User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Planetarion Discussions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 13:57   #101
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talin
Wrong. Every alliance gets a set limit of people who can be in tag, and at the same time recieve all the benefits of being in the same tag (faster defense, scan database, contributing to alliance score, and eventually being in the winning tag/alliance). That's it. It should stop right there, and everything would be fine.

Alliance limit in no way controls every player's and alliance's ingame behaviour, and every consequent attempt to make it do that (such as the "support" rule) was laughable, and successfully exploited - by more than one alliance.

If some alliance can find 14 or 140 extra people willing to "help" them win (while losing themselves), great, best wishes to them. I don't understand why would anyone want to prevent that from happening, nor how exactly does he plan to do that.
Thats 100% against the alliance limit rule.

The support planet rule may be vaque in some senses and needs clarification and a general overhaul so everyone understand it the same way. But the alliance limit rule is crystal clear, and there is no excuses, if you break it - you get closed.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 13:58   #102
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

He said should.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 14:26   #103
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Thats 100% against the alliance limit rule.

The support planet rule may be vaque in some senses and needs clarification and a general overhaul so everyone understand it the same way. But the alliance limit rule is crystal clear, and there is no excuses, if you break it - you get closed.
Call me Mr. Pedantic, but there is no alliance limit rule. There is just an ingame mechanism that says "you are not allowed to add more than 70 people to a tag". As such the support planet rule might be pullable when two tags decide to cooperate, but that is something which should concern PA Team a lot, because two planets are allowed to help each other and two galaxies are allowed to help each other, the entity called alliance seems to not be allowed this anymore.
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 14:39   #104
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Well then maybe that needs clarification too.

If the alliance limit rule isnt enforced whats to stop some morons from playing 400 people in the same alliance? and what would alliance rankings be worth then...
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 15:01   #105
Talin
Mildly Amused
 
Talin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
Talin will become famous soon enoughTalin will become famous soon enough
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
If the alliance limit rule isnt enforced whats to stop some morons from playing 400 people in the same alliance? and what would alliance rankings be worth then...
Nothing would stop them and nothing should stop them - other than their own competence and effort, of course.

Making an efficient and working alliance of 50 people is difficult. With 70 it's harder, with 400 is eight times as hard and would require a command structure and level of organization that I doubt modern-day alliances are capable of (and I would be happy if they were).

Either that, or they would be the cannonfodder and leecher/spy lair that mass-recruiting alliances were in the past, in which case I doubt anyone would be having a problem with them having 400 members.

I'd like you to be one of the "morons" who will try to run an alliance of 400 players and "win easily". It's not as easy as you make it sound. Even without the hardcored alliance limit it wouldn't be easy, much less when you actually have to fit 70 players in a winning tag, and the rest have to act as support.

You wouldn't keep them together for a day. Not to mention that talking about an alliance having 400, or even 200 members is pretty unrealistic today.
__________________
R4-R9.5 ETY | ViruS | Retalion | Other...
Inactive R13 and a couple of later rounds.

Last edited by Talin; 7 Jul 2007 at 15:11.
Talin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 15:33   #106
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Ok lets say Jenova and CT joined the same alliance then this round.

So what competition would there be?

There is a reason you got the same amount of players in a football field.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 15:35   #107
Talin
Mildly Amused
 
Talin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
Talin will become famous soon enoughTalin will become famous soon enough
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Ok lets say Jenova and CT joined the same alliance then this round.
Why would you ever want to say that?

You may as well attempt to make an arugment based on the question "what would happen if Jenova, CT, VGN, VsN, and eXilition support planets all joined the same alliance? My God, PA would be screwed then"
__________________
R4-R9.5 ETY | ViruS | Retalion | Other...
Inactive R13 and a couple of later rounds.
Talin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 17:06   #108
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

If a football team could manage to attract and organise 50 players i think they should be allowed to do so, there shoulndt be any rules limiting the amount of players on each team.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 17:21   #109
Talin
Mildly Amused
 
Talin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
Talin will become famous soon enoughTalin will become famous soon enough
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

For God's sake, stop using completely absurd and illogical analogy with football, or any other sport.
__________________
R4-R9.5 ETY | ViruS | Retalion | Other...
Inactive R13 and a couple of later rounds.
Talin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 18:02   #110
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Ohhh here i played PA for the competition in it.

