Round 13 predictions

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by lokken

Actually I'd wager HR had no such agreements - the fact is that their anti 1up stance meant they weren't targetted to anywhere near the level, that ND were by being specifically targeted once LCH and chums gave up on 1up.

Sadly HR can't work out this distinction.

Actually it is more of a 'kill the best/top alliance stance' because we want to win, something no other alliance had. Not LCH, not ND.....1up did, but they were the best/top alliance and they werent going to attack themselves

As you said above alliances just dont know how to win and i fully agree.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by lokken

Yet people think we were stupid to ally 1up?



I shall note that one down, it's gold, 'do not ally with those having a mutual interest, Kj thinks its ****ing retarded'.

This is exactly the problem with planetarion - no objectivity with personal bias ruling the roost. No one wants to try to win, merely take out people they don't like - what a crap, uncompetitive way to play the game. Very few people understand how to win, hence why 1up keep winning. LCH are a criminal waste of talent, HR stink of average, ND can be very good but are wildly inconsistent, the rest aren't worth writing about. Hopefully Ministry and ToT can offer something different.

Next time you try to insult me, atleast UNDERSTAND what's being said. NOT allying 1up does not mean I said you should have allied THE OTHER SIDE !! I've never ever stated that so how about you ask what I mean in pm (cba to post it here for the trolls) and maybe then you'd understand why I personally think ND made a poor decision allying 1up.

[lokken]

So we should not work with other alliances so we don't improve our cause against those who choose to target us?

How is this logical?

If you're implying that ND shouldn't have paired up with 1up because 1up is widely hated, I don't see how that's relevant when ND make round upon round independently minded decisions and make this pretty clear. We make decisions (like any reasonable alliance) to serve our own interests, not others and 1up best accomodated ours in r12, because our hand was forced to do so. I doubt ND wants a round identical to the last - we'd rather be able to have fluid politics, and play the game - however, other alliances don't see it that way. If they want a shit round, that's their prerogative.

I'll tell you what - the only people who are really pro 1up are those huge planets with planetary NAP's that enable 1up to win by shifting their alliances targeting away from 1up, because those alliances can't attack without them. The blame on ND is only one to save face from themselves from shocking conduct and their lack of discipline and fear of losing score in a war with 1up. That's the reality of things.

People in this game have become obsessed by Sid, Fury and 1up that it's consumed their judgement, instead of focusing on improving their own alliance, cooperation with other alliances and getting the job done, as others have done in beating his alliances to the ground. Do you seriously think Legion, Xanadu, FoS, Titans and LDK won without good discipline, HC's willing to commit to the cause and a few thoughful BC's working out how to beat them to the ground?

The only real decent bit of play outside of 1up in that regard in r12 came in the destruction of MISTU where they were quite honestly steamrollered because people were willing to put differences aside, cooperate to the full and give them a proper slap.

Give over. Responsibility lies with incompetent HC's (can be from any alliance outside 1up). They know it, but won't admit it.

[Gate]

Originally Posted by Zo0f

Yes, ND attacked the best alliance in the game and got incomming back from them. Oh wait, no you didnt HR did.

Gotta say, HR as I said, did what I considered to be the 'right decision'. ND just got trapped in a position where we would either hand the round to LCH and stagnate it, or we could fight and perhaps drag ourselves, and/or help 1up above LCH (Who were playing for second anyway). As such, the politics became less fluid towards the end of the round as I'm pretty sure ND and LCH now hate each other lots and lots

Originally Posted by Goodfellah

tof being T3 : would be cool , but not really realistic. and gate, i dont think every wave on a nd planet got deffed aswell. yes we are still a learing and new ally. But again there is lil faith in tof getting a top 10 spot, even tho we did it this round after loosing about about 6-7 members to ND. anyways predictions suck donkeyballs, we'll see it when we get there....

I for one think ToF are strong enough to get a T10 position, but I still feel there is a lot of room for improvement before you become an alliance deserving of T3 (note: next round, I doubt ND will be deserving of T3, compared to the likes of LCH, Ministry, 1up and ToT. Though I'd love to see us beat LCH ^^ ) . You're a newer ally, and have done very well to hold together and develop upwards with each round, but I would still claim that ND were better this round miltarily. This is purely my judgement though, and isn't meant offensively!

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by lokken

stuff ...

Lokken as I told you in pm aswell, I'm tired of the numerious idiots lately on AD who FLAME and INSULT others because they have different opinions or because they happen to see things in a different way then the majority.

Those pple only prove to me what idiots they are because clearly the sence of reason is and never was ment for those pple.

I understand pple sometimes get "annoyed" or "frustrated" because others simply don't wanna see understand their opinion. Even I sometimes fall for such behavior but imo it's immature.

About ND, YES I think the ND HC made a poor judgement call when allying 1up. Should they have allied lch and co? HELL NO. Should they have allied 1up? NO again. But that's just my opinion, I' can't tell whether it'd have been better or worse, nobody here can.

