User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Alliance Discussions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 18:16   #1
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: Close round so far.

alliance limit sure does help nicely on the close race

Its great!
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 20:08   #2
Gary
xVx Peon
 
Gary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Coventry
Posts: 268
Gary is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Close round so far.

Would be a bit different without Jenova's and Vengeance's support planets. Try fighting with just 70 people guys

Last edited by Gary; 19 Jul 2007 at 20:18.
Gary is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 20:35   #3
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Close round so far.

Yeah go Jenova!
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 22:05   #4
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: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GJN
Would be a bit different without Jenova's and Vengeance's support planets. Try fighting with just 70 people guys
The question is, why are you even fighting Jenova and Vengeance, it's not like you have a realistic chance of 1st, its quite confusing really :S
Game^ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 22:06   #5
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: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GJN
Would be a bit different without Jenova's and Vengeance's support planets. Try fighting with just 70 people guys
Man, I sure hope these alliances that want communities larger than some arbitrary number get punished soon. IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT.
Achilles is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 22:12   #6
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: Close round so far.

The entire reason behind the top10 beeing pretty close is actually due to the alliance limit.

Now as we all know both VGN and Jenova got support planet members, and as i havent seen any prove on CT having them yet it tells me CT must clearly be the most skilled alliance around - actually playing with 70 members and still doing so good.

Jenova and VGN on the other hand would prolly be bottum of top10 if they had followed the alliance limit and hence thier current rankings are misleading.

This taking into consideration it seems to me that Rock and TGV are actually doing fairly nice this round too.

I like judging alliances on an even playing field and actually beeing able to have a real competition about it.

But ofcause some alliances just mass recruit prior to round, then once they get hit 3-4 days in a row by an alliance they fall apart and drop trough the ranks... Aint no skill in mass recruiting and there aint no competition in it either.

This round is close due to an equal playingfield - Its not perfect yet but if the cheaters got punished i am sure next round would be even closer and more exciting.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 22:13   #7
Gary
xVx Peon
 
Gary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Coventry
Posts: 268
Gary is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Man, I sure hope these alliances that want communities larger than some arbitrary number get punished soon. IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT.
When did I say I was against a higher alliance limit? Just because I dont want rule breakers or rule benders to get away with cheating, doesn't mean I am against higher community numbers. Stop *trying* to make VisioN posters look unreasonable who request people actually adhere to the eula, and ingame mechanical restrictions.

If you want to change the game, try arguing intelligently, cut out the name calling and act in a more adult like manner. Then maybe the pa team and notable others will start to listen to you and your friends. Name calling (in my real life experience) doesn't help one to achieve what they want.
Gary is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 22:15   #8
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Close round so far.

You better believe it. Seventy is the ultimate community size. If a community were bigger than that, it would almost certainly suck.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 22:15   #9
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: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Its not perfect yet but if the cheaters got punished i am sure next round would be even closer and more exciting.
yes, about just as exciting as it currently is for a new or allianceless player to find a (decent) alliance to join that isn't restricted by the ingame limits \o/
__________________
[Vision] in a lost dream, contributing to The 5th Element at present
Wandows is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 23:15   #10
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: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wandows
yes, about just as exciting as it currently is for a new or allianceless player to find a (decent) alliance to join that isn't restricted by the ingame limits \o/
If you look on the progress from R19 to R22 you will see that:

1) the gap between the alliances in top10 has reduced.

2) each alliances getting closer to the alliance limit of 70 members

3) 2. results in higher member amounts on the top11-20 alliances too.

4) alot more competition over who will finish rank 1 (and the rest of top 10 for that matter)

Untill the last weeks time its actually been even closer in top10 then it is now, where a few groups are becoming more obvious to also stay about the same till the round ends, unless bigger politics plays in and alliances takes steps to change it.

So why on earth be annoyed on alliance limits when they clearly work wonders for the game dynamics.

And also Wandows, i dont believe its hard(er) for new players to find an alliance compared to earlier, i do on the other hand believe more and more decent alliances will see the light of the day due to the alliance limit.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 19 Jul 2007, 23:15   #11
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: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwtmc
You better believe it. Seventy is the ultimate community size. If a community were bigger than that, it would almost certainly suck.
I dunno man, I've done a bit of research and I found out something quite surprising!!

http://www.trattle.co.uk/pics/proof.jpg
__________________
"There is no I in team, but there are two in anal fisting"
Tomkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 08:58   #12
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
So why on earth be annoyed on alliance limits when they clearly work wonders for the game dynamics.
If we set all taxes to 100%, it clearly works wonders reducing income differences. Why don't we do that?
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 09:30   #13
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomkat
I dunno man, I've done a bit of research and I found out something quite surprising!!

http://www.trattle.co.uk/pics/proof.jpg
I'd say the awesomeness / size of alliances is a complex relationship we'll probably never fully understand. PA team understand it though. And for that we have a lot to be thankful for. Just think how bad said alliances would be if they had eighty members. They'd actually be negative in awesomeness
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 09:55   #14
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: Close round so far.

