|
|
23 Sep 2003, 01:18
|
#1
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Winning alliance?
It occurs to me, how will the winning alliance be decided at the end of PaX? Although the obvious choice would be score, it's not really fair to pick on an alliance that fills up its 150 spots when an alliance with half the players isn't far behind. And average planet score, while being a better representation of skill than the ability to mass-recruit above, can easily be abused by trimming memberlists.
This is the first time an alliance can be officially declared 'winner' by official ingame stats, rather than the impact the players percieve them the have. I'm just wondering if PA crew have considered this...
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 01:23
|
#2
|
Inflate My Ego
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hengelo, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,011
|
Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by xtothez
Although the obvious choice would be score, it's not really fair to pick on an alliance that fills up its 150 spots when an alliance with half the players isn't far behind. And average planet score, while being a better representation of skill than the ability to mass-recruit above, can easily be abused by trimming memberlists.
|
That's how it's always been, and I assume that's how it will be this round as well. It's just backed by the ingame alliance ranking system this time. Whereas in the past we had to rely on tags and memberlists to get a clear view of who was on top.
__________________
'Forever' said he. And then he was gone.
Who keeps an arrow in his bow,
And if you prod him, lets it go?
A fervent friend, a subtle foe
Scorpio
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 01:37
|
#3
|
Lucky
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: -
Posts: 3,830
|
a list of average scores would be nice though.
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 01:57
|
#4
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Scorpio
That's how it's always been, and I assume that's how it will be this round as well. It's just backed by the ingame alliance ranking system this time. Whereas in the past we had to rely on tags and memberlists to get a clear view of who was on top.
|
Well previously it was more often decided by the alliance with the most top 10(0) planets and control of top gals. But now its more in the domain of the alliances with a low average score but the numbers to look big on paper as it where.
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 02:02
|
#5
|
Eclipse High Command
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Eclipse
Posts: 1,144
|
My prediction would be:
The alliance winning pax will be the alliance beeing able to keep atleast a minority of its members motivated to play this great new game while the rest of the universe just quits and plays ********
P.S. spinner was atleast wise enough to remove the delete button so the disgusted customer cant show him the middlefinger by leaving the game in an obvious way
__________________
We fight together,
We win together,
or we die together.
-T&P slogan
Focht
T&P HC
Fury Exec
Eclipse CEO
Stan's muppet
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 02:48
|
#6
|
Toyboy
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: At Home
Posts: 190
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Razorback
My prediction would be:
The alliance winning pax will be the alliance beeing able to keep atleast a minority of its members motivated to play this great new game while the rest of the universe just quits and plays ********
P.S. spinner was atleast wise enough to remove the delete button so the disgusted customer cant show him the middlefinger by leaving the game in an obvious way
|
Heh, another ******** convert, slight problem in that ******** is down though, ah well, it's back in two weeks.
__________________
The Ministry
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 08:10
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oslo
Posts: 279
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jorinn
Heh, another ******** convert, slight problem in that ******** is down though, ah well, it's back in two weeks.
|
back already then??
geat
Need to move up to top10 lol :P
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 14:53
|
#8
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by xtothez
It occurs to me, how will the winning alliance be decided at the end of PaX? Although the obvious choice would be score, it's not really fair to pick on an alliance that fills up its 150 spots when an alliance with half the players isn't far behind. And average planet score, while being a better representation of skill than the ability to mass-recruit above, can easily be abused by trimming memberlists.
This is the first time an alliance can be officially declared 'winner' by official ingame stats, rather than the impact the players percieve them the have. I'm just wondering if PA crew have considered this...
|
well tbh, galaxy ranks and individual rankings of (look we got #1 player) means NOTHING anymore which is good. It's the alliance that counts, not the individual skills of their players.
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 15:05
|
#9
|
Das Scoot
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 788
|
PA will just pick whatever alliance has the most score at the end of the round to be the official winner. I mean, that's what they do with galaxies, they never say 'well you guys were fence sitters so you don't deserve it' etc. It's only on here that it'll be debated, which it has been done with planets, galaxies, and alliances since forever.
__________________
n00b since Jan 11th, 2001
I don't really know what I'm doing here
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 15:08
|
#10
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
well tbh, galaxy ranks and individual rankings of (look we got #1 player) means NOTHING anymore which is good. It's the alliance that counts, not the individual skills of their players.
rgds Kj
|
I thought you would say that.
rgds Xto
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 15:13
|
#11
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by xtothez
I thought you would say that.
rgds Xto
|
so you value individuals skills higher? you think it's better to have "selfish twats" that end up #1 then having active and loyal but alliance team players?