How much fun would PA be without competition?

For Competition to be fun it has to be on a equal playingfield.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 18:47   #111
Talin
Mildly Amused
 
Talin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
Talin will become famous soon enoughTalin will become famous soon enough
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

I'll give you one single, sublte hint. Football (most sports in general) is played by a fixed number of two squads. Planetarion is a Free For All war and diplomacy game which involves at least 10 (and in theory, an infinite number of) competing sides. The aspects of competition are different by a huge margin.

I am sure you can figure out dozens of reasons why such an analogy isn't applicable based on the above hint. I am, however, equally sure that you won't figure them out, and as such I can only use the following quote as suitable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
I'm not saying that I hate stupid people but they certainly don't make it any easier to like them.
__________________
R4-R9.5 ETY | ViruS | Retalion | Other...
Inactive R13 and a couple of later rounds.
Talin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 18:57   #112
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

If you have no rules on allianc sizes you have no way to qually compare alliances performance, or atleast the comparision becomes completely pointless.

If an alliance has 200 tagged members with -1 eta for defence they have an unfair advantage comparing them to other alliances with 70 members.

Its not that hard to figure out is it?

The alliance limit was put in for a reason and it works great, try and look on the current alliance top13, as you will see its a scaled rating based on the performance of each alliance on a equal playingfield. So the current alliance ranking actually reflect the performance of the alliances and hence it makes alliance rankings an actual performancemeter and a way to comparis your alliance to others.

Your way of looking on alliances would totally destroy pa as we know it alliancewise and would skew any form of equal competing amongst more then 2-3 major alliances.

But perhaps 2 alliances with say 4-500 members each, which would be the logical development of your suggestions, seems more fun to you? It doesnt to me, i like alliances where you actually know the other members.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 19:09   #113
Talin
Mildly Amused
 
Talin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
Talin will become famous soon enoughTalin will become famous soon enough
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
If an alliance has 200 tagged members with -1 eta for defence they have an unfair advantage comparing them to other alliances with 70 members.
They have an advantage, yes. They do not have an unfair advantage. Huge difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
The alliance limit was put in for a reason and it works great, try and look on the current alliance top13, as you will see its a scaled rating based on the performance of each alliance on a equal playingfield.
Weren't you complaining about Descendancy for a week, claiming how it's only goal is to "help" Ascendancy, and how this was, again, "unfair" and "illegal"? Or did you just change your mind about that? Because if you didn't, your statement about current alliance rankings fails.

Moreover, what about the alliances that are under 70 players? Obviously the alliances that have 70 players have an "unfair advantage" over those that have 60-65, or those that have 14?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
But perhaps 2 alliances with say 4-500 members each, which would be the logical development of your suggestions
Brilliant. Simply brilliant.
__________________
R4-R9.5 ETY | ViruS | Retalion | Other...
Inactive R13 and a couple of later rounds.
Talin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 19:20   #114
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Ohhh here i played PA for the competition in it.

How much fun would PA be without competition?

For Competition to be fun it has to be on a equal playingfield.
If you want to compete on the level of alliances then go and setup your own alliance and recruit as many members as you want. You will painfully learn that it's not just about sheer numbers but also about logistics, and it is damn hard to provide logistics for a 50 man alliance already.
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 20:22   #115
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

To Talin:

Yeah i was complainting about *scendancy - When you hit Asc you where beeing covopped by Desc etc. they clearly played as one alliance.

But how on earth you can transform that into beeing against what i wrote is beyond logic. Its exactly what i wrote and what i been writing all along.

To Heartless:
Running an alliance with 50 members is not a logistical problem at all, its quite simple and easy if you have just a tad organisational talent.

Back in R2 i ran a 400 member alliance singlehandly and i fail to see how hard it should be to run a 50 or 100 member alliance - Not to mention that i am an integral part of actually running a top10 alliance presently, and have been for a few rounds.