An alliance of 80 actually will change something.

I know i cant expect people like you to understand these things... after all your required to be able to do simple math.

If the alliancelimit is raised to 80 then each of the say top7 alliances recruits 10 more players (or in a few cases maybe take in 10 support planets?) which means the alliance in rank 8 will have no members as the top7 alliances expanded thier recruiting.

So Wandows, will it be easier to get in a decent alliance with less of them around? I think not.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 10:11   #15
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
An alliance of 80 actually will change something.

I know i cant expect people like you to understand these things... after all your required to be able to do simple math.
Quote:
So Wandows, will it be easier to get in a decent alliance with less of them around? I think not.


A simple derivation from labor market. I urge any sane person not to read this. In fact, this is totally directed to Red-.

Alliance limits stand as 70 players. There are 8 "decent" alliances. This means, the demand for players coming from "decent" alliances is 560. Thus, the decent alliances (top8) demand 560 players. Scenario a: Let's say there are 1000 players supplying themselves to alliances. We have excess supply of 440. Scenario b: in addition, the top7 alliances would each like to add 10 support planets to their ranks. This creates further excess suply of 70, to a total of 560.

Alliance limit is changed to stand as 80 players. Top7 expand their recruiting, allowing 80 more players.

In scenario a, the top7 each recruit 10 more, to 70. This means, that the 8thmost alliance loses 70 players (presuming rational choice each player climbs the ladder upwards). In this case, it doesn't get harder to get into a decent alliance - in fact, it gets easier to get in to a better alliance as the better alliances can recruit more. Does the 1st-7th alliances recruiting make the 8th alliance worse off? If it does, then the 8th alliance had already been worse off, not being able to hold on to it's players - if it's a decent alliance, this further gives more room for players to get in to decent alliances. The supply doesn't change, but the demand increases, hence leaving a lesser excess supply. Because of the increase in demand, less skilled players are accepted to decent alliances.

In scenario b, the top7 add each 10 support planets. The 8th alliance doesn't, hence it has 10 more spots for the players in the supply. Here, the demand has again risen by 10. Assuming #8 is a decent alliance, it again gets easier to get in to a decent alliance. Again, because of the increase in demand, less skilled players are accepted to decent alliances.

The drain will continue until it hits the low end of the alliances, in which case it will cease the excistance of a pair of alliances. By definition, these alliances were only waiting to be extincted anyways - being on the lowest par, these weren't the "decent" alliances to get in to in the first place. The more room there is in decent alliances, the easier it is to get in to them - the tradeoff is obviously that in which the worst alliances crumble and disappear from the game. At extreme, if you allow unlimited members, the decent alliances will of course recruit as much as they feel they want - and as long as they have applicants of the level they expect. Can this possibly be twisted in to increasing alliance limits makes it harder to get in to decent alliances?

Simple maths.

Simple logics.

You're still failing to get it, are you?

It's as insane as your drivel.

Please. Spare the forum readers of your drivel.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 10:23   #16
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: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
If the alliancelimit is raised to 80 then each of the say top7 alliances recruits 10 more players (or in a few cases maybe take in 10 support planets?) which means the alliance in rank 8 will have no members as the top7 alliances expanded thier recruiting.
What? Why would there be an equal migration of members from the #8 alliance into the other #1-#7 alliances (7 groups of 10 into each one)? That isn't how the game works at all. People join up with their friends and communities they know.
__________________
"There is no I in team, but there are two in anal fisting"
Tomkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 10:30   #17
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: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä
Alliance limits stand as 70 players. There are 8 "decent" alliances. This means, the demand for players coming from "decent" alliances is 560. Thus, the decent alliances (top8) demand 560 players. Scenario a: Let's say there are 1000 players supplying themselves to alliances. We have excess supply of 440. Scenario b: in addition, the top7 alliances would each like to add 10 support planets to their ranks. This creates further excess suply of 70, to a total of 560. [/i]?
Your not doing math, your doing onsided assumptions.

Who says there is 1000 players supplying themselfes?

Who says all players are of the same quality and hence does is the demand there for them?

Who says all alliances share your spam troll gangs intentions of impersonal mass recruiting?

Who says alliance will cheat by any means?

Your trying to apply flawed capitalistic market economics for 1 type of goods and 1 market to a more complex scenario where both the goods and the markets are varying, its simply not adding up.

