Planetarion Forums

Kargool · 22 May 2009, 21:12

Good grief. What have greed turned xVx into?

Anyways, as pr normal nothing organised lasts for longer than a couple of weeks in PA.

Achilles · 22 May 2009, 21:16

It's more than that. Ascendancy have agreed with xVx that it's tag shall not finish above theirs regardless of what happens during the remainder of the round. Of course, given the relative roidcount and levels of incoming this is likely just a formality.

Veedeejem! · 22 May 2009, 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Achilles

It's more than that. Ascendancy have agreed with xVx that it's tag shall not finish above theirs regardless of what happens during the remainder of the round. Of course, given the relative roidcount and levels of incoming this is likely just a formality.

Remind me to remember this post at the end of the round when you get your 4 in a row

Veedeejem! · 8 Jun 2009, 18:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Achilles

It's more than that. Ascendancy have agreed with xVx that it's tag shall not finish above theirs regardless of what happens during the remainder of the round. Of course, given the relative roidcount and levels of incoming this is likely just a formality.

1 TOOT THE ALLIANCE 161047 89 5,200,648 312,038,916
2 xVx 150937 86 5,175,806 310,548,401

Mzyxptlk · 22 May 2009, 21:18

TOOT THE SUPPORT tag does not feel it's subjected to this agreement and as a result we will be aiming for #1. Thank you and good day.

Mek · 22 May 2009, 21:21

well can't say i'm deeply shocked. I, however, do not think asc will let xvx win.

Achilles · 22 May 2009, 21:21

It will happen. As far as Ascendancy is concerned xVx have won and we are now pursuing goals apart from alliance rank. If, somehow, we do get too close to xVx (unlikely since we won't be hitting them) our tag score will be adjusted down appropriately. There was overwhelming support within the alliance for this course of action.

_Kila_ · 22 May 2009, 21:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Achilles

It will happen. As far as Ascendancy is concerned xVx have won and we are now pursuing goals apart from alliance rank. If, somehow, we do get too close to xVx (unlikely since we won't be hitting them) our tag score will be adjusted down appropriately. There was overwhelming support within the alliance for this course of action.

I suggest disbanding on the last tick if we're in the lead!

Kattepis · 22 May 2009, 21:28

Now xVx should be targetted :P
Then asc will go down aswell

Kargool · 22 May 2009, 21:24

Well, what you are doing makes sense. Effectively handing xVx the biggest non contested win in PA's history.

And I'm not criticizing you for it, mere the fact that the stupidity of the coalition that did not understand that this was actually going to happen.

Fuzzy · 22 May 2009, 21:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kargool

And I'm not criticizing you for it, mere the fact that the stupidity of the coalition that did not understand that this was actually going to happen.

aye - we're the stupid ones.

god forbid anyone does something which can realistically defeat ascendancy for a change.

Mzyxptlk · 22 May 2009, 21:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mek

well can't say i'm deeply shocked. I, however, do not think asc will let xvx win.

I'm not in it, so I can't be sure, but I think everyone in tag is HC this round. All it takes is one individual who feels we should stick to our agreement to make it happen.

Mek · 22 May 2009, 21:26

we expected xvx to have more balls than this to be brutally honest

Zaejii · 22 May 2009, 21:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mek

we expected xvx to have more balls than this to be brutally honest

don't be serious, its run by CarDinaL. (no offense to him, but still).

Mzyxptlk · 22 May 2009, 21:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mek

we expected xvx to have more balls than this to be brutally honest

xVx are taking the easy road, that's true, but I can hardly fault them for it. If someone offers you a sizable sum of cash, do you reject it "because it's too easy"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kattepis

Now xVx should be targetted :P
Then asc will go down aswell

It's a NAP, not a block. I'm pretty sure xVx is still napped to the BGs anyway, so this will strictly be an Ascendancy vs BGs thing. Taking down xVx does not hurt us in any way.

Mek · 22 May 2009, 21:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

It's a NAP, not a block. I'm pretty sure xVx is still napped to the BGs anyway, so this will strictly be an Ascendnacy vs BGs thing. Taking down xVx does not hurt us in any way.

well, considering the offer JBG was planning...that you guarentee xVx the round win if they hit the BGs with you...i trust this clause was added also or??

Mzyxptlk · 22 May 2009, 21:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mek

well, considering the offer JBG was planning...that you guarentee xVx the round win if they hit the BGs with you...i trust this clause was added also or??

Do you understand what "NAP" means? No, that clause was not added, I just said that xVx is still napped to them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

god forbid anyone does something which can realistically defeat ascendancy for a change.

You pulled it off. Congratulations.