In games like Everquest and Wow i have been a raidleader and guildleader trough 7 years+ and have been leading more then 500 raids in eq over the periode for 60-70 people at a time with absolutely no problems, i just cant see how it should be a problem organising 50 or 70 members at all.

Some of the basics of gaming and is that you compare yourself to others in progress, development, teamwork, effeciency etc. and if the game you take part in doesnt have some surrounding rules that create the setting of boundaries that you compete within, then the game itself and the competition will loose meaning.

What really matters in whos first and whos 10th in alliance rankings is dedication, skill and teamwork it isnt just one alliance with 5 x the members of the rest, and due to that the winner of the round will be the most deserving alliance, not just those who could recruit the most members.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 21:32   #116
Talin
Mildly Amused
 
Talin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
Talin will become famous soon enoughTalin will become famous soon enough
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
But how on earth you can transform that into beeing against what i wrote is beyond logic. Its exactly what i wrote and what i been writing all along.
Simple. If you think that Descendancy has been significantly helping Ascendancy, then Ascendancy's ranking does not reflect the true state of things (which you claimed in the last post). Afterall, who knows where would Asc be without this oh-so-great help from Descendancy scanners and cov-oppers? Make up your mind. Either the alliance limit backed up by support planet rule is an excellent thing which works flawlessly, or it isn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Running an alliance with 50 members is not a logistical problem at all, its quite simple and easy if you have just a tad organisational talent.
That sole statement (and the paragraph that follows) pretty much proves you have none. Care to enlighten us which Round 2 alliance that was, by the way?
__________________
R4-R9.5 ETY | ViruS | Retalion | Other...
Inactive R13 and a couple of later rounds.
Talin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 21:58   #117
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Simple. If you think that Descendancy has been significantly helping Ascendancy, then Ascendancy's ranking does not reflect the true state of things (which you claimed in the last post).
Asc is rank 10 now and soon they will be even lower, so i wasnt really counting Asc in my analysis of the current top10 ranking alliances as such. But *scendancy clearly shows whats wrong with breaching the alliance limit rule i.e. Descendancy tagged members covopping people who was attacking Ascendancy tagged members, and hence the prove the problem exactly. And since *scendancy stopped working as one and some of them got closed we have seen Ascdancy drop from rank 3 to rank 10. Maybe thats cause they no longer have 85ish members?

Your posts proves how you lack any form of overview on game balancing and the longterm effects on alterations to the ecologic surroundings of the game dynamics. But ofcause maybe your huge experience 3-4 years ago, according to your signature, gives you a hell of a lot of insight on current game dynamics.

If running a 50 member alliance is a problem try and run a raid in everquest with 70 members who has to cooperate on splitseconds in realtime, thats a challenge.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 22:22   #118
Talin
Mildly Amused
 
Talin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
Talin will become famous soon enoughTalin will become famous soon enough
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
But ofcause maybe your huge experience 3-4 years ago, according to your signature, gives you a hell of a lot of insight on current game dynamics.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like to go into ego battles, but I'm pretty sure that there are people who started playing in round 18 and have a better insight, based solely on this statement:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
But perhaps 2 alliances with say 4-500 members each, which would be the logical development of your suggestions
Anyway, I'm done. This has gone off-topic for a while now.
__________________
R4-R9.5 ETY | ViruS | Retalion | Other...
Inactive R13 and a couple of later rounds.

Last edited by Talin; 7 Jul 2007 at 22:27.
Talin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 22:30   #119
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

In a no alliance limit long term view the logical outcome of removing the alliance limit would be 2 larger sized alliances fighting it out - As one recruits more members a counter force will arise, as we all know pressure causes counterpressure or action causes reaction. So the logical outcome of no alliance size limits will be huge alliances, as there is no other way of beating an alliance with a greatly larger member base as its so simple that 3 fleets per member with 100 members in difference in member count gives huge difference in defence capabilities.