Infact you're a louzy HC if your goal is to get the #1 gal and player instead of having your entire alliance end up first.
I figured my answer would be one of every decent HC, which is playing for his alliance and only caring about his alliance's performances.
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 15:18
|
#12
|
Evil inside
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,631
|
Focht in "making-sence-shocker" post!
__________________
<Germania>but you called Fury a bully, and that is terribly unfair
<Hicks>Occassionally individuals do things without Executive consent
<Dreadnought>You cant whois on Eclipse server without a registered nic, which mr ****stirrer doesnt have.
<Almeida> well i like to grow fat myself too, and when i have enough ships then i can engage in big battles
<Nantoz> Zhukov for Lord Protector!
<Jakiri> (Windows)XP was fine on release
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 16:18
|
#13
|
I play the double-bass.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,198
|
what exactly is your definition of 'alliance-winning'?
__________________
The music called Jaazzz..
Charlie Mingus, such nimble fingers
Droppin the bass, all over the place
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 16:50
|
#14
|
dutchy
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Lupin
what exactly is your definition of 'alliance-winning'?
|
Highest ranking alliance by total score at the end of ticks...
There are a few dozen of other ways to 'catogarise' an alliance but most of them are too biased.
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 16:51
|
#15
|
etc.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Taken.
Posts: 1,602
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
so you value individuals skills higher? you think it's better to have "selfish twats" that end up #1 then having active and loyal but alliance team players?
Infact you're a louzy HC if your goal is to get the #1 gal and player instead of having your entire alliance end up first.
I figured my answer would be one of every decent HC, which is playing for his alliance and only caring about his alliance's performances.
rgds Kj
|
With all do resepect, just because an alliance HC wishes to have 'top finishers' does not mean that HC is a lousy one. In fact, because of the reasons stated above, what may well determine 'the winning alliance' is individual scores.
This is all subject to how the Creators and the Community itself decides to 'rank' planets, galaxies, and alliances (wether the same as rounds before or not).
rgds Ho
__________________
10/20/04 <Dinoman> babies are like a online game... u wery soon get lack of sleep... and u try give em diffrent skills... it allso kills ur social life
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 17:30
|
#16
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
With all do resepect, just because an alliance HC wishes to have 'top finishers' does not mean that HC is a lousy one. In fact, because of the reasons stated above, what may well determine 'the winning alliance' is individual scores.
This is all subject to how the Creators and the Community itself decides to 'rank' planets, galaxies, and alliances (wether the same as rounds before or not).
rgds Ho
|
not really. For a player, becoming #1 is an individual victory. For an alliance, you have to rank yourself towards the other alliances. Having more top planets doesn't make you better. the total score and thus power your alliance presents, is what matters when you wanna claim you won.
Nway, that's my view on it. And maybe "louzy" is abit strongly put, though it has some truth in it.
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 17:54
|
#17
|
etc.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Taken.
Posts: 1,602
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
not really. For a player, becoming #1 is an individual victory.
|
Yes. Additionally, it is an alliance victory, not to mention a galactic one as well. I was damn proud of the Legionnaires who were in the Top 10 each round. I was damn proud of Kileman, and much of Fury in Round 7 ('much' does not include everyone, ho ho). Get it?
Quote:
For an alliance, you have to rank yourself towards the other alliances.
|
My alliance has more top spots than yours. I win.*
Quote:
Having more top planets doesn't make you better.
|
It does in the eyes of the Universe (and logically as well; all that matters is who's on top when the ticks end - because then you get to have a nice lovely orgy in #creators [ OOOH AHHH SPURT]).
Quote:
the total score and thus power your alliance presents, is what matters when you wanna claim you won.
|
Or we can pretend every round never has two different sides claiming 'ultimate victory.'
Fact of the matter is, if one's alliance is 'so powerful' in 'total score' that means **** all if it can't claim a few top spots. Especially if you do a comparison to something as simple as 'Tag rankings' feature in-game:
Just because [YOU] has 1k planets, average score 200.000, [ASS] has 300 planets, average score 300.00, and [KJ] has 1 planet, average score 200.000.001, essentially comes to meaning [KJ] is the big wiener-winner.
