R11... and the winner is

[Barrow|Pony]

Originally Posted by Little Timmy

Just seems that people think the only alliances playing next round are fang/mistu and 1up
would be great if everyone keeps thinking that way IMHO.

shh

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Whats with all the anti-blocks 1up stance crap? As soon as you are not looking like you'll win, you'll secretly nap/block, and if it becomes public, you'll just claim self defence. I would not trust your stance.

It's people posting rubbish like this on the boards that makes everything so much harder. I can see how it's that hard to understand that we don't want a blocked/stagnated round and that we are more than happy to go it alone, win or lose.

Oh, wait....no I can't see that. Maybe's it's because I'm not stuck in a timewarp that only allows me to see a single alliance at a single point in time. Take the stupid specs off and have a real look. Different command, different game, different everything. The only consistency between now and when you lot are regurgitating this anti whatever bullshit from is Sid who could just have easily started 1up, blocked half the universe together and won the round easily.

[Barrow|Pony]

While 1up's sentiments are noble, there is nothing that has been done to make the general planetarion universe trust you.

There isnt any water under the bridge.

Maybe it's paranoia - but all we have to work from is our past experience.

[The_Fish]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

It's people posting rubbish like this on the boards that makes everything so much harder. I can see how it's that hard to understand that we don't want a blocked/stagnated round and that we are more than happy to go it alone, win or lose.

Oh, wait....no I can't see that. Maybe's it's because I'm not stuck in a timewarp that only allows me to see a single alliance at a single point in time. Take the stupid specs off and have a real look. Different command, different game, different everything. The only consistency between now and when you lot are regurgitating this anti whatever bullshit from is Sid who could just have easily started 1up, blocked half the universe together and won the round easily.

Like Barrow said. We have no reason to trust you. The only thing we have is your current statements, and the previous actions of your members/command.

Your statements are not very believable, considering your past history.

Hope you stay true to your word, but I know you wont.

[ComradeRob]

The PA community can trust us not to block. Perhaps we're arrogant, but we do believe we can win without allies, perhaps even if others block against us. Making a block would be self-defeating for us in many ways. It would just be doing exactly what almost all of us have done before, and after many rounds that has become boring. For my part, I have better things to do than start playing PA again just to lie to people in order to achieve something I already achieved several rounds ago.

We would like to see which other alliances would also like to face a new challenge - playing without blocks, at least until such time as blocks are needed to challenge the top alliance. Nobody has to play that way, and each alliance will make the decision based on their own situation.

Also, even though I think it's unlikely, if 1up (or anyone else) started to cause actual stagnation because of their dominant position, other alliances would be entitled to coordinate their efforts against that dominant alliance/block.

It is also worth remembering that blocks cause a lot of stress and work for alliance leaders. In my time as a HC, I spent far too much time dealing with allies - coordinating attacks, sorting out violations of agreements, discussing block policy and strategy. I think I would have had much more fun if I had not had to worry about what the rest of my block thought, and had been able to make decisions purely in the interests of my own alliance.

Remember, in any block formed it's likely that some of the alliances in it will still end up on the losing side even if the other alliances succeed (e.g Phraktos in r10.5), so it's often a poor strategy for weaker alliances to adopt. It's not as if blocks are a wonderful thing that everyone wants to keep - I believe that most of the top alliances would like to play without them.

[virogenesis]

The members within 1up have been chosen by.....
1. loyal
2. active
3. the members don't want nap or allies they just want to attack
When i first heard about 1up i was like damn... sounds great.... where can i sign up sorta thing
I myself was recruited due to my loyality i think & the fact I would fight hard if i had to.
If anyone can change pa it will be sid he is the most respected out of pa so don't doubt us just yet because people do change & we aren't exactly fury which you will notice after time hopefully & learn to respect our political ideas(or lack of) who knows we might have followers who copy the whole idea of a offensive allie.

[Barrow|Pony]

You guys do realize that taking 1up's word for 1up's integrity is fairly self-defeating - no?


You may very well be God's gift to Planetarion, but until you turn water into wine, you're just another one of the gang. Apologies, i suppose.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Your statements are not very believable, considering your past history.

Evidently I missed something. What was my past history again?

[virogenesis]

Originally Posted by Barrow|Pony

You guys do realize that taking 1up's word for 1up's integrity is fairly self-defeating - no?


You may very well be God's gift to Planetarion, but until you turn water into wine, you're just another one of the gang. Apologies, i suppose.

