Planetarion Forums - Ascendancy - winners of Round 16?

lokken · 12 Mar 2006, 13:04

to even start fencesitting we'd have to get our arse out of bed FFS.

TheShadowMan · 12 Mar 2006, 13:05

lo all,

fact:round isn't over yet
fiction: ascendancy have won

I personally think 1up are still in with a chance to win the round, but will have to change their tactics slightly for the next 6 and half days.

They source all your their low value planets and make them play for xp just like Ascendancy are doing at the moment. The growth from these planets combined with their high value planets score may over take Ascendancy. The gap as it stands is circa 45 mil i'm not sure if this is too much or just about right.

I feel that Ascendancy are going to sit back and be bit smug about the whole thing of being #1. I know I would be

. If they dont and continue to attack 3fleet evry day until the end it may be already over.

tsm

quick edit: Should ascendancy give the co-ords of their hidden planets to the MH to prove they weren't support planets. It would be gesture of good will I think

Desse · 12 Mar 2006, 13:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheShadowMan

quick edit: Should ascendancy give the co-ords of their hidden planets to the MH to prove they weren't support planets. It would be gesture of good will I think

I think MH can check which planets joined tag yesterday and check those planets movements out.

If however MH need a tool to find those coords, they are very welcome to PM one of us to get them.

Heartless · 12 Mar 2006, 13:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by El-CuRa

how many wars did you fight?

See my signature.

cura · 12 Mar 2006, 15:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Desse

Fence sitting in my book entails trying to piss as few alliances as possible off, by not hitting their planets. Or taking as many naps as possible. Just because we kept out of the political plays doesn´t mean fence sitting in my definition.

I doubt many alliances have not seen incoming from us. We have cared little about what alliances we have hit, but have mainly gone for the targets reaping the most XP. (this is not all Asc players, but the main majority of us).

that's what I meant with bringing it to a whole new lvl :P

I'm not whining, just finding it funny, I'm happy you did it cause it takes stuff like that for PA crew to realise smt wrong

jerome · 12 Mar 2006, 17:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by cypher

firstly grats asc... you won.

even tho i don't think this win took any skill at all even tho jerome desperately wants to make it look like it did

going ter or zik fi simply means you can roid anyone for XP. It might be smart to go that way, but it's not skill. Indeed for your case it's the only way you do well:P (cept morally in your opinion heh)

Also the way this round has gone has been a disgrace to pa itself and it can't be good for the game at all... ( a free round which will prolly make sure less people play the next instead of more isn't really good publicity)

you played the game right for this round i think, but not for pa as a whole if you think of the long run.

i still fail to see why the traditional style is more "skilled"? unless you mean skill as in activity or effort ofc

cypher · 12 Mar 2006, 18:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerome

i still fail to see why the traditional style is more "skilled"? unless you mean skill as in activity or effort ofc

the part where this round required far less skill then most imo is that a terran can basically hit anyone with BS (or a bunch of de) (goes for a couple of races) and same with zik fi... meaning you don't have to do any target searching or whatever as you don't even REALLY need scans (just jgp)
Also the only real 'skill' this round required was crashing your fleet often enough to stay small... which again is hardly an achievement

jerome · 12 Mar 2006, 18:22

er well i think it's fair to say since r11 every race had their allocated target that they could nearly always definitely hit with a certain fleet, scans only confirmed it etc.. hardly more skillful imo, i mean most terrans that i know of anyway only did the same thing - rushed wyverns with levs or faked or whatever at zikonians day in and out, hardly less skillful than previous rounds where you just chuck de+cr as cath at any bloody xand and you'd nearly definitely roid them or such etc

Fyodor · 12 Mar 2006, 18:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerome

i still fail to see why the traditional style is more "skilled"? unless you mean skill as in activity or effort ofc

The traditional style means you have to defend. Yourself and if applicable, your alliance mates. You have to build proper ships for def as well as attacks. If in and alliance you have to stay awake until your last fleet is out. While it may not take much more skill, it does take more dedication and hence raises the skill level of the general community due to more people needeing to calc if they are going to land and trying to figure out if the def is faked, etc etc.

jerome · 12 Mar 2006, 18:40

MO's/HC's working their ass off for planets doesn't mean a planet player himself is more "skilled" at all, imo.

i agree with what you said there about dedication etc & the rest, however.