Quote:
Nway, that's my view on it. And maybe "louzy" is abit strongly put, though it has some truth in it.
rgds Kj
|
Actually, it has no truth, as it's not a word.**
* Disregarding issues such as allied alliances and 'blocks wars.'
** rgds Ho
__________________
10/20/04 <Dinoman> babies are like a online game... u wery soon get lack of sleep... and u try give em diffrent skills... it allso kills ur social life
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 18:33
|
#18
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
[/i]
|
like I mentionned, that's how I feel about it. Ofc it's fun having the #1 player and top galaxy, but it's hardly priority of my alliance.
Priority is to do well as an alliance and let the pple in it have fun, after all this is just a silly game.
rgds Kj*
* rgds Kj > rgds Ho
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 18:36
|
#19
|
etc.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Taken.
Posts: 1,602
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
Ofc it's fun having the #1 player and top galaxy, but it's hardly priority of my alliance.
|
But we're not talking about 'your alliance' here, we're talking about the generalized criteria for winning a round -> rankings.*
Quote:
Priority is to do well as an alliance and let the pple in it have fun, after all this is just a silly game.
|
Not everyone shares this priority, some even claim it, and still venture to the same goal -> rankings.*
* Winning.
__________________
10/20/04 <Dinoman> babies are like a online game... u wery soon get lack of sleep... and u try give em diffrent skills... it allso kills ur social life
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 18:50
|
#20
|
FAnG
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 93
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
[b]But we're not talking about 'your alliance' here, we're talking about the generalized criteria for winning a round -> rankings.*
Not everyone shares this priority, some even claim it, and still venture to the same goal -> rankings.*
*Winning.
|
tbh spinner gave us the perfect tool for ranking alliances.
the ingame thing does have its faults, but the ranking is good.
it cant be exploited by having 3k members so the difference in membercount is neglible (unlike common rumours we do not have 150 members, we arent even close).
#1 player has got its merits, but in a random round #1 gal means **** all.
my gal is top 10 atm, we got eclipse, rah, nd, fang and inactives, now if my gal were to win all of those could claim victory if we used that.
concerning #1 player, i'd rather have 20 top 100 members than 1 defence hogging top 10 player, who grumbles when he cant have 3 fleets out roiding. so maybe it is an honour to have #1 player, but it isnt the goal my alliance strives for. we strive for a victory as a team, and that means that no one gets special priviledges because he might make top 10 if he does
__________________
[00:58] <Squirrel> YES **** ME **** ME
[00:59] <Squirrel> **** ME NOW OH YES AliasX **** THE **** OUT OF ME
[00:59] <AliasX> wtf
FAnG
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 18:59
|
#21
|
etc.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Taken.
Posts: 1,602
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Unf_Slasher
concerning #1 player, i'd rather have 20 top 100 members than 1 defence hogging top 10 player, who grumbles when he cant have 3 fleets out roiding. so maybe it is an honour to have #1 player, but it isnt the goal my alliance strives for. we strive for a victory as a team, and that means that no one gets special priviledges because he might make top 10 if he does
|
Incase you missed the choo-choo, you've only just caught onto the fact that, according to yourself, rankings do matter. Makes no difference if it's Top 10 versus Top 20, fact is, compartively, you'd be better off if you had more high-ranked; that is to say, yes, team effort is wonderful, but it all comes down to ranks - how it was achieved or otherwise (not including cheating methods etc.).
__________________
10/20/04 <Dinoman> babies are like a online game... u wery soon get lack of sleep... and u try give em diffrent skills... it allso kills ur social life
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 20:12
|
#22
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by HobbieRogue4
[b]But we're not talking about 'your alliance' here, we're talking about the generalized criteria for winning a round -> rankings.*
Not everyone shares this priority, some even claim it, and still venture to the same goal -> rankings.*
*Winning.
|
exactly, but I said "in my opinion" and I was refering to my situation, how I would feel about it. And How else to do that with using my own alliance?
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 21:04
|
#23
|
etc.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Taken.
Posts: 1,602
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
exactly, but I said "in my opinion" and I was refering to my situation, how I would feel about it. And How else to do that with using my own alliance?
rgds Kj
|
Simple: Don't use FAnG, because this thread, alas, is not about FAnG.
