Ascendancy - winners of Round 16?

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by bwtmc

The rankings have only ever served to try to assure ridiculously active players that it wasn't all a waste of time anyway.

(Quoted for relevance)

Then 1up would win Zhil, and as I said earlier in a post never replied to, that won't bring out anything positive either. And no, if I'm anything to go by, (and I'm an Ascendancy member so I am one 47th of the alliance) that's not the point Ascendancy are making (if they are making a point) it's probably something like what I said in my last post.

[Nolez]

Very cute with your insults, but there are very few Ascendancy members that are gloating. Most of us are trying to help others see our perspective but clearly that is a lost cause...

[Illuvatar]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

A good step would be for Ascendancy to disband their ingame tag - since their point has been proven to PAteam now - and let the real alliances continue to battle it out for a more meaningful and earnt rank.

I would take it as following:

Somebody made an example of the not balanced XP/Score formulaes this rnd!
So let them win ffs, they played the right way given to the stats and formulaes..

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by Tomkat

It seems to me that while some Ascendancy members have accepted their win with grace and respect for the work other alliances have put in (Jester, JBG, people who aren't posting), some still feel the need to gloat.

And you know what?

That's fine.

Those that want to gloat - let them have their little bit of glory.

They'd never be able to win in a "usual" round of PA.

Jester got them to the position they're at, with his coordination of Ascendancy (which, while being very laissez-faire, still did have some rather clever coordination).

So allow them this one little glory. Because it won't come again for most of them.

I respect what you're trying to say, it's slightly off the mark though given that a lot of the posters here and other Ascendancy members have certainly had (what you conventionally term) success before. And they'd be more than capable of acquiring it in the same way again.

[pig]

Originally Posted by Nolez

1. First off, while I'm sure its easy to assume that every alliance put their hearts into this round, I don't think it's an accurate assumption. For instance, as many people know I started the round in Angels. For the round, [Irvine], who most people realize is an excellent DC and a strong HC, more or less took some time off. In prior rounds I witnessed as he literally did 90+% of the DCing and carried Angels in many ways. This round he relinquished many of his duties to Alki as far as HCing and let several others fill in his place as DC. Sure, he was on often and still DC-ed quite a bit, but even he admitted that he wasn't playing as hard as usual because it was a free round. So while I understand your point, and its valid to some extent (at least that saying all those alliances put more into the round than Ascendancy did) you can't exactly claim that they all poured their hearts into it.

Always good to see a player leave an alliance and join another one for you. Also one DC does not make an alliance, I know angels players and bcs/dcs and for sure they have put a hell of a lot of effort into the round. I know irvine is some kind of angels good, but he isnt angels. There is no I in team...

2. I don't think every member of Ascendancy thinks they're "clever". Sure, I think most people will admit that our strategy, whether it was initally intentional or not, has led to us having a large lead late in the round. Was it fair? Yes. Was it wrong (as Zhil states repeatedly)? No. Sure, I think most Ascendancy members will agree that the XP system is totally out of whack and needs to be fixed, but regardless what we did was not only legitimate but it was fair.

Boasting on these forums and mocking others gives the assumption that you think your clever.

3. As far as, praise others and they'll praise you, I don't think that's going to work in this situation. I'll be the first to admit that this was one of the best rounds I've seen as far as equal opportunities for many alliances to do well (finish top3). There's a good 6+ alliances that have been top3 at some point this round, and they all deserve congratulations. Personally, I think F-Crew had some great players and did very well for themselves. Of course 1up played very well and ND showed a lot of people that they weren't a joke.

Most alliances did very well which I think is why it would be fair to think of this round as a big step forward for PA. Undoubtedly XP will be handled accordingly, and we saw a nice amount of alliances that are capable of competing for the top. If we were able to just all be good sports and, whether you like it or not, move on, this could be a good step into PAN.

Its a step back for pa imo. The game needs to develop not die on its arse.

[Tomkat]

would it be inappropriate to make an "idi and pies" joke here?

[The_Fish]

Originally Posted by Nolez

but the fact remains that we are winning the round, and thats not really a debatable fact.

Don't count your chickens before they've hatched.

[jerome]

tomkat, that's a sorry excuse for a post, even for you honey.

