f-crew FO

[The_Mad_Keg]

if thats the case, then we apologise, we try and keep it from happening, we kicked and active member last round when we caught him bashing and he refused to unclaim. Wakey did give simmons the opportunity to name and shame the people doing it, to allow us to take action but nothing was offered *shrugs*

[Cut Tooth]

Hey I'm not attributing blame to any party here, But I've just heard from his gal mate, simmons has definitely quit PA.

[The_Mad_Keg]

that sucks and if its FC members that have caused it it sucks more
i can only offer my apologies and convey to the bc team to keep a better eye out.

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by Cut Tooth

Note: simmons has quite PA, a few people tried to stop him leaving but he quit anyway.

Not wanting to sound overly harsh but that sounds an awful lot like throwing the proverbial rattle out of the pram.
A lot of people have had severe bashings in the past and didnt quit - but instead picked themselves up, dusted themselves off and carried on

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Yes, yet whoever plans on majorly attacking F-crew atm gets stigmatised by the community for ruining this game ...

Actually I think that through the past few months on this forum F-Crew have been pretty consistent.

They have no objection to being hit.

What they do object to is their very small members being bashed to oblivion when it wasn't necessary.

Obviously there is a problem as hitting those planets is inherent to hitting f-crew, so I can understand why the two arguments have collided. Then again I'd suggest F-Crew need to realise they are in a league where they are likely to get far less sympathy and need to teach their members to expect hard knocks and give them a bit more of a "never say die" attitude.

[furball]

Originally Posted by wakey

For example towards the end of last round VGN did a good job targetting us. We were standing in their way of a position and it made tactical sense to hit us and they did. If alliances want to target us and do so tactically then we have never had a problem with it.

Originally Posted by The_Mad_Keg

I made a reply in the predictions thread along the same lines, if an ally feels they proffer by hitting us, such as VGN at the end of last round, then do so by all means, we didnt complain about VGN's hits, they were well done and targeted all members of the ally, and tbh well played, u took the spot.

I remember talking about the ethics of hitting F-Crew quite a bit in another thread. It was in our best interests at the time - they were about 1 million score ahead of us and we were reaching the end of the round. It was no longer possible to just try to XP past them - and they were making pretty good gains themselves, so we were forced to target them specifically. We did this by searching for their top planets which were all pretty fat, and hitting them pretty hard. It worked well, as I remember.

Originally Posted by furball

I think that F-Crew will probably be targetted more in future rounds. They've established themselves as a serious alliance who train players, as opposed to a well-performing training alliance. A lot of alliances probably underestimated the worth of hitting F-Crew this round, and I feel that it's unlikely that the same will happen again.

Originally Posted by furball

F-Crew itself never dictated to other alliances that they shouldn't go to war with F-Crew. However, most top 10 allies took it as a given that it would generally be a bad thing to go to war with F-Crew because of the bad publicity and the poor XP gains expected.

However, I think that people are waking up to the fact that each round F-Crew have some very good players who present worthwhile targets. On the last day of Round 16 Vengeance targetted the top F-Crew planets which worked out pretty well for us.

That should sum things up nicely.

[Cut Tooth]

Originally Posted by Phil^

Not wanting to sound overly harsh but that sounds an awful lot like throwing the proverbial rattle out of the pram.
A lot of people have had severe bashings in the past and didnt quit - but instead picked themselves up, dusted themselves off and carried on

No, you don't sound harsh. It's true. From what I gather simmons was ex F-crew and he was (again apparently) given a dressing down from Wakey for attacking a smaller planet than his own at some stage. to be frank I think simmons feels F-crew have double standards.

[Rukhsta]

While we're digging up old quotes, you also said:

Originally Posted by furball

On topic, there's little value in an established alliance hitting F-Crew. It's terrible politically (since F-Crew do such awesome work with new players) and there's little reward for doing so. Almost all top 10 alliances have worked this out.

As I post, F-Crew sit above us in 3rd. But we still see no point in targetting the good guys of Planetarion when other fatter alliances sit above and below them.

Were you one of those people that "underestimated the worth of hitting F-Crew?"

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Rukhsta

I'm not encouraging everybody to pound F-Crew, especially, as you say, when there are better targets out there. I'm just saying that if it comes down to it, and you need to hit them in order to succeed, do it.

Originally Posted by furball

Sure. But that's not going to happen. If you're close enough to try to pass F-Crew, just XP past them through attacks - being the only option other than actively attacking them.

What changed?

[furball]

Yes. I changed my opinion over a few weeks. It's allowed, you know.