__________________
10/20/04 <Dinoman> babies are like a online game... u wery soon get lack of sleep... and u try give em diffrent skills... it allso kills ur social life
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 21:52
|
#24
|
Inactive peon
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
|
its a bit like formula 1 - u have the drivers and construcotrs championship. differnet teams play in differnet ways e.g. ferari play to have michael win everything and thus try and win the drivers and hope rubens gets enough points to give them the constructors as well. whereas mclaren and willaims are much more about a balenced team effort. But every team at the end fo the day wnats to win all the champinships hence its hte same in pa... the winning alliance will be the one that tops the alliance ranking simply becuase thats how everyone will asusme it will be so will play for that goal.... of course that alliance really wants the #1 planet and #1 gal to go with it.
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 23:01
|
#25
|
Fightin-irish for life
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: guinness brewery
Posts: 2,177
|
havin the #1 planet just means u got a greedy 3 fleets out attacking def whore in ur alliance , they have set up in game rankings to solve the prob of who wins so its no-ones fault if the X alliances has a few more members to give them the overall victory as its a level playing field with the alliances limited to 150.
regarding the top gal no alliance can claim it in a random round cause there are 10 planets in it so unless there was blatant acc swapping how is it possible to have more than 2 from 1 alliance in any gal
__________________
Ascendancy, now with added Irish
"In the absence of orders, find something and kill it."
-Rommel
|
|
|
23 Sep 2003, 23:46
|
#26
|
[Vision]
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 897
|
Quote:
Originally posted by gzambo
havin the #1 planet just means u got a greedy 3 fleets out attacking def whore in ur alliance
|
may i point out its PaX now? getting only roids is not all that gives you score mister
I don't mind to much who wins, as i am sure that the alliance that ends up @ the #1 position deserves it. But some recognition for the #1 player would be nice aswell as such a player worked hard for it aswell (and his alliances getting him there most likely =) ).
__________________
[Vision] in a lost dream, contributing to The 5th Element at present
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 00:15
|
#27
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
so you value individuals skills higher? you think it's better to have "selfish twats" that end up #1 then having active and loyal but alliance team players?
Infact you're a louzy HC if your goal is to get the #1 gal and player instead of having your entire alliance end up first.
I figured my answer would be one of every decent HC, which is playing for his alliance and only caring about his alliance's performances.
rgds Kj
|
Please don't put words into my mouth. I know you are perfectly capable of comprehending my first post, and how this is relvevant to my opinion:
Quote:
it's not really fair to pick on an alliance that fills up its 150 spots when an alliance with half the players isn't far behind
|
I never once mentioned top planet or gal was essential to winning. However I do feel that higher ranked planets, combined with a higher average planet score reflect more on an alliance than total score does. After all, mass-recruiting isn't exactly a skill.
But of course you knew that.
Troll.
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 00:23
|
#28
|
Commander
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: .nz
Posts: 519
|
Quote:
Originally posted by gzambo
havin the #1 planet just means u got a greedy 3 fleets out attacking def whore in ur alliance
|
On what exactly do you base that assumption?
It isnt exactly a very educated view at all.
Your alliance having and finishing with the #1 planet means that your alliance was so 'powerful and strong' that no other party was able to take down that particular planet and replace it with one of their own. You will never see a #1 planet that isnt from the best 'alliances' of the round (taking into account blocks and allys).
Having the #1 planet (without cheating -_-) is the product of a:
1) Strong alliance able to withstand all adversary
2) A strong galaxy (and or cluster in the case of galaxy being crap), that is able to support the said planet with low eta travel (in pax this is now the 'alliance')
3) Having a dedicated planet manager, that knows their stuff extremely well, has ludicrious online times and the ability to entice the masses to fight for their cause (keeping them #1).
Pissing a lot of people off has also never done wonders for the rankings of a #1 planet, along with arrogance and cheating.
Regardless of the in game ranking system, the #1 planet (and galaxys when they are private) will always be representative of the top alliance and or block. No matter what the bs total score is. Because if that overall alliance score cant be mobilised at any one time to take out the top planet, then its not exactly effective or hugely useful at all
__________________
[Fury]Kileman @_@
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 00:23
|
#29
|
FAnG
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 93
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by xtothez
Please don't put words into my mouth. I know you are perfectly capable of comprehending my first post, and how this is relvevant to my opinion:
I never once mentioned top planet or gal was essential to winning. However I do feel that higher ranked planets, combined with a higher average planet score reflect more on an alliance than total score does. After all, mass-recruiting isn't exactly a skill.
But of course you knew that.