So it cant be much more simple to see what will happen if alliance limits are removed again, besides it ruining the meassurement of how we compete.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 23:02   #120
Wandows
[Vision]
 
Wandows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 897
Wandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond reputeWandows has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Yes clearly its so simple, because we have seen it happen over and over again in previous (unlimited alliance size) rounds that there were only two large alliances to fight it out for themselves. In fact, i don't think there ever was such a round. Yes we have had quite a few rounds with generally the same winners (i.e. Fury/Legion and whatever evolved from their ashes), but iirc they were actually smaller in quantity than many of their competitors.

Downside ofcourse is that with the current intag scoring system, its a free bonus to spend the last few days getting all those unallied nubs to add score to your tag if you're that despirate to win in PA. But then again, unlike your beliefs, most alliances actually like a steady flow of quality into their alliance, rather than quantity.

Quote:
But *scendancy clearly shows whats wrong with breaching the alliance limit rule i.e. Descendancy tagged members covopping people who was attacking Ascendancy tagged members, and hence the prove the problem exactly. And since *scendancy stopped working as one and some of them got closed we have seen Ascdancy drop from rank 3 to rank 10. Maybe thats cause they no longer have 85ish members?
Care to explain how this is different from attack coorperation between alliances, or alliances having naps or alliances retalling a common enemy attacker the other? Each and everyone of them gets past the alliance limit in some way (and perhaps even the same way as happened with *scendancy). The attack coorperation allows you to get more cover on a target alliance than you could realisticaly achieve by only using the members in your own tag. Alliance limit wise you are only free from attacks from those in your own tag, having a nap adds more planets not attacking you than the limit should give. And alliances who shared a tad more than just a simple nap have in that past repeatedly assisted eachother by retalling a common enemy being a problem to the other alliance in the pact (either retalling their attackers, or defenders on targets they were attacking). Its all the same and causing "unfair" benefits to other tags/alliances, just the feature used for the coorperation differs.
__________________
[Vision] in a lost dream, contributing to The 5th Element at present
Wandows is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 23:11   #121
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

In early rounds the top alliances would try and match thier competitiors memberbases, so if one grew the other grew to keep up amount of fleets. And if not directly in 2 big alliances its been in forged blocks and often 2 big blocks fighting it out, where as after the alliance limit rule the blocks arent so crystal clear or directly working as much together as they used to.

But the point is still valid no alliance limit will force a race based on amount of members rather then on dedication, team work and skills as it is now, so the alliance limit is working very good imo.

2 or more alliances working together in a nap or block or in other forms is part of pa, agreed. But when it happens on the base of 1 alliance splitting into 2 tags its going too far and then acting as *scendancy has done this round its just not 2 alliances working together anymore and its certanly not how the last 4 rounds has evolved with next to no blocks forming and alliances playing on thier own terms and for thier own goals.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 7 Jul 2007, 23:50   #122
MiniMoose
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 30
MiniMoose is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
2 or more alliances working together in a nap or block or in other forms is part of pa, agreed. But when it happens on the base of 1 alliance splitting into 2 tags its going too far and then acting as *scendancy has done this round its just not 2 alliances working together anymore and its certanly not how the last 4 rounds has evolved with next to no blocks forming and alliances playing on thier own terms and for thier own goals.
Sooo... you're basically complaining that *scendancy together have decided to block together and actually play the game somewhat offensivly? Heaven forbid they should have the 'unfair advantage' of working together and fighting people that everyone else seems to be able to do as long as their alliances dont have similar names....

Or maybe your complaining because they are interupting the boring old galaxy bashing game of "i have more roids and can out produce you value wise, so i win!... we are playing sim city right?"

Seriously.. get over it. two alliances (and they are that, check the alliances page, you will see them there listed seperatly) fighting together and using the available ingame methods of warfare/recon/etc against the universe.. OH NOES!
MiniMoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 00:01   #123
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Thier scanners and covoppers where in 1 tag - regular players in the other and thats why serveral of thier asc scanners in desc tag has been closed.

Creating 2 real alliances blocking and acting as normal might be ok, but creating 1 alliance thats weak in regular pa terms and the other strong and benifitting directly from the weaker alliance is a breach of the alliance limit rule.