To add some detail, I hadn't really looked at F-Crew's planets that closely - just saw their average score and thought 'no'. I then looked them up in our intel DB and saw some rather nice targets full of roids, as well as the usual newbies. As the end of the round got closer I eventually decided to present it to my fellow HC as an alternative to hitting high-value high-size galaxies (basically Angels central). We then hit F-Crew's top planets over the last few days of the round - and the rollback screwed everything up, it wasn't good.

[Rukhsta]

Originally Posted by furball

Yes. I changed my opinion over a few weeks. It's allowed, you know.

Ok, cool.

It's just something that jumped out at me because I remember you being one of the people arguing with me when I was suggesting that people hit F-Crew.

[furball]

You're probably right, and I was conscious of changing my mind when I did. However, I'd say that I didn't have all of the information at the time - and upon gathering more information, I viewed the situation differently. I still would have never hit the bottom 30 F-Crew members, ever.

[TSP]

Originally Posted by Cut Tooth

From what I gather simmons was ex F-crew and he was (again apparently) given a dressing down from Wakey for attacking a smaller planet than his own at some stage. to be frank I think simmons feels F-crew have double standards.

This is correct, if I recall correctly. I'm not sure how this is having double standards however - if whoever simmons had been hitting in the past had come forward and complained, it would have been "F-Crew bashing" then, but it's patently obvious that it wasn't supported at all by the alliance. How is this any different to now? It's not like Wakey ordered them to bash - if they're found to be bashing, they'd get the exact same dressing down simmons got. If anything, simmons' remarks indicate that we're actually fairly hardline on this matter. In past rounds Wakey has been able to devote some considerable time checking people's targets and sending out mails warning them about hitting considerably under their value. That hasn't been possible this round, but if it's spotted, something will get done about it.

I don't think anybody from F-Crew has requested special treatment and I'd be unhappy if they did. We're a casual alliance, yes, we take in new players and yes, we're proud of it and we like to think we have a better spirit when it comes to doing good for the game as a whole, but we're not a special case. There are many other alliances out there with a similar ethic, people like ROCK and SiN among others, and I don't think because Wakey makes essay-length posts on the forums we're any different to them. I don't personally see us as a training alliance but that said, it brought me considerable satisfaction to read the top 100 list last round and see how many names I recognised from F-Crew. I've been sad to see most of them go, but all merit to them if they're ready for more elite alliances.

I must chuckle about the impression that we're a top 5 alliance and we hardly get any incoming, though. You have to remember that, command staff aside, we have a pretty high turnover between rounds, and last round's performance was down to a number of factors (we're not an xp alliance but the strength of the xp factor certainly benefitted our setup). I'd personally have thought the fact that alliances don't specifically target us was more down to it just not being worth it.

[Zo0f]

SKs are an essential part of any fleet. Its no fun if you cant wipe out someones structures while half-inching their roids. Its even better if you get their fleet too.

Unless you get an abusive PAmail, the morning after, you have failed!

[KweKweK]

To be really honest I find this simmons guy kind off weak...

He starts this whole thread to complain about F-crew and double standards they use and when wakey asks for the information to look into what happened and who was exactly responsible for what. He never replied, but instead just quits.

Most of the people here know what a ****load amount of incomming is and have experienced it, but still havent quit the game. Instead we realise this is a part off a wargame. Some get pissed, others just laugh, but in the end we pick up the pieces and try to get even.

Value > roids

Dunno if any sk's were used tho, which imo shouldnt be used in gal raids anyway.

My conclusion: F-crew's policy is pretty clear about bashing, but shit happens because its not easy to control a memberbase of 60+ inexperienced players. And for simmons, life is never easy so why should a wargame be any different?

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Rukhsta

Ok, cool.

It's just something that jumped out at me because I remember you being one of the people arguing with me when I was suggesting that people hit F-Crew.

On this matter I think furball and VGN showed some excellent play. At the time when you were saying people should hit us it really was too early for most to make their move on us, alot of positions were still up for grabs and as a whole we werent great targets so while that was the case it made little sense for those around us to hit us. It would have been a case of taking 1 step forward and 2 steps back. As the round progressed into the last few days though the end positions were much clearer and from a tactical stand point it made alot of sense for VGN to hit us and they choose their timing perfectly.

IMHO alot of alliances last round could have learnt alot from VGN by being aware of the situations and hitting the right 'target' at the right time rather than getting impatient and jumping the gun.

[cura]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Holy Shit I agree with Kj.

Holy Applepie I agree with Kj and fish.