Troll.
|
hmm your argument doesnt work imho.
last round the whole top 25 together had more score than about 500 people from rank 400-900.
so just recruiting 150 players wont win you the scores.
it would be nice if spinner added an avg value for the alliances, but imho total score is what should be ranked (thats the way rd 2 got decided as well in case anyone remembers).
1 last point, if spinner is looking at this he might fix the recruit exploit (people added as recruit not adding to score of alliance) a certain officer of a certain alliance always brags about
__________________
[00:58] <Squirrel> YES **** ME **** ME
[00:59] <Squirrel> **** ME NOW OH YES AliasX **** THE **** OUT OF ME
[00:59] <AliasX> wtf
FAnG
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 01:21
|
#30
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Unf_Slasher
|
Distracting me on AD while your alliance launches on my planet is not funny.
:((
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 01:42
|
#31
|
Eclipse High Command
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Eclipse
Posts: 1,144
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Unf_Slasher
hmm your argument doesnt work imho.
last round the whole top 25 together had more score than about 500 people from rank 400-900.
so just recruiting 150 players wont win you the scores.
it would be nice if spinner added an avg value for the alliances, but imho total score is what should be ranked (thats the way rd 2 got decided as well in case anyone remembers).
|
Last round was the old score system. Exponential growth was removed thats why we have atm the situation where a casual player is not too far behind a hardcore player.
So in a conclusion of this logic 150 casual players could beat 100 hardcore players scorewise.
__________________
We fight together,
We win together,
or we die together.
-T&P slogan
Focht
T&P HC
Fury Exec
Eclipse CEO
Stan's muppet
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 07:01
|
#32
|
~Gon
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 290
|
no i think it merely means the hardcore players will have to struggle a lil longer in the end they will succeed and will have much more score than their enemies anyway...
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 07:59
|
#33
|
The Usualsuspects
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 240
|
Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
well tbh, galaxy ranks and individual rankings of (look we got #1 player) means NOTHING anymore which is good. It's the alliance that counts, not the individual skills of their players.
rgds Kj
|
for someone who posts alot you never seem to say much do you
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 09:08
|
#34
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Norway
Posts: 236
|
well said dj
__________________
Vittoria o Morte
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 09:21
|
#35
|
Love's Sweet Exile
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Living on a Stair (Now Sword-less)
Posts: 2,371
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Lei~
no i think it merely means the hardcore players will have to struggle a lil longer in the end they will succeed and will have much more score than their enemies anyway...
|
Is that not sort of the point?
They may have more score than their enemies, but high score doesn't necessarily mean they will be able to "bash" their enemies to the ground, like in previous rounds.
The "hardcore" players definitely deserve to win, i don't think anyone would argue there, the problem in previous round was that them winning came at the expense of everyone else losing (badly...), which (hopefully) shouldn't be the case so much this round.
Quote:
Originally posted by Kileman
Because if that overall alliance score cant be mobilised at any one time to take out the top planet, then its not exactly effective or hugely useful at all
|
It won't be easy at all for an alliance to take down a #1 player in 1 (set of..) attacks, again due to the new scoring. Score now, rightly imo, doesn't just show how good at playing the game a planet it, it shows how well the planet has played for the whole round.
Its entirely possible, that you could kill all someone's ships, steal all their roids and them still have the #1 spot due to their attacks/defences/cov-ops/whatever earlier in the round.
__________________
--SYMM--
Ba Ba Ti Ki Di Do
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 11:51
|
#36
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by djcomplex
for someone who posts alot you never seem to say much do you
|
yet I make more sence in 1 post as all your posts added so far
get a life or just stay away from AD, troll
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 11:57
|
#37
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Razorback
Last round was the old score system. Exponential growth was removed thats why we have atm the situation where a casual player is not too far behind a hardcore player.