[BaSSe]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

No it doesn't - Ascendancy have not fought large planets - they cant, due to the small size of their fleets. All they need to do is hit midrange at best for value as long as its max xp for them and make sure their own value doesnt go up much by losing a portion of fleet to compensate. At least from what I've seen - 1up itself received very few Ascendancy incomings whilst we had alot of the biggest value planets around.

If you play 100% xp you`re correct that they don`t need to be big. Although ie 1up and eX had larger xp than nd/angels r15. Both cause they dared fighting larger planets. eX esp gaining from ND war though as attrition war in middle round isn`t profitable. But as said earlier I agree that there has to be a change in stats so you can`t have small value xp players dominating completly. How those stats would be made I trust the statsmakers are cabable of. If this is the general want of the planetarion community.

Imo it wasn`t about this rounds stats as others told though. As we`ve seen high ranked pure xp players all the other rounds aswell, and if there is a war they`ll do even better. This is the first were a whole alliance goes for xp though. Which imo makes the whole point of an alliance fade away.

[pig]

Originally Posted by Tomkat

It seems to me that while some Ascendancy members have accepted their win with grace and respect for the work other alliances have put in (Jester, JBG, people who aren't posting), some still feel the need to gloat.

exactly

[jerome]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Don't count your chickens before they've hatched.

he hasn't, he was talking in the present tense.

come on guys! you all try so hard to be so witty and so slitting in your "flames" yet you just highlight your self-affliclted fallacies and showcase childish ridiculous insecurities at being so helpless.

[jerome]

Originally Posted by pig

exactly

you'll find that it's a circle of shame/blame

[bwtmc]

BaSSe that's not the case on two levels (I know you haven't been around to see it, fair enough).

The alliance never set out to be anything, the members that took that path acted with free will and no direction at all.

& The memberbase is a lot more varied than most people seem to think. The Value v XP for many of the players is what you'd consider "balanced".

[Sk8az]

Careface O_o bring back r7... . . .. <3

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by Tomkat

It seems to me that while some Ascendancy members have accepted their win with grace and respect for the work other alliances have put in (Jester, JBG, people who aren't posting), some still feel the need to gloat.

If "those who aren't posting" were posting, people who claim to care about the good things they might say or attempt to say, apparently wouldn't reply anyway \o/

[Nolez]

Honestly, I've read the entire thread and seen no more than 3 posts from Ascendancy members gloating, boasting, or just generally trying to get people going. The fact is, most of us agree with half the things you lot are saying, you just choose to ignore that fact and attempt to flame us.

Oh, and to pig, yes I left an alliance mid-round, and if you knew anything about what went on inside of Angels you'd understand why. Needless to say this was no Angels' best round, and don't try to act like you understand what happened inside Angels or that you just plain know, because you don't.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by jerome

interesting notes to make: we've shown our hand. now let's see who is desperate enough for a win to go to lengths to acquire a better hand.

furthermore, why on earth are you trying to guilt trip us about the effort thing? a good definition of skill to me, has always been performing a task with the least amount of effort.

i've got other things to say about earlier posts, but i've also got other things to do

I really don't see how Ascendancy can be 'beaten' in the current very much broken system unless we reset and start again.

Guilt trip? You already know yourselves that your effort is neglible, as is the skill it required. I'd say all alliances that have involved themselves in the wars of this round have put more effort and skill into the game than Ascendancy has.

[bwtmc]

I'm really starting to feel good about Round 15's effort by eXilition again. All twenty six of Zhil's posts make me feel warm inside.

Unlike the unimaginative tossers who proclaimed the alliance overblocked at the time.

[BaSSe]

Originally Posted by bwtmc

BaSSe that's not the case on two levels (I know you haven't been around to see it, fair enough).

The alliance never set out to be anything, the members that took that path acted with free will and no direction at all.

& The memberbase is a lot more varied than most people seem to think. The Value v XP for many of the players is what you'd consider "balanced".

You`re correct that I know v. little about the round. Not questioning Ascendacy`s right to win though. From what Ive read here it`s been played perfectly. Lots of experienced and elite players. Changing strategy to meet xp, then hiding real score to make sure the war against 1up keeps on. During war it`s easier to land on larger planets and it also keeps their value growth low. All in all perfect play from what I`ve seen. (and as you`ve mentioned that`s v. little, as I haven`t followed this round at all). No blocking, no cheating accuses. The whole idea about being sucsessfull is either beating the established ones at their game, or thinking out of the box as Ascendacy has done.