To give you 1 of the many arguements why I think they shouldn't have allied 1up is because the moment they did, they confirmed what the other alliances did against them was the right thing for them to do.

I'm not saying it's right what lch and co did, but ND allying 1up TO THEM was the confirmation they needed to say "see we HAD to attack ND because they block with the #1 alliance".

I hope Lokken and co, that you atleast read it and THINK about it before you make your next post (while I don't think you're a troll Lokken).

[lokken]

I'm arguing via logic, while you claim (freely i'd add) that you are using your own biased view on top of vague assurances that i'm wrong. Ultimately even if what you say is true, we still had mutual interest, and we'd have been accused of being allied to 1up in any case. As cooperation made our campaign more successful (instead of being independent and being up shit creek without a paddle) i don't see how it's wrong.

They'd attack ND anyway because at the end of it, they'd bottle it out of the reasons i highlighted above. LCH just forced our hand, and we made the political response necessary to ensure we wouldn't be isolated - I think even via your 'logic', ND's move was highly beneficial.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by lokken

I'm arguing via logic, while you claim (freely i'd add) that you are using your own biased view on top of vague assurances that i'm wrong. Ultimately even if what you say is true, we still had mutual interest, and we'd have been accused of being allied to 1up in any case. As cooperation made our campaign more successful (instead of being independent and being up shit creek without a paddle) i don't see how it's wrong.

They'd attack ND anyway because at the end of it, they'd bottle it out of the reasons i highlighted above. LCH just forced our hand, and we made the political response necessary to ensure we wouldn't be isolated - I think even via your 'logic', ND's move was highly beneficial.

Though my reasoning, the constant attacks on ND COULD have been less but with allying 1up they never WOULD have gone less on default. I'm arguing with logic aswell Lokken. In my reasoning, they "could" have less incs while allying that would have been impossible cause lch couldn't take the roids from 1up so chose the next best thing, which happened to be ND who were ALSO their enemy due to allying 1up.

Oddly enough we both base our opinions on the same fact that LCH did some shity politics nway. You think no matter what, you'd receive the same incomings and while working with 1up you could atleast be more efficient. While I think you'd have had less incs if you didn't ally 1up and thereby showed LCH and co that they surely shouldn't stop hitting you now.

Both base our reasoning on logics, I respect and even understand your opinion, I just have different one but I did not at any point attack your personally or call it retarded because I have a different opinion. That's my point Lokken.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Though my reasoning, the constant attacks on ND COULD have been less but with allying 1up they never WOULD have gone less on default. I'm arguing with logic aswell Lokken. In my reasoning, they "could" have less incs while allying that would have been impossible cause lch couldn't take the roids from 1up so chose the next best thing, which happened to be ND who were ALSO their enemy due to allying 1up.

Oddly enough we both base our opinions on the same fact that LCH did some shity politics nway. You think no matter what, you'd receive the same incomings and while working with 1up you could atleast be more efficient. While I think you'd have had less incs if you didn't ally 1up and thereby showed LCH and co that they surely shouldn't stop hitting you now.

Both base our reasoning on logics, I respect and even understand your opinion, I just have different one but I did not at any point attack your personally or call it retarded because I have a different opinion. That's my point Lokken.

We were their enemy before we allied to 1up? Do you understand this?

With 1up we were able to orchestrate larger, more coordinated attacks and instead of falling over on our own should be attacked, result in much more damage being done to LCH. The other result was that when our block was successful, they had a choice to knock either us or 1up or the top - they made a choice, shirked the challenge, took down ND yet everyone whines about 1up winning for one reason or another, when its down to their own inabilities.

I'm yet to understand how putting ourselves in the frame for winning and ending 3rd is worse than staying isolated, potentially getting ****ed anyway and ending maybe 5th or 6th.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by lokken

We were their enemy before we allied to 1up? Do you understand this?

With 1up we were able to orchestrate larger, more coordinated attacks and instead of falling over on our own should be attacked, result in much more damage being done to LCH. The other result was that when our block was successful, they had a choice to knock either us or 1up or the top - they made a choice, shirked the challenge, took down ND yet everyone whines about 1up winning for one reason or another, when its down to their own inabilities.

I'm yet to understand how putting ourselves in the frame for winning and ending 3rd is worse than staying isolated, potentially getting ****ed anyway and ending maybe 5th or 6th.

Let's agree to disagree there then, AD never is and never was to convince pple of something, it's more about being heared so pple know your opinion.

[Treveler]

ND had the choise of either allying 1up or staying neutral and hide in the shadows. I dont know much about the inner workings of this round but its fair to assume that 1up would had a much thougher time and most likely not ended #1 as LCH would safely run to that position. Now who do you think is next on the hit list KJ? ND at this point would probably had stayed out of the fire but for sure would see some red lights from this point forward. LCH would probably want to pay back to HR for their services during the fight with 1up and aid HR to a position abow their old foe ND!