So in a conclusion of this logic 150 casual players could beat 100 hardcore players scorewise.
|
yup, but you can't come on AD claiming it's not "FAIR" cause the rules are the same for everyone. Nothing forbids those 100 hardcore players to recruit to 150. They have that ability, if they don't want to use it then they cannot use an arguement such as "but they had more members" cause that's something you chose for. It's a choice you and your alliance made, it's NOT an excuse that can be called in at the end of the round so you can still claim you did good and would have done better IF you had ...
rgds Kj
p.s. I replied to Focht, yet it is not directed to him personally or his alliance, it's a general remark (to avoid nasty replies )
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:02
|
#38
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
yup, but you can't come on AD claiming it's not "FAIR" cause the rules are the same for everyone. Nothing forbids those 100 hardcore players to recruit to 150. They have that ability, if they don't want to use it then they cannot use an arguement such as "but they had more members" cause that's something you chose for. It's a choice you and your alliance made, it's NOT an excuse that can be called in at the end of the round so you can still claim you did good and would have done better IF you had ...
rgds Kj
p.s. I replied to Focht, yet it is not directed to him personally or his alliance, it's a general remark (to avoid nasty replies )
|
yup, but you can't come on AD claiming it's not "FAIR" cause the rules are the same for everyone. Nothing forbids those 150 average players to play well. They can have that ability, if they don't want to get it then they cannot use an arguement such as "but they played better" cause that's something you chose for. It's a choice you and your alliance made, it's NOT an excuse that can be called in at the end of the round so you can still claim you did good and would have done better IF you had ...
I'll say this for clarification - Mass-recruiting is not a skill. It is an option for HC who don't have members capable enough to compete otherwise. The ability to mass-recruit doesn't make you deserve a top ranking, it just highlights how **** your members , that you have to resort to such measures to compete.
An alliance with 75 members and 3 million score is 'better' than one with 150 players and 3.1 million score in my book, and I'm sure quite a lot of other people's as well. I just want to know if the people in charge care enough to reflect that.
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:07
|
#39
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by xtothez
An alliance with 75 members and 3 million score is 'better' than one with 150 players and 3.1 million score in my book, and I'm sure quite a lot of other people's as well. I just want to know if the people in charge care enough to reflect that.
|
yes Xto, yet the alliance with 3.1 mill score will be the official winner. Ofc the individual skills of your members do matter, but only to an extend. The example you gave was a drastic one, you know that aswell, If you end up with the highest allaince score in total in PAX, then you must have top 100 players, quiet some cause otherwise you wouldn't have that score.
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:13
|
#40
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
|
Also, do you guys wanna take a lunch break and resume this afternoon? I could use something to eat, covering and killing your suicide fleets makes me hungry.
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:15
|
#41
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by xtothez
Also, do you guys wanna take a lunch break and resume this afternoon? I could use something to eat, covering and killing your suicide fleets makes me hungry.
|
nah, we are cooperating with all other alliances to take you down m8, yup. Call it blocking vs Xto. Infact, you're that important that we will waste all our efforts on bringing you down for the rest of the round.
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:17
|
#42
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
nah, we are cooperating with all other alliances to take you down m8, yup. Call it blocking vs Xto. Infact, you're that important that we will waste all our efforts on bringing you down for the rest of the round.
rgds Kj
|
[derail_own_thread]
I did wonder why so many fleets were needed. Am I allowed to get the Dragon in my gal to defend against you, or do their members not know you share an arbiter? [/derail_own_thread]
Thanks for clarification.
rgds xto
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:23
|
#43
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by xtothez
[derail_own_thread]
I did wonder why so many fleets were needed. Am I allowed to get the Dragon in my gal to defend against you, or do their members not know you share an arbiter? [/derail_own_thread]
Thanks for clarification.
rgds xto
|
could you ask dragons to add me aswell so I can have access to their arbiter aswell? thx
rgds Kj
P.S.: just to show how rediculous this remark of xto was, FAnG has not arbiter, no board and no site or PAtools atm. So yes, we share our NOT YET EXISTING arbiter ...
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:37
|
#44
|
Eclipse High Command
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Eclipse
Posts: 1,144
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
yup, but you can't come on AD claiming it's not "FAIR" cause the rules are the same for everyone. Nothing forbids those 100 hardcore players to recruit to 150. They have that ability, if they don't want to use it then they cannot use an arguement such as "but they had more members" cause that's something you chose for. It's a choice you and your alliance made, it's NOT an excuse that can be called in at the end of the round so you can still claim you did good and would have done better IF you had ...
rgds Kj
p.s. I replied to Focht, yet it is not directed to him personally or his alliance, it's a general remark (to avoid nasty replies )
|
infact you didnt reply to my post which is kinda funny that you quoted me. You might feel the need to adjust your postings this thread was not about fairness and not about fang but about predictions of the AD posters on how the winning alliance of r10 may look like. Infact my reply was aimed on unf slasher (admittingly also fang) but in no way towards fang or how fair they played or not but basically pointing out he made a wrong estimation of last rounds scoreing system compared with the new system implemented in paX. Infact i find the arrogance you dictating anyone what is the right way to count score or what is NOT an excuse highly amuseing. Please keep in mind we are not your fang peons so free choice of speech and free opinions cant be limited by thy highness kj
P.S. try in future to "reply" to the point i made rather than quoting me and trying to push something else forward which has nothing to do with my post at all.