I was merely questioning the future of PA if value wasn`t the main element of an alliance`s score. Then again the future of PA looks bad whatever happends.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by Europatriot

Would you or anyone else for that matter not feel very dirty winning the round if that was too happen, knowing you are actually 2nd best?

I'm sorry but for me to feel dirty about that would require me to actually think that is remotely true. Just because Ascendancy have managed to get an unrealistic ranking through abuse of a feature ingame does not make them a better alliance than 1up. (Or indeed any others in this game)

[Spritfire]

Originally Posted by Desse

Wasn´t this under his false assumption that DLR was a support tag for ND ?

Who knows?

We have never heard anymore just go ta warning about it.
No proofs, no apologise no nothing.

[jerome]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

I really don't see how Ascendancy can be 'beaten' in the current very much broken system unless we reset and start again.

Guilt trip? You already know yourselves that your effort is neglible, as is the skill it required. I'd say all alliances that have involved themselves in the wars of this round have put more effort and skill into the game than Ascendancy has.

what exactly is your definition of skill? it sounds pretty flawed if you call the #1 alliance atm as the least skilled
and since when has it been necessary to define the amount of success as by the amount of the effort put in?

[pig]

Originally Posted by Nolez

snip

At least when im up against it I dont shipjump . If you got kicked thats a different matter, my apologies.

[Nolez]

No I didn't get kicked, and if you think you're amazing because you don't shipjump then congratulations. Honestly, I've been a member of Angels for several rounds and have a lot of respect for Angels but what they did this round was not what I was looking for so I left. End of story really.

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

I'm sorry but for me to feel dirty about that would require me to actually think that is remotely true. Just because Ascendancy have managed to get an unrealistic ranking through abuse of a feature ingame does not make them a better alliance than 1up. (Or indeed any others in this game)

Open your eyes mate. What enabled Ascendancy to rise to the position they're now in was the political balance/score system/undeterred morale/(numerous other factors)

There's no 'feature in-game' that magically allowed a community of non-purposeful players to lead the round ~tick 1000.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by jerome

what exactly is your definition of skill? it sounds pretty flawed if you call the #1 alliance atm as the least skilled
and since when has it been necessary to define the amount of success as by the amount of the effort put in?

Skill involves more than just picking three high xp targets and launching.

Unless you're now claiming Ascendancy is a better alliance than all others. We all know that to be utterly false.

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by pig

At least when im up against it I dont shipjump . If you got kicked thats a different matter, my apologies.

Shipjump? Angels weren't even trying to win, they were playing purposefully to be mediocre with a better-than-mediocre playerbase. They could've done themselves so much more justice.

I'm glad Angels organisers haven't gone into this thread with 'rich' viewpoints. They are after all the alliance that dropped not far off half the tag instructing/guiding/suggesting they should three fleet, not defend and planet nap the key adversary.

That's exactly what people (apparently) would love to "accuse" Ascendancy of, well Angels did it!

[Desse]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

Unless you're now claiming Ascendancy is a better alliance than all others. We all know that to be utterly false.

I doubt you will find many if any Ascendancy posters claim here, that we are a superior alliance to 1up, ND, Angels etc.

And to all the posters who claim Ascendancy used in game flaws in the code etc, I would like to point you to this thread, where I(Ascendancy all round) went public with a flaw in the game code, that we as an alliance could have kept secret most of the round and gained an even bigger edge from.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by idimmu

All this 'better alliance' talk is rubbish.

To quote Biggdogg i think..

This isn't ****ing golf, the alliance with the lowest score isn't the winner.

Ascendancy were indeed the best xp-whores.

Best alliance in the game? I think not.

[I am Idler]

If possible Id like of Zhil to not look at me as a traitor for hanging out in the Ascendancy channel all round, launching a total of 1 fleet. Can that be done pls?

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by idimmu

If by best you mean forcing players to have an unnecessarily high level of activity, as well as waste a fleet slot and percentage of their ships on unnecessary and infact potentialy counter productive defence due to completly ignoring the game mechanics and ship stats only to come second by a considerable margin.