So besides Asc trying to tell people they where just 2 normal alliances, there is clearly enough indications of it not beeing so that they got serveral members closed.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 00:44   #124
Mzyxptlk
mz.
Alien Invasion Champion, Submarine Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Barts Watersports Adventure Champion
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Mzyxptlk has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Several? Rob and who else?
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
Mzyxptlk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 00:56   #125
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
And since *scendancy stopped working as one and some of them got closed we have seen Ascdancy drop from rank 3 to rank 10. Maybe thats cause they no longer have 85ish members?
Stop posting. For your own sake. I mean no offence but you actually come across as completely retarded in this thread. You've made so many factually incorrect statements and then extrapolated to ludicrous conclusions that I'm beginning to think this is just some form of elaborate troll months in the making. Below I'm going to post a list of factually incorrect statements you made

Quote:
Thier scanners and covoppers where in 1 tag - regular players in the other and thats why serveral of thier asc scanners in desc tag has been closed.
The first bit is wrong, there were scanners and covert-oppers and normal players in both tags. And the second bit is wrong, only rob (from either tag) has been closed.

Quote:
In early rounds the top alliances would try and match thier competitiors memberbases, so if one grew the other grew to keep up amount of fleets.
This isn't true, in r2 fury and legion were significantly smaller than BT and WaC for example.

Quote:
n a no alliance limit long term view the logical outcome of removing the alliance limit would be 2 larger sized alliances fighting it out
I don't even know where to start, this just isn't the logical outcome and stating it is is just silly.

Quote:
Your posts proves how you lack any form of overview on game balancing and the longterm effects on alterations to the ecologic surroundings of the game dynamics.
This I just quoted because it made me laugh.

Clearly you perceive yourself as some sort of hardcore gamer or something.



(I'm not going to follow that up with anything I'm just leaving that there in case I look back at this thread in a while needing a good laugh.)
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 01:08   #126
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
The first bit is wrong, there were scanners and covert-oppers and normal players in both tags. And the second bit is wrong, only rob (from either tag) has been closed.
So all your 0 roid covoppers beeing in Desc and none in Asc reflects that?

You even moved the 1 covopper you actually had tagged from start in asc to desc...

Quote:
This isn't true, in r2 fury and legion were significantly smaller than BT and WaC for example.
I was wingcommander in BT so i think i know how it played out.
WaC and BT was recruiting to match each others sizes why my alliance got recruited into BT to start with.

Besides WaC and Fury rather quickly formed a block, when my wing went against fury and then afterwards they went for BT - So i am having a hard time seeing how it didnt play out exactly as i am saying it will.

Wheater its 1 big alliance or big blocks i am rather enjoying PA as it is now with first 13 alliances beeing of similar size and competing on skill instead of amount of members - Look back at last round and you will see how just 10 members difference in size of the alliances made a big difference in where the alliances where ranked about. So if 10 members makes a rather big difference then what will 20 or 40 do?

Why dont you just admit to blatently trying to exploit the rules and alliance limit this round? Its not too hard to see the overall picture of your play during start of the round is it.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 01:10   #127
Talin
Mildly Amused
 
Talin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
Talin will become famous soon enoughTalin will become famous soon enough
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Mindnumbing.
__________________
R4-R9.5 ETY | ViruS | Retalion | Other...
Inactive R13 and a couple of later rounds.
Talin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 01:14   #128
Achilles
Poblacht na hÉireann
 
Achilles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,167
Achilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus wouldAchilles spreads love and joy to the forum in the same way Jesus would
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

I can't honestly believe someone is that stupid. How is this guy not banned for trolling? Seriously now.
Achilles is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 01:25   #129
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
So all your 0 roid covoppers beeing in Desc and none in Asc reflects that?

You even moved the 1 covopper you actually had tagged from start in asc to desc...
Who the hell was this?



Quote:
I was wingcommander in BT so i think i know how it played out.
Lolling.
Quote:
WaC and BT was recruiting to match each others sizes why my alliance got recruited into BT to start with.
True

Quote:
Besides WaC and Fury rather quickly formed a block, when my wing went against fury and then afterwards they went for BT - So i am having a hard time seeing how it didnt play out exactly as i am saying it will.
Lolling more.

