[AdmV0rl0n]

Originally Posted by furball

Then you are very much the exception.

No, I'm only an exception cos I come here and I bother to say it. Go look up the actual figures on how many players play and are not allied. (Example.)

Originally Posted by furball

I always played the game as an alliance member first and foremost, then a player, then a galaxy member, then a cluster member. Where my galaxy was full of allies then they'd become as important as my own planet, but that wouldn't be the case if I went random and ended up in a neutral or hostile galaxy.

Firstly, you ain't playing are you? What did you hit me with last time, you quit in RD 16?
I'm not attacking your method of play. I don't agree with it (but so what!). But what I am saying is your are wholly entitled to play that way, where things go wrong is PA team change the game to make your method the only method, in a very one dimensional game. The alliances already have 70 members in the largest structure in game, thats enough bloody advantage thank you very very much. They don't need more thrown their way round after round.

Originally Posted by furball

Harsh words.

Not harsh, just brutally honest feedback.

Originally Posted by furball

The simple truth is that the vast majority of the active playerbase is a member of an alliance. Why? Because alliances are the only means of getting reliable defence when you have incoming. Further, they are a means for you to have more successful attacks than if you attack solo.

No, the TRUTH is the game is so twisted now that to the largest method, players HAVE to be alliance members. That is not one in the same. Alliances are the only reliable method, because of a lot of crap thats been pulled. I recently suggested methods for attacking, ones that patently bring attacking back to where its a player thing, and you were amongst those shouting it down as soon as you've seen it. So yes, you've made a game where in reality, you have to wave people smaller in number than you (galaxies, clusters, inactives, other), usually by such bravery as huge waves from the 70 members structures, planned in number, overnight while your enemy sleeps. How very brave and clever of you. I don't think you need to sum up the whole wrong mindset and complete alliance whoriness better than this crap you just pitched.

Originally Posted by furball

So who should PA Team be catering to? The maverick solo player who isn't part of an established alliance? Maybe not. Does that mean that PA Team should cater to the top 10 alliances? Absolutely not. PA Team should cater to the game itself, Planetarion.

And what is that game? Is it a game for Players, Galaxies, Clusters, Alliances, and a rich tapestry of co-operation, war, and interesting activity, or is it going to be a desert where only large alliances swamp a tiny player base in ever smaller wars and numbers of players, in an ever tightening one dimensional game, while they scream 'noobs' at anyone new?

Originally Posted by furball

This realisation of yours - a truism but true nonetheless - contradicts the rest of your post. Every cluster works differently, and your earlier presumption that alliances will always carve up the cluster is a foolish one.

Thats not what I said. I said I know of one Ally that went out of its way to persue every possible method to break up clusters for its own end. I did not say they won, because I can;t speak for all clusters or cater for what happened in each cluster, but I know they persued that aim. And it was an aim done to further their own ends.

Originally Posted by furball

Where an alliance (and its allies) are weak in a cluster, it's logical for them to pursue a cluster NAP so that they can avoid as much incoming as possible.

Your Myopic vision is antagonising me. I don't know if you are doing this with blatant deliberate intention. Clusters are made up of Players, and Galaxies. They, if the game can stop being this alliance whoring bullcrap might like to follow some differing paths. Its called having an interesting and variable game.

Originally Posted by furball

Where an alliance (and its allies) are strong in a cluster, however, it makes logical sense for them to reap whatever profit they can from their cluster with the advantage of the -1 attack ETA, ruling out a lot of out-of-cluster defence. This is a war game and pressing home your advantage is how victories are won.

Yes. Indeed. In this I agree with you. But this is exactly the deeper level of the game that we want. Clusters would then have to stand and fight, or die. Its part of a wider, tougher game. The lower ETA means that clusters might fight back, or alliances end up in a cluster war fighting for control. It ties into the 70 player limit quite well.
By removing the -ETA1, its cow towing to what alliances want. They want an easier ride. They should not be given it.

Originally Posted by furball

However, life is not so good for those who are not part of the dominating alliances' plans. Those in a weak galaxy will be used as roid farms (without their consent), a place where players in the bigger galaxies in that cluster can get easy roids. This is how it happened before clusters were eliminated, and it's how it works now. The basic laws of war have not changed.

I'm sorry, but thats really something players, galaxies and clusters really need to deal with. And if they don't, they will suffer. And its not a reason to cow-tow to what the alliances want.

Originally Posted by furball

Acceptance of this by PA Team is a great relief to many players and the elimination of the -1 attack ETA will relieve much of the burden on those who end up in weak galaxies.

Galaxies are weak because of all the previous bending over for alliances, lets not mince our words. And now you advocate doing the same (again) to clusters. The *reason* this game is so twisted towards all this alliance only crap is because thats how its ended up being so, and its why the galaxies are weak, and why clusters don't work.

But tell you what. Anytime you want to try 70 player galaxies, and 12 player alliances we can talk about it again. You'll agree that galaxies is the way to go. If we twist the game so hard in any direction, it gets one very one dimensional.