|
|
8 Aug 2004, 20:47
|
#1
|
Why so serious?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 199
|
Seriously though
has LCH, mistu and vision given up on taking down 1up? Please get your fingers out of my ass, and start blocking fs.
(blablabla)
__________________
Don't Trust Anyone
4S
Illuminati
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 09:31
|
#2
|
Heh, Leeds !
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: In The Redfern
Posts: 3,790
|
Re: Seriously though
yes they have, that's why ND keep getting hit by them
~Vaio~
__________________
The George Harrison of BlueTuba
Yes, I know he is dead !
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 11:03
|
#3
|
I see you!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In any girl
Posts: 2,825
|
Re: Seriously though
lol Xy
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 12:19
|
#4
|
Spastic Drivel!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: BloodFlower Village
Posts: 313
|
Re: Seriously though
But... but.... They all signed Sid's proposal not to block
__________________
Amnesty International || Band Aid
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 13:25
|
#5
|
Retired PeOn
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Luton, UK
Posts: 175
|
Re: Seriously though
Yes, 1up have proved their the best etc etc, NO BLOCKING Blah Blah, now someone get moving and take them out. Its simple logistics... 100 versus 700+ means big battles, lots of people going into Vac mode, lots of suiciding and a hell of a lot of fun.
START ATTACKING 1UP fs!
__________________
Been there, done that, but was too skint to buy the T-Shirt
The most experienced n00b around since Round1.
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 13:50
|
#6
|
Vitriolic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: #public
Posts: 1,506
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brimstone
Yes, 1up have proved their the best etc etc, NO BLOCKING Blah Blah, now someone get moving and take them out. Its simple logistics... 100 versus 700+ means big battles, lots of people going into Vac mode, lots of suiciding and a hell of a lot of fun.
START ATTACKING 1UP fs!
|
Well done, I think you managed to uncover a tactic no-one else has thought of. I'll get the calc and the defence channel notices ready shall I?
__________________
Chief [ 1up] Chimp.
<@JBG> by the way is mazzelaar a community account that everyone in 1up logs into when they're feeling angry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
mazzelaar has always reminded me of a hungry hungry hippo. Except instead of eating marbles he just bites the heads off new AD posters
|
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 16:30
|
#7
|
Raaaaaaaah!
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,296
|
Re: Seriously though
Fleets grounded !
It's quite funny how you guys sell Mistu/Vision/LCH so short, they aren't retards they started cooperating ages ago, although they seem to have given up now.
__________________
Hicks
Mercury & Solace
Always [Fury]
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 16:31
|
#8
|
ND
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hicks
Fleets grounded !
It's quite funny how you guys sell Mistu/Vision/LCH so short, they aren't retards they started cooperating ages ago, although they seem to have given up now.
|
co operated against whom tho?
__________________
[ND]
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 16:51
|
#9
|
Sh33p h3rd3r
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 132
|
Re: Seriously though
Yea 1up ask for no blocking but it seems they have the most Naps in the universe. Yes i know its not blocking but just as bad. I'm sure most Naps will be broken just as soon as they run out of other targets tho.
__________________
Roiding No More
eXilitionAscendancy
*****************
Do not make me get out the paddle!!! "
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 16:54
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 537
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by LocknLoad
Yea 1up ask for no blocking but it seems they have the most Naps in the universe. Yes i know its not blocking but just as bad. I'm sure most Naps will be broken just as soon as they run out of other targets tho.
|
Which alliances do you think we have Naps with?
__________________
Synthetic Sid
[1up]
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 17:01
|
#11
|
Sh33p h3rd3r
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 132
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
Which alliances do you think we have Naps with?
|
Did I say alliances?
__________________
Roiding No More
eXilitionAscendancy
*****************
Do not make me get out the paddle!!! "
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 19:35
|
#12
|
Why so serious?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 199
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hicks
Fleets grounded !
It's quite funny how you guys sell Mistu/Vision/LCH so short, they aren't retards they started cooperating ages ago, although they seem to have given up now.
|
I dont believe that is true :[
__________________
Don't Trust Anyone
4S
Illuminati
|
|
|
9 Aug 2004, 21:27
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,081
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by LocknLoad
I'm sure most Naps will be broken just as soon as they run out of other targets tho.
|
Its getting that way - I belive they've altered their policy to killing anyone who launches on a 1up gal, even if they recall immediately, believing its a regular target
__________________
Dynamic Salvage!
[16:10:34] <[lfc]stif|afk> "dont be the worst in your alliance, join CT. We have Arfy!"
