NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Due to recent developments where by NewDawn has chosen to agree to Ascendancys request for a NAP, we’ve chosen to extend a NAP to Conspiracy, for their continued friendly disposition towards us.

Regards,

NFI Command Team

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

I swear my post was going to be better.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Due to recent developments whereby the opposing block, consisting of the third and fifth placed alliances, which we weren't losing to, didn't grow in size we decided the only appropriate response was NAPing the fourth placed alliance.

Regards,

NFI Paraphrasing Team

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

As opposed to wait and see if you could try and turn 2-7 placed alliances on us?

And you accuse me of half-truths...

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

I'm not denying anything. I'd have loved to see how you guys would hold up against some real incoming.


If only so you'd not have the time to text me at 7am bragging about how great you are because you covered 1 of your planets in an asc gal raid...

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Tzu, don't get drawn into debating JBG on the forums please. I will ban you <3

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Don't worry dude, nobody's actually reading AD. Seriously jsut check the who's online function, it's just you, me and tzu. Everyone else lost interest in this round last week.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

We should have our own forums. They'd be more active tbh.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Not if you're banned from talking to me!

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

touché :(

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

thx for making the round even less interesting!

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

And me!!! Isn't that wonderful?

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Well done, CT, well done.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Is that the Asc stamp of approval? :-)

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

this web of NAPs is gonna end with no-one attacking anyone by the looks of it.
The Asc NAP with ND only formalised the obvious situation that we have no interest in hitting the junior partner in the opposing block. CT's NAP only makes that block, already much superior, larger . If the Asc NAP was with anyone other than ND it would be a fairly transparent attempt to peel one member of the block away from the other, but as ND is about the least likely ally in PA to backstab I dont see this as a likely occurrence.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

That was the mz stamp of sarcasm.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Yeah it's pretty gay but on the other hand it's kind of hard to motivate yourself to work against the winning alliance when the ones who're already supposed to be doing it are giving you more incomming than the proposed target.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Mmmk, I'm still not up to date with all the protocols and stamps you seem to use, give it some time.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Boring round.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Not really. I fail to see how other alliances not going for the win should decrease your own motivation to. Quite the opposite: the fewer alliances go for the win, the higher your own chances of winning are.

In fact, we've done it rather often. Usually from a position in which we just ended up giving alliances like CT a chance to win, because they themselves couldn't be arsed to. That's irony for you. I remember a round in which Ascendancy set up a block against the #1 alliance (Apprime, I think, but don't hold me to it) at a time when we were 6th.

The problem here is that alliances like CT are never the ones to take the initiative. Even ODDR gave it a try this round, but CT are just an inert force and always have been.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

I crashed my fleet :(

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

How unlike you :rolleyes:

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Well that's not really true is it. Say CT and NFI were the only alliances who really tried to win. We'd get blown out of the water... If 5 others were trying to win, they'd inveitably be hitting whoever was at the top and would level out the enormous disparity in capability between CT and NFI. Simply put: the more alliances going for a win, the better chance we'd have of stealing it.

I didn't actually say that apprime and ascendancy giving up was reason for us to lessen our motivation to win, I said it'd lessen our motivation to hit the top alliance. Seeing as we have no chance of winning, the only motivation for hitting the top alliance is simply because I'd rather be playing a more exciting round of planetarion, and increase the fun had from the spectatorship aspect of the game. But, like I said, seeing as you and apprime have already given up, this isn't any longer much of a motivating factor.

The initiative here being the rallying of two other alliances far more capable than us, who are hitting us, and marching them upon the rocks of the top alliance who haven't been hitting us. Why? Because the alliance whose illustrious footsteps you lament us unable to follow in have already ****ing given up. Give me a ****ing break..

ODDR tried what this round? They've been hitting CT in an effort to finish 5th. I think that's perfectly reasonable. They're playing their round to the best of their ability to attain the highest rank possible. It's also exactly what we're doing.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

At this juncture it's worth pointing out that ct only had the level of incomings that they received due to the fact that when they were contacted about hitting nfi they refused to be involved. Incomings received thereafter have largely been ct planets in nfi heavy gals who had to be hit due to the fact they would def ingal otherwise.

Realistically I doubt anyone has given up yet. If CT dropped their nfi nap tomorrow and nd did the same the round would obviously be wide open. Unfortunately neither will and it isn't. It is instead about as interesting as a dried turd. Between nfi's complete unwillingness to even come near the possibility of fighting a vaguely even war, nd's being in bed with nfi's hc to the extent that describing them as having a cock up their ass would miss the fact that it's actual so far up there that it's banging off their tonsils and ct's, well, golan described it fairly well as a new low even for ct so I'll stick with that.

