Most Disappointing Alliances this round?
 

Which alliance have you looked at this round and felt disappointing. By what they have done, by what they haven't done, in fact anything.

Which alliances have reached new lows in the game of planetarion, which alliances have lost respect (if they ever had any).

Finally after such a bland round where alliances did very little, is there a future for an alliance in planetarion after such a disappointing round?

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

CT for not being able to maintain their winning streak

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

CT / Angels -> They never bothered to hit me with 100% They always sent their scanners to hit me ^^

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

All of em. Including Ascendancy.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Angels i found very dissapointing simply because with the playerbase they had, they had a very good chance to win...
CT a little dissapointed could not get closer to WP but CT still did not do too bad imo

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Penis Allianz, it didn't take down WP :(.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Most of them were wank as per usual in the current pa.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

i resent that

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Nonono, he didn't say he was going to take them down, but take them UP.... the arse!

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

I need graphical proof if he managed to... :salute:

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

CT\Angels for losing out to WP so 'easily'

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

ct for crashing alot

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Seconded.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

All of them ?

that`s just foolish to say, you can`t win this game without night activity, constant growing and alliance politics! Offcourse it aint what it used to be, but whats the point mentioning that in every second thread.

I think it`s cool that former Pack people came together years after they last played to gather some sort of an alliance. If only more people did!

Who started Wolfpack btw? im curious of it`s history.. Was not Wolfpack a core who left from VtS because of sertain differenties in the structure?

Biggdogg, TiG and teh real pro`s of this game started it, am i right?

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Angels.

Otherwise; Allfather has a good point.


Ascendancy played it nice though imo :)

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

What the hell are you talking about.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

more so disappointed at most of the alliances that ran defence calls and tried to play. WP with basically the same member-base did not stand a chance in previous rounds. They won this round playing even worse than before.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Without meaning to drag this thread wildly off topic this is a subject thats come up a fair bit, especially in the last few rounds.

The fact is that a round of pa is very much what you make of it. If you think that the round was boring or bland then you have noone but yourself to blame for it. The trend lately seems to be to moan about how boring the round is without doing anything yourself to make it more interesting. I realise that alot of people no longer have the time or inclination to play as they once did, and that may be understandable. However you cannot expect alliances to play for your enjoyment, they play for themselves and their members. As such if you don't like the way the round is turning out then it's down to you to do something about it, you can't expect someone else to make a move. Personally i found this round the best i've ever played game wise, and have learnt so much from so many different people. I didn't find it bored because i put myself in a postion where i wouldn't be.

It may be alright to sit on your highhorse and criticise other alliances for being shit, but at the end of the day if your not activly doing something to change the situation that you find so offensive then you are no better than whoever your criticising.

On the actual intended thread topic i have to say CT were the biggest disappointment for me, it took them a lot longer then Angels to start hitting us :)

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

I was mildly dissapointed with the performance of my own alliance - Vision - this round. I mean, we had less than half the members of every other major alliance (except asc, heh), so given that, we didnt do too badly. We got pipped on the line by ND (/me suicides), but all that aside, it feels as though something was missing. I realised that this round, Vision didnt really do anything really crazy or whatever that was lighthearted and fun. In the past i've been involved in some crazy stunts or lemming runs with my fellow Visionaries, but this round there wasnt anywhere near as much of that lighthearted fun or comedy as there used to, or should be. I feel that detracted from my enjoyment of the round, and as such i think it'll have to be brought back in for next round! :).

Whatever happened to the good times?

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

I thought vision, xVx, ND and Rock were just doing a rebuilding round?

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

I dont know about the others, but regardless its beside the point - we didnt do anything rediculous, we didnt do anything surprising, there was no major lemming run at the end etc. There was nothing notable or fun right at the end of the round - that i participated in at least - which can make or break a good impression for a round.

maybe its just the hirr in me talking? :)

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

.

All your WP bashing at the forums are hitting yourself in the ass. WP played least shit of all the other alliances. And don't come with crap like 'oooh ascendancy didn't even try to do def calls and still ended 2nd, that makes us so leet.' Hoo-fkin-ray. If WP played shit, you played more shit. **** off.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

That's completely wrong. You have to evaluate each alliance based on their playing style. Ascendancy's playing style suited them and they did very very well - finishing second after rising up the alliance rankings. Wolfpack took an early lead and held onto that, no point criticising them since we simply don't know what level of pressure it would have taken to get them to crack.