Disclaimer: i doubt anyone here spoke of fang as an alliance or about their way of living their live in pa. You brought YOUR alliance up at first and i honestly doubt it would be far better if you stop doing so because simply said there are other eggs in the basket and fang isnt by far the biggest or best.
__________________
We fight together,
We win together,
or we die together.
-T&P slogan
Focht
T&P HC
Fury Exec
Eclipse CEO
Stan's muppet
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:37
|
#45
|
used to register
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 979
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
could you ask dragons to add me aswell so I can have access to their arbiter aswell? thx
rgds Kj
P.S.: just to show how rediculous this remark of xto was, FAnG has not arbiter, no board and no site or PAtools atm. So yes, we share our NOT YET EXISTING arbiter ...
|
So what are you relying on? The ingame alliance "tool"? You're DOOMED... DOOMED!!!!!
__________________
R1: ??:?? | R2: 51:6 | R3: 37:12 | R4: 186:13 | R5: 13:17 | R6: 1:25
R7: 15:14 | R8: 34:4 / 52:10 ¤ | R9: 16:2 | R9.5: 34:6 / 41:6 ¤
R10: 2:2 | R10.5: 15:4 | R11: 28:8 | R12: 22:9
Damn, outdated and too lazy to edit, retired now
-----
Started playing again Still too lazy to update though
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:40
|
#46
|
Eclipse High Command
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Eclipse
Posts: 1,144
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
could you ask dragons to add me aswell so I can have access to their arbiter aswell? thx
rgds Kj
P.S.: just to show how rediculous this remark of xto was, FAnG has not arbiter, no board and no site or PAtools atm. So yes, we share our NOT YET EXISTING arbiter ...
|
Just Dragons have one and you share it ? :>
__________________
We fight together,
We win together,
or we die together.
-T&P slogan
Focht
T&P HC
Fury Exec
Eclipse CEO
Stan's muppet
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:44
|
#47
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Razorback
infact you didnt reply to my post which is kinda funny that you quoted me. You might feel the need to adjust your postings this thread was not about fairness and not about fang but about predictions of the AD posters on how the winning alliance of r10 may look like. Infact my reply was aimed on unf slasher (admittingly also fang) but in no way towards fang or how fair they played or not but basically pointing out he made a wrong estimation of last rounds scoreing system compared with the new system implemented in paX. Infact i find the arrogance you dictating anyone what is the right way to count score or what is NOT an excuse highly amuseing. Please keep in mind we are not your fang peons so free choice of speech and free opinions cant be limited by thy highness kj
P.S. try in future to "reply" to the point i made rather than quoting me and trying to push something else forward which has nothing to do with my post at all.
Disclaimer: i doubt anyone here spoke of fang as an alliance or about their way of living their live in pa. You brought YOUR alliance up at first and i honestly doubt it would be far better if you stop doing so because simply said there are other eggs in the basket and fang isnt by far the biggest or best.
|
100% accurate as always
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:47
|
#48
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Razorback
Just Dragons have one and you share it ? :>
|
could you and xto then PLZ add me to it? I feel left out cause I don't have access yet
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 12:49
|
#49
|
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by Kjeldoran
could you and xto then PLZ add me to it? I feel left out cause I don't have access yet
|
I'll sort if if you recall your jihad on me. I could use some lunch.
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
24 Sep 2003, 17:31
|
#50
|
Inquisitor
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: England
Posts: 2,207
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Winning alliance?
Quote:
Originally posted by xtothez
I'll sort if if you recall your jihad on me. I could use some lunch.
|
If you are thinking in a real dirty frame of mind, these mass launches could provide that nutrition.
__________________
----------
That uniform you're wearing
So hot I cant stop staring.
Zhil
[Spore] Executive
[1up]
[Fury]
Inquisitorial Lord Protector of His Emperor's Glorius Empire
[20:19:04] <mazzelaar> I have to say a big up to Zhil - without those 8 def calls you covered we would've been screwed. | r12 End Ceremony
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:55.
| |