eXilition are ranked #7

[notsure]

Originally Posted by furball

You don't need a NAP in place to form a co-operative unit of alliances, so long as there is a general understanding that when the shit hits the fan, the alliances in question will work together. Moreover, the logs might not even mention a NAP between those alliances - any such arrangements may be attack-based only, or at least only provide that the alliances will avoid targetting the other alliances of the block (e.g. hitting Omen-heavy galaxies if you were TGV).

Ok I'll clarify - Our BC's are free to choose any galaxy to hit --- except those with our members in them --- at no point have we ever avoided a galaxy because it may contain members of a particular alliance. In addition, at no point have we been asked to hit/not hit any particular galaxy by anyone outside of TGV.

Anyone with evidence that disputes that - feel free to pm me here or on irc.

notsure

[Wandows]

Originally Posted by Tietäjä

I'm saying, that, if Angels/the community is so concerned about eXilition winning the round, what do they expect the #2, #3, and other who aren't involved in the #1's team to do, start licking the pavement so that #1 doesn't have to react to anything that might threaten their position?

I think we're all used to the typical habbit of no one wanting to give it a shot untill its to late (just praying the inevitable won't happen), and then they have no shame in saying "but it is pointless now, we will never beat them so we won't bother". There are less than a handfull alliances willing to really risk their rank to better it in the future, specially if it means you could lose alot of ranks/members trying. But then again, it seems to be a common believe its not really needed as there is also less than a handfull alliances left with the ability to be devastating to another alliance. Most will stick to swapping roids hoping to outroid/XP the other (and some have no choice cuz they lack members willing to risk their personal rank for the alliance).

[ChipZ^]

Originally Posted by GrandAdm Thrawn

idd, the someone who obv. listened are ND, but actually ND retalled on us, for us striking them the other night. And one must admit they did it quite successful. But this is not the end, rather it just started really, because now we are hot

ND managed to steal 4000 roids from you yet end the day +600.

Something has gone amiss.

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by Tietäjä

I'm not complaining getting incomings, I'm just saying that there's really no incentive for me, ND, or xVx, nor LCH, to start paving your path to #1. Considering our members get nightly income from Angels, Vision, eXilition, Tides of Fire, VGN, Orbit, Hidden Agenda, Rock, F-Crew, LCH, Insurrection, ND, xVx, P|M, ToF, and Fury, there must be a huge block there.

I'm saying, that, if Angels/the community is so concerned about eXilition winning the round, what do they expect the #2, #3, and other who aren't involved in the #1's team to do, start licking the pavement so that #1 doesn't have to react to anything that might threaten their position?

**** off you shithead. Just like the rest of the top5 you mistake galaxy raids for hostile actions. Clearly you ****wits need to read some more Machiavelli and get a brain punched into your sorry little containers called bodies in order to understand the game and how to achieve victory.

**** YOU TOO VALLEH

[rain]

Originally Posted by Wandows

I think we're all used to the typical habbit of no one wanting to give it a shot untill its to late (just praying the inevitable won't happen), and then they have no shame in saying "but it is pointless now, we will never beat them so we won't bother". There are less than a handfull alliances willing to really risk their rank to better it in the future, specially if it means you could lose alot of ranks/members trying. But then again, it seems to be a common believe its not really needed as there is also less than a handfull alliances left with the ability to be devastating to another alliance. Most will stick to swapping roids hoping to outroid/XP the other (and some have no choice cuz they lack members willing to risk their personal rank for the alliance).

You may stop praying now, it won´t work. Some things/ppl never change.
edit: exilition is ranked 6th for quite a while now

[NitinA]

Originally Posted by Wandows

I think we're all used to the typical habbit of no one wanting to give it a shot untill its to late (just praying the inevitable won't happen), and then they have no shame in saying "but it is pointless now, we will never beat them so we won't bother". There are less than a handfull alliances willing to really risk their rank to better it in the future, specially if it means you could lose alot of ranks/members trying. But then again, it seems to be a common believe its not really needed as there is also less than a handfull alliances left with the ability to be devastating to another alliance. Most will stick to swapping roids hoping to outroid/XP the other (and some have no choice cuz they lack members willing to risk their personal rank for the alliance).