How on earth do you expect to change the playing style if you have no faith in us at all.
Yes we might lose badly by trying this method out but what we can say is atleast we tried.
We might be arrogant to think we can pull this off lets just forget the past if i never put the behind me i would have joint nd to destroy it but i never.

[Nitros]

somebody should close AD

[AzureWrath]

AD is the only source of entertainment atm

[The_Fish]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Evidently I missed something. What was my past history again?

Fury. Winning at all costs. Being lame.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Fury. Winning at all costs. Being lame.

Sy my single round in wrath and round 8 in what can hardly be described as still being Fury and you think you've got my measure. You don't think if I wanted to win at all costs I woulda been a Mistu member last round?

Well - you obviously know me inside out.

I used to think you were alright now I see you're yet one more reason why this game ended up on it's arse.

[virogenesis]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Fury. Winning at all costs. Being lame.

What about ND telling entity members not to go into vac mode in r9.
Thats lame because the members that listened to the nd officers at the time recieved no def as it all went to ND.

[The_Fish]

Originally Posted by virogenesis

What about ND telling entity members not to go into vac mode in r9.
Thats lame because the members that listened to the nd officers at the time recieved no def as it all went to ND.

hahahahahahhahahahahaa. Going into vac mode is the lamest of the lame.

[The_Fish]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Sy my single round in wrath and round 8 in what can hardly be described as still being Fury and you think you've got my measure. You don't think if I wanted to win at all costs I woulda been a Mistu member last round?

Well - you obviously know me inside out.

I used to think you were alright now I see you're yet one more reason why this game ended up on it's arse.

I am talking, throughout the thread, about 1up in general, nothing aimed at any one individual.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

I am talking, throughout the thread, about 1up in general, nothing aimed at any one individual.

So you're making a totally unfounded, in the majority of cases, massively broad sweeping statement about the whole of 1up. I really respect you now because thats much better way of looking at things.

[The_Fish]

After the previous actions of your HC in many previous rounds, it is really no surprise that I am cynical of your new found saviours of PA status.

[virogenesis]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

hahahahahahhahahahahaa. Going into vac mode is the lamest of the lame.

vac mode did it break weet.?... yes which was lame as weet managed to cover 92 nar gals in the first night so the option we took was the best action really.
The_Fish you really wanna learn what lame means because you keep on posting when your allie your in atm decided to backstab their own allie on their allie's server & infront of the ety hcs/officers.
Yes i know ND has changed the line up to the command team but as you keep on pointing out throughout this thread the past is the past which does have a effect still.
I have put this behind me.... can you do the same with 1up yes the line up we have does involve ex fury members but have you really looked at the line up..... it is a mixed line up with many from other allies.
just think of it as any other forget the core we have & instead of slagging us off for our approach support us in our actions its the only logical thing to do really as you want this game to change it won't change unless someone forces change to happen.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

After the previous actions of your HC in many previous rounds, it is really no surprise that I am cynical of your new found saviours of PA status.

So you know who the 1up HC are? Then you're well ahead of the rest of us as I'm fairly sure there hasn't been an announcement to it as yet or are we making assumptions again?

So now it's nothing to do with 1up in general it's to do with Sid?

You aren't really coming accross terribly convincingly now mate. Kinda floundering I would say. The point is you, like so many others, have built up this rather childish image of the boogeyman and to you all it looks likes Synthetic_Sid. I think it's about time y'all grew up and started letting the past go. This isn't round 3, this isn't Fury and this isn't constructive. What it is, is a load of mealy mouthed whiners dragging up the past for no good reason other than to stir trouble.

It's this simple and I'm fairly past the point of whether you decide to believe it or not:

We won't NAP
We won't block
We won't have agreements with any other alliance.

We could've had all these things should we have wanted them and I have no doubt ND would've jumped at the chance to work with 1up during round 11 but the point is no-one is and no-one will be as stated, to the very letter, in Sid's proposal.

Now do us all a favour and get over round "whatever it is that got your knickers in a twist".

[ComradeRob]

Originally Posted by Barrow|Pony

You guys do realize that taking 1up's word for 1up's integrity is fairly self-defeating - no?


You may very well be God's gift to Planetarion, but until you turn water into wine, you're just another one of the gang. Apologies, i suppose.