I cant possible see a different path for ND that that would benefit them more then the one they made.

Maybe if the LCH and company vs 1up war would continue until the last tick with no clear winner, but I doubt either part would alow ND to sneak in the back door without doing any dirty work. Mistu tried that and failed.

[The_Fish]

Loks logic is the true logic, not the logic that Kj thinks is right.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Loks logic is the true logic, not the logic that Kj thinks is right.

and that's your opinion, which I don't agree with but that's ok I guess.

[The_Fish]

exactly

[Veil05]

Originally Posted by alch

The day i will be top planet, is the day Nos and WP will win a PA round.

edit 1: might happen in round 23 after all the alliances will quit and the only players left will be 1:1 and 1:2 (1:2 roiding and farming the MH and PATEAM)

edit 2: its not that i believe nos and WP cant pull a win but... well i do believe it, sorry.

didnt nos win round 4? or did i just wish that up.. erm...

1] 1up
2] Ministry
3] ND
4] Angels (depending on membercount)
5] LCH
6] HR
7] Others...

[Joseph]

Originally Posted by TheRat

Do you guys honestly think 1up will be able to pull it off with all the alliances going after them? It just wont happen..

P.R.O.P.A.G.A.N.D.A.
=)
well, my #10
1-1up
2-ND
3-Angels
4-ToT
5-Ministry
6-LCH
7-VGN
8-Mistu
9-WP
10-who block with 1up =p

[Colt]

Originally Posted by Rabbagast

You should be long gone then :crazyxmas:

Round 6 = The Brotherhood

Don't forget it kids :xmasgrin:

Hmm, got me there though i actually meant in the current state of affairs

[Razorback]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Let's agree to disagree there then, AD never is and never was to convince pple of something, it's more about being heared so pple know your opinion.

thats just a cheap way to prevent admitting lokeen is right.

ND simply had no chance to make any other calls.

Scenario 1:
The stop hitting LCH/friends and hit 1up BUT LCH/friends go more for them, 1up joins -> ND lose

Scenario 2:
see above BUT LCH/friends go now for 1up with ND's help and 1up folds, ND is in the same position as before and only made LCH king, who publically insulted them and werent really their "friends" or 1up could even launch on ND and take them down (take someone with you if you go down burning etc) or in the end, if there is enough time, get a spanking from LCH/friends aswell just for the sake of old hostilities.

Scenario 3:
see above BUT see above and 1up holds its ground, ND might get be tgted now by 1up exclusively and be bombed down (just for fun and because they last snailed in on lchs side), losing everything and not making a difference.

Scenario 4:
Not beeing bullied by anyone, making your own choice and not helping those to win who actively try to achieve that by stepping on your back. A situation where you know you are only a partner in crime because you help is needed and not appreciated (HR/ND and LCH/ND disagreements) and where like explained above they might come for you next.
On the otherside of the decision would be someone who hasnt attacked you, does his own thing, was kind to you, plays literally above your ranking (nd never could have made at that point #1 ranking either way) and fights already the same demons you fight.

If i was hc i would go for #4 and ppl can say alot about me but deffinately not a lack of balls or enough "my own alliance first" attitude.

All in all Lokken is right, most alliances these days are outright shit and hide behind some demonizing and the need for partners to take down alliances half their size. This is just hillarious and the excuses are even more hillarious when you see how the topdogs of those alliances act and try to hide their miss"leadership" under scapegoating the #5 or #6 alliance for not joining in on the mass assault on the tiny #1 alliance.

Lets be blunt, noone else deserved to win against 1up, so they won. Same happened in r3 with the triad and many other rounds where just one side was better.
Sadly pa has too many alliances who just settle for #3 or #4 without trying to increase their own standings.

Answer in all honesty, why did HR team up with LCH to take down the #1 ? Taking down LCH would have been far more beneficial to them and served their members better in terms of rankings, especially if you dont attack the #1 alliance itself but try to outroid/score it by bullying a lower ranked alliance..... LOGIC ANYONE ?

[Razorback]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

About ND, YES I think the ND HC made a poor judgement call when allying 1up. Should they have allied lch and co? HELL NO. Should they have allied 1up? NO again. But that's just my opinion, I' can't tell whether it'd have been better or worse, nobody here can.

You suggest they go wildcard and attack 1up to get more incomings...... but in the next sentence you say you cant tell wether this would have been better or worse for nd.
Why do you suggest it then ?

To give you 1 of the many arguements why I think they shouldn't have allied 1up is because the moment they did, they confirmed what the other alliances did against them was the right thing for them to do.