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 08:07
|
#14
|
Vitriolic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: #public
Posts: 1,506
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Real Arfy
Its getting that way - I belive they've altered their policy to killing anyone who launches on a 1up gal, even if they recall immediately, believing its a regular target
|
We extended a policy of no incoming until hostile for planets from other alliances in 1up galaxies. I personally do not call this a NAP. I see it as a means to keep ridiculous galaxy politics, which often upset more than one apple cart, on the back burner and remove some of the pressure of galaxy politics which we all know exist in top galaxies.
With the glut of intel about we know it is both simple and quick to find out if these planets are attacking a 1up planet, thus we believe that any planet that now launches on a 1up planet, given the information available to them, is now performing a hostile act and shall be treated accordingly.
__________________
Chief [ 1up] Chimp.
<@JBG> by the way is mazzelaar a community account that everyone in 1up logs into when they're feeling angry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
mazzelaar has always reminded me of a hungry hungry hippo. Except instead of eating marbles he just bites the heads off new AD posters
|
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 10:02
|
#15
|
pe0n
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Kindom of the Netherlands
Posts: 1,347
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazzelaar
We extended a policy of no incoming until hostile for planets from other alliances in 1up galaxies. I personally do not call this a NAP.
|
Why is a policy of no incomming not a NAP?
__________________
round 5 noob
round 6 noob
round 7 noob: rank 6.198 25:20:25 - VoC member
round 8 noob: rank 4.112 7:2:3 - TFD member
round 9 rank 941 23:1:9 - TFD HC
round 9.5 rank 860 22:7:3 - TFD HC
round 10: rank unknown (was #1 for a while) 5:2:5 - Vengeance pe0n
round 10.5: rank 683 19:10:2 - VGN member
round 11: rank 138 8:8:4 - VsN member
round 12: rank 515 - VGN 'special attack officer' -> jumped ship to Rock
round 13: rank 85: NoS
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 10:16
|
#16
|
Vitriolic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: #public
Posts: 1,506
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gerbie
Why is a policy of no incomming not a NAP?
|
The opinion was my personal one. I see a NAP as something whereby both parties cooperate to for a common good and by both parties I mean alliance. In this instance 1up are calling the shots simply to save hassle for ourselves and to ease politics for our members in mixed galaxies where friction between the galaxy members would do us more harm than good. However, if the agreement is broken, then there is no bargaining, retals or discussion at any sort of level. It's over, plain and simple.
Like I say, it's my own personal view on the situation. People will call a spade a spade but because of the one sided nature of the agreement I don't think it's quite as simple as just calling it a NAP, as this insinuates other things.
__________________
Chief [ 1up] Chimp.
<@JBG> by the way is mazzelaar a community account that everyone in 1up logs into when they're feeling angry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
mazzelaar has always reminded me of a hungry hungry hippo. Except instead of eating marbles he just bites the heads off new AD posters
|
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 12:42
|
#17
|
ND
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
|
Re: Seriously though
well, NAP stands for Non aggression pact. That is what you have. No two ways about it, they wont hit 1up, you wont hit them.
__________________
[ND]
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 12:53
|
#18
|
Vitriolic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: #public
Posts: 1,506
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Fish
well, NAP stands for Non aggression pact. That is what you have. No two ways about it, they wont hit 1up, you wont hit them.
|
I'm not going to insult your intelligence and try to explain why we have the policy we do any further than what Rob has posted in a different thread.
Got nothing better to do while the games down?
__________________
Chief [ 1up] Chimp.
<@JBG> by the way is mazzelaar a community account that everyone in 1up logs into when they're feeling angry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
mazzelaar has always reminded me of a hungry hungry hippo. Except instead of eating marbles he just bites the heads off new AD posters
|
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 15:42
|
#19
|
Evil inside
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,631
|
Re: Seriously though
That smells like a NAP
__________________
<Germania>but you called Fury a bully, and that is terribly unfair
<Hicks>Occassionally individuals do things without Executive consent
<Dreadnought>You cant whois on Eclipse server without a registered nic, which mr ****stirrer doesnt have.
<Almeida> well i like to grow fat myself too, and when i have enough ships then i can engage in big battles
<Nantoz> Zhukov for Lord Protector!
