Hicks

[xtothez]

I had just posted this in the 'laf' thread, but I'd rather open it as a point of discussion in its own right. How do you think the round will be decided?

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by Hicks
I can't recall the last time a Fury member lost asteroids. The one think I can say with certainty is the average Fury member has a higher rank than they did a fortnight ago (Well up until several ticks ago).

However, so far we’ve been very poor in big engagements so far Titans and LDK have won three compared to our one Need you continue what ? There've only been 3.

I find it convenient that you can acknowledge and belittle the public achievements everyone saw them make, while claiming your overall superiority based on absence of public facts and 'data' you know they cant disprove you on, be it true or not.

It may surprise you to know that at the end of the day, it's battles like this which decide wars. Picking a few roids here and a few roids there from each other on a daily basis does little to convince people if the two sides are evently matched. But public displays of carnage like this is what brings to light:
a) Who has the spare resources to devote to such engagements (i.e., who is winning,
b) Who public opinion will be in favour of (watch the smaller satellite alliances creep away from the Fury camp and towards those who they think are stronger),
c) The loyalty and dedication of your own members (I know if I had just lost 80% of my fleet on the orders of a BC who had 10minutes ago promised me totally free roids on the #1 planet, I'd lose a little faith in my alliance's command...).

Baseless facts and invisible statistics prove nothing. If you want to win a war, get the fk out there and kill something (lo LDK).

[ironhell]

Originally posted by xtothez
-snip-

Another pointless thread by a [person of below average intelligence]...

Cant you just [go away please]?

xtothez clearly rawks

Originally posted by xtothez

b) Who public opinion will be in favour of (watch the smaller satellite alliances creep away from the Fury camp and towards those who they think are stronger)

hello Ely

[xtothez]

Originally posted by Xavier March


hello Ely

Unless you know something my HC didnt inform me of, you dont have a valid point here.

'troll'

[Gayle29uk]

Originally posted by ironhell


Another pointless thread by a ****ed up retard...

Cant you just **** off and die ?

I thought it was back to the AD of last round, a valid political point with no flaming. Best post I've read in ages

Originally posted by xtothez


Unless you know something my HC didnt inform me of, you dont have a valid point here.

'troll'

I put up with Whis in one of my chans :/

[xtothez]

Originally posted by Gayle28uk

I thought it was back to the AD of last round, a valid political point with no flaming. Best post I've read in ages

Thank you.

I've promised myself that if I ever write another offensive flame post on AD i'll set fire to my modem. It's for that reason I'm not quoting Ironhell's post.

[Tempestuous]

Originally posted by xtothez
It may surprise you to know that at the end of the day, it's battles like this which decide wars.

HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

For someone who professes to run Ely's mil that's an incredibly n00bish thing to say.

[Ahriman]

Originally posted by Tempestuous
HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

For someone who professes to run Ely's mil that's an incredibly n00bish thing to say.

Was that a failed attempt to look clever, or a successful attempt to cement your position in the latest idiot poster ranks?

It's getting harder and harder to tell.


Of course Hicks is saying what's convenient; it's all that most people with even a barely considered position are willing to give. Personally I think that though big battles like the recent one are useful for both deciding the fate of particular galaxies, and obvious kudos benefits, there are other ways to win the war in the long run, as Hicks has suggested.

On a not entirely disconnected subject; we all believed furs when he was that NewX's plans were progressing nicely last round, didn't we?

[xtothez]

Originally posted by Tempestuous
HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA

For someone who professes to run Ely's mil that's an incredibly n00bish thing to say.

Care to look at the reasons I provided for that statement, and explain your reasoning and point of view behind each one? Or would you prefer to flame here in Storebo's place? (has he got an AD time-out from Sid now, heh : ).

We're past the point were small scale roiding affects the outcome of a round. Each alliance is moving its pieces into position for the endgame, they know who proved themselves during the early free-for-all roiding. The current framework of the top 100 is not going to change sufficiently in favour of any one particular alliance without special cirumstances or a repeated, drawn-out war of attrition. For example; we aren't going to see half of Fury's top 100 planets drop dead overnight without a huge shift in either those player's allegiances, or a dedicated effort from the whole universe working together to move them. Which leaves these sorts of battles were one side is noticeably weakened and affected for the following days, days in which their opponents can capitalise on that weakness.
My point is that the balance of power will not change in favour on either side without events like this. We all know how fked up the defense system is this round, how effective is it to throw highly inefficient numbers of ships at average planets day after day for a small reward of roids, when you can annihilate several days worth of enemy ship production in a few ticks (possibly eliminating a few players in the process, due to the 'I'm ****ed, I quit" mindset)?