There is no "right" or "wrong" LCH & co attacked for roids and score not on a holy mission from god or any other moral instance. They wanted to win and so did 1up. Beeing neutral or napped to 1up is no sin or morally wrong or anything an alliance hc would need to fear a "rightfull crusade" for. Hence your whole argumentation is flawed and i doubt LCH got any smoochies for doing the right thing, cause in the end it was the wrong thing :P

I'm not saying it's right what lch and co did, but ND allying 1up TO THEM was the confirmation they needed to say "see we HAD to attack ND because they block with the #1 alliance".

thats the kind of logic which lead to a bunch of worldwars and has a very flawed chain-logic in it. LCH & CO could just have attacked 1up but their teeth got worn off so they went for something easier and softer in the hope it would help them outroiding the #1 because frankly even if they had "rightfully" or not defeated nd back to oblivion without getting enough roids to outgrow 1up noone would have given a fart for it. Lets spell it out, they came for easy roids, didnt get them and lost. -> wrong choice in the end.

:xmas:

[Shev]

Originally Posted by Razorback

Answer in all honesty, why did HR team up with LCH to take down the #1 ? Taking down LCH would have been far more beneficial to them and served their members better in terms of rankings, especially if you dont attack the #1 alliance itself but try to outroid/score it by bullying a lower ranked alliance..... LOGIC ANYONE ?

Yet another imbecilic comment from a 1up troll. How many times have LCH been slated for not attacking 1up, and instead concentrating on ND.

HR have stated many times that they had no agreements with any alliance save Insomnia this round, yet you continue.

Also, I take it you disagree with a whole shedload of 1up/ND posters about attacking the #2 instead of the #1? I can go and get some quotes of them saying how chicken it is to not attack the #1 if you like. They obviously don't follow your 'logic'.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by Razorback

You suggest they go wildcard and attack 1up to get more incomings...... but in the next sentence you say you cant tell wether this would have been better or worse for nd.
Why do you suggest it then ?


There is no "right" or "wrong" LCH & co attacked for roids and score not on a holy mission from god or any other moral instance. They wanted to win and so did 1up. Beeing neutral or napped to 1up is no sin or morally wrong or anything an alliance hc would need to fear a "rightfull crusade" for. Hence your whole argumentation is flawed and i doubt LCH got any smoochies for doing the right thing, cause in the end it was the wrong thing :P


thats the kind of logic which lead to a bunch of worldwars and has a very flawed chain-logic in it. LCH & CO could just have attacked 1up but their teeth got worn off so they went for something easier and softer in the hope it would help them outroiding the #1 because frankly even if they had "rightfully" or not defeated nd back to oblivion without getting enough roids to outgrow 1up noone would have given a fart for it. Lets spell it out, they came for easy roids, didnt get them and lost. -> wrong choice in the end.

:xmas:

All you quoted you based yourself on the assumption that I'm LCH, that I support LCH or even think they did the right thing by attacking ND and settle for #2 instead of #1.

Yes, such additude is how a bunch of worldwars started. Didn't I say that aswell? I said the allying between ND and 1up was for LCH THE CONFIRMATION to keep attacking ND, exactly what I said.

Can't a person just have a different opinion? I "THINK" things would have gone better if they didn't ally 1up. Nobody here can prove if it would have or wouldn't have, hence why I use the word "THINK" because I don't know it for sure either.

And erm, it's not a lame way to admit Lokken is right. I have a different opinion, I don't agree with LOKKEN, he doesn't agree with me. We BOTH know that from eachother, we had a dicsussion ( you know, the ones without the usual flames and insults) and that was it. I no longer saw a point in dicsussing as I know his logic and mine is different, there it ends for me (and it was a fun discussion).

I'm not LCH, I'm not HR and I think no alliance deserved to win but 1up. I'm Angels and tbh, this whole "who's gonna win the round" stuff was never really remotely interesting to me because with 35 pple only (quality I must add) you just can't consider the top spots so it wasn't really our concern.

[Razorback]

Originally Posted by Shev

Yet another imbecilic comment from a 1up troll. How many times have LCH been slated for not attacking 1up, and instead concentrating on ND.

HR have stated many times that they had no agreements with any alliance save Insomnia this round, yet you continue.

Also, I take it you disagree with a whole shedload of 1up/ND posters about attacking the #2 instead of the #1? I can go and get some quote of them saying how chicken it is to not attack the #1 if you like. They obviously don't follow your 'logic'.

hellosies, im not 1up so smell the coffee.

HR not having any ties with LCH would support my argument, since ND wouldnt get much lesser incomings and LCH wouldnt be in a colation of the "right" as Kjeldoran stated but on their own trying to make profit out of an existing conflict regardless of who is on whos side.
Get the quote if you like tho it wouldnt do jacksh1t to my point of every alliance trying to improve its own position over some mysterious "lets kill xy" hysterias. If you are a responsible HC try to improve your own alliance instead of ending as the servant of someone else..

In my book if HR had no ties with LCH and was anywhere close to them they should have tried to claim the #2 spot for THEMSELF instead of (like suggested by others) playing a helping hand in the decisionprocess for #1.

The idea always to teamup on the #1 only works if everyone is mentally stable enough to play fluid politics, apprently thats not the case so the whole idea is defeated once someone decides to "kill #1 and settle for what the new #1 offers you".