Quote:
Wheater its 1 big alliance or big blocks i am rather enjoying PA as it is now with first 13 alliances beeing of similar size and competing on skill instead of amount of members - Look back at last round and you will see how just 10 members difference in size of the alliances made a big difference in where the alliances where ranked about. So if 10 members makes a rather big difference then what will 20 or 40 do?
Maybe the problem is with the scoring system then? The alliance rankings really just don't say that much about the game itself. If enough people had left wolfpack on the last day of the round for whatever reason and let whoever was second in the rankings come first would that actually have changed anything meaningful ingame? The reasons why PA sucks so ****ing much a lot of the time is because it's not a wargame anymore, it's a score accumulation game. And there are ****ing tons of games out there that do that and do it really well.

Quote:
Why dont you just admit to blatently trying to exploit the rules and alliance limit this round? Its not too hard to see the overall picture of your play during start of the round is it.
Why don't you come with an off button?
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 02:51   #130
shibaMac
huzo0r
 
shibaMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 58
shibaMac has a spectacular aura aboutshibaMac has a spectacular aura about
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Your posts proves how you lack any form of overview on game balancing and the longterm effects on alterations to the ecologic surroundings of the game dynamics.
Whereas you are an expert, blessed with foresight and an encyclopedic knowlege of game theory. And you only come across like a troll because we don't recognise your genius. Let me be the first to call for a mass posrepping!

Quote:
If running a 50 member alliance is a problem try and run a raid in everquest with 70 members who has to cooperate on splitseconds in realtime, thats a challenge.
These things are not even really comparable. Running an alliance is much closer to running a guild, which is hard and complicated.
shibaMac is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 03:55   #131
Zaejii
This Space for Rent
Speedy Thief Champion, Turbo Turtle Champion, Cop-For-This Champion
 
Zaejii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 583
Zaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud of
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

i'm beginning to think Red- is just posting nonsense to piss people off and get his post count up so he feels important. he obviously isn't reading any posts except the ones he wants to judging from his looped responses.

anyway, my confusion still stands. a scanner can't scan for his friends or he gets closed, but its okay for 2 alliances to attack the same galaxy/alliance while not attacking each other?
__________________
When in doubt, blame Ascendancy.
#pastats
Zaejii is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 08:12   #132
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
These things are not even really comparable. Running an alliance is much closer to running a guild, which is hard and complicated.
I ran a guild of 200-400 members trough years in everquest 1 - must admit it didnt seem that hard to me. Today its branched into EQ2, Wow and Vosh, where ive been running things organisationally in both wow and eq2 before i retired both games, and it still doesnt seem that hard to run neither an alliance nor a guild.

Btw i think you may still have a few members left in Ascendancy that still hasnt written in this post.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 08:50   #133
Game^
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 531
Game^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to behold
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
I was wingcommander in BT so i think i know how it played out.
WaC and BT was recruiting to match each others sizes why my alliance got recruited into BT to start with.
No, BT were mass recruiting (over 1k tagged planets at one point, compared to 300 odd in WaC, 120 in VtS and around 200 in Fury), OMG BT MUST HAVE BEEN UNSTOPPABLE WITH THOSE KIND OF NUMBERS...

Quote:
Besides WaC and Fury rather quickly formed a block, when my wing went against fury and then afterwards they went for BT - So i am having a hard time seeing how it didnt play out exactly as i am saying it will.
WaC didnt form any block with Fury, VtS and Fury attacked BT together, dividing the targets up with odd and even clusters. Believe it or not, despite BT having twice the members, the 'war' was wrapped up within a week (OMG MORE MEMBERS <> MORE POWER).

Fury and VtS were then going to turn on WaC next, but they disbanding before a fleet was launched.

If you are going to reference to earlier rounds to prove a point, at least try to ensure its correct.
Game^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 09:22   #134
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

When we left BT (350 members) to fight fury WaC quickly started targeting us too and most of our incomings was Fury / WaC.