Ace · 12 Mar 2006, 19:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by idimmu

*snip*

But, and I hate to say it as it only brings pain and heartache, for whatever reason, whether it's due to arrogance, incompetance or stagnation, the majority of the players of this round played the game the same way it's always been played and failed to take in to consideration what could transpire with the stats and mechanics, and this lack of skill in reading the game is what ultimatly caused them not to win.

It all depends on the way ppl would like to play.
You are now saying that ppl who like to play in the way they always did (help defend their alliance friends) and thus needing def ships are all stupid and need to learn how to play.

I don't agree with you on that.

This game by itself (without IRC) is no fun at all.
The fun part is being in a alliance with friends and attack together and try to defend each other.

Sending off 3 fleets land no matter what and send 3 more is more like a automated thingy wich any 3 year old could do, I don't see any skill in that.
Yes it takes less time then "traditional" play and maybe it's better for your health

.

I still feel it's not the way this game, alliances and gals where meant to be.

Don't take this wrong I don't want to say you did it wrong just want to say what I think of the way you guys played this round.

cura · 12 Mar 2006, 20:00

I think the main reason why people decided not to play it like Ascendancy is because they didn't want to aknowledge PA took this turn. Every person I knew was told this was going to be the best way to play, and to get victory. More a question of denial than arrogance or incompetance, or maybe all of it. There's alot of people that would rather quit PA than play it this way.

Tesla · 12 Mar 2006, 20:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by El-CuRa

I think the main reason why people decided not to play it like Ascendancy is because they didn't want to aknowledge PA took this turn.

That's bullshit. They chose the other way because they thought it would bring them victory, any 1up or Angels can confirm this.

The_Fish · 12 Mar 2006, 20:16

maybe 1up or Angels can, ND is a different matter. Most people opposed to me wanting ND to do this was because it would 'destroy ND's community', not because they didnt think we could win. Well, there was some idiots thinking that too, but they were generally ignored.

aNgRyDuCk · 12 Mar 2006, 20:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tesla

That's bullshit. They chose the other way because they thought it would bring them victory, any 1up or Angels can confirm this.

no, your reply is bullshit... we played the game the way it was meant to be played, we didn't take the cheap ass way out, we worked hard for the roids and score we got.

a lot of members put in the hard work to keep their planets fighting, and active...a lot of MO's busted their asses working calls, tryin to defend in a round where def stats blow......... those are the people that earned a win

Tesla · 12 Mar 2006, 21:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by aNgRyDuCk

no, your reply is bullshit... we played the game the way it was meant to be played, we didn't take the cheap ass way out, we worked hard for the roids and score we got.

a lot of members put in the hard work to keep their planets fighting, and active...a lot of MO's busted their asses working calls, tryin to defend in a round where def stats blow......... those are the people that earned a win

buhuuu.. cry me a river tbh..

Troll · 12 Mar 2006, 21:06

Well I didn't want 1up to win, so I guess the phrase "becareful what you wish for" applys to me this round.

Shortest post by me EVER

aNgRyDuCk · 12 Mar 2006, 21:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tesla

buhuuu.. cry me a river tbh..

weak sparky...real weak

Tesla · 12 Mar 2006, 21:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by aNgRyDuCk

weak sparky...real weak

You didn't give me much choice now did you ?
I tire of the the same old whine post in and post out. I tried being mature about it and to avoid being too 'smug', but the inane ongoing crap about how you deserve it and all makes me want to wind u guys up some more. Whoever ends #1 deserves it.

For example I couldn't care less if someone made a tag just to beat us now. That would be their choice to make. It is just a game after all.

cura · 12 Mar 2006, 21:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tesla

That's bullshit. They chose the other way because they thought it would bring them victory, any 1up or Angels can confirm this.

I was mainly talking about our (ND) members. We had DLR split off from us because the players voted they didn't want to play that way. ND members choose that because it's what ND has been doing for 16 rounds now and they thought it would weaken the band players have with eachother, even if most of the people knew DLR's playing style would be an easier victory than the normal way. You can say many things about ND, but saying our first goal is victory would be just wrong.