Take note that i think if the HR/ND conflict indeed was a seperate one you can gladly be left out of the "&co" fraction and ill take back my point about hr's stance (the name could be replaced with anyone supporting LCH actively tho).

[Shev]

Originally Posted by Razorback

hellosies, im not 1up so smell the coffee.

I think most would agree you're about as 1up oriented as any non-1up poster then, regardless of your actual membership.

The idea always to teamup on the #1 only works if everyone is mentally stable enough to play fluid politics, apprently thats not the case so the whole idea is defeated once someone decides to "kill #1 and settle for what the new #1 offers you".

You mean, exactly what ND did? When they killed LCH with 1up then settled for next best?

Note that I don't disagree with ND's choice - in fact I think they made the right decision. It's just the constant flaming of other alliances for doing things that have been done by 'your side' gets a bit old.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Shev

You mean, exactly what ND did? When they killed LCH with 1up then settled for next best?

Note that I don't disagree with ND's choice - in fact I think they made the right decision. It's just the constant flaming of other alliances for doing things that have been done by 'your side' gets a bit old.

I don't think we settled for next best - I certainly didn't - I wanted us to win, could see clearly how we could via the decision we made and the conditions necessary to do so - namely ND and 1up ruling the roost with the enemy piling into 1up so we could outroid them with our ships given free reign and get the lead. Instead, 1up were the ones that got the best out of the deal, as LCH didn't think as hoped.

I think ND has played tactics that potentially allowed them to win, while LCH were negative and chose to be ruled by those who held personal score above their alliance's welfare.The only point we settled for 'next best' was when it was clear that LCH was going for us instead of 1up, so we clearly chose 1up as r12 winners, as LCH hardly endeared themselves to ND this round.

I think my position at least has been entirely consistent. I don't have any input on ND political policy, I merely make my interpretation of it as I see fit.

[demiGOD]

well i guess the argument got sent back to 1up winning and ND this and LCH that and so on and so forth... in my really honest and unbiased opinion, i think... 1up didnt really beat anybody in r12, although in technical terms with the scores and everything obviously shows that 1up won the round.. it just seems like the cue-ball scratched on the eight-ball hence favoring 1up's victory.. on purpose by a lot of other alliances, no matter how sick this idea may be, its utterly possible that in the back of a lot of alliances' minds, they wanted 1up to win..

this is a conspiracy..

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by lokken

I don't think we settled for next best - I certainly didn't - I wanted us to win, could see clearly how we could via the decision we made and the conditions necessary to do so - namely ND and 1up ruling the roost with the enemy piling into 1up so we could outroid them with our ships given free reign and get the lead. Instead, 1up were the ones that got the best out of the deal, as LCH didn't think as hoped.

You are missing the point. You wanted to win, if LCH and 1up fighting allowed you to outgrow them. Making no attempt to actually win by military strength. Did you really think you could win without any hard work? When you were forced to make a decision you gave away the victory to 1up. This is the type of 'tactics' 1up HC have been mocking people for over the past two rounds. The only difference is as you helped them during the round, they have spared you the AD hastle.

[Razorback]

Originally Posted by demiGOD

well i guess the argument got sent back to 1up winning and ND this and LCH that and so on and so forth... in my really honest and unbiased opinion, i think... 1up didnt really beat anybody in r12, although in technical terms with the scores and everything obviously shows that 1up won the round.. it just seems like the cue-ball scratched on the eight-ball hence favoring 1up's victory.. on purpose by a lot of other alliances, no matter how sick this idea may be, its utterly possible that in the back of a lot of alliances' minds, they wanted 1up to win..

this is a conspiracy..

yes the cueball decided a 50ppl alliance would outroid and outgrow all the others and put up a defence to stop 2-3 alliances from breaking through without actually playing hardcore.

What stuff do you smoke when this posts are the result dude ?

Furthermore name 5 top10 alliances who wanted 1up to win. (as you stated alot) ?

[Razorback]

Originally Posted by Zo0f

You are missing the point. You wanted to win, if LCH and 1up fighting allowed you to outgrow them. Making no attempt to actually win by military strength. Did you really think you could win without any hard work? When you were forced to make a decision you gave away the victory to 1up. This is the type of 'tactics' 1up HC have been mocking people for over the past two rounds. The only difference is as you helped them during the round, they have spared you the AD hastle.

You have to hope for some fortune if you come from the 3rd and want to overtake #1 and #2.
Planetarion is a numbers game, moral has its part but even if you plan to win and have the best players (lets not even discuss how you measure that) still someone else can ougrow you because its a fluid environment and noone can concentrate 100% pa (the other game called RL also runs 24/7).

Keeping all that in mind, you need a decent plan and a general idea of "chain reactions" to make your way from the backseat into the driversseat. ND fought with all their fleets and i doubt they thought they would "win without hard work" as thats impossible in such a small environment with atleast 2 other dedicated alliances aiming for the topspot.