If you see any gaping flaws in my logic, please feel free to point them out in a dignified and orderly manner. I will no longer respond to petty flames on these boards.

[randal]

I can't actually see what there is that is soo hard to understand in Xthotzhestz's simple post.
It kinda struck me aswell that ppl like Hicks keep on with their 'Nothing bad happened today, just another step on towards the final victory for furby' kinda talking..

I'm not in any of the alliances involved in anything this round (even tho many would claim i'm titans or something, which is wank of course), and even i would say that if you'd ask your fellow alliance members or friends (or those of your allies) who lost up to 20-30% of their score for actually nothing ( http://www.pilkara.com/rank.php?acti...um&orderby=ASC .. i'm sure there are a few among them), i doubt they'd agree with you that 'nothing at least a bit bad happened today'.

(Of course there are some of the defending side in that list aswell, but it's quite clear which side had most of them)

Originally posted by xtothez


words

Lots of good points there
Fury will still flame you tho just the way it is

[Hicks]

Originally posted by xtothez
How do you think the round will be decided?

I find it convenient that you can acknowledge and belittle the public achievements everyone saw them make, while claiming your overall superiority based on absence of public facts and 'data' you know they cant disprove you on, be it true or not.

It may surprise you to know that at the end of the day, it's battles like this which decide wars. Picking a few roids here and a few roids there from each other on a daily basis does little to convince people if the two sides are evently matched. But public displays of carnage like this is what brings to light:
a) Who has the spare resources to devote to such engagements (i.e., who is winning,
b) Who public opinion will be in favour of (watch the smaller satellite alliances creep away from the Fury camp and towards those who they think are stronger),
c) The loyalty and dedication of your own members (I know if I had just lost 80% of my fleet on the orders of a BC who had 10minutes ago promised me totally free roids on the #1 planet, I'd lose a little faith in my alliance's command...).

Baseless facts and invisible statistics prove nothing. If you want to win a war, get the fk out there and kill something (lo LDK).

Personally I think it'll be decided by which ever alliance manages to keep it’s members active which could be hard with the current state of play. I don’t think either side is moving anything into position for endgame we’re still at a point where asteroids are of huge importance and the rate players can grow at is far more important than killing ships. I don’t think we’ll see a position where one side tries goes for the kill for at least a fortnight possibly longer hence why I think activity will become a problem, I’m a big fan of chipping away at the defence base of an alliance slowly and getting an advantage in the Top 100 I wouldn’t like to see my side move to end it unless we were certain of victory or facing defeat. I disagree that it’ll be engagements like this that decide the round I think it’s engagements like this, which give one side the opportunity to decide the round if you see what I mean, Fury will be running low on ships for the next few days and if Titans can capitalise and start moving asteroids about then I think it’ll be close to over but I just don’t think their capable of doing that as I hope the losses weren’t as serve as they seemed on the scan. If I’m honest about today I think it’s a travesty that’s the last large-scale loss we can afford and I hope we learn the lessons from today and stop making sloppy mistakes. I’m a tad disappointed no one has stood up and said I planned it I accept responsibility for my actions though.

In answer to your letters:

a) Now, I'd say Titans, LDK and ViruS have the upper hand though I'd have said this morning that Fury or FaNG were in control it’s been quite close for a few days and I hope it’ll remain that way, I guess tonight will decide
b) Public opinion matters little. What exactly small satellite alliances have we got to creep away from us. If your referring to “neutral” alliances creeping in to try and help Titans, LDK and ViruS share the spoils then I think their scum of the earth. Then again if they base their alliance direction on the results of a single battle then they deserve the hammering they’ll get in due course.
c) Their loyalty was impressive as was the number of them who tagged [Fury] once the first combat tick came through (Played guys I'm proud of you). No BC promised them asteroids however a member (Storebo) did make a forum post claiming victory as for loss of faith in our command I suspect it wasn’t a command member who organised the attack.

As Ahriman said of course I'm going to say what's convient I'd just watched my alliance lose a million or so ships what are you expecting me to do

[Gayle29uk]

Originally posted by Hicks
<snip>

Another good post, keep it up guys

[G.K Zhukov]

[quote]Originally posted by Hicks

loads of words[/b]

Try to come up with something new Hicks, and dont the usual pr-talking

[Hicks]

Originally posted by G.K Zhukov


Try to come up with something new Hicks, and dont the usual pr-talking

Hmmm ? You didn't get many gold stars at school did you ?