Maybe we should all just nap anyone! Anyone who feels like it propose an ingame nap to ascendancy and we'll accept it!


Edit: I don't really blame anyone for this round though. Apprime and ascendancy are significantly below par, although given the decline in recent rounds this is hardly that surprising. NFI are eager to win their first round. ND hc have friends in there. CT aren't exactly used to battling it out for #1 since r32. Nobody else has both enough members and sufficient quality and motivation to get involved at the top. It's just that, well, if we're going to do this can we just end the round now? NFI #1 alliance, 1.5.6 #1 planet and we can flip a coin between 13.3 and 8.2 for #1 gal! Roll on round 39!

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

So take measures to prevent that. PA is not a 1-on-1 game. Evolution did not take out Apprime, Ascendancy and NewDawn on their own last round. Show some initiative.

As opposed to a boring round? Yeah, sounds good to me. Get to it.

Yes, this is exactly what you should be doing. Not because there's some moral imperative, mind you, but because that's how you put yourself in a position to do well and (not unimportantly) have fun..

As for us hitting you, let me tell you what our raid targets have been these last few days:
Friday: 10:7 (4 NFI, 1 CT)
Saturday: no raid (random roiding)
Sunday: 11:2 (2 NFI, 1 CT)
Monday: no raid (mass fr/de wave on top 10 NFI planet)

We have not "given up". We simply recognize that we are in no position to win this round. Approach us! Get us to work with you! Why do we always have to do this shit for you?

At least they're hitting somewhere.

[edit] Or you chould just read JBG's post. That works.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

You said less alliances going for the win increased our chances of winning; to which I suggested it didn't. Saying "take some initiative" doesn't strenghten your point.

It'll be a more boring round from a spectatorship point of view, yeah. That's not the same as me in totality having a boring round though.

Yeah so I guess I disagree with the idea that we'd be doing better if we did that.


Not only have app been sending a lot more than that, but NFI have been sending a lot less.

Because you realistically stand to gain from it and we don't.
As I said before in my first post, I'm not personally a fan of the NAP, and would rather join a block to hit ND/NFI, but I'm not going to pretend I think it's obviously in our best interests.. It isn't.

Yeah we have more roids than them because we stayed home the past 594 ticks. (Hint: try ****ing around with the upgrade section and the numbers 8 and 3 while holding down shift or something)

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

What i dont understand is why CT suddenly refuse to join a block against a dominating alliance. They have done so to pin down Ascendancy and/or Apprime since round 30. This is exactly why the last 3 rounds have been dull. Its the same alliances sticking dicks up eachothers asses, successfully making every round about having most allies. There has not been a real fight for #1 since Apprimes win in round 34 and to some extent round 35. I wish alliances could try to improve themselves instead of naping every man and its dog to take care of the slightest problem.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

It actually does. You just don't see what options you have.

[edit] Originally I wrote a step-by-step plan for victory here, but when I finished it I deleted it because that's the kind of bastard I am.

However, if you're only interested in getting big numbers in the PA spreadsheet, then perhaps, yes, napping as many alliances as possible is the best move to make. Me, I play this game to enjoy myself. Napping the #1 alliance and gal raiding for the remainder of the round does not fit my definition of "fun".

Short-sighted.

I don't understand. * and #?

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Coming from the guys that needed six alliances to hit us at PT250?

([[App, Asc] 30 fleets combined], ODDR, ND [37 hostile fleets that night, teamed with VGN the next night on our top planet - so much for your pre-round agreement rumours], Osiris and CT. There were other random incs, but we don't begrudge that.

What is it, exactly, you're lamenting us for?

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

ND HC have sat in NFI private channel all round, they're not breaking the NAP. End the round sooner rather than later please, so much for this round trying to be an encouragement for new players to get involved. It's going to be another 500 ticks of getting bashed by the #1/#2 allies.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

There was last round, which had 4 different alliances in the top spots at various points of the round and which wasn't decided until the last tick.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Dude, you dont know what real incs is. You have actually never been in such a position. Weeks of continuously fighting enemy fleets equal to 1,5-2x of the entire alliance 3-fleet deffing, thats real incs and you never had it. NFI doesnt even get close either.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Neither did you. Or anyone in the last 20 rounds, for that matter. Convince me, though. I will accept a graph of a round in which an alliance gained no roids for more than 10 days. PAwiki will help you.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

I didnt express myself clear enough so i see why it was misunderstood.
What i mean is that not since round 34 and to some extent r35, has a dominating alliance needed to fight a long, outnumbered and continuous war to secure a win. Last round was still a NAP frenzy where none of the alliances got anywhere close to what Asc and Apprime faced in the previous rounds.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

About 1 week for Apprime x2

About 2 weeks for Apprime there

About 1,5 week for Ascendancy.