And I amusingly agreed with this, too:

Originally Posted by frostbeule

the only problem with them is - noone has the guts to speak it out as he will get a 10pages esseay written by wakey to read why they still are a training alliance.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by El-CuRa

Holy Applepie I agree with Kj and fish.

I got nothing to do with this, I swear !!

[wakey]

Originally Posted by El-CuRa

And I amusingly agreed with this, too:

If you agree with what frostbeule says then your quite frankly a fool. His whole argument is flawed as he seems to think "Training Alliance" is another word for "Failure".

The term "Training alliance" just like the term "Elite alliance" or "hardcore alliance" isnt talking so much about the relivent success or lack of it but about the attitude and policies of that alliance.

The fact that we achieved rankings above where we should be in the past few rounds doesnt mean we have gone 'elite' it just mean we have managed to get pretty much every member in the alliance to perform well above their percieved potential and thus the rankings we acheived are due to us being success as a training alliance

[Brug]

This thread reminds of a discussion 2 rnds ago.

Aldough Wakey will deny its relevant, it isn't imo.

It also shows what happens if you land on F-Crew, you get crucified on AD.

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showth...r+boys+failure

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by Brug

This thread reminds of a discussion 2 rnds ago.

Aldough Wakey will deny its relevant, it isn't imo.

It also shows what happens if you land on F-Crew, you get crucified on AD.

http://pirate.planetarion.com/showth...r+boys+failure

dont be stupid.
You got crucified for senselessly bashing a newbie and his gal who were below the average score of orbit and for sending seven waves at it - and rightly so, Not for simply landing on fcrew.

Anything over 3 waves on poor targets like that is a waste of time and pointless. Dont forget that an alliance has more members then a galaxy does so you CAN attack those with a larger average score then yourselves and still win through outnumbering them
One has to question the competance of the MOs who organise such attacks as the one wakey complained about

[furball]

Brug, unfortunatly you're just making yourself look foolish. Run while you still can. Phil's said it all but you get my two cents for free.

[Brug]

Without going into that discussion again, I only wanted to point out we got falsly accused of bashing, just as F-Crew is now.

'It also shows what happens if you land on F-Crew, you get crucified on AD.' is not what I'm trying to say. It doesn't reflect my thoughts the way I had them in mind, but I won't edit it, as its already quoted.

[furball]

Then simply rephrase yourself...

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Brug

Without going into that discussion again, I only wanted to point out we got falsly accused of bashing, just as F-Crew is now.

'It also shows what happens if you land on F-Crew, you get crucified on AD.' is not what I'm trying to say. It doesn't reflect my thoughts the way I had them in mind, but I won't edit it, as its already quoted.

You do realise what the words falsly mean dont you? When a HC admits both publically on the forums and privetly via IRC pm to multi waving on a galaxy outside the top100 where all the attackers are significanty larger than their target its hardly 'falsly accusing'. The closest Orbit came to denying it until much later on was to say state no target had more than 5 waves but some waves had multiple attackers.

And you werent 'cruicified' for landing on F-Crew, there was a single member in that galaxy and from an F-Crew pov it wasnt worth a second glance. If there had been no F-Crew member in that galaxy and I'd heard about it then I'd have still posted the thread as it was a worying trend that was seemingly getting more common every day by the lower ranked alliance and orbit simple supplied the evidence to back up my post (What I always find strange, threads like that where I have evidence to make a point I get moaned at for being too personal, while on theads where I decide that being specific isnt whats needed I get moaned at for being vaugue and not supplying any evidence of what im saying, seems you cant win )

[ReligFree]

This thread is a load of crap. In PA you get attacked, you get waved sometimes. If you dont have the fleet to stop it and have big gaps in your fleet then what do you expect? Cease the whining, play PA and deal with it.

[jerome]

yeah but you have a banana in your signature.

[Illmaticks]

It its within bash limit, it can be bashed.

Otherwise it woulndt be within the bash limit. To me, thats logics, and anyone complaining about this should complain directly to Apoccomaster or anyone in charge - who is actually able to do anything about it.

Hence; concluding; anything within your limit is a legit target. Even more so now, where xp isn't really an important factor anymore. Anyone not able to cope with a few incomings (who hasn't tried having 9-10 waves on a single night thrown at their planet, jesus fkin christ), probably shoulnd't waste their precious time playing a wargame that revolves around charging each other with massive fleets. Dada, problem solved.

[Gate]

Originally Posted by Zo0f

SKs are an essential part of any fleet. Its no fun if you cant wipe out someones structures while half-inching their roids. Its even better if you get their fleet too.

Unless you get an abusive PAmail, the morning after, you have failed!