<Jakiri> (Windows)XP was fine on release
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 15:47
|
#20
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: Seriously though
Frankly I'm appalled 1up haven't been hitting every planet from 1:1:1 down to 51:2:10 in rotating order.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 15:55
|
#21
|
Aaranaf's Master
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 237
|
Re: Seriously though
I've tried, most are too small tho
__________________
R3: nub R10: 12:9:1 to 9:7:3 G Rank #14 P Rank #194
R4: 275:6:13 R10.5: 17:9:9 quitter
R5: 4:8:4 to 35:11:x R11: 15:4:9 G Rank #10 P Rank #32
R6: 22:22:11 R12: 29:8:9
R7: 8:16:9 G Rank #52 R13: Forgot
R9: 52:6:5 for a week R14: Forgot
R9.5: 12:7:17 G Rank #17 R17: 14:3:6 G Rank #6 P Rank #9
[1up] Peon
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 17:09
|
#22
|
Raaaaaaaah!
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,296
|
Re: Seriously though
Or in vacation
When have alliances ever not given other planets in their own galaxies NAPs ? I'm quite glad we do it, saves a lot of nasty internal galaxy arguements. It's hardly our fault that certain alliances seem unable to force their members to hit us or their BCs and HCs to hit us for that matter.
__________________
Hicks
Mercury & Solace
Always [Fury]
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 19:08
|
#23
|
Eclipse High Command
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Eclipse
Posts: 1,144
|
Re: Seriously though
its a well known fact as soon as you start to break up galaxy naps you will take side against your own members.
Ppl will not report incomings on them, ppl will make fake calls or try other nasty stuff and your members will be upset because you "ruin" their galaxyranking or hit ppl they got to know quiet well by then.
The more active the galaxy is and the more active the ppl in it are. the more damage will you do to your OWN alliance, because you will see ppl leaving and ppl choosing their galaxy over their alliance.
Since the pa community shrinked and the rounds went on and on, every member has a history and his natural "team" of guys he gets along with. If you hit the #1 galaxy for easy roids, your own members will be upset because you take part for the #2 gal etc etc. Same can be applied for personal galranks. "look you bashed this xy bc now he says i sold him out and will ruin MY round".
However i do agree that galaxy nap policiy is something which has been done since r3 by every alliance in the game to protect its own members. Be it in blocksplits, or mixed random galaxys.
__________________
We fight together,
We win together,
or we die together.
-T&P slogan
Focht
T&P HC
Fury Exec
Eclipse CEO
Stan's muppet
|
|
|
10 Aug 2004, 21:50
|
#24
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 346
|
Re: Seriously though
Yes, in casual conversation, I call them Galaxy NAPs.
In so much as any planet in a 1up galaxy wants to make themselves more useful wtih asteroids than without (by defending our planets, reporting their incoming, etc) then we'll let them keep them. If they want to attack us for whatever reason, then thats fine too, they get added to our target list.
I'd be surprised if any of the top 4 alliances didn't have a similar policy.
__________________
[1up]
|
|
|
11 Aug 2004, 11:04
|
#25
|
Why so serious?
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 199
|
Re: Seriously though
vision doesn't. They let their biggest members fk over everything they want.
__________________
Don't Trust Anyone
4S
Illuminati
|
|
|
11 Aug 2004, 11:32
|
#26
|
Sh33p h3rd3r
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 132
|
Re: Seriously though
Visions biggest members that sit in 1up gals also nap them. Bunch of cowards imo
__________________
Roiding No More
eXilitionAscendancy
*****************
Do not make me get out the paddle!!! "
|
|
|
11 Aug 2004, 12:50
|
#27
|
Affectionate Nickname
Join Date: May 2002
Location: wigan
Posts: 206
|
Re: Seriously though
Taken from Sid's Proposal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
For such an agreement to work, a few issues would need to be addressed - starting off with a definition of what constitutes a block. My understanding is that the limit of members per alliance next round is most likely going to be 75. With that in mind, I'd tend to view any pair of alliances working together as a partnership - and any group of 3 or more alliances with a combined membership of more than 100 as a block. What constitutes working together? As soon as your members are forbidden to attack members of another alliance then I'd consider you as part of the same block. If your alliances all share target lists and insist on members only attacking those targets then that would make you part of a block.
|
So all those planets who have had a "policy of no incoming" are effectvely, by Sid's standards, in a block. There are already 97 members in 1up and I'm fairly sure more than three planets have been given Planetary Nap Status, and as those single planets who have been offered these NAPs span further than 1up and 2 other alliances then again, that constitutes as a block.
Nice one Sid. Wait long enough for people to actually stop reading the proposal and go back on the fundemental values of what it stands for. Now THATS clever.