At that stage of the game Fury was no stronger then us and had it been just us and Fury it would have been hard to see a clear winner of that fight, but with WaC help they got the upper hand.

And it wasnt untill after that fight that VtS and Fury went for BT. And a BT that organisationally fell together due to non action taking HCs not as much as because the concept didnt work out. But they picked fencesitting as strategy and it didnt work.

Btw welcome to the post game, 1 less asc member missing to post in it
__________________
Back from the unknown

Last edited by Red-; 8 Jul 2007 at 09:27.
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 09:41   #135
Game^
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 531
Game^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to behold
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
When we left BT (350 members) to fight fury WaC quickly started targeting us too and most of our incomings was Fury / WaC.
WaC never targetted BT please attempt to get it right.

Also im not Asc
Game^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 10:10   #136
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Omg you just cant read can you?

My alliance joined BT as a wing and we left BT again to fight Fury.

But it must be hard understanding the word "left" ?
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 10:24   #137
ComradeRob
wasted
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Under the floorboards
Posts: 1,240
ComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Stop derailing my thread
__________________
“They were totally confused,” said the birdman, whose flying suit gives him a passing resemblance to Buzz Lightyear in Toy Story. “The authorities said that I was an unregistered aircraft and to fly, you need a licence. I told them, ‘No. To fly, you need wings’.”
ComradeRob is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 12:34   #138
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Rob's right really (and I apologise for getting caught up in it myself), if we're going to continue a discussion of "what are ascendancy really up to this round" and "what really happened in round whatever" we can have another thread for it.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 16:13   #139
Remberasha
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Atlanta Georgia (USA)
Posts: 54
Remberasha has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Cool Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

First - I find being closed for scanning for someone else to be outrageous.

This pretty much screws the individual un-allied players, and new players learning the game.

The whole concept of this action will stifle game play as people now fear to scan for friends, newbies, and non-allied players.

I am (and have been) playing Un-Allied//Independent and using my real handle in-game for many rounds and I have played since R-2. Over the years I have developed friendships throughout PA. So for me, asking friends for scans (or giving friends scans) is not only good for play, but nessecery.

I will most certainly continue to trade scans in my galaxy and cluster channel when and wherever they are needed and risk closure, but that would be a sad day for PA when closure for scan offers happens to be the general law of the game. I don't even know what alliances people are in that I have done many of the scans for! I just do them on request as a gal-m8 or Cluster-m8'...

I think the wisest thing that PA-Crew could do, - is eliminate scans from the research track and make them all avilable from start, - and just rely on amps/deflectors and cost of scans be the limiting factor.

As to Ascendency/Descendency situation -- well I feel that scans should not be a basis for planet closure - but the cov-ops teamups should definitly be a basis for closure as that is clearly a thing that denys a level playing field in this game..... mass cov-oppping is rude - especially against the non-allied. (grin)

Remby

Last edited by Remberasha; 8 Jul 2007 at 16:19.
Remberasha is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 18:24   #140
Zaejii
This Space for Rent
Speedy Thief Champion, Turbo Turtle Champion, Cop-For-This Champion
 
Zaejii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 583
Zaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud ofZaejii has much to be proud of
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Remberasha
As to Ascendency/Descendency situation -- well I feel that scans should not be a basis for planet closure - but the cov-ops teamups should definitly be a basis for closure as that is clearly a thing that denys a level playing field in this game..... mass cov-oppping is rude - especially against the non-allied. (grin)
check the top 10 on the covert op page, then say its *sc doing all of the mass covert opping. its been mentioned before in this thread, everyone is going after *sc when Jenova has a covert op bp, as do other allies apparently judging by the rankings.

but, i digress. think the original topic was, "is it unfair to scan for someone not in your ally tag?". getting tired of reading all of Red-'s mindless jabber. can we get back on topic plzthnx.
__________________
When in doubt, blame Ascendancy.
#pastats
Zaejii is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 18:41   #141
DunkelGraf
Drunken Boozer
 
DunkelGraf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 298
DunkelGraf is a splendid one to beholdDunkelGraf is a splendid one to beholdDunkelGraf is a splendid one to beholdDunkelGraf is a splendid one to beholdDunkelGraf is a splendid one to beholdDunkelGraf is a splendid one to beholdDunkelGraf is a splendid one to beholdDunkelGraf is a splendid one to behold
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

So for next round im not able to get any scans until i got my own researched?
PLEASE do not shorten rounds any further, otherwise i have them scans researched, launch my first attack and round is over being eta 1 to my first target \o/
__________________
Geilheit ist KEINE Schande !!!!