[randal]

Originally posted by Hicks
Personally I think it'll be decided by which ever alliance manages to keep it’s members active which could be hard with the current state of play. I don’t think either side is moving anything into position for endgame we’re still at a point where asteroids are of huge importance and the rate players can grow at is far more important than killing ships.

Here again it's quite obvious that being the winner in a tough, important battle and killing quite a bunch of enemy ships is more a moral rising thing than getting a good share of your ships killed cause of mistakes in the command or similar things.
It's quite likely that a guy who has high ambitions loses a share of his motivation when something like this happens, while a nice win and a demonstration of strength of your own side is more likely to rise his commitment.

Maybe it's not so deadly important if here or there die a few ships more at this stage of the round, but i'm sure at least a few members of fury, fang and allies were quite personally disappointed today, and need a small break or something to get back the motivation to fight again..

Also ppl with high ship losses are more likely to be the target of roiding now, and are more vulnerable of course.. or they think themselves they should rather get some score back before roiding again, or whatever.

Originally posted by Hicks
c) Their loyalty was impressive as was the number of them who tagged [Fury] once the first combat tick came through (Played guys I'm proud of you). No BC promised them asteroids however a member (Storebo) did make a forum post claiming victory as for loss of faith in our command I suspect it wasn’t a command member who organised the attack.

The actual idea of attacking the top planet was fine granted you actually WIN the battle, the execution was arse. How fang thought they could 'suck in all the overburn defence 2 ticks early because they watched ldk do defence in the past' is beyond me. Just a waste of two sets of hostile fleets and an extra 2 ticks for ldk and others to get defence. If those planets hadve gone in with the main attack it might have evened out the losses a bit. Obviously more planets attacking couldve helped but imo the execution of the attack was completely retarded. Not to mention a bit silly having no real (read: accurate) calc made up to give some indication of where it awas heading.

my two cents there :/ (possibly a bit off topic but eh)

ps. Pld Servuz and teh rest for a nice defence, i lost the ships i sent to observe the battle.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally posted by Hicks
Hmmm ? You didn't get many gold stars at school did you ?

*humring*
My teacher from first to 6th grade gave out gold stars. Dooing good in school those years, I got plenty.

You, on the other hand, prob didnt

[Hicks]

Originally posted by randal

Here again it's quite obvious that being the winner in a tough, important battle and killing quite a bunch of enemy ships is more a moral rising thing than getting a good share of your ships killed cause of mistakes in the command or similar things.
It's quite likely that a guy who has high ambitions loses a share of his motivation when something like this happens, while a nice win and a demonstration of strength of your own side is more likely to rise his commitment.

Maybe it's not so deadly important if here or there die a few ships more at this stage of the round, but i'm sure at least a few members of fury, fang and allies were quite personally disappointed today, and need a small break or something to get back the motivation to fight again..

Also ppl with high ship losses are more likely to be the target of roiding now, and are more vulnerable of course.. or they think themselves they should rather get some score back before roiding again, or whatever.

Nice points, I think the morale booster point is over rated though the effects are temporary but there is always that day or two hangover when you lose ship/asteroids where you don’t want to play anymore hopefully as I said earlier and you pointed out with members being vulnerable everyone has to give 100% but it'll be interesting to see if Titans can capitalize and take full advantage of this.

Looking at it again I think the losses on girlees were far worse proportionally and I think we did well to pick ourselves up from that I just pray we can again.

[Ska]

Originally posted by Hicks
stuff

Wow, posting without flaming....Im almost impressed

[xtothez]

Originally posted by Hicks
Personally I think it'll be decided by which ever alliance manages to keep it’s members active which could be hard with the current state of play.

Exactly the psychological factors I refered to. With normal roiding attacks people rarely lose ships due to the usual 'news scan, calc, recall' procedure. Barring occasional mishaps, people rarely lose their fleet wholesale in this manner, so when it does happen, its all the more devastating for them. With this being the last round and all, the ties holding people to their burnt-out shell of a planet for another few weeks grow weaker. Who said you cant kill planets? Do enough damage, do it convincingly, and they kill themselves.

On a related note, I've just spotted that my target for tonight (who lost a decent amount of fleet today), has just clicked the magic vac mode button. One more down, I wonder how many others do this tonight...

Originally posted by Hicks
I don’t think either side is moving anything into position for endgame we’re still at a point where asteroids are of huge importance and the rate players can grow at is far more important than killing ships. I don’t think we’ll see a position where one side tries goes for the kill for at least a fortnight

You cant really argue that the top 100 in a fortnight will be radically different from the t100 now. Yes, some planets may be (un)lucky in their various exploits, but on the whole we wont see an alliance dropping from positions like that without some sort of catalyst to help them (such as todays debacle, there's always someone who loses their fleet in these affairs, and quite often its several people).