/me slaps Wandows around a bit with a large trout

[Lokie]

Originally Posted by Tietäjä

I'm not complaining getting incomings, I'm just saying that there's really no incentive for me, ND, or xVx, nor LCH, to start paving your path to #1. Considering our members get nightly income from Angels, Vision, eXilition, Tides of Fire, VGN, Orbit, Hidden Agenda, Rock, F-Crew, LCH, Insurrection, ND, xVx, P|M, ToF, and Fury, there must be a huge block there.

You do know that Tides of Fire and ToF are the same i hope, or did ya realy think they had a special bond?

[Tietäjä]

Originally Posted by Lokie

You do know that Tides of Fire and ToF are the same i hope, or did ya realy think they had a special bond?

Yes, I know, I intentionally listed it twice, and added fury it too. You do know that they've not been around in ages.

[Shoshuro]

Originally Posted by Heartless

**** off you shithead. Just like the rest of the top5 you mistake galaxy raids for hostile actions. Clearly you ****wits need to read some more Machiavelli and get a brain punched into your sorry little containers called bodies in order to understand the game and how to achieve victory.

**** YOU TOO VALLEH

DIY.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Heartless

**** off you shithead. Just like the rest of the top5 you mistake galaxy raids for hostile actions. Clearly you ****wits need to read some more Machiavelli and get a brain punched into your sorry little containers called bodies in order to understand the game and how to achieve victory.

Amen brutha.

[GrandAdm Thrawn]

Originally Posted by ChipZ^

ND managed to steal 4000 roids from you yet end the day +600.

Something has gone amiss.

prolly they had allys who joined, also ND are xp-whoring no roid horters, so they may have lost most of them again...

[Mek]

Originally Posted by Tietäjä

Angels is sitting with a deal with group of alliances, and are ranked first at the moment. Why would anyone else, outside the deal, feel like starting to hit eXilition just to make things easier for Angels?

anyone feel a little dejavu?

round 17?

Omen, inSomnia, ND, Angels?

[MaxMilliaN]

heartless stop whining about other alliances doing the shit work your alliance never could.

each alliance decides what they do, atm Angels is #1 with a lead and they sure like to shag with other alliances. So if theres a war gonna break i sure know angels will be in it, as it would be just silly to go hunt exilition while angels run with the round

gladly this round there arent too much retarted hcs who will just blindly join the anti exilition crew

[Kargool]

Originally Posted by MaxMilliaN

each alliance decides what they do, atm Angels is #1 with a lead and they sure like to shag with other alliances. So if theres a war gonna break i sure know angels will be in it, as it would be just silly to go hunt exilition while angels run with the round

Well, I do see your point but then there is also the threat of eXiltion, no single alliance can handle them alone, and if they are just gonna sit by and watch eXiltion pass them on the way to the top, then I honestly have to say that the alliances they pass got no spine. But then again, thats their perogative to be spineless cowards not willing to put their members through some fights along the round.

[MaxMilliaN]

the threat is alliances that are ranked higher then yours, not those that are lower.

[pig]

Originally Posted by MaxMilliaN

as it would be just silly to go hunt exilition while angels run with the round

I would rather see Angels win than eXilition.

Also why would it be stupid to hit eXilition?

You guys are the best alliance in the game. Best average. Best command. You are growing everyday (about to enter the top 5) Why not hit you now before you can grow any further?

Also flipping the idea on its head there are claims exil arent going for the win etc, just 40 players etc. In that case im sure any 80 player alliance can twat exil for a few nights and gain quite nicely from them, seein as exil are roid fat.

[pig]

Originally Posted by MaxMilliaN

the threat is alliances that are ranked higher then yours, not those that are lower.

Yes because 1up round 12, Ascendancy round 16 and 1up round 17 all taught us this, didnt they?*






*not sure on the actual rounds, just guessing.

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by MaxMilliaN

heartless stop whining about other alliances doing the shit work your alliance never could.

each alliance decides what they do, atm Angels is #1 with a lead and they sure like to shag with other alliances. So if theres a war gonna break i sure know angels will be in it, as it would be just silly to go hunt exilition while angels run with the round

gladly this round there arent too much retarted hcs who will just blindly join the anti exilition crew

You might want to take a look at one of my other postings where you'll actually be able to read that I'd like to see eXilition winning the round - for the sole reason of being the only remaining competent alliance in this game.

[Tietäjä]

Originally Posted by Mek

anyone feel a little dejavu?

round 17?

Omen, inSomnia, ND, Angels?

Yeah. Strangest thing is, they never learn.

[Hude]

Originally Posted by pig

Also why would it be stupid to hit eXilition?