Instead of your silly and wrongfull assumptions try and look on the empirical data for R19, 20, 21 and now 22 - Its clearly not supporting any of your assumptions.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 10:32   #18
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: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomkat
What? Why would there be an equal migration of members from the #8 alliance into the other #1-#7 alliances (7 groups of 10 into each one)? That isn't how the game works at all. People join up with their friends and communities they know.
Ofcause there woulndt be, it was an example under the assumption that there was only 8 decent alliances with 70 members each and the limit beeing rasied to 80.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 10:46   #19
Lei~
~Gon
 
Lei~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 290
Lei~ is on a distinguished road
Re: Close round so far.

First of all a communities members, dont have to act as support planets even if they are playing pa. I see myself as part of vision community. Yet i havent even interacted with vision this round. Also please dont rate all vision posters on red-. He can be a lil stubborn. Wub you tho red- :-)

I think alliance limits are about ok. But i think its time to get rid of the support rule. After all if an alliance can get that many ppl, from another alliance or without alliance at all, to support them its at least an organisational feat.
__________________
rd 2 - rd 19 [Unknown] [FAnG] [Absolute] [SiN] [VsN]
Lei~ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 11:04   #20
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Close round so far.

It's not wrong that the alliance with the most/best friends should be the most powerful and hardest to stop. It is wrong that this alliance is persecuted by pa team for being the best. How can/why should everyone else act against them if there's dodgy rules and confused administrators doing it for them. It's not enough to say the rounds are getting better because they are close. First, you have to consider why they are close.

thread commentary: I don't really subcribe to the alliance limit rule whatsoever.. but the few that like it seem to concentrate on the less than concrete presumption that the largest alliances might overwhelm everyone else, ruining their game. Ironically, what this really means, is that these alliances can get away with being the most powerful without being recognised, since they can only ever show off seventy planets. And then the people the rule was designed for end up moaning about it anyway.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 11:08   #21
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Ofcause there woulndt be, it was an example under the assumption that there was only 8 decent alliances with 70 members each and the limit beeing rasied to 80.
Then it was a stupid assumption with no basis in reality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Your not doing math, your doing onsided assumptions.

Who says there is 1000 players supplying themselfes?
He is. The figure is pretty realistic, given that PA Team have stated previously that around 1000 players are in alliances out of the total playerbase.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Who says all players are of the same quality and hence does is the demand there for them?
Erm.....you. It was you who said that the players of the 8th ranked alliance would all transfer into the top 7 alliances and that the top 7 alliances would have a demand for them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Who says all alliances share your spam troll gangs intentions of impersonal mass recruiting?
No-one does, although that is a wonderful strawman. I'm not quite sure you intended it though

It was you who ignored the community aspect of alliances, whereby alliances do not simply disband due to spaces being opened up in bigger alliances. Keizari (aka Tietäjä) simply took your concept the step further it deserved and showed you what would actually happen under your assumptions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Who says alliance will cheat by any means?
No-one except you. Please don't mention cheating again, since you've been demonstrating for the last week that you have no idea what it is or represents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Your trying to apply flawed capitalistic market economics for 1 type of goods and 1 market to a more complex scenario where both the goods and the markets are varying, its simply not adding up.
Yet it was you who initally presumed that the members of the 8th ranked alliance would automatically transfer into the top 7 alliances as a result of increasing the member limit. I've already stated that this is idiocy, re-iterating myself is getting a little tiresome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Instead of your silly and wrongfull assumptions try and look on the empirical data for R19, 20, 21 and now 22 - Its clearly not supporting any of your assumptions.
SHOW ME THE DATA!
SHOW ME THE DATA!
SHOW ME THE DATA!
SHOW ME THE DATA!




sorry, I came over very Jerry Maguire there
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 11:21   #22
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: Close round so far.

The data is the alliance rankings of the previous rounds, but your prolly not capable of looking on the top10 alliances and then take in variables of membersize and score and see how it has evolved.

Half the exuses for cheating and exploiting PA, and causing its downfall imo, is done by people saying "everyone else is doing it" the other half cling on to arguments about their opinion on how the game should be run is more important then the rules and hence they shoulndt have to follow them, and all rules should be removed etc. - 2 different sides of the same patethic excuses for not abiding by the rules.

About the 1000 players - Yes there is 1000 players but these players vary _alot_ in experience and quality and those 1000 players are not at all interessting to the top alliances hence any simplistic market models for supply and demand are insane to apply under these conditions.

But ok asking you lot to understand these simple things might be too much to ask.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 11:26   #23
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: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
An alliance of 80 actually will change something.

I know i cant expect people like you to understand these things... after all your required to be able to do simple math.

If the alliancelimit is raised to 80 then each of the say top7 alliances recruits 10 more players (or in a few cases maybe take in 10 support planets?) which means the alliance in rank 8 will have no members as the top7 alliances expanded thier recruiting.