Fuzzy · 22 May 2009, 21:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Kila_

With the first option, there's always a chance that the BGs will turn on them and let us back in. With the second option, even if the BGs turn on them, we'll let them win. The second option is also a lot easier to do...

hold on. xvx have 2 options

option 1: BG's might turn on xVx
option 2: if BG's hit asc - asc will make sure xvx win

so the BG's can screw over xVx but apparently asc are incapable of doing the same thing to them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

You pulled it off. Congratulations.

Thanks?

so now asc is basically conceding the round win and just want to bully those who challenge them? gg

Sebos · 22 May 2009, 21:57

If asc are gonna let xvx win why keep planets in tag? as so many of ur posters claim if ur not first who cares....... surly it dnt matter if u come last tbh so long as ur not above xvx.

If your plan is to really just mess up the BGs round then drop members now as a sign of good faith since most of ur guys are in gal i dnt think u need alliance eta toooo much.

Kattepis · 23 May 2009, 13:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

It's a NAP, not a block. I'm pretty sure xVx is still napped to the BGs anyway, so this will strictly be an Ascendancy vs BGs thing. Taking down xVx does not hurt us in any way.

I ment that if xVx is being targetted by the rest they will drop to the second rank again.
Then maybe asc will smell the victory and breaks the xVx nap. If they dont break it they will end up low by kicking members at the end and so we have to bring xVx down to a very low point so asc will end up low aswell.
If asc breaks the nap they break their word. And not many alliances will be to happy to nap with them in new rounds cause asc will have a bad reputation in this. Especially xVx wont be to happy with it.
Then xVx has to go to war again with asc to get back to the first rank. Then the competition is on again.

And xVx should be targetted anyway because they napped asc. Then let asc win the round and let xVx feel they should have kept on fighting. And the block can always make a nap with xVx again on just 1 term. Fight asc again.

Riddim · 23 May 2009, 13:57

We are clearly reaching new heights in lameness.

_Kila_ · 22 May 2009, 21:31

What the hell does this have to do with "balls"?

xvx have two options to secure the round win: keep fighting us or take the NAP.
With the first option, there's always a chance that the BGs will turn on them and let us back in. With the second option, even if the BGs turn on them, we'll let them win. The second option is also a lot easier to do...

_Kila_ · 22 May 2009, 21:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

hold on. xvx have 2 options

option 1: BG's might turn on xVx
option 2: if BG's hit asc - asc will make sure xvx win

so the BG's can screw over xVx but apparently asc are incapable of doing the same thing to them?

NAPs can be terminated and usually notice is given. NAPs are in effect every tick between the start and end of it. Our agreement to let xvx finish above us isn't really in effect any tick other than the last, so in order to "win" we'd have to go back on our word, which I don't think will happen.

Yes we could decide to go back on our word, but I don't think Ascendancy have ever done this before.

Centronic · 22 May 2009, 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Kila_

What the hell does this have to do with "balls"?

xvx have two options to secure the round win: keep fighting us or take the NAP.
With the first option, there's always a chance that the BGs will turn on them and let us back in. With the second option, even if the BGs turn on them, we'll let them win. The second option is also a lot easier to do...

As if the bgs would turn on xvx and allow asc to get into the fight for top spot again.

_Kila_ · 22 May 2009, 22:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Centronic

As if the bgs would turn on xvx and allow asc to get into the fight for top spot again.

The BGs don't want this round to stagnate as that would leave the #1 alliance to roid them dry. If the status quo were to remain, we would have died and xvx would have run away with it and started to roid the BGs, so yeah I can understand why people thought the BGs would switch to hitting xvx.

[ND]Disc · 22 May 2009, 22:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Kila_

The BGs don't want this round to stagnate as that would leave the #1 alliance to roid them dry. If the status quo were to remain, we would have died and xvx would have run away with it and started to roid the BGs, so yeah I can understand why people thought the BGs would switch to hitting xvx.

You talk out your ass mate. Still atleast another weeks worth of roids to gain from Ascendancy, and then that leaves what? 2 weeks left? Even if BGs turned on xVx, theyd have at most 1 week left of the round to hit them, which at that point would be pointless, and undermine what they've done.

If your going to blatently lie, then just keep lieing to yourself. Don't bring it to forums.

[ND]Disc · 22 May 2009, 21:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Kila_

What the hell does this have to do with "balls"?

xvx have two options to secure the round win: keep fighting us or take the NAP.
With the first option, there's always a chance that the BGs will turn on them and let us back in. With the second option, even if the BGs turn on them, we'll let them win. The second option is also a lot easier to do...