I agree with you on this, up to a point. My main problem is that some people seem to be determined to disbelieve anything 1up say. Mostly it boils down to "I hate you because you won too often in past rounds", and some people seem determined to follow these feelings rather than reason and rationality. I can sit here typing out posts until my fingers fall off, but some people will not believe the words of anyone who is not on their 'side'.

However, blind optimist as I am, I will at least try to restate the point:

All alliances have freedom of choice. If you want to make a block, go ahead. Nobody can stop you from doing so, and if you keep it secret then perhaps nobody will ever even find out. If your block gains a shared victory as a result, I'll congratulate you before I wander off back into the PA sunset, with a slight shake of the head as I wonder if a no-block round will ever be possible. If you're happy with the state of the game then good luck to you in subsequent rounds.

Having fought on many different sides in my PA career, I think I can appreciate both sides of the argument here. If you look back to r6, there were few people more determined to defeat Fury than I was at the time. I can pretty easily imagine what most people think of 1up - that we are trying to manipulate the universe into giving us the easiest possible path to victory. That's a reasonable concern; 1up want to win, just like any alliance. I can imagine the scenarios that are running through alliance HC's minds - that 1up are secretly blocking whilst trying to prevent anyone else from doing so; that 1up are trying to build up anti-block sentiment then use this to get other alliances targetted by the 'moral majority' of PA; or that 1up will use any pretext available to form a block early in the round. If I was an alliance HC now (as I once used to be), those are the concerns I would have.

If you don't trust 1up, that's fine. I don't think I ever trusted any other alliance's statements fully when I was in a HC position. But playing without blocks doesn't require you to trust 1up. If enough alliances agree to avoid blocks, we can have an open, fair and competetive start to the round. If, later on, 1up are winning, then it's within the rights of the other alliances to cooperate if they think that they have to. I'm sure that once the round is underway, people will be trying to claim that 1up are doing much better than they actually are in order to justify making blocks (see? Paranoia affects both sides ).

The whole anti-blocking thing is a proposal we have for making the game more enjoyable. Nobody is taking away your rights to back out of it if you think you're being deceived or to simply decline to agree with it at all. And let's not forget, 1up could easily be the victims of betrayal too. We've already agreed to avoid blocks, and we are hoping that we can trust the words of other alliances who also agree to this. It's not like we're proposing a one-sided agreement that binds everyone else and not us. If anything, we are most tightly bound to the agreement as we are the ones most strongly advocating it.

[Kjeldoran]

what I find funny, is that alliances like 1UP, FAnG, Mistu and WP have OFFICIALLY stated they will go solo. So we did infact respond to Sid's request to atleast give it a try. What I see from ND and all the other alliances, is moaning about how it won't work etc etc ...

If this won't work there's only 1 to blame, which is your HC cause they didn't wanna try to go solo and forced everyone else into blocking. That's how blocking works. One start, and the rest gets sucked into the circle till all alliances have made deals.

When that day comes, then point to yourself and realize what a lame HC you have.

This post was meant at the alliances that still refuse to atleast give solo a try. I know pple will flame this thread and tbh I honnestly don't give a shit about it. Tbh, FAnG probably has more chances on winning again if we block. We did that last round sure we can do it this round again. Same goes for 1UP. But now they propose to go solo and we like the initiative, let's see what balls you lot "of the super I don't know howmuch alliances coalition" have ...

[Barrow|Pony]

I dont think ND was moaning about anything. I'm all for a no-block universe, it would give this game a new political environment to invigorate the playerbase. I also think that what 1up proposed is a fantastic step in the right direction.

I'm merely saying that its hard for us to jump out and believe that many groups will follow suit. If even three or so medium sized alliances go against the grain and create an attack group 3x the size of its nearest competitor, it leaves the rest of the universe out to dry.

I, for one, am not willing to risk round 11 based on a premise for which I have no assurance.

There is plenty of room for optimism Rob, and I'm optimistic about the future of this round, partially because of 1up's sheer size and their vocal condemnation of the massive blocks of old. Just pardon me if I don't become a card-carrying-member of the "1up saved Planetarion" group until it actually happens.

edit: Rob, please note that my argument would remain if it were any alliance making the same announcement. There is no ill will on my part, or ND's part, against the remnants of fury. The proposal is simply asking for all of the alliances to make a leap of faith with no guarantees of any sort. I don't care that my planet was trashed every round since I've started playing, but I cant speak for everyone.