Originally posted by Hicks
I disagree that it’ll be engagements like this that decide the round I think it’s engagements like this, which give one side the opportunity to decide the round if you see what I mean, Fury will be running low on ships for the next few days and if Titans can capitalise....

I believe I made that point in my posts : )
Things like this are quite like a getting a red card in football. For all the teams may be equal skillswise, losing a fraction of your side gives the opposition a valuable opportunity to capitalise. An opportunity that would be hard to waste. Victroy isn't guarunteed, but its a damn-sight easier.

Originally posted by Hicks
b) Public opinion matters little. What exactly small satellite alliances have we got to creep away from us. If your referring to “neutral” alliances creeping in to try and help Titans, LDK and ViruS share the spoils then I think their scum of the earth. Then again if they base their alliance direction on the results of a single battle then they deserve the hammering they’ll get in due course.

Some alliances will do it without even noticing. If you were presented with a list of planets who suddenly had immensely profitable roid/score ratios, who also had their addiction to the game weakened a little, would you pass it up? I imagine Fury will have a busy night tonight, whether people intend to be anti-Fury or not. And of course, thats alot of members to cover. Someone always has to suffer. Will it be the 'defence base of the alliance', or the top 100 you are slowly getting into place?

The average joe-peon will also notice these things more. They wont have a clue if 10 top 100 titans planets are raped overnight. They will notice the general furor surrounding the "Titans just raped number 4 ranked player!!!111" and "Fury took down number 1!!!!!" threads on here.

Originally posted by Hicks
c) Their loyalty was impressive as was the number of them who tagged [Fury] once the first combat tick came through (Played guys I'm proud of you). No BC promised them asteroids however a member (Storebo) did make a forum post claiming victory as for loss of faith in our command I suspect it wasn’t a command member who organised the attack.

Fair enough for the average Furby member to be over zealous and declare victory here before the battle is joined, but people with the history and reputation of Storebo should know to keep their mouths shut. Remember my point ^ above about joe-peon. Storebo has been in several top places in PA over the rounds. When he talks, (some:) people listen. When he talks BS, people notice and wonder how and why he had the support for that contribution, and what that says about his peers.


Nice post Hicks. It's been a long time since I've had a proper discussion on Alliance Discussions.
: )

Originally posted by Hicks
Personally ... <lots of words> ... so ships what are you expecting me to do

Nice post Hicks.....

[mazzelaar]

Originally posted by G.K Zhukov


*Dooing* good in school those years, I got plenty.

Not in english class it would appear.

[Silva baby]

i believe that huge battles are a deciding factor
or at least a significant raid u know wat i mean?
in rd 7 i do believe or was it rd 6 no idea tbh
of all ppl Hicks would rememebr Mercury and Solace got kicked by LDK
badly

Hicks himself has admitted taht boosted Fury and Legion into overdrive and win the round was it not?

[hAl]

Originally posted by Hicks
c) Their loyalty was impressive as was the number of them who tagged [Fury] once the first combat tick came through (Played guys I'm proud of you).

Hmmm, after t1 there was 1.14m Fury ships surviving left with I'd guess between 100k and 300k ships to be arriving for next tick. Somehow though on tick two there was only 1.0m Fury ships left to face the enemy. Seems somehow about 250k to 350k ships bailed out of there before t2 which does not seem very loyal leaving you m8s to die.

hAl

[Outcast2k]

Originally posted by hAl


Hmmm, after t1 there was 1.14m Fury ships surviving left with I'd guess between 100k and 300k ships to be arriving for next tick. Somehow though on tick two there was only 1.0m Fury ships left to face the enemy. Seems somehow about 250k to 350k ships bailed out of there before t2 which does not seem very loyal leaving you m8s to die.

hAl

A couple of people did pull. And they will/are being handled by Executives. But it sure wasn't 300k ships.

[hAl]

Originally posted by Outcast2k


A couple of people did pull. And they will/are being handled by Executives. But it sure wasn't 300k ships.

Well, there was 140k less ships AND there was about 20 fleets incoming for that second tick as I seem to remember (but feel free to correct me with a newsscan link as i lost those). The average incoming fleet was between 10k and 15k (15k-20k was average for defenders fleets).

So combining the 140k less ships present even with quite a few fleets incoming I'd image 300k ships being pulled was only a moderate estimate even. Could be more.

hAl

Originally posted by ironhell


Another pointless thread by a [person of below average intelligence]...

