Thread: Ally limits
View Single Post
Unread 19 Jul 2012, 11:37   #131
ArcChas
General (Adjective Army)
 
ArcChas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Yorkshire, England.
Posts: 825
ArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud ofArcChas has much to be proud of
Re: Ally limits

Quote:
Originally Posted by neroon View Post
this is something i TOTALLY disagree with.. quality should not be overcome by superior numbers.. it should be overcome by either better quality or smart play, not the superior numbers!!! fs, read it and u understand it as well, that this sounds sooooooooo pathetic :/ (not saying ure pathetic, just the idea is mate..)
I'm not saying that I want quality to be overcome by superior numbers - just that it's the only way. If it is overcome by superior quality or tactics that just means that higher quality STILL beats lower quality ("Ult wins again"). If a new alliance forms with better quality players than Ult then superior numbers will be needed to overcome them. Sorry if this seems to be circular logic but it's self-evident.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neroon View Post
now I wont go in to details again why i personally think small 40 man tags would be awesome in planetarion, however.. think about this: why shouldnt a 40 man tag with high quality players win a round if they play it seriously well? if ure alliance does not match the quality needed to get to top, why should u actually be there then? whats the point there, just to make u feel good? that aint a valid point imo
The point is that "the rest of us" (not just me) are tired of seeing the same alliance win every round - 4 on the trot with a distinct likelihood of adding this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neroon View Post
now whole other thing with this matter tho, is that planetarion designers should also step in with such a change and make it more worthy for alliances to play for rank 2-5 for instance.. the more competition u have, the more the 2nd and 3rd place also have a meaning.. some ppl will now come here and say that if u aint #1, u aint nobody, and at this stage its getting to be true, since there is no competition.. landing on 3rd place today is as good as being the last, since the #4-20 tags are small as fck neways and do not have anything to say in the competition.
This community, rightly or wrongly, has always dismissed any rank other than #1 as being a failure but I agree with you that 2nd is (can be) better than 3rd (or 5th). Indeed I always cared about VGN's performance in every round when I was HC there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neroon View Post
and now im again reaching my all time argument for smaller tags-> at least try to make more competition!
You seem to be arguing against your own poin here (see your 2nd paragraph) and, as I've repeated argued, tag size has no effect on competition. There will still be one dominant alliance, two or three "in with a chance if they block" and "the rest".
Quote:
Originally Posted by neroon View Post
to all the fckers that are gonna come and start iwth the bs that theres no fact that it would improve anything, etc.. well, dont start with that shiz.. we aint got facts as nothing has been tryed yet :P
We have plenty of facts (right Mzyx?) but even if we hadn't that wouldn't be a good reason to break up existing groups of players to make the find new homes (or quit).
__________________
Amnion (aka The Arcane Chas of Arcania) - Playing PA under those and other pseudonyms every genuine round since Round 2. Most recently (and insignificantly):
Onset of Apathy R94 | Stacks of Resources R95 | The Necromancer of Dol Guldur R96
70 Years of Queen Elizabeth R97 | Worst of The Worst R98
Knights of the Green Shield R99 | Look Out of The Window R100 | Most of All R102
Hard of Hearing (2:7:1) R103 | The Lateness of Your Application (1:6:6) R104 | Kinnison of Tellus (5:1:2) R105
ArcChas is offline   Reply With Quote