__________________
My posts represent me and me alone and have no connection to any of the communities I may or may not be involved in unless stated within my posts. Bints.
|
|
|
11 Aug 2004, 13:27
|
#28
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,081
|
Re: Seriously though
Stop looking for loopholes in Sid's arguments and accept the fact that 1up were the best alliance in this round
__________________
Dynamic Salvage!
[16:10:34] <[lfc]stif|afk> "dont be the worst in your alliance, join CT. We have Arfy!"
|
|
|
11 Aug 2004, 13:38
|
#29
|
Dawsons Creek r0x
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 83
|
Re: Seriously though
donkie, did u even read what he wrote? Thats talking about an alliance ordering their members to not attack a certain alliance.
Believe me, that has not happened in 1up.
__________________
Proud Dawsons Creek fan
[1up]
Round5 - 16:23
Round11 - 21:1
Round12 - 22:5
|
|
|
11 Aug 2004, 17:41
|
#30
|
Affectionate Nickname
Join Date: May 2002
Location: wigan
Posts: 206
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Real Arfy
Stop looking for loopholes in Sid's arguments and accept the fact that 1up were the best alliance in this round
|
I don't deny that their performance this round has been fantastic, and I certainly accept the argument that they've done the best this round. And I'm a student of philosophy and politics - I read statements, find loopholes and provide counter arguments. Its what I do. When I find a problem with an argument I'll present it - whether it is against the #1 alliance or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yupster
did u even read what he wrote?
|
Yes, thoroughly, but your argument is also flawed. A NAP is still a NAP, whether ordered alliance-wide or planet wide, and it is still stopping people from attacking each other though they're not in the same alliance. And I take it that 1up members do not attack those planets which 1up has a NAP with? So it would appear that members of an alliance[1up] are being told not to attack certain others dispite the fact they are not allied.
And yupster, only last night your ships were heading for a LCH planet[one of only six to be napped with 1up] and you were given orders to recall.
__________________
My posts represent me and me alone and have no connection to any of the communities I may or may not be involved in unless stated within my posts. Bints.
|
|
|
11 Aug 2004, 19:02
|
#31
|
Raaaaaaaah!
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,296
|
Re: Seriously though
We're told not to attack galaxies with 1up in unless they've been actively hostile, is this so hard for you retards to grasp ? All 1up galaxies start on planet NAPs, this I'm pretty sure is standard practice unless theyre useless, the reason for this is two fold. If 1up begin hitting member's galaxies when they've done nothing wrong it creates tension in galaxies, galaxy mates are unlikely to report incoming and generally make things difficult for our members, secondly it helps create divisions in other alliances, early out we ripped apart several huge 1up galaxies who had planets who were being hostile to us, after this the rest of their alliances were less likely to act up preferring to betray their friends and alliances in return for little numbers in the asteroid field. It's hardly our fault that your members refuse to attack us, perhaps you guys need to get your own houses in order and kick members for cowardice.
__________________
Hicks
Mercury & Solace
Always [Fury]
|
|
|
11 Aug 2004, 22:55
|
#32
|
Commodore
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 337
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov
That smells like a NAP
|
it is one
and where there is a NAP there also is a block in creation, and considering how many NAPs there are imo one could well call it blocking
__________________
If you want to survive in a world of wolves you have to be a wolf. If you want to change a world of wolves you need to be a lamb
r1: n00b
r2: 7:11 - T7C HC, WaC(Jr), Sedition HC
r3: 31:25 - Sedition, Century, SL HC
r4: 95:21 - BlueTubas'
r5: 30:5 - BlueTubas, VtS
r6: 33:24:1 - Deus Ex Machina HC, politically retired
r7: 38:22 -> 26:11 - RaH peon
r8: 12:3:4 - Defended by 1:1
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 00:05
|
#33
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 346
|
Re: Seriously though
As things are quiet and well.... boring this afternoon, I'll indulge you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by *donkie*
And I'm a student of philosophy and politics - I read statements, find loopholes and provide counter arguments. Its what I do.
|
Does that pay well?
Quote:
Yes, thoroughly, but your argument is also flawed. A NAP is still a NAP, whether ordered alliance-wide or planet wide, and it is still stopping people from attacking each other though they're not in the same alliance. And I take it that 1up members do not attack those planets which 1up has a NAP with? So it would appear that members of an alliance[1up] are being told not to attack certain others dispite the fact they are not allied.
|
I've already said its a NAP, a galaxy NAP. Who cares what you call it? I won't argue the semantics of what word you use.