! [ToT]-KC !

Äscendäncy, we got Penis inside!
DunkelGraf is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 8 Jul 2007, 23:14   #142
G.K Zhukov
Evil inside
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,631
G.K Zhukov is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Free Achi.

Imprison multihunters for beeing idiots!
__________________
<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
G.K Zhukov is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 9 Jul 2007, 00:14   #143
Tomkat
:alpha:
 
Tomkat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 7,871
Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Tomkat has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Ok lets say Jenova and CT joined the same alliance then this round.

So what competition would there be?
I dunno man it'd make things easier on IRC as all the buttes would be hanging out in the same channel.

PS Red- is hilarious, can we give him an Internet Comedy Seal of Approval or something?
__________________
"There is no I in team, but there are two in anal fisting"
Tomkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 9 Jul 2007, 04:31   #144
Vaio
Heh, Leeds !
 
Vaio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: In The Redfern
Posts: 3,790
Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
I was wingcommander in BT so i think i know how it played out.
.
Oh, fk, not you ?
__________________
The George Harrison of BlueTuba

Yes, I know he is dead !
Vaio is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 9 Jul 2007, 04:32   #145
Vaio
Heh, Leeds !
 
Vaio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: In The Redfern
Posts: 3,790
Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.Vaio has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
When we left BT (350 members) to fight fury WaC quickly started targeting us too and most of our incomings was Fury / WaC.

At that stage of the game Fury was no stronger then us and had it been just us and Fury it would have been hard to see a clear winner of that fight, but with WaC help they got the upper hand.

And it wasnt untill after that fight that VtS and Fury went for BT. And a BT that organisationally fell together due to non action taking HCs not as much as because the concept didnt work out. But they picked fencesitting as strategy and it didnt work.

Btw welcome to the post game, 1 less asc member missing to post in it
Oh, that is so not true.
__________________
The George Harrison of BlueTuba

Yes, I know he is dead !
Vaio is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 9 Jul 2007, 16:07   #146
Game^
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 531
Game^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to beholdGame^ is a splendid one to behold
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaio
Oh, that is so not true.
Been there, done that, realised he was stupid...
Game^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10 Jul 2007, 11:16   #147
Veil05
NE
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 828
Veil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud ofVeil05 has much to be proud of
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

After briefly skipping through the posts, i see that Red- has managed to turn another thread into "Alliance Limits". I actually remember Red- wasnt he in that UNHOLY alliance?

In light of what Rob said, yes i fully agree. If someone has paid there money (not necessarily this round) they deserve to run their planet however they wish. It was hardly a massive breach of the rules.
__________________
PEACE.
Veil05 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10 Jul 2007, 11:22   #148
Red-
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 204
Red- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these partsRed- is infamous around these parts
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vaio
Oh, that is so not true.
Dunno what you where doing back then, but i was wingcommander and i ran a tuba private irc server so i saw it all play out from behind the scenes.

Me and Sid had a huge war which Sid won with the help of WaC and thats factual... But ok most of the peeps in BT was merely fencesitting till it was too late so you prolly woulndt know anyways.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10 Jul 2007, 11:44   #149
Talin
Mildly Amused
 
Talin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 105
Talin will become famous soon enoughTalin will become famous soon enough
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

The plot thickens.
__________________
R4-R9.5 ETY | ViruS | Retalion | Other...
Inactive R13 and a couple of later rounds.
Talin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 10 Jul 2007, 12:03   #150
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Is scanning for someone unfair?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Dunno what you where doing back then
I believe vaio was Blue Tuba HC.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:05.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018