So Wandows, will it be easier to get in a decent alliance with less of them around? I think not.
80 x 7=8 x 70

According to the example you just laid out the level of difficulty involved in getting into a decent alliance is exactly the same.


Edit: Split this new discussion off. Given that a discussion actually arose from it I'll leave the posts but in future no posts accusing another alliance of breaking the rules without offering any proof will be tolerated. This is not the place for that.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.

Last edited by JonnyBGood; 20 Jul 2007 at 11:40.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 11:50   #24
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

You have to remember that this is a free round, next round will the playerbase probably go down with atleast 10 maybe 15%.

A limit of 70 is okay, allthough i fear that in a paid round it will actually be to high.

You also notice that with the current limit new alliances are emerging and some of them seem to be able to keep on going next round aswell, hopefully this is a trend that will continue.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 11:52   #25
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Sorry but some of us dont have access to c-service(alki/achi) and other alliances hc's username and password (jenova/cisco) to thier own websites to prove such things. (ohh wait who was it that had both...)

Furthermore i cant really see how my posts took the post ofcause tbh.

The topic was the close race this round - And yes its a close race which i believe is due to the alliance limit evolving over the last rounds and showing a clear indication of why its a good things - As it levels out the playing field and assurres a more close and exciting race for top rankings, unlike alot of previous rounds.

Ofcause you can not see longterm effects of a rule change in a round or 2 but given that we now have quite some rounds of data it looks like the alliance limit rule is the main variable causing the close race in the top alliance rankings. I certainly can not see other variables with a bigger explanatory power then the alliance limit.

But what we can see over the last rounds is that there tend to be a tendancy towards more and more alliances approaching the 70 member limit with the effect that the gaps between them gets smaller and with the effect that the quality of the memberbase of each alliance tends to become higher i.e. causing closer competition. A sideeffect of this is that the amount of decent alliances actually are rising and that the organisators/leaderships of said alliances as a whole seem to be improving skillwise in running and administrating the alliances they run.

So yes the round is close and thats a good thing, lets not ruin it in the future by removing the game dynamics and rules thats causing it.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 11:54   #26
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Close round so far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Your not doing math, your doing onsided assumptions.

Who says there is 1000 players supplying themselfes?
It's an assumption based on player- and alliancefigures throughout my late time on PAX (that is, round 17 onwards). I presume it's a fairly good view of the amount of players who actually want to be members of an alliance and cooperate at some level.

Quote:
Who says all players are of the same quality and hence does is the demand there for them?
In fact, I did not state so. In fact, if you read carefully, you'll see me talking about skill levels. I went on with the assumption you made (that the top alliances want to have 80 players if possible), hence the top alliances will recruit up to their limit irregardless of the evident decline on the skill of the available players. And as I said, this will eventually cause the least competent alliances to crumble. Additionally, it's not "wrong", instead it's a vital part of the alliance competition, that competitive players seek to join competitive alliances.

Quote:
Who says all alliances share your spam troll gangs intentions of impersonal mass recruiting?
If they don't, and they feel posting affects recruitment outcome, then they're incompetent at that field, and should indeed make to have a forum team to enhance recruitment efforts. I press here, that I'm not representing my opinion as a member of any alliance, and in fact, there's little way except a priori knowledge to connect me to my IRC nick even less to my alliance.

Quote:
Who says alliance will cheat by any means?
Not me. You seem to be in favour of branding a lot of alliances for having support planets.

Quote:
Your trying to apply flawed capitalistic market economics for 1 type of goods and 1 market to a more complex scenario where both the goods and the markets are varying, its simply not adding up.
First, it's not capitalistic market economics. Second, as elaborated above, the analysis scales good. If top8 alliances are able to recruit 10 more players (assuming they don't work it out to make room for the support planets you accuse them of), they will be recruiting competitive players. By default, the competitive players will usually want to join competitive alliances. This is why it'll scale upwards, and the fall will hit on the lower register. This will actually make it easier for even less skilled players to join a decent alliance, as currently you don't see any very bad alliances being on the top70 limit.

Wonder why? Because people want to join decent alliances, and more room in decent alliances will unarguably lead into more people being able to join decent alliances. This is secondary to the point of the discussion, but applies still.

Quote:
Instead of your silly and wrongfull assumptions try and look on the empirical data for R19, 20, 21 and now 22 - Its clearly not supporting any of your assumptions.
In fact, having been a high command member of an alliance you might name decent on two of those four rounds, I'm probably well up to date. How and why does my analysis not fit the empirical data of round 19, 20, 21, and 22? You should instead look into empirical data. In terms of "modern planetarion", Omen might have been at one point scaled as a decent alliance (though particularily impressing it never was). Knowing our recruitment policies, the increase in the size of the alliance limits actually did expand into recruiting less known players. These often came from galaxies of our own: a few good examples would include add and Mortalp, who both were fairly unknown prior to their joining Omen (from fAst's galaxy of round 17). In fact, I myself vouched for having add join us, even if there was some pessimism mainly because he was inexperienced and unproven.