[Razorback]

Originally Posted by Shev

I think most would agree you're about as 1up oriented as any non-1up poster then, regardless of your actual membership.

what you think or hope is really very very far outside of my concerns. If you want to put me in the 1up corner, do so, be vocal about it, accept that im not a 1up member and come back to the argument.

You mean, exactly what ND did? When they killed LCH with 1up then settled for next best?

Note that I don't disagree with ND's choice - in fact I think they made the right decision. It's just the constant flaming of other alliances for doing things that have been done by 'your side' gets a bit old.

My post included 2 different points, you missed both.
1) Alliances should be concerned about their own ranking i.e. from #3 -> #2 instead of supporting some big cause or just following old hatreds and old "bills" from 1-10 rounds back.
2)ND would have loved to be #1 but realistically the realised that would be out of reach unless a miracle happend and lch/1up would destroy each other and take everything down with them what else was in the way. ND didnt settle for the next best spot, if they wanted to do that they would have joined LCH, but instead they redefined their own goals, saw what was possible and went for something where they wouldnt have lost their face and the independance (decisionwise). You can compare that to some other examples here i may name Fang (yes KJ something positive) who always followed their own agenda.


In general i think the point is, pa needs tougher hcs, ppl who are ruthless and who first and foremost have the gain and ranking of their own alliance in the eye not a greyhaired blockseatpolitician. Deals can be made, can be broken and enemies can be partners. This should be the concept of a wargame and not "you remember 4 rounds ago bla bla, before x is #1 lets help y regardless where we end".

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by Razorback

yes the cueball decided a 50ppl alliance would outroid and outgrow all the others and put up a defence to stop 2-3 alliances from breaking through without actually playing hardcore.

-exactly proves my point! why would anyone let any alliance with a 50-60 member-base get past them on the rankings?! in an environment of the most darwinian of all atmospheres where survival of the fittest is the main motif, the most basic of human instincts and mechanisms will not allow anybody of the same level to out-do them unless allowed by an outside influence - the general knowledge in r12 was if anybody's winning this round, let it be 1up because it only makes sense now this idea might not be verbatim from a lot of people, but a lot of their actions implied this - it is absolutely outrageous to witness a 50-60 member-base alliance rediculously outroiding and outscoring alliances with 90-100 members!!

Originally Posted by Razorback

What stuff do you smoke when this posts are the result dude ?

-canadian.. the best stuff around

Originally Posted by Razorback

Furthermore name 5 top10 alliances who wanted 1up to win. (as you stated alot) ?

-anybody NAP'ed to any group where the success of the winning alliance is imminent because "letting" is equivalent to "wanting" - we may use the phrase "i had to, i had no choice" but it is people's own free will to decide to think that way..

[jerome]

are you really that oblivious or just plain trolling?

[Razorback]

Originally Posted by demiGOD

-exactly proves my point! why would anyone let any alliance with a 50-60 member-base get past them on the rankings?! in an environment of the most darwinian of all atmospheres where survival of the fittest is the main motif, the most basic of human instincts and mechanisms will not allow anybody of the same level to out-do them unless allowed by an outside influence - the general knowledge in r12 was if anybody's winning this round, let it be 1up because it only makes sense now this idea might not be verbatim from a lot of people, but a lot of their actions implied this - it is absolutely outrageous to witness a 50-60 member-base alliance rediculously outroiding and outscoring alliances with 90-100 members!!

1/10 dude, its survival of the FITTEST not of the biggest or tallest, etc. If your way of Darwin would apply to humanity we would have already extinguished (as the leader would always kill his peasants and vice versa till only 1 person of a tribe survives and then the tribes kill each other etc etc because noone will ever settle for an achievement), hence your argumentation is wrong.
LCH&CO didnt have any "let 1up win" feelings, nor did the majority of the alliances, they just sucked (compare a fiat to a ferrari here, both cars, 1 good 1 crap).

-anybody NAP'ed to any group where the success of the winning alliance is imminent because "letting" is equivalent to "wanting" - we may use the phrase "i had to, i had no choice" but it is people's own free will to decide to think that way..

To get down to your fundamental points: Alot / Many/ Everybody needs a clear number, please bring it because im eager to hear it of the top10 alliances.
As for the whole, you need to differenciate between personal goals and alliance goals. Those goals can be in a human society on the same track but can also be in the complete opposite direction, i.e. in a losing scenario ppl trying to save themself, giving up on their alliances cause or in a winning scenario ppl getting too greedy and leaving or working against their alliance to raise in rankings.


You shouldnt touch the trolling, you are not good at it and your very misconceptial understanding of even the most basic psychological / human society rules combined with your lack of pa knowledge makes someone shiver histerically laughing. So please do yourself and others a favour and keep doing stuff you are good at and leave the reply button for awhile.