You guys are the best alliance in the game. Best average. Best command. You are growing everyday (about to enter the top 5) Why not hit you now before you can grow any further?

i thought maxmillian is omen this round

[pig]

Originally Posted by Hude

i thought maxmillian is omen this round

You probably thought right doesnt change anything I wrote though.

[qebab]

Personally I wouldn't really mind a war with eXilition, even though I know they are better than us. It just comes down to some facts:

We are already on #1 spot, if we can "outroid" eXilition we can keep it, and they will bring the war to us, sooner or later.

If we go to war against eXilition, I fear to experience a repeat of round 15 with our dc's working their arse of to cover some incomings, only to see ND launch morning waves and take cap on us. Only this time with both ND and Omen, in which case there is no doubt we would lose rather quickly.

eXilition are not currently "winning", they are just very fat. Sure it would make sense to target them to steal some of their roids, but they are the one alliance that can actually defend them well.

As I said, I wouldn't mind such a war, but I don't think I am in the position to start it.

[Mighteh]

5 eXilition 26211 42 1,282,408 53,861,156
i feel like a test lab mouse.

and eXi is the guy in a white suit doing experiments on mine, and my group's mental abilities.

"lets see... asc done it, 1up done it... lets see if we can do it aswell... after all, they were stupid enough to allow it twice in a row... maybe theyre just stupid enough to allow it for the third time"

or is it, yet again, ALL the eXi members in tag...
Like the guy said in V for Vendetta...
"... i got the feeling that every event takes place is linked, everything was not an accedent" (or something to that effect"

and to the question "So, do u know what will happen next ?" he answered:
"no... it was just a feeling"

after all, i hope i am wrong and eXi does not have another 20 top X members out of tag. or hiding in other allies....

[qebab]

It doesn't come down to stupidity, I think. It is more about lack of trust, balls and skill.

After all, these guys who call themselves HC and order people around must have had a certain intellect to be able to get that position, right? If they didn't, they wouldn't be HC of anything larger than the closest toilet. Part of being HC is to realize the limits of your alliance. If you know that your alliance don't possess the morale to be hit by several other alliances for weeks, then you will try to avoid that situation, if you can. Anything else would in fact be stupid.

Therefore, they would need to clear their backs before starting a war. Because how would member morale be affected by being hit and owned by an alliance several ranks below you? That wouldn't be pretty. One on one, someone might stand a chance, but the second that war starts, others will jump in for easy roids, and these opportunists will ruin every hope of victory for the alliance that started it, in my opinion.

Now, Angels has no very good reason to go war against eXilition, only the roids. We're #1 already, and there is a pretty good chance that by going to war with eXi we will not only allow the other alliances in the top to gain on us, and probably pass us, but we will also be wide open for raids done by these alliances. And they have no reason not to hit us, after all.

Omen is in a similar situation. By hitting eXi, they would stagnate their own growth, and lose contact with the #1 spot, at the same time as they make themselves wide open to any contender who wants to take them out of the equation.

I am assuming the same goes for New Dawn and Tides of Fire as well.

There's kind of a cold war in the top 4 right now, and I don't think much will happen before at least two of those alliances decide to do it together.

[rain]

Originally Posted by Mighteh

after all, i hope i am wrong and eXi does not have another 20 top X members out of tag. or hiding in other allies....

hiding members in other tags won't work, they must be out of tag to fully contribute when finally join exi tag

[Ziw]

_FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUEING/DISSUSION_
Hideing members in other tags would work greatly, since they DO take they'r value with them, and seeing how haveing like 20 extra's with loads of value would boost _ANY_ alliance, it would work.
And again to point it clearly out _FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUEING/DISSCUSION_
Oh. ps. pls do quote this and make it look like exi have 20 planets out of tag, it would really make you look fking smart ^^

[robban1]

if allie limit was 50 we would have more allies and more wars instead of this pussy race we have atm

[Ziw]

Originally Posted by robban1

if allie limit was 50 we would have more allies and more wars instead of this pussy race we have atm

if ally limit had been 50, we'd end up with upto 3 good ally's totaly domenating the game with the other ally's powerless to do _anything_.

[Squidly]

Originally Posted by robban1

if allie limit was 50 we would have more allies and more wars instead of this pussy race we have atm

I'd be quite interested to try a round with this idea, if not have it at 40 or even 30.

[Ziw]

Originally Posted by Squidly

I'd be quite interested to try a round with this idea, if not have it at 40 or even 30.