Prejudging the BGs is dumb, everyone was up for hitting Asc for atleast another week or 2, and why would we hit xVx? We aint got shit on xVx's tactics up until tonight.

Stop trying to put thoughts into xVx's head. At the end of the day this was probably a certainty anyway, seeing as Asc have about 20 members in xVx anyway...

newt · 22 May 2009, 21:59

So to summarise: the bgs have won! They had one goal coming into this round, and its been accomplished. I'm sure they all had a lot of fun as well. Well played chaps.

Lets hope alliances like ascendancy that are stuck in the old way of playing follow their trend in the future.

CBA · 22 May 2009, 22:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newt

So to summarise: the bgs have won! They had one goal coming into this round, and its been accomplished. I'm sure they all had a lot of fun as well. Well played chaps.

Lets hope alliances like ascendancy that are stuck in the old way of playing follow their trend in the future.

Let this be noted to all of you. A true genius at work!

HOORRRAY for the BGS!

ATRO · 22 May 2009, 22:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newt

So to summarise: the bgs have won! They had one goal coming into this round, and its been accomplished. I'm sure they all had a lot of fun as well. Well played chaps.

Lets hope alliances like ascendancy that are stuck in the old way of playing follow their trend in the future.

Yeah great, then Asc finish first, second and third and you have something else to complain about, team up to a laughable point where you vastly outnumber your opponents then run around forums pretending you are like Flash Gordon saving the world.

I am usually a master of self restraint but whilst i love the fact that so many none Asc posters have become active again the standard of posting most certainly hasn't improved.

newt · 22 May 2009, 22:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atro

garbage

If you're going to slag off my posting, at least make a good post yourself dude. Reasons why your first paragraph reaks of stupidity:

The asc-core is probably 30 people or so (maybe as many as 50? who knows) - most of the alliance are people who are not die-hard ascendites. If we had a new planetarion where alliances were groups of 20-40, mostly playing in the ascendancy-spirit, they wouldn't go "OMFG I WILL MAKE AN ASCENDANCY-2 TAG AND BE THEIR BITCHES" - they will go "interesting, lets get a group of people and compete for #1"

Understand?

Achilles · 22 May 2009, 21:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

god forbid anyone does something which can realistically defeat ascendancy for a change.

You guys had no intention of defeating us. Not one of you was intending to try and finish above us, your only aim was to drag us down by sheer weight of numbers and none of you had any intention of stopping. That's all well and good, but then let's not pretend we're playing for alliance rank anymore. If it's just a fight you guys want then let's have at it.

As for xVx I honestly have no idea what they intend to do, but best of luck to them whatever it is.

Vladel · 22 May 2009, 21:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Achilles

You guys had no intention of defeating us. Not one of you was intending to try and finish above us, your only aim was to drag us down by sheer weight of numbers and none of you had any intention of stopping. That's all well and good, but then let's not pretend we're playing for alliance rank anymore. If it's just a fight you guys want then let's have at it.

As for xVx I honestly have no idea what they intend to do, but best of luck to them whatever it is.

I would have called the "stop hitting you point" when ND and CT passed you

[ND]Disc · 22 May 2009, 21:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Achilles

You guys had no intention of defeating us. Not one of you was intending to try and finish above us, your only aim was to drag us down by sheer weight of numbers and none of you had any intention of stopping. That's all well and good, but then let's not pretend we're playing for alliance rank anymore. If it's just a fight you guys want then let's have at it.

As for xVx I honestly have no idea what they intend to do, but best of luck to them whatever it is.

I think you forget, most BG's aim was to not stagnate the game, which Ascendancy have tried to do from the off

Over recruiting
Teaming with fully tagged alliances to hit smaller BGs
Using the lack of support rule to your advantage

and now Ascendancy are further stagnating the game by allowing a #1 contender to go unchallenged.

At this current time i'm more annoyed at xVx to be honest, or the people that matter, Liths. BGs gave them a chance to win the round, both had common goals, xVx to get #1, and BGs to stop Ascendancy from being gay. BGs kept their side of the bargain, xVx took the easy road to #1, and i'm not even sure if that road will get them to #1.

PA community sucks to be quite honest

Linkie · 22 May 2009, 23:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by [ND]Disc

Using the lack of support rule to your advantage

Oh noes, using the rules to our advantage. How very very mean of us.

EDIT: Also, I actually completely understand most people not trusting asc to actually follow through with this. But personally, I'm pretty sure we always stick to our agreements. And when it's stated as bluntly as it is, there's really no way around it.

