originally Posted by _Kila_ (Post 3168607)

If you think that one alliance dominating like this is bad for the game, do something about it instead of crying. When fury and legion were dominating, people were there to stop them, when 1up dominated, eXi came along and stopped them. It's not our fault that CT were too idiotic to help Omen keep Asc down early. It was entirely possible.

It's not Ascendancy's fault that it's a more attractive alliance than others. Maybe the other alliances should think hard about why people choose Asc over them (hint: RIGID HEIRARCHY WITH RETARDED RULES AND SECRECY IS INCREDIBLY SHIT).

Originally Posted by Light (Post 3168608)

Thats the main point, yes it takes 2 (or 3) alliances to stop Asc at the moment but lets just say if CT did help Omen bash Asc early on which put Asc out of the round. What would happen next round? Would Asc be able to hold onto all its good players or would some of those players start to think 'i want to win and in Asc were just going to get bashed again'.

Originally Posted by Banned (Post 3168589)

I appreciate the sentiment and thank you for the flattering words Wishmaster, but it's not over until it's over.

Originally Posted by Heartless (Post 3168614)

Actually we have a constant turn-over of people. There are lots of people in Omen this round that were Asc last round. And I think the main reason why people like being in Ascendancy simply is the way we work. There's no def leeching because we don't do secrecy. Everyone can fully use our arbiter. Everyone can go and set up attacks. Since everybody can do these things we run brutally efficient, since arguments about what we should do next come always down to some sort of number crunching the PA mechanics, sketching up how different scenarios work out and then take the most promising action. And since we constantly argue with regards to game mechanics over the course of a whole round and how our score would develop from taking certain actions it is rarely that we do something totally stupid.

Originally Posted by Zoro (Post 3168597)

I aint gonna be so nice.

You are ruining the game - too many good players I one place.

3 on the run has nearly been 5. AND i'm sure u'll win the next one too.

alliance limits should be seriously cut if this game is to survive

Originally Posted by Zoro (Post 3168597)

You are ruining the game - too many good players I one place.

Originally Posted by Wishmaster (Post 3168611)

I actually have faith in the natural progress of this and all games. Eventually some other alliance will come and beat asc.

#1 Reason why alliances fall apart is because they get bored of winning.

Conc dominiated - legion / fury dominated - 1up dominated - eXi dominated ( exi still being undefeated though, asc aint undefeated they are just on a winning Streak :-p )

Originally Posted by Cochese (Post 3168644)

People should probably look at why Asc succeed round after round, rather than just say "they have all the good players".

They (we) are definitely beatable, it just comes down to the simple fact that no one has put forth the effort required to do so.

You can't just throw a bunch of fleets around and win. This round has pretty well proved that. You have to want it, you have to put in the effort, and you have to try (and play) harder than you think your opponent is.

As Heartless mentioned, the hierarchy of typical alliances is quite obviously (hey look, 3 in a row!) flawed. Figure it out for ****s sake.

I'm the absoulte last son of a bitch that should have to tell you people how to 'win' PA since after almost ten years, I've never won a round and am pretty much shit at it.

I do however, "get it", which is where the rest of you seem to be failing miserably.

/me goes back under a rock

Originally Posted by Nadar (Post 3168641)

I take all responsibility for Ascendancy winning this round.

However, if it goes down the drain, I had nothing to do with it.

Originally Posted by Banned (Post 3168633)

Really? I'd rather think the level of the game this round is higher than it's been for many rounds. This is definitely the round I've enjoyed most since round 19 (though I only played 3 or so in between there outside scanning).

Originally Posted by Wishmaster (Post 3168578)

A well played round, a well deserved round win.

You were by FAR the best alliance this round and have had a rough round from the start and up till now, and always managed to get out on top.

Originally Posted by [JungleMuffin] (Post 3168689)

Oh btw:

Ascendancy: While we were trying, you were sleeping.

Says it all tbfh.

Originally Posted by Cochese (Post 3168644)

People should probably look at why Asc succeed round after round, rather than just say "they have all the good players".

They (we) are definitely beatable, it just comes down to the simple fact that no one has put forth the effort required to do so.