Note the italics I added. Galaxy mates of our members are by very strong Planetarion tradition, and encouraged by the game mechanics of PA, considered to be allied until they prove otherwise. When they defend our members, report their incoming, and generally are on our side, they deserve a little consideration.
Ultimately, we are playing the game to our own higher standards. To win by the rules we set for ourselves is the motivating factor. And at the end of the round, when we reflect on the results, it will be only to ourselves that we have to answer.
__________________
[1up]
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 02:44
|
#34
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 35
|
Re: Seriously though
1up has NAPs? Where do I sign up for that list? I mean if they had NAPs don't ya think they'd be shortening their list of targets. In galaxy NAPs make perfect sense. It helps the galaxy grow stronger and it also helps protect the alliances of those in the galaxy. Now some of us only have one alliance in our galaxy so its kinda useless but I still think its a good idea.
As for the 1up NAPs, like I said, if they did I'd be the first to sign up along with a lot of other people but they don't. Maybe if you earn their respect they'd decide not to attack you or your gal, perhaps they'd even ask a member of your gal (or you) to join. They don't however. 1up is an alliance that has beaten us all at the game and that is that. It's the way things work folks. You got beat so stop trying to find some hole to try and ease your concious about.
__________________
The subconscious is a state in which reality is just a visitor.
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 10:21
|
#35
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: Seriously though
The only people to come out badly of the galaxy NAPs are the LCH/MISTU/VsN whoever who make a conscious decision to not do their alliances bidding - they might as well play for 1up if they feel that way.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 10:40
|
#36
|
ND
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
|
Re: Seriously though
What I don't understand is why, after they've easily won and are now invincible, they don't cancel some of these galaxy naps for the roids and ranks. I mean, taking zo0f out of the top 10 wouldnt be too hard for them, moving another 1up into his place.
__________________
[ND]
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 10:46
|
#37
|
Pedantic hypocrite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Fish
What I don't understand is why, after they've easily won and are now invincible, they don't cancel some of these galaxy naps for the roids and ranks. I mean, taking zo0f out of the top 10 wouldnt be too hard for them, moving another 1up into his place.
|
What's the point though? PA isn't just ranks and roids. Whoever's zo0f's 1up galmate(s) would probably take offense. 1up would be lambasted with claims that they're 'betraying' those galmembers who have undoubtedly helped them to their position.
It's already crystal clear that 1up has won, why should they add insult to injury?
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 10:50
|
#38
|
Sh33p h3rd3r
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 132
|
Re: Seriously though
Its those galmates that betrayed their alliances first by taking the naps. Whats another betrayal or two.
__________________
Roiding No More
eXilitionAscendancy
*****************
Do not make me get out the paddle!!! "
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 11:10
|
#39
|
Pedantic hypocrite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Back and to the left
Posts: 1,488
|
Re: Seriously though
The two 'betrayels' have little to do with eachother.
__________________
I always wanted to be a dancer, but I could never get the shit off my shoes
.......
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 13:59
|
#40
|
Jedi Mastah
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Ålesund, Norway
Posts: 69
|
Re: Seriously though
1up owned us all, get over it and start pondering how to avoid it next round
__________________
Villeh
Round 3-4 Newbie
Round 6-10 NoS
Round 10.5-11 FAnG
[Mercenaries]
[Illuminati]
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 14:05
|
#41
|
Sh33p h3rd3r
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 132
|
Re: Seriously though
Any alliance that puts together 70-90 of the most active players will own hands down. The only way to counter it is to put together another 70-90 just as active people. Which would leave two very active alliances and 10+- very inactive to semi active alliances.
Outcome:
Less people playing or even careing.
They should have kept the 75 member or even less players per alliance. May have made things a bit more equal.
__________________
Roiding No More
eXilitionAscendancy
*****************
Do not make me get out the paddle!!! "
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 14:41
|
#42
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 537
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Fish
What I don't understand is why, after they've easily won and are now invincible, they don't cancel some of these galaxy naps for the roids and ranks. I mean, taking zo0f out of the top 10 wouldnt be too hard for them, moving another 1up into his place.
|
Jester pretty much hit the nail on the head: there's no incentive for 1up (as an alliance) to break the deal it offered to members of other alliances who share galaxies with our members. All it would achieve is to demonstrate bad faith on our part and piss off our members in those galaxies who worked hard to gain cooperation from their galaxy members.
Having an all-1up top10 would be nice - yes. But I value keeping my word far higher.
