So what happened to the "loyalty" factor?

[Atul]

Originally posted by Zh|l
I always have and will continue to take attacks against Fury as personal. It is a weakness with my hardline approach, one that you originally thought was a unique way of viewing the game and something you liked me for.

"Friends" who betrayed Fury ended up betraying me and thus being the cold hearted bastard I am I brushed aside.

im impressed
i completely agree to that (concerning Xanadu in my case ofc)
friends who dont stand over an attack on them really dont belong to the game (you see that best in games like ********* or ss, where theres only your allies and everyone else is free to attack, incl. galm8s and stuff)

i think the turning point for the dropping loyalities towards alliances was indeed r4, where most of the players felt a very strong connection to their alliance, while in r5,r6 due to alliances getting weaker and having splits (wp/vts, the betrayal of ely, deus and all the others) players felt that they are in need of new friends.
as we had a big new player influx since r6, i think theres only few "veterans" who played r4 in an alliance and ever experienced that sort of loyality, which may add to the point too

[reznor]

Alliance & BG's
...off course...there is always an effect...Good & Bad....
probably pointing out 1 big factor good effect....less POWERBLOCKING...then it will go back to the root...BG's>Alliance>Blocks>and round and round....and thanx we're still having some fun....PA game/community almost reached the top (creators, HC's, ace players are so genius )....and nothing to go but down...then will start again...diff environment...diff alliances...hope for new blood...

[Silva baby]

Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
When a BG's own leadership actively and vocally supports such actions and denounces the game, etc. I disagree. The fact that no member of OuZo has stepped forward to denounce the actions of their brethren is also a key.

Ultimately, I've always been under the impression that leadership does, if not inadvertantly, represent "the whole" of the said alliance, battlegroup, or other entity.

That i think is the problem, a BG doesn't have to explain its actions, why does it have to?? its a BG its a group of people of friends. The conditions they wish to set in order to allow for memebrs could be as simple as knowing them in real life or something. And anyway like everyone said BG's are less strict, less defined then an alliance, they don't need to justify their actions or justify keeping a member because they are formed in friendship blah blah or skill. And also, leadership does not represent the whole alliance/bg cause if it did then its highly flawed. Y because HC rarely are heard or seen

[McIvan]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Zh|l
You're wrong. My attitude existed in round 4 when I was a mere member for Fury and had nothing to do with command.

References: Lokken, McIvan. Meth.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i]Originally posted by Lupin [/i]
but you did identify youself with Fury? you also could do it, although you are not in the High Command.

He most certainly did identify himself with Fury, in exactly the manner he does now....

BTW anyone who can't handle their friends being on the opposite side is the one with a problem. All of us manage friendly competition with our mates in other spheres of life, without becoming the oft-times bitter and twisted enemies represented on these boards.

A bit of perspective would do some people a world of good.

McIvan
BlueTuba

[Parthos]

Originally posted by Zh|l
I disagree, I believe it lies with the alliance. We see what happens when loyalties lie with friends only (i.e Battlegroups, cheating etc)

Where does the friends > * thing come from anyway? The only answer that springs readily to mind is laziness, though I'm sure there must be more or deeper meanings behind it. Laziness defined thusly: I would go to the ends of the earth for my old galmates; we keep our old galchan as a random-round defense channel for our current gals to go to when we get incoming. We're in all different alliances now. When incoming comes for one of them who is in my ally, I defend and take it to the alliance; when it comes for one who is being attacked by my ally, I take it to his alliance and make sure he gets covered by them. I mean, is it that people are too lazy to go into xx alliance channel and pass the call on? It's not like any alliance, given incoming at eta 6-8, has any sort of problems covering it in a random round.

We're friends, we don't need to attack together every day or constantly defend one another personally in order to keep that friendship "alive." We hang, we talk, we share battle reports, and sometimes we even attack or defend together. I get the feeling "friends > *" is just an excuse for what the bg's have evolved into (though very few actually began this way): hassle-free dual-alliance membership. What could be sweeter than to have a second alliance membership, in an alliance that has no political resposibilities (hence rarely if ever, putting the bg as a unit in the line of fire, thereby making its defenses much more successful as its entire membership will never be under attack simultaneously), works behind the scenes attacking the fattest targets it can and defending however it pleases them?