Then yes, we're not the best alliance in the game....

Indeed, you aren't. Glad you could agree.

[Tesla]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

Indeed, you aren't. Glad you could agree.

I, a Ministry member (which is hardly the last bastion of maturity), actually have to call u childish. Which says a lot

[furball]

Originally Posted by MotoX

Big fuss for nothing !

They played according to rules and still you moan, that loser behaviour doesn’t suit you at all!?

As long as they follow PA guide book all goes, morale issues aren’t gone show shit in the history books so get over it..

The only ones to “blame” is of course PA team who let this happen!

Nice played Ascendancy……….

Yes, let's all blame PA Team.

Originally Posted by Zh|l

A good step would be for Ascendancy to disband their ingame tag - since their point has been proven to PAteam now - and let the real alliances continue to battle it out for a more meaningful and earnt rank.

That's the only way 1up can win - and you've obviously worked that out.

1up played well, and that'll be remembered. They were the strongest alliance.

[Seth Mace]

Well Round16 is certainly going to be remembered for all the wrong reasons!

Thank f#ck this wasn't a p2p round.

[JonnyBGood]

I'll try and explain a little bit about ascendancy this round now, just because so many people don't seem to understand it. Firstly, it's not an alliance in the conventional sense. You're under no obligation to help anyone else. Any teamwork is completely and totally voluntary. While I haven't been in a serious alliance except for 2/3 of last round with subh I think a lot of people didn't really want to associate with complete assholes. I'd honestly say I've enjoyed talking to everyone that I have spoken to in ascendancy.

Secondly it's not really an alliance of xp whores. It's an alliance of people playing however they want to play. When considering people who wanted to join we had no minimum score or maximum value requirements heh. It just happens that xp whoring is a convenient and easy way of playing that provides sufficient results to keep you entertained by planetarion.

Third comes the question of best alliance. I'm sure some of our more regular AD viewers well remember that question, in general, rearing its ugly head earlier on this round. The argument there mainly evolved into a "what makes the best alliance" question. Does having the most roids? No, that makes you the alliance with the highest roid-count. Does having the most value? No, that makes you the alliance with the most roids+fleet. Does having the highest score? No, that makes you the winning alliance. Bearing in mind the fact that the round isn't over and all this should really be left off until we definitely see what happens, although I would acknowledge that it is very difficult to "stop" ascendancy now, all that can be said is that right now the alliance in the number one position is ascendancy. Plain and simple fact.

However then you come onto the more pressing question. Do they deserve it? They didn't put in as much effort as other people, so surely those people who tried harder deserve it more? Don't they? Well yes, in all likelihood, 1up and ND fought a damn hard round, and 1up moved up another notch in my estimation for coming out ahead. But the alliances that work the hardest don't always win, I'll lay diamonds to little green apples that fury and xanadu in r6 worked harder than NoS and WP but neither of them got their victory for it. That acknowledged you can't dismiss xp whoring as a tactic of essentially no effort. If we'd all stayed up as many hours as the average 1up member and launched/recalled/launched on our targets we'd probably have gained more score, due to a simple greater fleet usage over time equation, and we'd be even further ahead. So if we were an extra 50 million ahead now, having put in that extra effort would we then be worthy winners of the round? Would we then be the best alliance?

I can see why a lot of you are annoyed, people like zhil especially. You all work ****ing hard for your alliances and yeah that used to win PA. But it didn't this round. Whatever about knowing exactly who or what ascendancy was and what their intentions were if you looked at the stats and didn't see the potential for a 50 man xp-whoring alliance to win the round it's nobody's fault but your own. Quite true, I don't think rob, jester and bwtmc went all out trying to win the round. Circumstances merely conspired in our favour. Bottom line, our way of playing was fun. Isn't that what a game should be about? No, I don't think it should remain this way but for god's sake don't demolish everything and resort to a pure value game again. There's a balance, a happy medium, stuck in there for us all to find.