PS Zo0f, your PA art of war .txt was wrong.

[Phrazer]

While I dont wish to restart this pointless R15 argument, i do find it interesting that F-crew stand accused of the very thing they accused us of a couple of rounds ago - they are even using the same "excuses"

I use the term "excuses" losely because im sure F-crew didnt million wave the gal in question, as much as im Damn sure Orbit didnt back in R15. It seems that Fcrew are being blamed for something they almost certainly didnt do.

it sucks doesnt it??

Originally Posted by simmons

i thought this game wanted/needed new blood? I guess ***** considers everybody under 1,000 posts an idiot. nice job buddy thanks for the imput

I felt this point was so valid it needed to be made again

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Phrazer

I felt this point was so valid it needed to be made again

Actually idler considers everyone an idiot, regardless of post-count.

[Phrazer]

I meant it more as a general observation on some of the attitudes you see on AD - hence why I deleted his name

The reception of posts by the community from people with fewer posts is usually so derogatory as to discourage people from posting their views at all.

However that is not a topic for this thread even though Brug’s view earlier on seems to be a good example of this. He made what he thought was a valid comment [which I totally agree with, and he was entitled to do] and got flamed for it as no doubt I will be

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

Actually idler considers everyone an idiot, regardless of post-count.

He has some exceptions though

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Phrazer

I meant it more as a general observation on some of the attitudes you see on AD - hence why I deleted his name

The reception of posts by the community from people with fewer posts is usually so derogatory as to discourage people from posting their views at all.

However that is not a topic for this thread even though Brug’s view earlier on seems to be a good example of this. He made what he thought was a valid comment [which I totally agree with, and he was entitled to do] and got flamed for it as no doubt I will be

Its a two way street though. Those people whom come on this forum and post and have only a small number of post more often than not bring the responce they get on themselves with the way the post. Look at simmons for example, he hasnt posted much and hasnt earnt any respect from the forum community and certainly hasnt earnt the right to post a thread thats abusive from the off. I mean come on rather than a constructive post about it his post is little more than a personal attack on me, not to mention its littered with inaccuracies that he knows are wrong (after all he makes out that we are hyprocrites and that we post here that bashing is bad but priviatly encourage it, something he knows isnt true as he used to be a member until he quit after getting a dressing down from me over him bashing)

To make matters worse when people pick up on his attitude and attack him for it he plays the "Post count" card. Now at times yes theres people with high post counts whom 'flame' low post count people simply as they have an ego and think people with less posts are lesser beings but more often than not when people play this 'card' its because they were justifably flamed but they dont want to admit it. It ends up breeding a culture of hatred towards low post count people and makes the situation worse. If we could get rid of this cry wolf situation then real cases would get dealt with much better but seeing as it seems to be an inbuilt thing in society (as we see the same thing with some people in ethnic minorities claiming racism over the tinyiest thing, some women claiming sexism when they get passed over for a job ect ect)

Basically if you dont want flamed on these forums then you have to act how you want others to act towards you. If you make good posts that dont resort to flaming your get respect even if you have very few posts and if people dont agree with you totally, if you do what simmons did your get flamed and wont gain respect on the forums

[Alki]

f-crew's attacking style is no different than any other alliances, why should it be. The only alliances i've a problem with, with there attacking style would had to be vgn and nd from past experiences. I know that vgn launched based on landing tick, but meh, the amount of overkill sent on each wave made baby jesus catch aids. Also nd like to overwave planets to death from my experience over the rounds. Both valid tactics in today's game style, whatever gets you roids eh lads

[Ace]

same goes for sending 7 waves of 2 fleets on a guy with 240 roids.
Not pointing at anyone here but doesn't that seem like a waste of fleets slots ?
Oh and I forgot the poor guy has out of those 7 waves 3 waves with more then 1 attacker.

If he quits I can see why that is, hope he will not though.

[Proxi]

I'd be laughing if that was me, after the first two waves he wont have anything to lose, and the attackers have just completely wasted an entire night.

[Ace]

Originally Posted by Proxi

I'd be laughing if that was me, after the first two waves he wont have anything to lose, and the attackers have just completely wasted an entire night.

I know that, you know that but do new players look at it like that ?

[Proxi]

I suppose not, which is why they have to be educated by the more experienced members of their gal. This is the place where new people learn the game until they can be pointed in the direction of an alliance which knows what its doing.