[[Graham]]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

what I find funny, is that alliances like 1UP, FAnG, Mistu and WP have OFFICIALLY stated they will go solo. So we did infact respond to Sid's request to atleast give it a try. What I see from ND and all the other alliances, is moaning about how it won't work etc etc ...

If this won't work there's only 1 to blame, which is your HC cause they didn't wanna try to go solo and forced everyone else into blocking. That's how blocking works. One start, and the rest gets sucked into the circle till all alliances have made deals.

When that day comes, then point to yourself and realize what a lame HC you have.

This post was meant at the alliances that still refuse to atleast give solo a try. I know pple will flame this thread and tbh I honnestly don't give a shit about it. Tbh, FAnG probably has more chances on winning again if we block. We did that last round sure we can do it this round again. Same goes for 1UP. But now they propose to go solo and we like the initiative, let's see what balls you lot "of the super I don't know howmuch alliances coalition" have ...

WELL permit me to flame this a little

now picture it

fang 100 members
mistu 100 members
1up 100 members
ND 60 members
VGN 40 members

NOW WHY would VGN and ND blocking be so bad? that would make them up to 100 members which matched the other 3 with 100. PERFECTLY FINE in my eyes.

this is just ofc an example but you get what i mean.

[Barrow|Pony]

Graham - it wouldnt. thats the point.

[Kjeldoran]

yet we all know if blocking starts that the primary goal is to simply have more members, not EQUAL members then the other alliances.

Also, and I'm just wondering. FAnG and I'm sure 1UP aswell have had more applications then pple they actually CAN recruit thx to the 100 pple limit. I wonder where those players go to if they don't end up in fang, mistu, wp or 1UP? Nothing stops other alliances from recruiting to 100 members, it is infact piss easy to reach there and still have quality players.

[Barrow|Pony]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

yet we all know if blocking starts that the primary goal is to simply have more members, not EQUAL members then the other alliances.

The political moves made by ND since at least round 8 have been made for stability - not to be bigger than anyone else

[DrunkenViking]

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

Making a block would be self-defeating for us in many ways. It would just be doing exactly what almost all of us have done before, and after many rounds that has become boring.

There's different forms of blocking, if 2 alliances realises at tick 800 that this will go straight to hell and they contact eachother to block, that is a completely differnt thing than making a huge super-kembo-humongus-powerblock before ticks start to ensure an easy win and massive stagnation. If every large/strong alliance starts with "cleen sheets" and noe ties, i'm sure we'll see an interesting round no matter how politics develops as the round sets and ppl get the upperhand etc. Just my n00b opinion as allways tho, so no need to take it serious.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by DrunkenViking

Just my n00b opinion ......

And, as far as I can tell, right on the money

[DrunkenViking]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Nothing stops other alliances from recruiting to 100 members, it is infact piss easy to reach there and still have quality players.

lol, can i just say....n00b!
You must have been FAnG too long cause you have no touch of the "reality" as other smaller alliances live in
You simply recruit off your reputation and domination the last couple of rounds, and once you got the biggest memberbase and they're quite active, then ofc more ppl want to join, especially big ppl cause they want an alliance thats able to defend their score. Example: Valhalla would need 5 times more members to cover an average FAnGer than FAnG needs, because of the "head start" you got. Dont believe that its easy for an alliance with aprox 50 members will have an easy task to prove themself either as long as the major alliances with 80-90-100 members have been blocking with eachother and consumed the others. Dont let the success run to your head(oops too late), cause at some point i'm sure the others will catch up. ppl apply to join FAnG because you proved that you can win a round, and who doesnt want to be on the winning team. Dont believe thats your übercharm that makes ppl apply for FAnG.

Sorry about my outburst(and all the "dont"s), but seriously kj, dont run around and believe that recruitment is an easy task and that potentially good players come knocking on the door till it falls down in all alliances. Perhaps a random round or two will change much because it will get harder to preset politics, i seriously hope so.

[DrunkenViking]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

And, as far as I can tell, right on the money

at least explain to me why what i said was completely wrong
allways been a n00b, allways will be, but still. Set me straight instead of just putting me down

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Barrow|Pony

The proposal is simply asking for all of the alliances to make a leap of faith with no guarantees of any sort.