It's pretty much the alliances' fault this whole bg/alliance conflict arose. People always enjoyed attacking with their friends; many alliances, seeing the way outside handling of attacks lightened their workload, permitted and encouraged formation of these groups. I think it was around round 6 or 7 when alliances even put policies in place telling members "we won't be running many/any alliance raids; every member ought to find themself a bg." The little pet that the alliances nurtured grew into a monster snapping at their heels, and now it gnaws on their carcasses.

[Stress]

the answer is simple tho.
do not allow members of your alliance to be in a BG.
if that bg is not under direct controll of your alliance.

my guess would be that in some time, BG's will make the Alliances unexistatnt. Then some BG leader will think hey we can make this innto an alliance. and the cycle continues.

Basically, the single most valueable asset an alliancecan gain from ints members, is loyalty. that is what can break other alliances, in a war. Naturally u need some level of experiance. But still, if you have members willing to go the distance, for the alliance and not ofr their own glory. Its how to win a war.

Then comes the Question, why do one play the game. ITs all a matter of, if u play for the alliance. Or if u play for your own glory. Personally I've newer ben a fan of glory seeker's. But i do se what the BG's contribute to. Sadly they are in some ways in direct conflict with alliances.

If i was still in an alliance, I would ask expect it and its members to be purly part of that alliance, and anny possible bgs to be allso 100% controlled by them.


What is the fun in winning a game, without choosing a side ? ITs a lot more powerfull and giving, if u can win. Staying true to your promises.

[clau777]

I'm the most loyal guy in the universe !!!!

[NeverLastomon]

well, i take BG's as small alliances.

back in R4 days when there were a lot more ppl playing those BIG alliances were possible, but now about 10k ppl playing its just not possible.

BG are about 150 ppl alliances and are based on friendship.

but alliances still act big, tho i must say my BG has more activity in it then in my alliance channel.

i kinda think that when alliances dont want to change they will simply be overtaken.

[Naris]

Originally posted by Denniz
Funny to hear from Vision HC.
You were WP BG that didnt had the balls to split off allready end r6, so u stayed as wp BG back then.

I think most alliances are too afraid to lose their members and try to lock them down in one place and dont give them chance to EXPLORE pa with other ppl and different societies in the pa universe.

I remember back in rnd (3-5) in pa of Aesir, I let ppl leave without any problem from the Hc`s staff, because of one main reason.
- Its no point to be angry if you see a member need changes and explore other communities, another thing you cant bind a rope around a person and refuse to let him go, then threat him to roid him. Its a risk to take and all Hc`s nightmare. There are some still who refuse to re-join who are Bc`s, which I understand very well since we had a break for 3 rounds. But we got most of our old members back.
That is what I call loyalty since rnd 3 of planetarion.
Sincerely
Naris

[Storebo]

I'm loyal to my friends.. Once was very loyal towards Elysium, but all many of my friends went away from there.. Thoose that still remained wanted a change. I really wanted to make Elysium strong. Why i kept bringing in really good loyal players in there.About the same that left with me. They stayed because of me... I stayed because of other reasons, and when Soben left thoose reasons became smaller. And there where people we all wanted to play with, but couldn't because Elysium had gained a bad reputation. So Adelante was born, shouldn't have merged it with all the other weird ****. It could have been very different, but it all got out of hand. I'm loyal to whomever is loyal to me. And I do my best to never betray them, hard when such things conflict with eachother.

[Storebo]

Originally posted by Stress
the answer is simple tho.
do not allow members of your alliance to be in a BG.
if that bg is not under direct controll of your alliance.

my guess would be that in some time, BG's will make the Alliances unexistatnt. Then some BG leader will think hey we can make this innto an alliance. and the cycle continues.

Basically, the single most valueable asset an alliancecan gain from ints members, is loyalty. that is what can break other alliances, in a war. Naturally u need some level of experiance. But still, if you have members willing to go the distance, for the alliance and not ofr their own glory. Its how to win a war.

Then comes the Question, why do one play the game. ITs all a matter of, if u play for the alliance. Or if u play for your own glory. Personally I've newer ben a fan of glory seeker's. But i do se what the BG's contribute to. Sadly they are in some ways in direct conflict with alliances.