Cant you just [go away please]?

he has some points there and if you say he is below average intelligence, then where is your intelligence, heh?

and the thread isn't pointless because it's named "Hicks"..

next time you prolly should read a thread before posting in it.

[lokken]

Originally posted by G.K Zhukov


Try to come up with something new Hicks, and dont the usual pr-talking

But that's what AD is for

[Tempestuous]

Originally posted by xtothez


Care to look at the reasons I provided for that statement, and explain your reasoning and point of view behind each one? Or would you prefer to flame here in Storebo's place? (has he got an AD time-out from Sid now, heh : ).

We're past the point were small scale roiding affects the outcome of a round. Each alliance is moving its pieces into position for the endgame, they know who proved themselves during the early free-for-all roiding. The current framework of the top 100 is not going to change sufficiently in favour of any one particular alliance without special cirumstances or a repeated, drawn-out war of attrition. For example; we aren't going to see half of Fury's top 100 planets drop dead overnight without a huge shift in either those player's allegiances, or a dedicated effort from the whole universe working together to move them. Which leaves these sorts of battles were one side is noticeably weakened and affected for the following days, days in which their opponents can capitalise on that weakness.
My point is that the balance of power will not change in favour on either side without events like this. We all know how fked up the defense system is this round, how effective is it to throw highly inefficient numbers of ships at average planets day after day for a small reward of roids, when you can annihilate several days worth of enemy ship production in a few ticks (possibly eliminating a few players in the process, due to the 'I'm ****ed, I quit" mindset)?

If you see any gaping flaws in my logic, please feel free to point them out in a dignified and orderly manner. I will no longer respond to petty flames on these boards.

Your reasoning is flawed, the nitty gritty of wars is not fought as large battles on one planet one night, they're sustained encounters everywhere with consistancy being the key.

[xtothez]

Originally posted by Tempestuous


Your reasoning is flawed, the nitty gritty of wars is not fought as large battles on one planet one night, they're sustained encounters everywhere with consistancy being the key.

Early in the round, yes.
The consistancy shown over the last 1200 ticks is what has decided the foundation for the next phase. Now everyone has a good idea where the other side lives. Its no longer a case of throw your ships at someone and hope he doesn't have a good alliance. Anyone with any smarts will know the alliance and quite likely the nickname of their target now. And if you want to be effective when hitting a particular opponent, why waste resources hitting someone else at the same time, when you can divert more towards one alliance? These are the concentrated encounters I'm refering to. Times when its very effective to tie up your opponent at one location in order to weaken the rest of his lines and hit elsewhere later.

How many Fury members went down at Servuz? How many have either quit, gone into vacation, or lost sufficient fleet to prevent them defending their alliance as efficiently tomorrow? Your consistancy does nothing to help you if are as leet as before but with a fraction of the resources to use.

[Tempestuous]

Originally posted by Ahriman

Was that a failed attempt to look clever, or a successful attempt to cement your position in the latest idiot poster ranks?

It's getting harder and harder to tell.

I could never hope to be as cool as someone with that rank.

[Scouse]

Originally posted by Tempestuous

-

I heard you organised the attack, amongst others.

[sigrid]

Originally posted by Hicks
I can't recall the last time a Fury member lost asteroids. The one think I can say with certainty is the average Fury member has a higher rank than they did a fortnight ago (Well up until several ticks ago).
.................................................................................................... .....

ermmmmm...
I have some furys in my battlegroup who loose roids every day...
explain:P

[SilverSmoke]

Originally posted by Tempestuous


Your reasoning is flawed, the nitty gritty of wars is not fought as large battles on one planet one night, they're sustained encounters everywhere with consistancy being the key.

what i remember of this game is that the alliance that targets a single top enemy planet and fails is losing the round.

[Demented Turnip]

Originally posted by SilverSmoke
what i remember of this game is that the alliance that targets a single top enemy planet and fails is losing the round.

You'd have to explain what happende in R6 then.

[SilverSmoke]

Originally posted by Demented Turnip

You'd have to explain what happende in R6 then.

Round 6 was quite unique compared to the other rounds

[cypher]

Originally posted by sigrid
Originally posted by Hicks
I can't recall the last time a Fury member lost asteroids. The one think I can say with certainty is the average Fury member has a higher rank than they did a fortnight ago (Well up until several ticks ago).
.................................................................................................... .....

ermmmmm...
I have some furys in my battlegroup who loose roids every day...
explain:P

LIES!!!!!!!

p.s. ello xtothez:P

[Psi_K]

Originally posted by sigrid
ermmmmm...
I have some furys in my battlegroup who loose roids every day...
explain:P

/me huggles Sigrid