[Seed of Chaos]

Originally Posted by Colt

Hmm, got me there though i actually meant in the current state of affairs

rofl :xmas:

Not sure about the top 10, but my own (probably worthless) opinion is that the universe will let 1up will win yet again (history has a tendency to repeat itself) and that WP will probably sneak into the top 5 without anyone noticing (they almost always do )

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Zo0f

You are missing the point. You wanted to win, if LCH and 1up fighting allowed you to outgrow them. Making no attempt to actually win by military strength. Did you really think you could win without any hard work? When you were forced to make a decision you gave away the victory to 1up. This is the type of 'tactics' 1up HC have been mocking people for over the past two rounds. The only difference is as you helped them during the round, they have spared you the AD hastle.

Only way we could have a chance of winning though am i rite?

We know we don't have as many power players as LCH/1up, so we can't fight with guns alone, so we pursued a mix of politics and military strength, because the latter can't take us to the top on our own, because we can't become a top alliance overnight - we have improved greatly during r12, but there's only so much you can do. We recognise our limitations, and play in a way that best suits us. Many alliances have used politics to combat their deficiencies.

HR on the other hand refused to play the political game, stayed out of the central conflict between LCH and friends and 1up/ND and ends up as an alliance that had a far lesser effect on the outcome of the round although you have to give them a bit of respect for sticking to their guns.

We have no problem with 1up winning, because the decision we took would have resulted in either 1up or ND winning. Our gamble didn't materialise, we have no quibbles whatsoever with 1up winning, because if we can't win, the other option is LCH an alliance that behaves in a way that suggests that they view us with contempt.

But I agree with you, yes. ND should be militarily stronger so we can do things more under our own steam - we're working on it.

[Mav]

I noticed not many of you hold NoS as not having much of a chance, hopefully, next round they will surprise you all with some changes.

[Colt]

Originally Posted by Razorback

yes the cueball decided a 50ppl alliance would outroid and outgrow all the others and put up a defence to stop 2-3 alliances from breaking through without actually playing hardcore.

What stuff do you smoke when this posts are the result dude ?

Actually, what stuff do you smoke? You seriously believe that 1up didn't play Hardcore??! Get a grip ffs. And it was 67 no 50

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by _ryzekiel_

are you really that oblivious or just plain trolling?

not really that oblivious and i'm definitely not trolling - just voicing out an opinion that sid's 1up's reputation in the game is so known and so much influencing that it almost overpowers and overshadows other alliances' goals to winning a round to a point where others might very well be possibly purposely letting them the win (also to a point where they might not even notice themselves doing it or are in denial) - which of course an advantage that was utilized skillfully by them and will definitely be a strategic priority for them in r13

[Tis]

Originally Posted by demiGOD

not really that oblivious and i'm definitely not trolling - just voicing out an opinion that sid's 1up's reputation in the game is so known and so much influencing that it almost overpowers and overshadows other alliances' goals to winning a round to a point where others might very well be possibly purposely letting them the win (also to a point where they might not even notice themselves doing it or are in denial) - which of course an advantage that was utilized skillfully by them and will definitely be a strategic priority for them in r13

You do realize that the more you whine, and the more fantastic your view of sid and company becomes, the more likely it is to become a self-fullfilling prophecy? Whether or not his rep is as influential as you claim, the more credit you give it the more powerful it becomes.

The moral of the story, you ask?

Shut up.

[lokken]

Tis gains +10 moderator points for style

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by lokken

Only way we could have a chance of winning though am i rite?

We know we don't have as many power players as LCH/1up, so we can't fight with guns alone, so we pursued a mix of politics and military strength, because the latter can't take us to the top on our own, because we can't become a top alliance overnight - we have improved greatly during r12, but there's only so much you can do. We recognise our limitations, and play in a way that best suits us. Many alliances have used politics to combat their deficiencies.

HR on the other hand refused to play the political game, stayed out of the central conflict between LCH and friends and 1up/ND and ends up as an alliance that had a far lesser effect on the outcome of the round although you have to give them a bit of respect for sticking to their guns.

We have no problem with 1up winning, because the decision we took would have resulted in either 1up or ND winning. Our gamble didn't materialise, we have no quibbles whatsoever with 1up winning, because if we can't win, the other option is LCH an alliance that behaves in a way that suggests that they view us with contempt.

But I agree with you, yes. ND should be militarily stronger so we can do things more under our own steam - we're working on it.

If you never try to win under your own steam, how will you know you cannot manage it? You cant only try to win when you are 100% sure you can win. This form of thinking is what gives 1up the win round after round. This may come as a shock but winning is not ever 100% and takes hard work.

Fluid politics are what kept the round going and alliances moving up/down the ranks all round. The problem was once 1up were top the driving force behind the fluid politics stopped. As many others have done in the past ND fell pray to this and sealed the round.

My point stands, ND have done exactly what 1up HC have been mocking other alliances for over the past two rounds. You only avoided public mockery due to the fact you helped them during this round, and 1up know they will need friends next round.