You can't just throw a bunch of fleets around and win. This round has pretty well proved that. You have to want it, you have to put in the effort, and you have to try (and play) harder than you think your opponent is.

As Heartless mentioned, the hierarchy of typical alliances is quite obviously (hey look, 3 in a row!) flawed. Figure it out for ****s sake.

I'm the absoulte last son of a bitch that should have to tell you people how to 'win' PA since after almost ten years, I've never won a round and am pretty much shit at it.

I do however, "get it", which is where the rest of you seem to be failing miserably.

/me goes back under a rock

Originally Posted by Munkee (Post 3168710)

You cant talk about the lack of hierarchy etc ascendancy HAS become conventional other than their round 16 win the last 3 rounds they have turned against what the alliance was first set up for. The alternative to exi 1up rules and systems and the whole **** pa attitude is long gone imo. For you to say there is no hierarchy in asc is LOL... take a look at any of the joint channels with other alliances and theres always the same 3 or 4 asc in there. They are HC's whether you like to call them that or not, you have a hierarchy. The naps, no defence statuses etc etc all lead to asc just turning in to a skilled conventional alliance. IF they really didnt care crashers wouldn't get kicked right? looking shit wouldnt matter right? but its all a big issue now it seems! Well done tho guys, who knows it might all go complete circle for ya over the next few rounds.

Originally Posted by Munkee (Post 3168710)

You cant talk about the lack of hierarchy etc ascendancy HAS become conventional other than their round 16 win the last 3 rounds they have turned against what the alliance was first set up for. The alternative to exi 1up rules and systems and the whole **** pa attitude is long gone imo. For you to say there is no hierarchy in asc is LOL... take a look at any of the joint channels with other alliances and theres always the same 3 or 4 asc in there. They are HC's whether you like to call them that or not, you have a hierarchy. The naps, no defence statuses etc etc all lead to asc just turning in to a skilled conventional alliance. IF they really didnt care crashers wouldn't get kicked right? looking shit wouldnt matter right? but its all a big issue now it seems! Well done tho guys, who knows it might all go complete circle for ya over the next few rounds.

Originally Posted by [JungleMuffin] (Post 3168708)

Ascendancy: While we were sleeping, we were getting salvage.

:/

Edit: Kila, i do believe u missed the tone of the post.

Originally Posted by _Kila_ (Post 3168716)

There are people who step up and take responsibility, do politics, raids etc.
The lack of titles such as DC, BC and HC just mean that anyone can step up to do it when they want, and it provides far more efficiency. When there are defcalls, in regular alliances you have just the DCs dealing with them and they're often incredibly secretive in their own channels. We have, literally whoever the **** wants to, stepping up and taking the calls, doing them in #ascendancy and therefore having the input of everyone who is around rather than just "the supah 1337 secret cru" who are in the DC channels.
As for attacks, yes it's usually the same people organising our raids but that tends to be because a. others can't be bothered and b. the people dealing with politics may have specific targets in mind. The shared sense of responsibility and lack of BCs who are expected to sort stuff encourages people to sort their own day raids and launch/recall missions in wartime.
I think this was epitomised when we fought Omen before CT dropped the NAP; we didn't just have "BCs" setting up attacks, we had dozens of people making sure that everyone who entered the channel had fleets moving, with different people setting up teamups and defdraw missions all over the place. Spreading the load makes it so much easier.

The only thing that may be a little harder to get involved with is politics because you generally need to discuss it with those who are already involved and see what they are doing/have done and tell them that you want to contribute in some way. And these people will be completely open with you if you ask them what's going on, because secrecy is shit.



You're making it sound like we're cocky and think this round has been easy. It hasn't, it's been damn hard and a load of effort has been put into it.

Originally Posted by Munkee (Post 3168718)

you ask and we tell you.

Originally Posted by Munkee (Post 3168710)

IF they really didnt care crashers wouldn't get kicked right? looking shit wouldnt matter right?

Originally Posted by _Kila_ (Post 3168716)

You're making it sound like we're cocky and think this round has been easy. It hasn't, it's been damn hard and a load of effort has been put into it.

Originally Posted by [JungleMuffin] (Post 3168723)

While we are at it, i feel there are congratulations in order for ROCK, xVx and hirr. They assisted Asc mervelously to the win, yes?