In all those examples there was a huge block outnumbering Apprime or asc greatly. Keep in mind that both alliances started losing roids when the block got larger and topped the existing incs that wasnt great enough to take more roids then they gained. Speaking for Apprime, we often grounded fleets for def more then 1 week at the time, using leftovers to organize waves in the morning, making use of 100% of our fleets. This often led to gaining small amounts of roids every day because of effective def and gaining small roids on the morning retals.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

I was gonna write something about how little 60-70 fleets is, and thus how useless U are: but wait, what? 15 fleets each from Asc and App, how useless we are!

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

There were of course more, I just used those particular numbers because they highlighted the fact that NewDawn were more aggressive towards us before tick 280~ ? than any other alliance. And while I don't think it was really a 50/50 split, I did find it interesting that App would organise a huge teamup against us and then only send a few of their own fleets at us in an attempt to avoid the backlash of having that many alliances hit us.

Seriously though, Apprime can pussy out of a teamup they organised and then cry about nobody sending a lot of hostile fleets at us?

:rolleyes:

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

normally ppl underestimate rather than overestimate the number of incs, i remember quite often thinking omg that was a terrible night, must have been 150 fleets and when added up it only really comes to 90-100.
Or have U gotten to the point where you no longer need to big up the opposition in order to convince ppl ur really the ones ganged up on (in spite of things currently being basically 3 vs 2), ie it no longer matters ur gonna walk it whatever anyone thinks?

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

7 days and 4 days. Interesting graph though, because you see how differently Apprime and p3nguins dealt with mass incomings (defend and retal vs. death, death, death).

8 days, 2 days to recover almost fully, then 3 more days.

5 days, 3 days to recover, then another 5 days. I like how DLR and Evolution level out at tick 700 and never recover.

Anyway, this is all rather offtopic. Feel free to make one more post about this, then let's focus on the round at hand, please.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Ah yes, the internet spreadsheet reduction. In what way does winning the round (rather than just getting a high rank) transcend this rather irksome realisation that every PA achievement outside of ****ing one of the female members at a meet, is subject to being boiled down to "uh, yeah, but dude.... it's just a box in excel lol"

Cool. We're in different situations though aren't we... For ascendancy, this might be incredibly boring because you don't get enough inc to trouble you and the raids don't pose a challenge. A block war would be much more exciting for you. For me, if CT joined with you to hit NFI/ND, what would likely happen is a short conversation between NFI and ND would result in a few nights of inc completely obliterating my alliance in the very understandable hope that we would probably drop out of the block. I guess you could call this a "challenge" for us to overcome, and that if we were to show a little "initiative" we might be able to use our 5 anti BS def fleets to repel the 8 billion waves of incomming; but if I'm honest, I think a war with ODDR + constant app/asc inc is enough of a challenge already thanks.

No, it's not short sighted because it's not the sole reason for why we didn't sign up with you to hit NFI. It just wasn't exactly the best incentive to overlook the fact that we'd essentially be helping you in your goals whilst neglecting ours.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Uh oh... looks like NFI have stifled f-pprime's attempt to breathe some new life into the game.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

"Those particular numbers"? As opposed to numbers that didn't come in handy as much to attempt to prove your particular point?

As has been said before (many times), the Ascendancy of round 30 and Apprime of round 34 are gone. Say what you will about Cardi, he isn't the kind of guy to go galraiding when he knows that 5 alliances (your words) will be attacking his main enemy. Under the circumstances, I'm sure Apprime did the best they could.

In any case, the organizer and the main competitor of a block don't necessarily need to be one and the same. Ascendancy played the role of the former multiple times while not being the latter. I see no reason why Apprime could not do the same, especially when there are no other alliances to do it (hi CT).

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

I think you might have your overs and unders mixed up in terms of making your estimates, but yeah - that happens to all of us :P

I think you're just mistaking me for somebody who's trying to put an angle on something - if I were to manipulate the facts and numbers then somebody would undoubtedly call me on the bluff. mz, for example, who seems to know everything about every round of PA to the point he's a scary person, would certainly 'set me straight' if I were to exaggerate numbers (as he's just done with HaNzI).