That doesn't stop CT's performance being particularly disappointing - since they failed to see that they couldn't just grind this round out like they did last round. Angels have been criticised in some places, but the closure of their eXi BG was always going to cause them pretty severe damage. WP have credited them with effective attacks on WP so hopefully Angels can do a better job next round.

I'm a bit disappointed by VGN, although not totally suprised - we can quite clearly see what gôsu bring to the table. TGV played well, Subh failed to live up to expectations and if I say what I think about Tides of Fire my PM inbox will cry since they can't take criticism.

Orbit and F-Crew round out the top 10 and have been neck-and-neck all round. Well done to both of them.


On races: 1 Terran, 11 Cathaar, 10 Xandathrii, 32 Zikonian and 46 Eitraides in the top 100. Some tweaking may well be needed.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

:cathaargh:

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

A few selected VtS core started Wolfpack since they were pretty much tired of VtS and Fury clogging up the universe with the big fat fleets and their big fat NAP.

Biggdogg, TiG, decoy, Agamemnon, LX, etc.. think Game might have blowjobed his way there aswell... I hanged around wit them before they went official, but never really joined.. Fury and such...

Wolfpack was actually the channel for Fury and Legion's Execs, where we plotted how to murder Bluetuba, kill of RB, murder TE and laugh at IPC. Good times :) The Wolfpack of nowdays have nothing in common with the original, besides ripping off the name.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

I wouldn't be praising us if I was you furball. Our round was weak, score wise we are atleast 30mill off where we feel we should have been and Hidden-a are too close for comfort (no offence to them but we are significantly better than the 14mill gap we had)

So while its encouraging that we could keep a top10 position while having a bad round its nothing to shout home about. Our issues have mostly been resolved now though and we are hoping to use this experience to kick on from next round

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

furball is talking total shit, ascendancy were disappointing - we should have won, that goes for a lot of alliances though. i wouldn't call the others disappointing since i expected angels/ct to be totally useless anyway for example. however, only wolfpack 'exceeded' expectation sort of - i'm not sure i imagined them winning, but they did so kudos to them. the rest failed miserably.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

A round where jer isn't in the EoRC is a good round as far as I'm concerned.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

well its not at all like the original but it isnt ripping off the name. When the vts gang had formed wolfpack they merged with Out Of Order (a smaller ally basically made by the Tuba creators) and became Wolfpack Order.. Most vts peeps jumped back to vts and after a short time the ally cut out the Order name part and went with the Wolfpack name as it originally was and evolved to what it is today. So I wouldnt really call it ripping off the name

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Considering I don't think a single one of the original wolfpack HC have, or want to have, anything to do with the current wolfpack I probably would.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Couldn't have said it better.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

I was fairly disappointed with CT this round, they seemed fairly pants. The whole war with wolfpack seemed fairly shit and meaningless, rounds where one alliance holds the top spot all round are gay man :(

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Wolfpack - number 7 when it mattered !

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

ye can agree in some way.. but still.. they decided to do that merge and then left the ally.. the ally just continued.. with new leaders.. like any other ally has done over time

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

No, it's very different. It's as if after round seven a few random new legion members decided to have an alliance called legion.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Well so bluetuba round 2 when the hc left shouldnt be allowed to be called tuba for the rest of the rounds then? and Angels aint Angels anymore?
the legion peeps that started wolfpack merged with OoO and created the "new wolfpack" then left the ally.. the ally went on.. like all allies in pa have done over time when the original hc quit.. it is still the same origins even tho the peeps left..

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

There's a difference between HC moving on and what happened with wolfpack. If in any random alliance the HC left and gave over the alliance to a new group this is quite clearly different than if they disbanded the alliance and some people just decided they wanted to keep it going. I don't really remember what happened with BT to be honest and as far as I'm aware angels was brought back with the support and consent of the old HC, or at least not outright opposition. Perhaps you should ask someone who was in both versions of wolfpack, such as mista for their opinion on the issue.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Asendancy.