Why not then actually just to private gal's, so ppl could sort out own setlements ingal, instead of trying to overpower a overwhelming already established alliance wich they'r quite doomed to fail anyhow?
Like, make the game fun, bringing back wars instead of creating new ways for ppl to hide away in the t5 ally's while they'r bussy fencesitting?

[_Kila_]

Originally Posted by MaxMilliaN

it would be just silly to go hunt exilition while angels run with the round

Funny, the same was being said in R12; "omg why are you concerned with the #7 alliance (1up, were at the time of the post also ranked #7) when they have less members and LCH are so far ahead?!11111"

Originally Posted by MaxMilliaN

the threat is alliances that are ranked higher then yours, not those that are lower.

You played Round 13, right? you remember eXi going from ranked #4 to #1 fairly fast, right? - are you arguing that wolfpack who were #1 shouldn't have been concerned with eXi's growth and them catching up on WP because they were ranked below WP?

[jerome]

losing hydra played a reasonable part in that too, for wp

[Squidly]

Originally Posted by Ziw

Why not then actually just to private gal's, so ppl could sort out own setlements ingal, instead of trying to overpower a overwhelming already established alliance wich they'r quite doomed to fail anyhow?
Like, make the game fun, bringing back wars instead of creating new ways for ppl to hide away in the t5 ally's while they'r bussy fencesitting?

Make X private galaxies or so. One alliance per galaxy. Nuff said. {I am kidding btw. Really.}

[Tietäjä]

Originally Posted by Squidly

I'd be quite interested to try a round with this idea, if not have it at 40 or even 30.

Definately. What hits back here, is the score of officers and scanners (that are very essential on the current game system). There's not enough of these people, alliance staff, in general, to run 10 competitive alliances of 30-40 people.

[Squidly]

Originally Posted by Tietäjä

Definately. What hits back here, is the score of officers and scanners (that are very essential on the current game system). There's not enough of these people, alliance staff, in general, to run 10 competitive alliances of 30-40 people.

True enough. But, it might encourage some to step up and give it a try under the help of more experienced folks?

[robban1]

Originally Posted by jerome

losing hydra played a reasonable part in that too, for wp

well wp was totally shit that round

[Rinoa]

Originally Posted by Tietäjä

Even ND+LCH can't just ignore the fact that 219 > 123 > 69 > 42.

sorry keizari i didnt follow what u were meaning there can u please explian it?

[Stoom]

Originally Posted by Rinoa

sorry keizari i didnt follow what u were meaning there can u please explian it?

I think he's trying to say that Angels is with VsN and ToF, LCH is with ND and Omen are on their own.

[Mek]

Originally Posted by Stoom

I think he's trying to say that Angels is with VsN and ToF, LCH is with ND and Omen are on their own.

*cough* P|M *cough*

[mens]

Originally Posted by robban1

well wp was totally shit that round

I owned.
as always.

[GrandAdm Thrawn]

If I were hc I would team up with eXi and bring down those allys ahead of me instead of wory about them, I mean, they are 15m behind (more even compared to omen/nd)

[pig]

Originally Posted by GrandAdm Thrawn

If I were hc I would team up with eXi and bring down those allys ahead of me instead of wory about them, I mean, they are 15m behind (more even compared to omen/nd)

Lucky your not a HC then.

[Dotatrix]

I'm one of the players eXi is hiding with my ~350k score.

[ComradeRob]

Originally Posted by robban1

well wp was totally shit that round

'that round'?

Originally Posted by qebab

After all, these guys who call themselves HC and order people around must have had a certain intellect to be able to get that position, right? If they didn't, they wouldn't be HC of anything larger than the closest toilet.

Whatever gave you that idea? As in many things, the shit tends to float to the top in PA alliances. Alliances might have one, maybe two 'visionary' leaders; people who can formulate a reasonable plan, handle politics and generally move the alliance in the right direction (Sid being the archetype here). The remaining HCs are there to carry out the plan. This provides clear accountability: the visionary is accountable to the alliance as a whole (they would leave if his plans consistently failed) and the other HCs and officers are accountable to the visionary (they are judged by their ability to carry out his plans). But these people are rare: far more common are people who can act like visionaries when it suits them, then hide when things go wrong, or flawed visionaries who, despite their forceful personality, tend to produce plans which fail too often.