Mek · 12 Mar 2006, 21:44

i hate the fact, idimmu, that you are thinking this is a good thing for the game and is a benefit to the community and the game as a whole.

i dont know if this is what you are intending with your posts m8, but it sure is how its coming across to me

do you really wanna see the game fall flat on its arse??

Tesla · 12 Mar 2006, 21:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by El-CuRa

I was mainly talking about our (ND) members. We had DLR split off from us because the players voted they didn't want to play that way. ND members choose that because it's what ND has been doing for 16 rounds now and they thought it would weaken the band players have with eachother, even if most of the people knew DLR's playing style would be an easier victory than the normal way. You can say many things about ND, but saying our first goal is victory would be just wrong.

Fair enough.. But ND does try to obtain victory like the rest of us though (sometimes anyway..heh..). Last rounds fenceride showed that..

Tomkat · 12 Mar 2006, 22:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by cypher

going ter or zik fi simply means you can roid anyone for XP. It might be smart to go that way, but it's not skill.

What is "skill" in PA?

I know for a fact that since I've switched from value to XP, I've had to put in more work.

Sending defence is easy - the MO does the work, you send the ships off and wait for a recall message.

Now I have to usually find my own targets in the day (when defended against on ones in a raid), scan them myself (because otherwise I'd be pestering scanners all day long) usually every few ticks so I have fleets constantly moving, and I find myself getting up 4 times a night to check on things (ships heading towards a defended planet are useless ships).

It's also much easier for people to defend against you, as you're sending tiny fleets. I'd hardly say it takes skill to send a gigantic Zik fleet at someone, which is pretty difficult to defend against, and then cap roids. That's what I was doing before.

Before, I would simply pick a target in 1up's raids, launch on it, and check at eta 4. The XP whoring relies on constant attacking and constant gains in score. You can't sit back on your roids and laurels and wait for them to grow, because often you don't have many roids to sit back on.

Of course I'm not poo-pooing the value route, but to write off the XP route as easy is silly. It isn't that easy - it can be very tiring if you're going to do it properly (although I think I've been doing it more hardcore since I started a week ago than those who have been doing it since the beginning).

Quote:

Originally Posted by cypher

you played the game right for this round i think, but not for pa as a whole if you think of the long run.

I disagree. I think Ascendancy winning has highlighted how important it is that XP needs to be fixed for next round. We all knew it - this has confirmed it to PA team.

jerome · 12 Mar 2006, 22:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by aNgRyDuCk

no, your reply is bullshit... we played the game the way it was meant to be played, we didn't take the cheap ass way out, we worked hard for the roids and score we got.

a lot of members put in the hard work to keep their planets fighting, and active...a lot of MO's busted their asses working calls, tryin to defend in a round where def stats blow......... those are the people that earned a win

please for the love of god stop thinking just because you tried hard it makes you deserve it more. winners aren't defined by the amount of effort put in, they're defined by the score they have. note exactly what i've said before any of you jump on this being utter sore losing(PRESENT TENSE) fags.

lokken · 12 Mar 2006, 22:25

There are few parts of planetarion that require skills of any kind.

Some are dependent on the stats, being able to decide whether a planet can be successfully faked and outsmarting your opponent. A Xan playing for XP is a completely different proposition to a terran XP'ing for example. It's a lot harder, a question of looking at someone's fleet and finding a hole and seeing if you can stump the chap you're attacking.

The DC is one that (contrary to some views) does require some skill, simply by economising with fleets and ships and by spotting fakes and keeping your alliances fleets alive.

The BC is another if it's in the sense of taking down a whole alliance, by drawing defence and striking punches at them where it will really hurt the opposition.

But ultimately the HC is the most demanding in terms of any 'skills' - team working, leadership, intelligence, public relations, political awareness are just a few of them. You need to be better than and outsmart your opponents.