Were shit all round. Always complaining about "not getting Wolfpack" and they didn't even try.

useless ****s


(also ct and angels for being of a certain persuasion that doesn't involve women)

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

i was in OoO and voted against the merge.. the merge happened and the ally came to be what it is today.. When most of the legios jumped ship a short while after, i cant remember anyone arguing about the name.. they merged into that ally and then left. They never spoke about disbanding.. just said they left to go back to vts.. the "new" wolfpack was still left with some of the old wolfpack members and with i guess half of the hc after the merge.. so it just went on like normal allies usually do when some of the hc wants to go other places..

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Put it this way. Would it not be more accurate to say, in terms of members and command structures, the OoO recruited some wolfpack players than wolfpack recruited some OoO members? Perhaps you'd like to counter idler's original point and state, besides the name, what this wolfpack has in common with r4 wolfpack. As I said though, ask someone like mista for their opinion on the issue.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

ye i see ur points.. but all im saying is that i think it was the original wolfpack that initiated the merge.. and ye we might have had a slightly bigger memberbase.. both had a small base.. if i recall right the hc was split 50-50 or even a slight more original wolfpack hcers.. they left suddenly to go back to vts.. was no talk about disbanding or anything.. they left and took a few original wolfpackers with em and the rest just stayed in it.. so i dont think its right to say that they cant use the name.. If they hadnt just left in the way they did and said that they wanted to unmerge and disband etc then sure i guess we would have kicked most of the wp'ers and gone back to our precious OoO but it didnt happen.. but ye the original and the present is quite different.. by person skill and by memberbase..

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

This is very different, because we never had anyone tell us not to package ourselves as BlueTuba. On top of this the HC didn't leave for another alliance, they just disappeared into inactivity. The original Wolfpack in contrast aren't exactly acquiescing. If anything you are OoO, not Wolfpack.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

ye well the original tuba hc formed OoO.. and didnt argue about the tuba name carrying on.. and the original wp hc left after the merge and if i recall right didnt argue about the wolfpack name carrying on.. i know its abit different concidering the merge and so but still it has some similarities.. the fact is that after my memory none of the leavers said anythin about the name carrying on so the name must be allowed to go on.. tbh my personal opinion was to not merge and have OoO continue..

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Playing football without the use of your legs would, i imagine, involve quite a lot of skill on the part of the players ;).

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Or a lot of penalt..., oh wait.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Back on the topic, CT were absolutely piss poor. Fleet crashes, terrible defences, lack of impetus into fighting wolfpack there is a long list that you could attribute against them. My commentary on the round 20 winners ceremony says a lot.

<[CT]aNgRyDuCk> I'd thought about it for a long time, but had no reason to quit 1up, and with no 1up, no exi, this round, we had all the right ppl available

<@Lok> "we thought we could get a team of really average people from 1up together and win quite easily"

And this round, how it showed.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

f-crew for being same as always! SHAG! :>

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

Despite been F-crew HC (for the final time) we really did suck. No night activity and a lack of BCs.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

CT's performance in round 21 was lacking, certainly... and ofcourse not what we expected...but your take on CT's members couldn't be further from the truth tbh.... they aren't average people, they are all players who have in the past have shown solid playing ability and been a part of winning alliances.... the single biggest factor in CT's performance in round 21 was inactivity. Not only did the HC not pull their weight activity wise, because of the HC's inactivity, it became contageous and spread throughout the alliance like a wildfire. Bluey for example really got ragged out because basically the rest of the HC dropped the ball and "expected", or "assumed" that she, or someone else would carry the ball where day to day alliance housekeeping duties were concerned. Real life played a huge part in the CT HC's inactivity, but no excuses, we needed to be more active and we weren't. Gm, JeZz, Adastra, Arfy, Sven, and a few others DID step up and pick up the slack as the round progressed, but it was too little too late, by that time we had lost the motivation and interest of the alliances membership. Without those Senior MO's stepping up and getting things done CT would have fallen off the map, it's a testament to their hard work that CT stayed in the top 5.

We expect round 22 to be different. We will tighten down in a lot of areas, and we expect to be in much better shape next round. Ofcourse I'm not one to try and predict the future, but I do know we are already working towards a lot of improvements, starting with a more active HC.

Re: Most Dissapointing Alliances this round?
 

As opposed to being a testament to how shit all the other alliances were this round. :)