Mzyxptlk · 22 May 2009, 23:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by [ND]Disc

I think you forget, most BG's aim was to not stagnate the game, which Ascendancy have tried to do from the off

Over recruiting
Using the lack of support rule to your advantage

Yes, I totally agree. We should follow rules that don't exist. Also, see Theam's topic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by [ND]Disc

Teaming with fully tagged alliances to hit smaller BGs

Are you seriously accusing us of blocking? I find this hilarious for obvious reasons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by [ND]Disc

and now Ascendancy are further stagnating the game by allowing a #1 contender to go unchallenged.

At this current time i'm more annoyed at xVx to be honest, or the people that matter, Liths. BGs gave them a chance to win the round, both had common goals, xVx to get #1, and BGs to stop Ascendancy from being gay. BGs kept their side of the bargain, xVx took the easy road to #1, and i'm not even sure if that road will get them to #1.

PA community sucks to be quite honest

Had the NAP between xVx and the BGs been dropped two days earlier, we would've taken a different decision. Had the BGs created 3 tags instead of 6, we would've taken a different decision. Had we felt like playing more hardcore than we are now, we would've taken a different decision. We're in this situation now because of the decisions we all took. Don't delude yourself, there were only two ways your strategy could've played out: either we we were going to come out on top, or the BGs were going to be hard pressed.

Since you did everything in your power to avoid the first outcome, don't pretend to be Mr Innocent when the alternative rears its ugly head. You created this situation just as much as we did.

If your strategy was to keep the balance of power (as per HK's post) then this thread is a strong indicator of it failing miserably. Right now, there is no balance of power, at least not between xVx and Ascendancy. Time to step up to the plate.

As for your last line, according to you, the goal was to make sure Ascendancy didn't win. Mission accomplished. Why are you angry?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vladel

It's a sad day indeed that a tag would even contemplate such a length to ensure another wins. Tho ofc no-one believes this for a second.

This is hardly anything new.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HK

What the hell people, do you really believe asc consider themselves as losers just because of a roid deficit which would melt away in days?

I liked your post, it was quite interesting. The part I quoted is meaningless though: what we consider ourselves to be is irrelevant. We can all think we're superman, but in the end, the only thing that matters is which alliance appears at the top of the list. The agreement is that if Ascendancy finds itself in first place while xVx is in second place, we will drop members until that changes.

Vladel · 22 May 2009, 21:40

It's a sad day indeed that a tag would even contemplate such a length to ensure another wins. Tho ofc no-one believes this for a second.

lokken · 22 May 2009, 23:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vladel

It's a sad day indeed that a tag would even contemplate such a length to ensure another wins. Tho ofc no-one believes this for a second.

I've got an idea, lets out extreme them by pooling loads of numbers against them that might work...

Knight Theamion · 22 May 2009, 21:41

I do not wish to be in any BG right now. Because what will happen is something very, very strange. They will get incoming! Organized ones. They will get hell unleashed. It will be fun!

morrow · 22 May 2009, 21:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by knight theamion

i do not wish to be in any bg right now. Because what will happen is something very, very strange. They will get incoming! Organized ones. They will get hell unleashed. It will be fun!

Bring - It - On!

Ty :|

Achilles · 22 May 2009, 21:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vladel

I would have called the "stop hitting you point" when ND and CT passed you

Please, you would need another 400 planets to achieve that.

Vladel · 22 May 2009, 22:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Achilles

Please, you would need another 400 planets to achieve that.

only 60 count

Mek · 22 May 2009, 21:47

i like asc's thinking. You now expect the battle groups to turn on xvx and level the gap and you will take 1st place from under the feet of xvx and systematically screwing the battle groups and xvx at the same time. Agreements are there to be enforced and broken, so you can appreciate why people don't believe you will stick to this agreement

Achilles · 22 May 2009, 21:48

Fortunately it's no longer important what you believe.

Knight Theamion · 22 May 2009, 21:59

it's called defence, and it is pretty nifty when fighting people.

ATRO · 22 May 2009, 22:11

I think he meant that it would take a bigger weight of numbers against Asc for them to be dragged down to CT/ND level.

_Kila_ · 22 May 2009, 22:12

He means another 400 hitting us

Wishmaster · 22 May 2009, 22:19

delete account and just say mission accomplished, asc didnt win?

That being said, asc are retarded doing this, as all would have turned on cardi in a day or 2 anyway, and asc would have rollercoasted to #1 this round

[DW]Entropy · 22 May 2009, 22:31

So alliance ranking is pretty much worthless now.

Zirikk · 22 May 2009, 22:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by [DW]Entropy

So alliance ranking is pretty much worthless now.

That easily happens when big part of the universe plays to prevent one alliance from winning instead of trying to win themselves.