Everyone keeps saying how PA needed a miracle so maybe a little leap of faith from everyone might get the ball rolling. People can chastise 1up or say we're proposing what we are for a means to an end. However, I think people forget this is a huge leap of faith for us, probably more than any other alliance as we are the ones shooting our mouths off. We run the risk of sticking to our guns and lasting 4 days after the tickstart because someone else built a block simly to kick our asses. The way I see it we have two paths in terms of the way the 1up round pans out:

1. Everyone sticks to the proposal, we do great by finishing with a high position in the alliance ranking and our confidence was justified.

2. Everyone sticks to the proposal, we get wasted and we're a set of arrogant wankers for shooting our mouths off on the boards.

Either way, in my opinion, thats a lot more fun for everyone including, and I am speaking merely from a personal point of view, 1up.

So come on Barrow, take a little leap with us

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by DrunkenViking

at least explain to me why what i said was completely wrong
allways been a n00b, allways will be, but still. Set me straight instead of just putting me down

hehe - apologies for my slang. I was trying to say you were absolutely correct and I agreed wholeheartedly.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by DrunkenViking

Sorry about my outburst(and all the "dont"s), but seriously kj, dont run around and believe that recruitment is an easy task and that potentially good players come knocking on the door till it falls down in all alliances. Perhaps a random round or two will change much because it will get harder to preset politics, i seriously hope so.

Put me in charge of recruiting for WHATEVER alliance, and I will get it full to 100 members, with enough quality players. This isn't me being arrogant, it's just simple reality.
If I'd start a new alliance tomorrow I'd get it full and with quality players.

I'm sure other alliances have skilled pple aswell who can achieve such things if they put their mind to it.

[The_Fish]

I dont think that post could make you sound like more of a **** there Kj.

[virogenesis]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Put me in charge of recruiting for WHATEVER alliance, and I will get it full to 100 members, with enough quality players. This isn't me being arrogant, it's just simple reality.
If I'd start a new alliance tomorrow I'd get it full and with quality players.

I'm sure other alliances have skilled pple aswell who can achieve such things if they put their mind to it.

Irvine comes to mind for some reason not sure why

[Barrow|Pony]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

So come on Barrow, take a little leap with us

Not sure what jumping, skipping, hopping, and leaping round 11 will hold. I just wanted to dispell the myth that because I'm skeptical, ND is a blocking whore alliance who cant recruit to 100.


Kjeldoran - I will take you up on your offer. Tomorrow, if you find me on IRC, I will give you all the rights and priviledges of NewDawn HC - and you can recruit 30 'quality' members before monday.


edit: I am completely serious about this. Maybe this would put a stop to LB's fun and exciting "if you dont win, you have no structure and your command sucks" arguments of joy.

[Tis]

two notes:

[graham] - have you even bothered to read sids post? by his definition, your 'example' would not even be considered a block. kindly hush till you have some clue what you are talking about.

and kjel - since your lot are always so quick to point out "OMG! NOOB! ITS FAnG not Fang!!," i feel it is my duty to inform you that it is 1up, not 1UP. :P

[Cayl]

Barrow:

Please let us know what kind of assurances you need to be given to be totally comfortable with this idea. At least this way we'll have a starting point for discussion. As it stands there seems to be nothing we can say that will penetrate your stubborness or alter your attitude in the slightest. As you seem to be the next alliance in line to accept the proposal in an official manner, I'd like to know what you're holding out for.

[LB|away]

since ND wants to block
we should talk about blocking to cayl

[Colt]

Originally Posted by virogenesis

How on earth do you expect to change the playing style if you have no faith in us at all.
Yes we might lose badly by trying this method out but what we can say is atleast we tried.
We might be arrogant to think we can pull this off lets just forget the past if i never put the behind me i would have joint nd to destroy it but i never.

Originally Posted by virogenesis

Irvine comes to mind for some reason not sure why

pity you can't seem to

hypocrit.

[virogenesis]

Colt please tell me where i talked about Irvine's past because i don't think i did.
I think you will see I only metioned Irvine & nothing else you see...
So how exactly does that make me a hypocrit.... please explain as i am quite confused.
Like I said to kj last night \ this morning i thought someone would help a fellow alliance mate

[Tesla]

What a bunch of crap.. Does everyone think that 1up are _that_ good ? heh.. Sure they have a few decent plrs, but its not by far unbeatable in a 1v1 fashion. I for one am happy to step up to the challenge. And I can say wiv a pretty much 99% probability I will be playing next round in an opposing alliance, shud be fun ^^
Also about the non trusting thingy: What has 1 up to gain from blocking ? A hollow victory ? If they got for that one they take the piss and will bore themselves to death, so I actually believe that they wont.