Some alliances don't follow this kind of structure, and instead have collective responsibility with no overall head. As a result, nobody is responsible. It becomes easy to hold a HC position without ever having to justify what you do to anyone, and it becomes very difficult for the other HCs to remove you, because they don't have the authority to do so, being of no higher rank. Qualities of leadership, vision, determination or ambition are not necessary here. Stability, caution, unity and non-confrontation are the virtues required in such a system, but these do not tend to lead to round-winning alliances. The lack of accountability means that it's difficult for an alliance to change direction. Also, if the alliance does contain members with the potential to be leaders, their rise will be resisted by the collective HC who do not want to become subordinate to an individual leader.

Most successful PA alliances have had a single leader, and those without a leader have tended to fail. Even alliances with no official leader will often acknowledge that one individual has played a special role in improving the alliance's performance in a single round. Too many alliances seem, to me, to lack the visionary leadership which is necessary to make the bold, decisive moves which win rounds.

[Tietäjä]

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

The whole post

Brilliant view of it. If there's little visionary leaders around nowadays, there's definately also very little able enforcive parts of the staff around. Meaning, the officers and the rest of the high command that make the "leader's" plans into practise. Either part usually fails, or both - eXilition and 1up come up to my mind as two alliances during PAX that have had both a visionary leader and brilliant staff (perhaps 1up with more focus on the leader, eXilition with more focus on the absolutely superior staff).

[Scorpio]

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

Most successful PA alliances have had a single leader, and those without a leader have tended to fail. Even alliances with no official leader will often acknowledge that one individual has played a special role in improving the alliance's performance in a single round. Too many alliances seem, to me, to lack the visionary leadership which is necessary to make the bold, decisive moves which win rounds.

hmm, not questioning you, but could you name a few successful alliances that had a single leader? I can only think of one good example, being Fury.

[Tietäjä]

Originally Posted by Scorpio

hmm, not questioning you, but could you name a few successful alliances that had a single leader? I can only think of one good example, being Fury.

eXilition. Yes, and 1up. Unless you added that up as "Fury". These points aren't valid though, unless you agree that PA(X) was played after r9 too, and that PA didn't die when fury et co ceased to exist.

edit. now before I get told to **** off for not knowing shit, I reckon kaifux was a "visionaire" in eXilition rounds 13 and 15, and generally he is held in such a position there. it doesn't mean the rest of the high command wouldn't work their asses off - and as said, perhaps it's the best-staffed alliance in the recent history.

[-=Yggdra=-]

I wouldn't call Kaifux a "visionaire". R13 we started with 4 HCs (ricka, Kaifux, MacTanzu and BaSSe) and one by one they dropped out until only Kaifux was left and he stepped up and did the work of all 4 HCs (the main reason why eX didn't play R14 because Kaifux was just too exhausted). But these are the moments when leaders are born and no one in eX would even think about doubting any of his decisions.

So yes, you can defenitly say that a successful alliance needs a single leader, with 1up and eX being the perfect examples as those 2 alliances dominated the last 2 years of Planetarion.

[ComradeRob]

Originally Posted by Scorpio

hmm, not questioning you, but could you name a few successful alliances that had a single leader? I can only think of one good example, being Fury.

Ah, I thought that might get a response from a Xanadu person

NoS did OK out of having Dingo as leader, much as I disagreed with him myself. I can't imagine a committee agreeing on the political moves that he pulled. Legion, although they definitely had a council system of leadership, tended to have one person who was 'first among equals' in terms of making strategic decisions (Grendel or Biggdogg). Eclipse had a CEO and, although, again, I may have disagreed with him on some issues, the system did work. Settling disputes would have been impossible without a person able to say 'this is what we are doing, and that is final'. I might be wrong, but I seem to remember that LDK had a leader too (Lrytas?).

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by Tietäjä

(perhaps 1up with more focus on the leader, eXilition with more focus on the absolutely superior staff).

Originally Posted by Tietäjä

now before I get told to **** off for not knowing shit, I reckon kaifux was a "visionaire" in eXilition rounds 13 and 15, and generally he is held in such a position there. it doesn't mean the rest of the high command wouldn't work their asses off - and as said, perhaps it's the best-staffed alliance in the recent history.

From what I've observed it's more of a culture thing. You feel much more comfortable DCing into the early hours for some alliances, and much less in others. Don't take it as a given that every round 1up and eXilition have played there's been a solid officer base already, that new players can just settle in these already very strong teams.

Often there's no base for anything at all and it's just alliance culture that has supported the formation of some kind of team.