Some of these "cheating" accusations that have come up against us are laughable. When it comes to insulting jester for his stats it's downright appalling. If he was trying that hard to fix the round do you not think he would have stayed up at nights trying to do even better? Or actually gone out and actively recruited enough players to win the round instead of basically having them come to us because we offered something PA hasn't been the hottest on in a very long time, entertainment. (I apologise sincerely to the fish for bringing this up on AD considering I asked him to remove the discussion to PD this morning but I am trying to cover all angles in here. He can reply to this if he wishes but I won't reply back to that here). I dare say there's not a single person in ascendancy who's unhappy, and that's not because we're in the #1 spot right now. If anyone was unhappy they could have left earlier, no hard feelings. We're not the disgruntled sort of children who'd go out and try and kill someone for leaving the alliance.

Concerning cheating, I wonder how exactly we cheated. The only exploit of the game that was discovered by someone in ascendancy, I think, was posted in detail by desse on PD. Concerning the effectiveness of xp-whoring I have a long-ass post on that on PD, in cypher's thread, which I would be happy to repost here if people would like to hear my opinions on why xp-whoring worked so well this round. What have you to recognise is that it's a cumulative effect. For every resource that's spent on offensive ships in-game that's a resource that is not spent on defensive ships, which means that for every extra attacking fleet there's one less defensive fleet. Ascendancy, DLR and all alliances which lent even slightly more towards 3-fleeting and playing differently to how they did in previous rounds were effectively participating in an extended fallacy of the commons. We all wanted our little bit extra and sure if only we (for anyone) had stopped it, it wouldn't make much of a difference and we'd still be punished so why not plunder what we could? That's a question that, realistically, can only be answered by making that strategy less rewarding, in other words you appeal to people's self interest.

As regards fixing it whilst I am fully aware that pateam have posted their solutions I would like to reiterate my own personal suggestion of diminishing xp returns inside certain value ranges. XP is a wonderful addition to the game when used correctly, alliances that punch above their weight in terms of fleet usage should be rewarded for it. What should not be rewarded is the tactic that I personally and many others have used to such an insane extent this round, keeping our value deliberately low in order to increase our score later on.

Planetarion is a war-game. Look at that phrase, it is a combination of two words, one predominant. Conditionally it is a war, it rewards effort, skill, bravery, political ability, ambition and nerve. Primarily it is a game, it should be fun, interesting, rewarding and captivating. While success in what it is conditionally may aid in what it is primarily I really don't feel that the way forward for PA is all those late nights DCing. We had a wonderful game once, really remarkable. It attracted some of the most intelligent and interesting people on the internet and I am damn proud to have been part of it. However we all must acknowledge those who left us. Some people took it all too seriously, and some still do. You need balance.

To those who are utterly bewildered by this turn of events I urge you to think about the game more. Be original, be creative, see what happens. To those of you with nothing but contempt for us I ask you what did we do wrong? To those of you who threaten to quit I'd ask you to reconsider, this is after all a game. To my fellow members of ascendancy, I take my hat off to you. Not for getting to #1, not even if we keep it, but for being truly wonderful people that I'm glad I got to know.



PS While writing this post I forgot to pre-launch my bs fleet and got it stolen \o/

[jerome]

moral of the story? concentrate on ingame, not on ad you utter overzealously literate newbie.

[gzambo]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

Thank f#ck this wasn't a p2p round.

so no chance of refund damn

[NitinA]

Don't think you could get a refund from being disappointed from the outcome of the game anyway.

-NitinA

[qebab]

Fact is, this showed that the alliance, and the alliance wars as I know them might very well be obsolete. There's no effort needed in playing for xp (I tried it the last few days, with prelaunch I've only been online 25 minutes to launch and jgp...) and the alliance is now only a tag of people who attack together. Sure, you can say some do defend each other. Sure, some go for value.

But now a lot of people realized, or came to the conclusion that xp is the way to go. How many people will care enough to play the game old-style next round? I know I won't.

How many players will rather just three-fleet in attack and just go for xp all round? I haven't decided if I will.

It might not be justified, but I'm fearing that we can get a snowball effect, and that this will lead to a lot of xp-whores threefleeting at few value planets all next round. I'm just feeling a bit resigned. And please, this is no post to whine about Ascendancy, I didn't mention you with a word before this. It's just about the course the game seems to be taking. If someone can convince me that there is nothing to worry about, I will be happy. But I don't intend to sacrifice large parts of my real life for this game when others win it with not nearly the same effort.