In fact, the empirical data would, if you looked at it, point out that the more room there is in "decent alliances", the easier it is for players to join one of these "decent alliances". A very solid claim would go that if you would reduce the the alliance limits, you would contradictionally come up with less decent alliances, hence less options to join those.

Why would this happen? Because the will of people to join the officer staff of an alliance to actively help organize the alliance is on decline. Hence, if you break the 70-man alliances in to 35-man alliances, and enforce ruthless limits, you will have alliances which will collect the cream of the officer crop, and work effectively, and alliances which will be left with little staff to speak of, hence work less effectively.

Please, do elaborate what part of the empirical data of rounds 19-22 points out that increasing alliance limits does not aid more people to join these alliances, memberlimits of which successively have been increased (since round 17).

Quote:
Originally Posted by JBG
According to the example you just laid out the level of difficulty involved in getting into a decent alliance is exactly the same.
In fact, I disagree. The ones that will eventually be the ones to pay the price of increased member counts will be the alliances in the bottom level (beyond top15, or so, varies). Why? If we make the blunt instrument that while increasing the membercounts of top7 to 70, this will in practise be primarily recruitment of a) friends, b) promising members of lower ranking alliances. The sled will ride downwards with "better members" of lower ranking alliances joining higher ranking/more proven alliances that have room for recruits. If we define that a "decent" alliance is one that consistently ranks say top10, we'll end up having 100 more spots in these "decent" alliances (presuming we'll have 10 of them).
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 11:59   #27
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Ofcause you can not see longterm effects of a rule change in a round or 2 but given that we now have quite some rounds of data it looks like the alliance limit rule is the main variable causing the close race in the top alliance rankings. I certainly can not see other variables with a bigger explanatory power then the alliance limit.

But what we can see over the last rounds is that there tend to be a tendancy towards more and more alliances approaching the 70 member limit with the effect that the gaps between them gets smaller and with the effect that the quality of the memberbase of each alliance tends to become higher i.e. causing closer competition. A sideeffect of this is that the amount of decent alliances actually are rising and that the organisators/leaderships of said alliances as a whole seem to be improving skillwise in running and administrating the alliances they run.
What i wrote in my previous post.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:04   #28
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Sorry but some of us dont have access to c-service(alki/achi) and other alliances hc's username and password (jenova/cisco) to thier own websites to prove such things. (ohh wait who was it that had both...)
I have neither asked for nor received any information on anyone from anyone in cservice. I had access to jenova's intel because hay man, some people just don't change their passwords that often. Even if you did this isn't the place for it, you should take your accusations to a multihunter.

Quote:
Furthermore i cant really see how my posts took the post ofcause tbh.

The topic was the close race this round - And yes its a close race which i believe is due to the alliance limit evolving over the last rounds and showing a clear indication of why its a good things - As it levels out the playing field and assurres a more close and exciting race for top rankings, unlike alot of previous rounds.
A theoretical discussion on the causes and variables involved in causing a close race is different to discussing a specific close race. I'm not saying this was a bad diversion (if it was I'd have deleted it), it's just different. View this as recognition of your discussion starting skills.

Quote:
Ofcause you can not see longterm effects of a rule change in a round or 2 but given that we now have quite some rounds of data it looks like the alliance limit rule is the main variable causing the close race in the top alliance rankings. I certainly can not see other variables with a bigger explanatory power then the alliance limit.
The departure of exilition and 1up and the departure or deconcentration of their excellent officers and memberbases wouldn't cross your mind?

Quote:
But what we can see over the last rounds is that there tend to be a tendancy towards more and more alliances approaching the 70 member limit with the effect that the gaps between them gets smaller and with the effect that the quality of the memberbase of each alliance tends to become higher i.e. causing closer competition. A sideeffect of this is that the amount of decent alliances actually are rising and that the organisators/leaderships of said alliances as a whole seem to be improving skillwise in running and administrating the alliances they run.
Actually I think the quality of the memberbase is decreasing, the fact that overall size is shrinking would tend to support this, as well as the aforementioned departure of a number of individuals who previously existed at the top levels of the game.

Quote:
So yes the round is close and thats a good thing, lets not ruin it in the future by removing the game dynamics and rules thats causing it.
Have you ever asked yourself how alliances start? Perhaps you could look over the empirical data yourself and analyse how the various top ten alliances started off.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:05   #29
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: Close round so far.