Tesla

[I am Idler]

Originally Posted by Nadar

Why would the "old celebrities" perform better than the people already around? I mean.. The people that is around now knows the game better than the people who didn't play r10+.. My point is: Just because they're "PA Celebs" it doesn't mean they still will 'own'

its a question of maths and probability.

the old knows best

[Heartless]

Actually I can understand ND in here. Fact is that history is not just sum of things that would have been avoidable, but also the things humans tend to judge by. And let it be a game or not - the Fury people have not at all shown to be trustworthy to the universe. Not just them, though - others have as well.

Thing is the fear of secret blocking will always be around unless we see that planets will be tagged with the alliance they belong to which would allow everyone to possess the same intel and thus judge by the same correct information. Misinformation can lead to a lot of wrong decisions, maybe take Phraktos declaration of war last round as one good example for this.

[Fyodor]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

.

It's this simple and I'm fairly past the point of whether you decide to believe it or not:

We won't NAP
We won't block
We won't have agreements with any other alliance.

The way i read these numerous exclamations looks more like this.

We won't NAP....unless
We won't block....as long as
We won't have agreements with any other alliance... Except if such and such happens.

Now maybe its me, but if you say your not going to do something, and you want what you say to be taken for truth, then dont leave yourself wiggle room, or dont say it at all.

If the whole of PA blocks against you, and 1up fights alone, then i will believe your statements and proposals have sincerity. But if for whatever reason you go against all of your proposals, then you are just a bunch of airbags.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Fyodor

We won't NAP....unless
We won't block....as long as
We won't have agreements with any other alliance... Except if such and such happens.

Now maybe its me, but if you say your not going to do something, and you want what you say to be taken for truth, then dont leave yourself wiggle room, or dont say it at all.

If the whole of PA blocks against you, and 1up fights alone, then i will believe your statements and proposals have sincerity. But if for whatever reason you go against all of your proposals, then you are just a bunch of airbags.

You, like so many others, are missing the point completely. 1up have stated we will be beginnging the round with none of these things. Yes, if a block develops we will do what we have to do to break it up and we hope that everyone else is of the same opinion.
The whole deal from 1up is that we will not be the ones taking the game towards stagnation and we will do anything we have to, hopefully with the help of everyone, to ensure the same situation as last round does not come into fruition.

Now will people please stop trying to turn this into some ploy of ours to formulate an easy victory because it doesn't matter which way you look at it, assuming you are being objective, that in a "going it alone" round no single alliance will have an easy ride to the top.

[Cayl]

to follow up, if 1up finds blocking to be strictly necessary for survival, the moment that block is no longer an absolute necessity, we will break the block and do our best to return the round to a free for all. This is entirely consistent with Sid's initial proposal.

[Fyodor]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

You, like so many others, are missing the point completely. 1up have stated we will be beginnging the round with none of these things. Yes, if a block develops we will do what we have to do to break it up and we hope that everyone else is of the same opinion.
The whole deal from 1up is that we will not be the ones taking the game towards stagnation and we will do anything we have to, hopefully with the help of everyone, to ensure the same situation as last round does not come into fruition.

Now will people please stop trying to turn this into some ploy of ours to formulate an easy victory because it doesn't matter which way you look at it, assuming you are being subjective, that in a "going it alone" round no single alliance will have an easy ride to the top.

Im not missing the point. I know what you are stating. But even sid in his initial post on the subject said his idea wasnt entirely altruistic. All im saying is alot of youse guys are going around making statements which you want people to accept. And im saying time will tell if you are truthful or not.

[Fyodor]

Originally Posted by Cayl

to follow up, if 1up finds blocking to be strictly necessary for survival, the moment that block is no longer an absolute necessity, we will break the block and do our best to return the round to a free for all. This is entirely consistent with Sid's initial proposal.

So when 1up feels its necesary to block, it will. And if another alliance feels its necesary to block it will. The all of the sudden there are blocks. Im not trying to bad mouth anyone here. All im saying, is if you block when you feel its necesary, then it defeats the purpose of haveing an anti block stance. I do understand you all think blocking is bad for the game. But blocking is a fact of life in PA. Many times before people have come out anti block, only to block later. If you really want to be altruistic and "lead by example" you should state "no matter what happens in the round 1up will not block"

I understand how ridiculous that sounds, but a i think a statement like will enable more people to believe that your anti blocking statements are really for the benifit of the game.