If i was still in an alliance, I would ask expect it and its members to be purly part of that alliance, and anny possible bgs to be allso 100% controlled by them.


What is the fun in winning a game, without choosing a side ? ITs a lot more powerfull and giving, if u can win. Staying true to your promises.

When I was Elysium I was all for our gals attacking with Elysium. Was a common goal of mine and Soben. We where both in military department, and personaly whomever didn't attack Ely targets I saw as traitors =)

[Duke Leto]

Zhil's loyalty to Fury (as misplaced and twisted in itself as that is..lol) is a function of his sense of self, ingrained to the point where he has become an unintentional and willing prisoner of it, much in the same way as I with hirr - the first and last alliance I ever belonged to through 8 rounds.

Due to the fact that his bag was loyalty and honor to Fury, anything he did in Fury's name, even if viewed as treachorous or dishonorable in the eyes of anyone else, was insignificant when held in context to his personification of Fury and the honor there derived. It was the perfect suit of armour, making Zhil bulletproof to almost any assault on his person... to this very day I see.

The fact that he pledged his loyalty to one of the most revered and reviled alliances in PA history makes his loyalty all the more significant in his own eyes and thus increases the stature of his ego in terms of sense of "self" in planetarion.

Outside of the megolomania that has evolved from this titanic persona that Zhil has manifested in himself, he is still a good guy in my book, but for you who see him as the standard bearer of Fury, an apologist and zealot, know that I view him in a far gentler and sympathetic light.


I'll leave you with a quote that perhaps impresses upon you the currency in character that Zhil has worked so hard to amass a fortune in over his tenure, that installs in him the authority and grudging respect he commands:

"Histories are more full of examples of the fidelity of dogs than of friends."
-Alexander Pope

Never shall it be an affront on my character to have such a dog as Zhil as my friend.


Leto

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by lokken
Loyalty is signing up to one alliance. For one round or the greater.

imo (alliance) loyalty is like you described. But, if it's only for 1 round then I can't call it loyalty (that is if you don't quit playing but move to another alliance). There's no loyaly involved imo when you only commit to something for a fixed period of time, if you knew that before you so called pledged loyalty.

Also loyalty is such an expesive word. You have loyalty towards friends, galaxy, maybe BG and your alliance.
Everyone uses different measures of priority here so it's hard to judge someone's loyalty.

What might seem loyal to him/her, might not be seen as truly loyal by his/her alliance HC.

rgds Kj

[Sun_Tzu]

First of all, FRIENDS > *! It's as simple as that, that's allways what's guided my choice of alliance and so it will in the future(just so happens Dragons seem to have the biggest chunk of my m8s these days )

Secondly, alliances can blaim themselves if BG's grow in power. With the return of the random galaxies two important things changed: People were used to playing with theirs friends and attacking with their gals, this came to an end. The solution? The alliances weren't able to gather the community spirit to compensate for the loss of the close-knit galaxy and thus BG's started evolving, growing as multiplying. The alliance attacks were also not powerfull enough, why go attack with alliance when your BG provides more freedom for you to move and is a more secure and safe group to attack with, you allways know people will launch etc. and if someone sleeps in you can allways call them, the attacks of BG's had the element of security that gal-raids used to have but with your members now being spread out more, making it harder to mass-counter.

The old alliances are failing, you need new alliances built from the ground up around groups of closely knitted friends, forming battle-squads within the alliance and thus keeping the attacking under alliance control.

or something...

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by Zh|l
I always have and will continue to take attacks against Fury as personal.

odd isn't it, I get flamed, accused and shot down by everyone when I do that (and so it seems I always take such things personally, though in the past more then now but still ...).

Yet you get admired for doin it, think some pple need to take of the hypocritical glasses and judge the same action the same way, and not let their personal feelings towards that person involve in the judgement.

rgds Kj

[Maddix]

Originally posted by Kjeldoran
odd isn't it, I get flamed, accused and shot down by everyone when I do that (and so it seems I always take such things personally, though in the past more then now but still ...).

Yet you get admired for doin it, think some pple need to take of the hypocritical glasses and judge the same action the same way, and not let their personal feelings towards that person involve in the judgement.

rgds Kj

Fury > Fang.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by Maddix
Fury > Fang.

obviously they always were, doesn't mean taking this against Fury personal means more then any other Hc of his alliance

Then again, some pple like to live in the America syndrome, meaning "we're bigger so we can be morons and do anything we want cause ya can't do **** about it nway".