Its all a matter of perspective, I was discussing this with Achi last night, that with the expirience a person have in regards to where he has been in the game the last few years his opinions would obviously be both marked by that expirience and not to be understanding the finer mechanics of being a top alliance.

I would say that (and appologies if anyone feel hurt by me using them as an example) wakey would not know much on how to run a top alliance, and angryduck being the competative animal he is, would have issues understanding some of the problems the lowerranked alliances have based on the sole fact that neither of them have had any expirience with running either opportunities.

It is very much so for players in general aswell, if you've been with fury>angels>1up and etc etc, how are u then capable of really understanding how a limit effects an alliance like Hidden Agenda when you have never expirienced the game the way they do based on your previous expiriences.

The game is all about various types of alliances and them all being able to work more or less well under the current restrictions that is the current alliance limit.

I feel the current limit is abit to low for being a free round, and probably a bit to high for being a paid round.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:05   #30
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Sorry but some of us dont have access to c-service(alki/achi) and other alliances hc's username and password (jenova/cisco) to thier own websites to prove such things. (ohh wait who was it that had both...)
The inability of Cservice operators, while it may and does probably have facts to support it, is beyond the discussion of alliance memberlimits. This is a very pointless argument. What comes to other alliances' high commanders giving Jenova or Cisco their login informations, well. Why does Cisco have them?

Furthermore i cant really see how my posts took the post ofcause tbh.

Quote:
The topic was the close race this round - And yes its a close race which i believe is due to the alliance limit evolving over the last rounds and showing a clear indication of why its a good things
No, please look at the empirical evidence, especially of rounds 18 and 19. There you can see why the close race doesn't come because of alliance limits evolving, but because of the lack of a/ dominant alliance/s

Quote:
Ofcause you can not see longterm effects of a rule change in a round or 2 but given that we now have quite some rounds of data it looks like the alliance limit rule is the main variable causing the close race in the top alliance rankings.
You're using an idea of a market equilibrium theory where you only have one factor affect one factor. This doesn't, by your own words, add up. In fact, there are plenty of other factors that affect the data and the development of the alliance scheme. In fact, the alliance limits play a very minor role here. For further evidence of this argument, see the alliance end ranking data of rounds 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21.

Quote:
But what we can see over the last rounds is that there tend to be a tendancy towards more and more alliances approaching the 70 member limit with the effect that the gaps between them gets smaller and with the effect that the quality of the memberbase of each alliance tends to become higher i.e. causing closer competition.
Again. You're off tracks. While there might be such an effect, the larger effect is still the lack of a dominant alliance. Of my own experiences: Omen had a chunk of eXilition "core" round 17. Why? Because a lot of our core were friends with them, and had played with them before, hence eXilition not playing their "second in line" alternative was Omen. Round 18, when eXilition played, a good chunk of our memberbase went there. This has nothing to do with the alliance limit itself.

Quote:
So yes the round is close and thats a good thing, lets not ruin it in the future by removing the game dynamics and rules thats causing it.
You're talking about inexisting or very insignificant dynamics. Perhaps there will be a dominant alliance next round. In that case, you'd have the empirical evidence smashed in your face hard enough to realize how wrong you are.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:06   #31
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
What i wrote in my previous post.
Is equally invalid.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:19   #32
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Again. You're off tracks. While there might be such an effect, the larger effect is still the lack of a dominant alliance. Of my own experiences: Omen had a chunk of eXilition "core" round 17. Why? Because a lot of our core were friends with them, and had played with them before, hence eXilition not playing their "second in line" alternative was Omen. Round 18, when eXilition played, a good chunk of our memberbase went there. This has nothing to do with the alliance limit itself.
(and other lines on the same subject).

With alliance limitations in memberbase there is a limit to how many quality players can enter into the same alliance, this ensures a bigger spread of quality members causing the quality (experience) beeing spread out to other alliances.

As a top alliance, it beeing say exi breaks up or doesnt play a round the memberbase will split up into other alliances where there is room. If there isnt enough room in 1 alliance they will spread into more assuring a positive effect on those alliances they join.

If you use cascadeeffect dynamics for the spread of alliance members beeing limited by alliance limit you should note that when a certain alliance hit peak the cascadeeffects will benefit another alliance - Hence improving the overall skill level of more alliances trough the aqusitions of more skillfull and experienced players.