Hard as it may be to swallow, I was simply correcting a couple of mistruths, rather than try to have any vast influence over anyone.

I'd also suggest that anyone basing their decisions/ambitions/goals on what is said on the forums propobably shouldn't be in a position to make decisions or set ambitions or goals beyond an individual level. With the exception of extreme examples, i.e. public declarations of wars/excessive abuse directed at one person or alliance... that kinda thing. But you get my point.

Just out of curiosity, who are the 'two' that are versus my apparent 'three'?

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

From "watching" the round on sandmans twice a week or so, this round seems pretty lol.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

I regret to inform you that you seem to have read the exact opposite thing of what I wrote. Feel free to try again, though. This time, please don't replace actually reading my post with picking out the one long word and engaging in a session of creative association about what you feel the rest of it might possibly mean. It doesn't make you look very clever.

I for one am glad that you appear to have proven me correct when I said you didn't see what options you have.

I would, however, like to point out (again) that Ascendancy have not in fact been hitting you. We have actually attacked NFI-heavy galaxies, as demonstrated above. And, oh, have those foolish attempts ever cost us.

And what goals would those be, exactly? The magical coming up from 5th-soon-6th spot to snatch up the #1 position while one is watching? Or the mass crashing then kicking a top planet from tag plan of dread, doom and devastation that has been Ascendancy's approach so far? No, no, no, much better to play it safe and nap the alliance that's already 30m score and 25k roids ahead of you.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Bugger I gave U a free point!

Everyone has an agenda here

Well clearly NFI nap'd to CT and ND = a block, and Asc/App are your opponents, I left out osiris because they seem to have sort of given in without Santa. That Asc is NAPed with ND is clearly not relevant since fighting centers upon NFI's position, and ND can influence things just as well by hitting App as Asc.
Clearly A NAP shouldnt really equal a block as its not an offensive alliance but a non aggression pact but for as long as I can remember NAP has been synonymous with blocking in this game. Its rarely as simple as A B and C vs X Y and Z, but its usually portrayed as such. This is one such instance where the lines are not neatly drawn, but blocks do exist.
And for good measure if we were to add osiris in then its NFI/ND/CT vs Asc/App/Osi but still 3/2 in terms of relative strength.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

<3

Well, you're right I guess. Once NAP'd it's generally easier to work with somebody after having established the basis for a relationship. Also, from what I gathered Osi joining your war on us was originally because your side (either asc or app) had laughably convinced them that at some point we were going to mass-target osi, and that joining you was the only way to prevent it. They joined as a pre-emptive measure, rather than a reactionary one - I don't think they're about to fall for the same trick twice though.

Besides, we're hitting App because they wanted to challlenge us for roundwin. I think they've seen now that it wont happen - there's talk of them giving up on all but lolwaving our top planets - and are just trying to ensure that we don't win either. So naturally, NFI are interested in hitting them. I don't know what NewDawn's take on it is, nor do I expect CT will be helping us team on App all the while they have their own incoming to deal with.

As tzu said, CT didn't join in the free-for-all on NFI so we've agreed to a non-aggressive-pact as to prevent us hitting their planets either on solo attacks or in galraids. It's far more effort than it's worth to chase somebody down and get them to recall a solo attack on a friendly alliance than it is to just take advantage of the hardcoded system available ingame, no?

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

Kenny you're really telling me for the rest of the round you're going to attack Apprime/Ascendancy & not hit ND/CT/Osiris?

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

I wont hit anyone I have a NAP with, unless they cancel it first with the intention of hitting us, nor do I intend to target an entire alliance who I'm not at war with.

So that covers ND/CT/Osi, to the best of my knowledge.

We told ND when we made our NAP that we'd not target them or break the nap, but if they beat us by roiding more effectively then credit where credit's due etc.

Quote me, make a note of the date and time of this post if you'd like, but yes - that's what I'm saying.

Re: NFI Statement on todays political shifts
 

If Kenny's word isn't good enough, you can have mine. Over 10 years now I've held to it, and I've no intention of going back on it this round either.

ND/CT/Osiris will not be targeted to either ensure NFI win or advance our planet/gal ranks unless they first take hostile actions against us.

ps. I'm rather appalled that there's such disbelief that someone playing this game might actually strive to be honorable in their actions.