P.S. I apology to all americans here who do posses a brain, this was just meant at the avg

rgds Kj

[Duke Leto]

Originally posted by Kjeldoran
odd isn't it, I get flamed, accused and shot down by everyone when I do that (and so it seems I always take such things personally, though in the past more then now but still ...).

Yet you get admired for doin it, think some pple need to take of the hypocritical glasses and judge the same action the same way, and not let their personal feelings towards that person involve in the judgement.

rgds Kj

Good point. I have no doubt in my mind that FanG is as good a community as any, and that you Kjel, have been an upstanding devotee.

IT boils down to perceptions, agendas and quite bluntly, the way you carry yourself that also adds to how you are treated on these boards.

AS to loyalty, I do not think that I can point to many players who have stayed with one alliance for the entire tenure of their gameplay, although I know of quite a few personally in my own alliance. This does not have to do with player loyalties per se, as alliances come and go, and people must change with them.

It may seem unfair, but those who maintained their loyalty to those alliances that became institutions within planetarion received the benefit of the strength and longevity of these institutions when developing a sense of "loyalty and self". I know of many others who have been in several alliances and in each one, were loyal to the core, until disbanding, or internal rifts that splintered them.

All I am saying is that loyalty, honor and conviction towards an alliance or ideal is as much to do with the character of an individual as it does their actual relationship with an alliance. Outside of Fury, Zhil has still maintained himself in exactly the same way as before... and this can be said of many others as well.

Partisan PA Politics is an unfair game where those who have become "established" have a bit of an advantage over those who do not, or perhaps have a spotty or turbulent history. In this regard, I commiserate with your situation Kjel, as I know of people in FanG who I hold in a very high esteem, some I like, and some I do not, so this is not a personality contest for me.

Just to prove that, I hold Germania in as high a regard as Zhil. I believe they have similar bases of loyalty, honor and personal dedication that has earned them a reputation of some magnitude and influence in the game, although Germania may be perceived as more of a twat by a great deal of the PA community. This has to do with personality though, and I believe is an unfair perception of him as personal attacks are often used to undermine his daunting tactics of debate.

In the end, loyalty is relative, but trust and accepting someone's word as a bond are born from the character of an individual's soul, and I think that is what this debate is truly about, as the politics of the game only blurs the rest.


Leto

[Sun_Tzu]

Originally posted by Kjeldoran
odd isn't it, I get flamed, accused and shot down by everyone when I do that (and so it seems I always take such things personally, though in the past more then now but still ...).

Yet you get admired for doin it, think some pple need to take of the hypocritical glasses and judge the same action the same way, and not let their personal feelings towards that person involve in the judgement.

rgds Kj

it's simple, I'm suprised you can't see, they just don't understand what he's talking about half the time so instead of making themselves look foolish they just chear :P i.e. a true politician ^^

Thus we conclude the solution for respect is using BIG WORDS and HIDDEN CONTEXTS and the likes to stick it to people without them even noticing anything

[HobbieRogue4]

FAnG and proud!

[Ahriman]

Originally posted by Duke Leto
[Germania's] daunting tactics of debate.

I couldn't help but laugh

[Sun_Tzu]

Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
FAnG and proud!

Got a problem with that? It's the best community I've been a part of, the rnd7-8 FAnG, friendly good players working together having a blast.

Besides, didn't you quit this game? If you're gonna go away, be a man and leave full out and don't come back to nag about ****e you don't know anything about(from my experience the naging about BG's is total BS, o/c I've been a Dragon though so it might be different than on "the other side"...)

[Duke Leto]

Originally posted by Ahriman
I couldn't help but laugh

I was trying to be nice... and that was the most diplomatic way of putting it... : )


Leto

[Duke Leto]

Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
FAnG and proud!

STRENGTH AND HONOUR!! et al.


: )



Leto

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
FAnG and proud!

Hobbie and for once not trying to blatantly insult pple or alliances ...

rgds Kj

[Tempestuous]

For The [Fury]

[LEFF|pm]

nah, nutting interesting, rumad...