There has never been a round with such a close race or so many alliances so equal in memberbase as in this round and i can not see any other variables that could explain this beyond statistical significans - And also i have not seen a single argument for what other variables could be causing the close race of this round with any form of weight or leverage.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:23   #33
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

a) There aren't any superpower alliances left.
b) It's early days still
c) Jenova and CT went to war with each other

You're also ignoring the fact people leave the game.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:26   #34
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

a) i think 0 superpower alliances is a good thing - multipolarity is a hell of a lot more fun then unipolarity or bipolarity imo.

b) its not that early anymore is it? 650 ticks into the round.

c) and so did alot others in top10 - or well have been targeting each other for weeks now.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:32   #35
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
a) i think 0 superpower alliances is a good thing - multipolarity is a hell of a lot more fun then unipolarity or bipolarity imo.
I'm not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing, it's simply a cause.

Quote:
b) its not that early anymore is it? 650 ticks into the round.
I'm not entirely sure. Do you have equivalent data from previous rounds?

Quote:
c) and so did alot others in top10 - or well have been targeting each other for weeks now.
Not as intensively.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:43   #36
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
As a top alliance, it beeing say exi breaks up or doesnt play a round the memberbase will split up into other alliances where there is room. If there isnt enough room in 1 alliance they will spread into more assuring a positive effect on those alliances they join.
Indeed. Now this effect by itself (the nonexistance of dominant alliances) is far greater than any effect you could achieve dabbling with the alliance limits.

Quote:
There has never been a round with such a close race or so many alliances so equal in memberbase as in this round and i can not see any other variables that could explain this beyond statistical significans - And also i have not seen a single argument for what other variables could be causing the close race of this round with any form of weight or leverage.
Maybe it's just you not seeing the other variables. Or just denying them on sight.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 12:52   #37
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä
Indeed. Now this effect by itself (the nonexistance of dominant alliances) is far greater than any effect you could achieve dabbling with the alliance limits.
The reason behind a lack of a hegemon in the universe, causing multipolarity instead of unipolarity, is not nessecarily due to certain alliances beeing gone, but could be attributed to the more even competition between alliances. So whereas there in the past was largely dominant alliances there seem to be more of an even playingfield now, and hence there is no dominant alliance.

It in no way needs to be cause and effect as you see it, it could easily be the other way around (which i believe it is).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä
Maybe it's just you not seeing the other variables. Or just denying them on sight.
Name them pls and why you think they are important.
__________________
Back from the unknown

Last edited by Red-; 20 Jul 2007 at 13:07.
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 13:11   #38
Kargool
Up The Hatters!
 
Kargool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
Kargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet societyKargool is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

most of the people that leave the game isnt quitting because of the alliance limits.

Thats like saying that most people die due to oxygen being poisonous
__________________
Planetarion veteran
Kargool is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 13:38   #39
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
Name them pls and why you think they are important.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
So whereas there in the past was largely dominant alliances there seem to be more of an even playingfield now, and hence there is no dominant alliance.
You answered to yourself, except in a wrong correlation. The lack of dominant alliances has to do with the decline in quality and activity of the playerbase, not because they pitch has become magically even due to alliance limits. You can verify this by checking for example round 18's eXilition winning margin (mind you, alliance limits then were stricter than they are now, so your correlation is by empirical evidence flawed).

Code:
Rank Name Members Av. Size Av. Score Size Score 
1. eXilition     63  710  4886954  44700 293217224  
2. NewDawn       78  485  4461363  37810  267681770 
3. Furious Omen  78  693  4446579  54070  266794751 

4  Tides of Fire  79  680  3922509  53682  235350540 
5  VisioN         75  686  3843899  51439  230633912 
6  xVx            66  568  3481289  37502  208877329 
7  TGV           61  575  3406482  35048  204388950
Round 19. Notice that the XP formulae made impact then (thus ND being "closer"), and why FO was so close, it's because it was a merger of two "top" alliances. eXilition staff will probably admit to you that it wasn't one of their finest rounds, in fact, it was a sort of a decline. The top10 still fits inside 10million score (albeit eXi still has a 24% edge over ND). Also, notice the varying alliance memberlimits. NewDawn and FO at 78, eXilition at 63.

Code:
Rank Name Members Size Score Avg Score Avg Size 
1 eXilition       63 125,858 293,830,203 4,663,971  1998 
2 Omen             65 54,288 180,454,270 2,776,219 835 
3 1up             61 31,328 146,250,252 2,397,545 514 
4 xVx             68 47,308 144,956,903 2,131,719 695 
5 Tides of Fire    75 33,908 140,733,545 1,876,447 452 
6 Subh            61 33,941 133,593,521 2,190,057 557 
7 ROCK            75 35,032 128,532,942 1,713,773 454 
8 F-Crew         75 35,312 116,940,193 1,559,202 471
Round 18 data. This will further elaborate why you are wrong. Notice eXilition at 293 million score, and Omen trailing more than a 100 million behind, and after Omen there's still a 34 million gap to 1up. Notice, that despite the fact that third tier alliances are allowed more members (Tides of Fire at 75 with ROCK and F-Crew), they're still trailing miles and miles behind.

