Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiba
i do actually agree or atleast see where ppl like you and Mz are coming from but i also beleive that the defpool of a 100 man tag vs smaller allies makes the big allainces unhittable - with 50 man tags you take away that unfairness making ppls chances of landing an atatck greater which in turn could even things up
|
This assumption requires several other things to be true. The quality of the players in both tags needs to be more or less consistent, and each player in the larger tag needs to add to the greater value. Both alliances need to have equally skilled dc's. But most importantly, there is an assumption that the incomings an alliance with 100 members faces will be equal to that which a 50 member alliance faces.
Now, due to random incomings, having twice as many planets naturally exposes you to about twice the amount of incomings over time, disregarding explicit targeting. Further when you are being targeted, twice the amount of planets presents twice the amount of targets, again there is an increased chance of more incomings since you are likely taking up more space in any given galaxy etc. This has little bearing on specific planet targeting of course, yet it should be clear that the assumption that twice the planets equals twice the fleets against the same incomings is unlikely to be true.
I also stated that there needed to be an assumption that each additional member would increase the value over the smaller alliance. This is an important distinction, because simply having the same amount of value spread over twice the players means you need to get a hold of twice the players to cover the same incomings, whilst gaining you no advantage in staving off those incomings. However, even if we assume that there is a value advantage, there is an increasing "cost" to mobilize it, so long as the value is not twice that of the smaller alliance. If indeed the value is twice that of the smaller alliance, then you are correct, the larger alliance is clearly the harder one to hit. However, if the larger alliance is only 1,5 times the value of the smaller alliance, I would venture that the smaller alliance is actually harder to hit.
Take as an example Vision last round. With a small BG within ND, we were able to target and successfully roid multiple big vision planets. Similarly, Apprime were quite capable of taking on ND, even though ND had both greater value and more players. Apprime simply had an easier time to getting full utilization out of their value, and as such could both out-defend and out-attack ND.