Finally, activity in itself is not "skill", it is "effort". Managing your activity and making the most of it is a skill, so one might say that Ascendancy are actually doing best in that department for the results they get for the time they spend. The fight against burnout in my view is the most important, it applies to every player.

qebab · 12 Mar 2006, 23:59

Just thought I'd post to agree with lokkens excellent post. There isn't really any skill involved in managing a planet. With training, a 5 year old could do that. It's more about experience, and connections, and of course if you can use a bcalc, that helps too. Usually, there will be people around you giving you idea's on what fleet combos to use, and how to attack etc, so you can't really say there's a skill in that either. Managing a planet is about dedication, with the value route, more so than with the xp-route. Anyone can do both. (Stamina is the keyword to high ranks, along with the word "connections")

And as you said, the skill in this game, is mostly from officer-level and up.

Storebo · 13 Mar 2006, 01:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nadar

There's already made a fix for next round (read PA News)

It's impossible for everyone to xpwh0re because there'd be no one to wh0re with

The 'natural force' would make sure some xpwh0res turned into valuewh0res.

pff... who read pa news...

It's all propaganda :P

Storebo · 13 Mar 2006, 01:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by qebab

Just thought I'd post to agree with lokkens excellent post. There isn't really any skill involved in managing a planet. With training, a 5 year old could do that. It's more about experience, and connections, and of course if you can use a bcalc, that helps too. Usually, there will be people around you giving you idea's on what fleet combos to use, and how to attack etc, so you can't really say there's a skill in that either. Managing a planet is about dedication, with the value route, more so than with the xp-route. Anyone can do both. (Stamina is the keyword to high ranks, along with the word "connections")

And as you said, the skill in this game, is mostly from officer-level and up.

Well.. u could argue that being a xp whore is at no risk at all, cause people can't really stop u. Value players can be fleetcatched.. roided etc...
No need to worry about defence if u get incomings... no long mornings trying to get defence... calling up your whole gal etc..

XP-whoring doesn't require any unscheduled extra time kinda.

So i'd say a value player more deserves to win the round then a xp player due to the time they put into it.

Gimmick · 13 Mar 2006, 01:17

Congratulations Ascendancy!

Cocteau · 13 Mar 2006, 03:50

Acendancy, winning without even trying. That r0x, heh.

Blame Jester, nuff said

Chika · 13 Mar 2006, 06:08

I applaud ascendancy for thier play. happy they didn't make this a "default" win for certain alliances. Behold the evolution of PA. if you are over-active you are an idiot.

Nolez · 13 Mar 2006, 08:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chika

I applaud ascendancy for thier play. happy they didn't make this a "default" win for certain alliances. Behold the evolution of PA. if you are over-active you are an idiot.

Stoom · 13 Mar 2006, 11:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storebo

Well.. u could argue that being a xp whore is at no risk at all, cause people can't really stop u. Value players can be fleetcatched.. roided etc...
No need to worry about defence if u get incomings... no long mornings trying to get defence... calling up your whole gal etc..

XP-whoring doesn't require any unscheduled extra time kinda.

So i'd say a value player more deserves to win the round then a xp player due to the time they put into it.

Yet, I dare to say I put in alot more time in last round then many of the top 100 players playing for value, however I only finished #186. So that means I deserved to be top 100 over them?

On a side-note, you'd be surprised how much time I put into this round while being an XP-whore...

Alki · 13 Mar 2006, 11:42

hillary duff is overrated

alch · 13 Mar 2006, 12:53

I am not playing this round, so i might be more objective than some of you.
I can easily say that i would be extremelly pissed with ascendency for winning the round if i would be playing and i would be a hard working HC who put a big amount of daily hours in this game and the organization of my alliance.

To claim if ascendancy had the full right to win or not, they completely had. The fact i would be angry wouldnt derive from the fact they won a round with less work and less time, but from the fact that a group of individual could so easily jeopardize my work. The fact that as a HC i couldnt spot the XP sheme and couldnt adjust my alliance to play within the "rules" (because lets face it, they never cheated or never exploiter a loophole, they just used a legal system which was there to be used by any HC) would greatly piss me off, but only because I FAILED. If I remember right, there was a round when Synthetic_Sid made the stats and everyone shouted that 1up would have the advantage because the only fact sid made them:
http://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=177385 - guess what, same case with Jester, stop being hypocryte.