There's no empirical data stored on rounds 20 and 21 on Planetarion Wiki, so now that you've been so reliant on that evidence, could you please present them to us? In my knowledge, those rounds were both more even than 18 especially, even though the alliance limit was raised (technically) and the pitch was made more even (ie. everyone can have that 70 nowadays with few stunts, instead of just the third tier alliances).

How does it look like in the light of this evidence? It appears that the decline of the dominant alliance after round 18 made it's impact. Accompanied by a leave of a share of the alliance's elite from the active playerbase, it resulted in more even alliance competition - not because of tweaking the alliance limits, but because of a decline in the quality and activity of the playerbase. And a decline in it's concentration to the named alliance.

Are you still convinced that the tweaking of the alliance limits has had the most visible impact on the changes in the alliance competition (or lack of thereof)? To summarize, while the alliance limits have actually become looser, the competition has become more close. What was your original argument, again?
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 13:42   #40
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

One of the main reasons that the alliance rankings are so tight these days is because rounds are so short. There isn't time to recover from a full-on war (the type that 1up and eXilition used to have) for the winner or the loser, so instead we see a roid race where alliances target galaxies for most of the round.

Sure, there's planet targetting on and off between the main alliances, but it's evident that there's just not enough time for wars to be profitable. You win a two week war, your reserves are sapped but you're ready to start fighting your way back up the rankings having taken down your main competitor.....and suddenly the round's over. Damn, we finished 2nd while a fence-sitting alliance took 1st.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 13:44   #41
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

I seriously doubt there are alliances around nowadays that are capable of excerting the level of military power the likes of eXilition, 1up, and fury did.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 13:47   #42
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

If the quality players has been spread out in more alliances as a result of the alliance limit, your analysis in no way can deny that. If the top10 alliances has become more experienced and now has a higthened quality, your analysis does not reflect that either.

ND for one beeing rank 2 in R18 and only rank 6 in this round - Does that mean that the other alliances has improved or ND has declined in quality?
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 13:52   #43
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

It means ND has declined in quality from how they were round 19. (Reckon, round 18 Omen were rank #2). I am not denying that the quality of players has spread (and declined), but I am denying that it's because of the alliance limits.

Can you now, given round 18 and round 19 statistics, elaborate why on earth has increasing the alliance limits made the competition more "close"? Or did you already give up the correlation and try dodge the whole conversation into a drivel about ND, and the spread of the quality players.

Sigh.

I'm off home, someone put him back to his cage.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 13:57   #44
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Your assumption is that the quality of the playerbase hash declined, so alliance limit has no correlaiton at all with the closer race we see now.

But if you look on R21 you will see that the gaps in score there was in top10 rankings was directly correlated to thesize of the memberbase and the score each alliance accumulated.

I am saying that the quality of top10 alliances overall has hightend and thats partly due to the alliance limits causing the quality players to be spread to more alliances which in generel affect the quality of those alliances.

Its ofcause impossible to say who has the truth, but dismissing alliance limits as having any explantory power at all is simply not rational.
__________________
Back from the unknown

Last edited by Red-; 20 Jul 2007 at 14:04.
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 14:13   #45
robban1
Registered User
 
robban1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
robban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these parts
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

erm alliance limit onlygives the dudes in tag better eta in def but it doesnt say jack then it comes to attacks and that shit

your argument skills is lacking a bit here
__________________
____________________________

robban1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 14:59   #46
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

People not in tag can not attribute score can they... however they can give an unfair advantage to those in tag.

Besides your argumenting something thats not even part of the debate...
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 15:13   #47
robban1
Registered User
 
robban1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
robban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these parts
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
People not in tag can not attribute score can they... however they can give an unfair advantage to those in tag.

Besides your argumenting something thats not even part of the debate...
sorry thay i draged up a bit that is important but not a part of "your" debate

ct isnt 70 either btw but you prolly belive they are cos they said so to ya
__________________
____________________________

robban1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 15:23   #48
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

I havent seen any prove ct is above 70 members, unlike the other 2.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 15:35   #49
robban1
Registered User
 
robban1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
robban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these parts
Re: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-
I havent seen any prove ct is above 70 members, unlike the other 2.
how can you prove that? i can add 200 planets as vsn in arbi and claim you are a bunch of cheaters too
__________________
____________________________

robban1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 Jul 2007, 15:39   #50
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: The alliance limit and its impact on the rankings

with the jenova hc username and password beeing spread by asc guys i reckon most people had access to the jenova homepage with hc access by now.... i know of serveral vgn members whos not in tag but still use vgn defence channels of vgn etc.
__________________
Back from the unknown
Red- is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 16:34.


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