PS! This is not the reason why I am quitting. It's just a thing that makes it easier to quit.

[Storebo]

It is a win, and it is a smart one. But the fault lies with pa-crew for not reducing xp as the number of players dropped.

Having a number 1 alliance which noone can fight, isn't what the game is about.

But if someone suggested this strategy last round when exilition was around, I'd go for it.

But I bet the xp will be checked up on and fixed after this round, else everyone will play like this next round, and where's the fun in that? :P

[The Real Arfy]

Originally Posted by JBG

For every resource that's spent on offensive ships in-game that's a resource that is not spent on defensive ships, which means that for every extra attacking fleet there's one less defensive fleet.

Plus of course, the amount of people suiciding those ships/resources leads only to a higher roid:value ratio in the universe, hence attacking is again easier. Whats done is done, just try to enjoy the rest of the round. If 1up can still take it, I'll be delighted, otherwise I'll carry on building my ships and protecting my roids.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Storebo

But I bet the xp will be checked up on and fixed after this round, else everyone will play like this next round, and where's the fun in that? :P

Appoco has already announced pateam's intention to modify xp for next round.

[The Real Arfy]

Originally Posted by qebab

Fact is, this showed that the alliance, and the alliance wars as I know them might very well be obsolete. There's no effort needed in playing for xp (I tried it the last few days, with prelaunch I've only been online 25 minutes to launch and jgp...) and the alliance is now only a tag of people who attack together. Sure, you can say some do defend each other. Sure, some go for value.

But now a lot of people realized, or came to the conclusion that xp is the way to go. How many people will care enough to play the game old-style next round? I know I won't.

How many players will rather just three-fleet in attack and just go for xp all round? I haven't decided if I will.

It might not be justified, but I'm fearing that we can get a snowball effect, and that this will lead to a lot of xp-whores threefleeting at few value planets all next round. I'm just feeling a bit resigned. And please, this is no post to whine about Ascendancy, I didn't mention you with a word before this. It's just about the course the game seems to be taking. If someone can convince me that there is nothing to worry about, I will be happy. But I don't intend to sacrifice large parts of my real life for this game when others win it with not nearly the same effort.

PS! This is not the reason why I am quitting. It's just a thing that makes it easier to quit.

Why don't you read the announcements, and furthermore, PD/PS?

[Nadar]

Originally Posted by Storebo

But I bet the xp will be checked up on and fixed after this round, else everyone will play like this next round, and where's the fun in that? :P

There's already made a fix for next round (read PA News) It's impossible for everyone to xpwh0re because there'd be no one to wh0re with The 'natural force' would make sure some xpwh0res turned into valuewh0res.

[qebab]

Originally Posted by The Real Arfy

Why don't you read the announcements, and furthermore, PD/PS?

Obviously because I'm retired.

Originally Posted by qebab

PS! This is not the reason why I am quitting. It's just a thing that makes it easier to quit.

[cypher]

firstly grats asc... you won.

even tho i don't think this win took any skill at all even tho jerome desperately wants to make it look like it did going ter or zik fi simply means you can roid anyone for XP. It might be smart to go that way, but it's not skill. Indeed for your case it's the only way you do well:P (cept morally in your opinion heh)

Also the way this round has gone has been a disgrace to pa itself and it can't be good for the game at all... ( a free round which will prolly make sure less people play the next instead of more isn't really good publicity)

you played the game right for this round i think, but not for pa as a whole if you think of the long run.

[cura]

it did bring fence sitting to a whole new level innit

[Desse]

Originally Posted by El-CuRa

it did bring fence sitting to a whole new level innit

Fence sitting ?

[cura]

Originally Posted by Desse

Fence sitting ?

how many wars did you fight?

[Desse]

Originally Posted by El-CuRa

how many wars did you fight?

Fence sitting in my book entails trying to piss as few alliances as possible off, by not hitting their planets. Or taking as many naps as possible. Just because we kept out of the political plays doesn´t mean fence sitting in my definition.

I doubt many alliances have not seen incoming from us. We have cared little about what alliances we have hit, but have mainly gone for the targets reaping the most XP. (this is not all Asc players, but the main majority of us).