[Gate]

Originally Posted by Zo0f

Fluid politics are what kept the round going and alliances moving up/down the ranks all round. The problem was once 1up were top the driving force behind the fluid politics stopped. As many others have done in the past ND fell pray to this and sealed the round.

My point stands, ND have done exactly what 1up HC have been mocking other alliances for over the past two rounds. You only avoided public mockery due to the fact you helped them during this round, and 1up know they will need friends next round.

I still believe ND were eventually politically trapped, and had the choice of giving the round to LCH easily, or fighting with 1up to try and rise up the round.


Anyway, change my prediction: I predict that HR will end above ND now, with the active cores and extra officers of 2 impressive alliances together, I personally think this gives HR the extra edge.

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by Gate

I still believe ND were eventually politically trapped, and had the choice of giving the round to LCH easily, or fighting with 1up to try and rise up the round.

It may well of seemed similar to LCH. They are being beaten and the two alliances around them are blocked together. If they attack 1up, ND wins. If they attack ND, 1up wins. Im sure they would rather 1up won, as they deserved it more. However if either of you were capable of fluid politics without being lead by 1up and wanted to win. You would of hit 1up.

In the end the inability of HCs in alliances other than 1up to make their own politics ended the round and allowed 1up to win. You were trapped Gate, but by yourselves.

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by Tis

You do realize that the more you whine, and the more fantastic your view of sid and company becomes, the more likely it is to become a self-fullfilling prophecy? Whether or not his rep is as influential as you claim, the more credit you give it the more powerful it becomes.

The moral of the story, you ask?

Shut up.

NO, the moral of the story is -

dont let this happen again - all competing alliances that are on the same level as 1up, reattach your balls and regrow your spines for the next round - do not be influenced and/or bullied by another party when you know that you can out-do the said party by your own self - 1up's way of pussifying the whole universe obviously worked in r12 and should not repeat on the next round

[jerome]

ah, nevermind your posts have shown the answer to my question.

Ignorance is bliss, they say.

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by _ryzekiel_

Ignorance is bliss, they say.

You and me both know it is baby! <3

[jerome]

that's greasy bum sex not ignorance fs :|

[manxkat]

Well there we have it 1up to win by a short head in r 13
lots of valued and philosophical arguments, some flaming, to be expected, cretins also
have a opinion, personal attacks were unjustified, we only wanted a top ten breakdown
not how we won the war with top politics, bullshit, allied too, etc. etc.
Next round may be something quite different, ha ha, we shall see

[Razorback]

Originally Posted by Colt

Actually, what stuff do you smoke? You seriously believe that 1up didn't play Hardcore??! Get a grip ffs. And it was 67 no 50

without playing hardcore was a sarcastic addition. regarding some weird god or cueball deciding who wins....

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by _ryzekiel_

that's greasy bum sex not ignorance fs :|

well.. bliss usually ends up in greasy bum sex so i guess it all makes sense now..

im changing my r13 predictions

T1 - 1up
T2-10 hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Gate]

Originally Posted by Zo0f

IIn the end the inability of HCs in alliances other than 1up to make their own politics ended the round and allowed 1up to win. You were trapped Gate, but by yourselves.

With HR concentrating on 1up, and with VisioN very strongly on their side, with Mistu also concentrating on ND, I think LCH could have fought, quite easily, for first IMO. As LCH, with an ideal plan, I would have tried to hit 1up alongside HR (Not saying you were both co-operating, but that 2 sources of organised incs would have made things difficult for 1up), whilst delegating the job of pinning down ND to Mistu/VisioN. Instead, 1up had an extremely easy time to just cruise to the top as Mistu. LCH and VisioN all concentrated on ND, leaving just HR to hit 1up.

If LCH were inable to hold back a 1up that was also getting organised incs from another source, then they quite simply didn't deserve to win...

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by Gate

With HR concentrating on 1up, and with VisioN very strongly on their side, with Mistu also concentrating on ND, I think LCH could have fought, quite easily, for first IMO. As LCH, with an ideal plan, I would have tried to hit 1up alongside HR (Not saying you were both co-operating, but that 2 sources of organised incs would have made things difficult for 1up), whilst delegating the job of pinning down ND to Mistu/VisioN. Instead, 1up had an extremely easy time to just cruise to the top as Mistu. LCH and VisioN all concentrated on ND, leaving just HR to hit 1up.

If LCH were inable to hold back a 1up that was also getting organised incs from another source, then they quite simply didn't deserve to win...

That is a possability, however the other side of that is the activity of other alliances was so low by that point that is wasnt possible for them to have a big enough impact. In the end after a round of fluid politics ND made a non fluid agreement with 1up and stuck by it. That being the break in the chain which decided the outcome.

In the end ND had a very good round, defended very well and surprised a lot of people by finishing 3rd. Which was a great achievement for ND. Im not bashing that.