You can deny Asc with this win, is it decent? of course it is, they played within the rules and managed to beat the most experienced HCs around. Did they do it with skills? Of course, as much skill as it take for a value players to launch 2 fleets to an assigned targets by his BC and send a defense fleet where the DC ordered him to. Its just the fact they have put less time in this game than you that make you furious... oh and the fact that half of their players are hald assed about this game and act like clowns. They seems less serious than you and put let time than you, but managed to beat you all. That is called Stategy, guys.

Well done. Lets hope this game change tho, because honestly i wouldnt like to play one round like this.

alch · 13 Mar 2006, 13:01

wonder who deleted JBG post....

JonnyBGood · 13 Mar 2006, 13:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by alch

wonder who deleted JBG post....

I did. I posted it instead in the thread more directly concerning that particular issue on PD.

Treveler · 13 Mar 2006, 15:59

I think most people realised that xp-whoring would be a very rewarding strategy given the offensive stats and low ally count (why by everything that is good and decent in this world did you chose such a low ally count in a free round? What smartass came up with that idea?) but I and many like me simply won’t play that game. If this round started over and I knew exactly how effective xp-whoring would be, I would still go for value if I by some freak accident signed up an account.

This round must have been the most boring peace of crap round I have ever played, and to have such a crappy round with such ****ed up stats in a free round must be a big blow for the PA team. This was supposed to be a free round advertising what’s great about PA. Instead you get a nightmare of a round with a lot of pissed of costumers.

Treveler · 13 Mar 2006, 17:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by idimmu

Noone seemed to mention how shit the stats were or how shit the round was until Ascendancy won...

No of course not. No one said anything about the stupidity of xp-whore completely dominating top 100 untill Ascendancy took the lead.

jerome · 13 Mar 2006, 17:11

that's not what he said treveler honey

Kjeldoran · 13 Mar 2006, 17:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by idimmu

Noone seemed to mention how shit the stats were or how shit the round was until Ascendancy won...

I however did. You'd know that if you look back at a post I made even before Ascendency entered the top10.

Treveler · 13 Mar 2006, 17:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by jerome

that's not what he said treveler honey

The round is not shit because you guys are winning its shit because of the, ehh strange stats, and complete domination of xp-whores. So yes, ppl did complain about the shitty round long before Ascendancy took the lead.

Heartless · 13 Mar 2006, 17:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Treveler

The round is not shit because you guys are winning its shit because of the, ehh strange stats, and complete domination of xp-whores. So yes, ppl did complain about the shitty round long before Ascendancy took the lead.

Play beta next time and help fixing stats then.

Wishmaster · 13 Mar 2006, 18:48

The main problem is the xp formula - not the stats.

The stats need only minor fixes - if the xp system is sorted somehow.

So was no real need to whine at the stats - cept a few points.

Played with worse stats (r13 cath/zik)...

cypher · 13 Mar 2006, 18:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by idimmu

Noone seemed to mention how shit the stats were or how shit the round was until Ascendancy won...

try and get some logs from 1up private channels.... i doubt you'll repeat something like this then....

we been saying it when asc was around #8 or #10 alliance.

Nolez · 13 Mar 2006, 19:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alki

hillary duff is overrated

Totally untrue. If Hillary Duff is overrated, then so is value

lokken · 13 Mar 2006, 19:54

Having searched Hilary Duff courtesy of google, I'd describe her as the kind of celebrity that while quite attractive is probably quite likely to be overrated.

However, what I can say is that she is offtopic and will not be partaking in any future discussion in this thread.

Thanks.

Stifler · 13 Mar 2006, 20:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heartless

Play beta next time and help fixing stats then.

there wasnt a public beta as far as i know, yes you could go and ask for access to #beta, and in most cases it was given(i think), but how many would do that?

Banned · 13 Mar 2006, 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stifler

there wasnt a public beta as far as i know, yes you could go and ask for access to #beta, and in most cases it was given(i think), but how many would do that?

The stats beta was completely open, no invite required. Unfortunately, it wasn't as well advertised as it should have been.

Cannon_Fodder · 13 Mar 2006, 20:27

There was.

Edit: Beaten by Banned :/