They are talking about "loyalty" and other things you got no clue about :P

[Som1]

being loyal to an alliance doesn't means to stay with it for 10 rounds.

being loyal to an alliance for me is stick with it's decisions, give out your best for your alliance and make your alliance pass first in all your decisions. Be it for an half round or 10 rounds.

For exemple, I wouldn't consider Farmer Bob which was part of the same alliance for 4-5 rounds and always ended top10 without ever defending his own alliance as a loyal member.

[HobbieRogue4]

Originally posted by Duke Leto
STRENGTH AND HONOUR!! et al.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by LEFF|pm
nah, nutting interesting, rumad...

They are talking about "loyalty" and other things you got no clue about :P

omg Rumad m8, he hit you right on the nose there

still wub ya though

rgds Kj

[cypher]

Originally posted by Som1
being loyal to an alliance doesn't means to stay with it for 10 rounds.

being loyal to an alliance for me is stick with it's decisions, give out your best for your alliance and make your alliance pass first in all your decisions. Be it for an half round or 10 rounds.

For exemple, I wouldn't consider Farmer Bob which was part of the same alliance for 4-5 rounds and always ended top10 without ever defending his own alliance as a loyal member.

think i was in alliance with him... he was one of the first to offer me defence anytime something happened.

i saw KJ say something about zhil and him defending fury always and saying he did same. if you want to be respected for that reason, then why do you mind it so much when scouse and parra do same for titans?

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by cyphie

i saw KJ say something about zhil and him defending fury always and saying he did same. if you want to be respected for that reason, then why do you mind it so much when scouse and parra do same for titans?

no, reread what I said, I said that while Zhil takes stuff towards Fury and Wrath personal, I tend to do the same concerning FAnG. My point being, if Zhil does it then pple are impressed, if I do it then they call me an idiot.

Those pple are hypocrits and should take off their "double standard" glasses for once and judge the same action objectively.

that's what I said, also I never minded parra or scouse doin the same for Titans, infact I'd be surprised if they did not do everything possible for their own alliance.

rgds Kj

[Scouse]

Originally posted by Kjeldoran
My point being, if Zhil does it then pple are impressed, if I do it then they call me an idiot.

It's the way you do it. You take huge offence to anything anyone says against FAnG and tend to rattle somthing out like a kid might in a school yard. Whereas Zhil might take the same level of offence, or more, yet he tends to put forward a logic counter-argument.

[Torjus]

u can nevah trust ppl xtothez, etc
he did`t show any loyalty to his friends/community

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by Scouse
It's the way you do it. You take huge offence to anything anyone says against FAnG and tend to rattle somthing out like a kid might in a school yard. Whereas Zhil might take the same level of offence, or more, yet he tends to put forward a logic counter-argument.

maybe because English is Zhil's native language and I often have trouble expressing myself the way I intend to. that and the fact that pple are biassed and will try to find stuff to counter with.

rgds Kj

[Som1]

Originally posted by cyphie
think i was in alliance with him... he was one of the first to offer me defence anytime something happened.

i saw KJ say something about zhil and him defending fury always and saying he did same. if you want to be respected for that reason, then why do you mind it so much when scouse and parra do same for titans?

Bob was an invented name, I didn't meant the Bob was like this heh.

[cypher]

Originally posted by Som1
Bob was an invented name, I didn't meant the Bob was like this heh.

heh k:P my mistake was already wondering:P

[Banned]

Originally posted by Kjeldoran
maybe because English is Zhil's native language and I often have trouble expressing myself the way I intend to. that and the fact that pple are biassed and will try to find stuff to counter with.

rgds Kj

I'm tired of hearing that cop-out. Make a deal with a mod to post in your native tongue for a week/month with a designated translator (or for more fun, you can pick one, and we'll pick one, and they can both translate.)

[Kjeldoran]

Originally posted by Banned
I'm tired of hearing that cop-out. Make a deal with a mod to post in your native tongue for a week/month with a designated translator (or for more fun, you can pick one, and we'll pick one, and they can both translate.)

well, gladly I never asked the opinion of some annoying twat who's biggest life achievement is being an unbelievable annoying troll on AD.

Go bitch at someone else ... maybe they might appreciate it.

rgds Kj

[HobbieRogue4]

Hi. I'd like to have my thread closed now. Thank you.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
Hi. I'd like to have my thread closed now. Thank you.

You're welcome.