Obviously we're taking a far tougher line on those who don't keep their half of the deal, but there will be no cancellations of agreements made by 1up against those who have fully kept their end of the deal.
__________________
Synthetic Sid
[1up]
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 14:47
|
#43
|
The Natural Blonde
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: England,Manchester/Nottingham
Posts: 28
|
Re: Seriously though
lol sid @ trying to start a war
__________________
Alive and clicking # ATOM rules
PA SD,VtS,VeN,VanX,MaDCoWs,ViruS,FaNG, Angels.
Other games WPO, Xanadu, Elysium, Rock, ViruS
|
|
|
12 Aug 2004, 15:03
|
#44
|
Evil inside
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,631
|
Re: Seriously though
Let me translate: Sid doesnt want to spoil chances for winning next round too.
(Hi salomo)
__________________
<Germania>but you called Fury a bully, and that is terribly unfair
<Hicks>Occassionally individuals do things without Executive consent
<Dreadnought>You cant whois on Eclipse server without a registered nic, which mr ****stirrer doesnt have.
<Almeida> well i like to grow fat myself too, and when i have enough ships then i can engage in big battles
<Nantoz> Zhukov for Lord Protector!
<Jakiri> (Windows)XP was fine on release
|
|
|
15 Aug 2004, 04:41
|
#45
|
Commodore
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 337
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov
Let me translate: Sid doesnt want to spoil chances for winning next round too.
(Hi salomo)
|
Round 2, 3 and 4 all over again? But where is Legion and who is RB these days?
:-)
__________________
If you want to survive in a world of wolves you have to be a wolf. If you want to change a world of wolves you need to be a lamb
r1: n00b
r2: 7:11 - T7C HC, WaC(Jr), Sedition HC
r3: 31:25 - Sedition, Century, SL HC
r4: 95:21 - BlueTubas'
r5: 30:5 - BlueTubas, VtS
r6: 33:24:1 - Deus Ex Machina HC, politically retired
r7: 38:22 -> 26:11 - RaH peon
r8: 12:3:4 - Defended by 1:1
|
|
|
15 Aug 2004, 06:45
|
#46
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: Seriously though
RB is 1up clearly.
Legion is fang
Fury is hirr
|
|
|
15 Aug 2004, 10:32
|
#47
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest
RB is 1up clearly.
Legion is fang
Fury is hirr
|
no legion ain't
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
15 Aug 2004, 15:23
|
#48
|
Evil inside
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,631
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salomo
Round 2, 3 and 4 all over again? But where is Legion and who is RB these days?
:-)
|
Forest is still around..
Indeed, your correct. Its the old trick of galaxy-pacification again. PA politics evole around the same things, round after round.
__________________
<Germania>but you called Fury a bully, and that is terribly unfair
<Hicks>Occassionally individuals do things without Executive consent
<Dreadnought>You cant whois on Eclipse server without a registered nic, which mr ****stirrer doesnt have.
<Almeida> well i like to grow fat myself too, and when i have enough ships then i can engage in big battles
<Nantoz> Zhukov for Lord Protector!
<Jakiri> (Windows)XP was fine on release
|
|
|
15 Aug 2004, 17:01
|
#49
|
Lost the Fury... :(
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 516
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov
PA politics evole around the same things, round after round.
|
and, after 13 rounds, you still havent the slightest idea what those things are...
|
|
|
15 Aug 2004, 17:31
|
#50
|
Down Boy - WOOF!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Somewhere About Here .
Posts: 530
|
Re: Seriously though
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Fish
What I don't understand is why, after they've easily won and are now invincible, they don't cancel some of these galaxy naps for the roids and ranks. I mean, taking zo0f out of the top 10 wouldnt be too hard for them, moving another 1up into his place.
|
There isnt a top10 alliance in the game that doesnt have a highranking player being gal protected by 1up.
Nice of you to pick out a HR one tho fishy, especially with the hear-say thats been posted about ND on these boards recently:P
__________________
R2: -=42=- & [HR] ICD Squad Founding >> [HR] Alliance
R3: -=42=- & ICD Squad [HR] >> [HR] >> Sedition Wing [HR] >> G-II Wing [HR] >> [HR] Alliance
R4: [HR]
R5: [HR] - [DuH] Triad with [BD] & [UV]
R6: [HR] - [HyB] Alliance with [BD]
R7, R8, R9, R9.5: Nos Wing [HR]
R10: [HR]
R10.5: [HR] - [FYTFO] Alliance with ]LCH[
R11, R12, R13, R15, R16, R17: [HR]
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:16.
| |