I remember quite correctly that preround predictions thread. Let me just get my prediction out of there, being the first to rationally put asc in 2nd place (behind a wrong #1, but i was unaware of alliances membercounts at the time i wrote it, as i clearly stated in my beginning line)
Quote:
following predicting is based on rougly top7 alliances having around same amount of players , and all having at least 90 members to reach the limit. Its impossible to take into account future playerbase counts when making a viable predict on outcome so thats how i justify this
1. ND
2. Asc
3. CT
4. xVx
5. Vengeance
6. ROCK
7. FAnG
8. ToF
9. Orbit
10. DLR
11. Evo
12. to be named BG
13. HA
14. HR
15. F-Crew
Asc wont win due to early block forming against them by ND+VGN+1 or 2 BG's, vgn being the first one to bail out of it but bg's being the most reliable allies as they are not blinded by ranks but play for different goals. Smaller group attacks where all members of that group are active and have an internal competition within a bigger scale works; denial showed that in past, and i dont think this smaller-group approach is that much different when those groups are standalones instead of part of one alliance.
|
notice how the actual memberbase highly affected it, its why my predictions were far off. If i knew there and then that xVx would be the only other alliance getting to 90 (or more) in tag, i would've put them ahead. Now, i dont post this to show how good i am in predicions (cause tbh, my outlay was a bit off), but mainly as a respons to Light (among others) who claimed
[fk this quote i cant get it right..anyway, its a quote.]As far as i can see, this "horribly predicitable PA politics" is completly false. Considering, pre-round everyone was thinking it was going to be a heavily Asc dominated round, with them pwning anything/everything..[/qoute]