[furball]

Originally Posted by Alki

f-crew's attacking style is no different than any other alliances, why should it be. The only alliances i've a problem with, with there attacking style would had to be vgn and nd from past experiences. I know that vgn launched based on landing tick, but meh, the amount of overkill sent on each wave made baby jesus catch aids. Also nd like to overwave planets to death from my experience over the rounds. Both valid tactics in today's game style, whatever gets you roids eh lads

If you feel like providing examples from recent rounds then feel free to pm me with them. We never sent more than 3-4 waves at targets, and those with 4 waves were the ones we considered tough nuts to crack - e.g. attacking 10:4 last round, fair play to those guys. If we attacked an alliance then it was their problem not ours.

As for overkill, you're going to need to provide examples as well as proof that it was HC-sanctioned as opposed to less skillful members making others look bad. Until then no-one's going to take what you say with anything more than a pinch of salt.

[Alki]

Originally Posted by furball

If you feel like providing examples from recent rounds then feel free to pm me with them. We never sent more than 3-4 waves at targets, and those with 4 waves were the ones we considered tough nuts to crack - e.g. attacking 10:4 last round, fair play to those guys. If we attacked an alliance then it was their problem not ours.

As for overkill, you're going to need to provide examples as well as proof that it was HC-sanctioned as opposed to less skillful members making others look bad. Until then no-one's going to take what you say with anything more than a pinch of salt.

Ah, just the response I was hoping for. For one i didn't mention you overwaved planets. Secondly, nor did i state that the 'overkill' attacks where HC-sanctioned. Thirdly, I said they were valid attack strategies, not once did i mention whether it was purposeful or accidently, it was merely an observation I had made and continued to see. As for proof that it did happen(intentionally or not) I did provide it, after we had a little chat about it.

Way to not read the post

[furball]

Originally Posted by Alki

Ah, just the response I was hoping for. For one i didn't mention you overwaved planets. Secondly, nor did i state that the 'overkill' attacks where HC-sanctioned. Thirdly, I said they were valid attack strategies, not once did i mention whether it was purposeful or accidently, it was merely an observation I had made and continued to see. As for proof that it did happen(intentionally or not) I did provide it, after we had a little chat about it.

Way to not read the post

Ah, my old friend semantics. How's he doing these days?

No, you didn't say any of those things specifically. You didn't have to. They were implied in your post, whether you intended them to be or not. I replied to what you said expressly and commented on what was implied. It is perfectly easy for someone to read your post and decide that it reflects on the command of Vengeance as opposed to individual members.

At the end of your post you said that they were valid attack strategies, then dismissed that notion with a flippant comment. One might think that you weren't being entirely sincere with that original description.

[Alki]

Originally Posted by furball

Ah, my old friend semantics. How's he doing these days?

No, you didn't say any of those things specifically. You didn't have to. They were implied in your post, whether you intended them to be or not. I replied to what you said expressly and commented on what was implied. It is perfectly easy for someone to read your post and decide that it reflects on the command of Vengeance as opposed to individual members.

At the end of your post you said that they were valid attack strategies, then dismissed that notion with a flippant comment. One might think that you weren't being entirely sincere with that original description.

It wasn't really a dismissal but I see how it could be read that way, gaining roids any way that is legal is fine by me, apologies that my post didnt reflect that.

Being truthful here, I did not mean nor wish to imply any of those things, the thought hadn't even crossed my mind, if it had then I most probably would of posted. I know noone in the VGN command except yourself and a chap called RobTD? anyway im not at liberty to post about your command hence i didn't wish to imply those things duder!

[furball]

Originally Posted by Alki

Being truthful here, I did not mean nor wish to imply any of those things, the thought hadn't even crossed my mind, if it had then I most probably would of posted. I know noone in the VGN command except yourself and a chap called RobTD? anyway im not at liberty to post about your command hence i didn't wish to imply those things duder!

I must say that it worries me that you only know one person in Vengeance's current command, given that I'm retired. I gather that it's no longer your responsibility to know people such as these, so let's just hope that this doesn't reflect on the other alliances competing this round. Especially since Vengeance is presently ranked 5th (great job by them so far this round).

[Alki]

Originally Posted by furball

I must say that it worries me that you only know one person in Vengeance's current command, given that I'm retired. I gather that it's no longer your responsibility to know people such as these, so let's just hope that this doesn't reflect on the other alliances competing this round. Especially since Vengeance is presently ranked 5th (great job by them so far this round).

tis true, i requested no responsibility, and solely signed up to play for myself and myself alone

[Razgriz]

Whenever i see a post with "F-Crew" in the title i try to stay away for as long as possible.
Excuse me for speed reading through the two pages but for what it's worth F-Crew is a training alliance and as far as i'm concerned that dosn't grant us any special treatment.

"Why do we fall?"
"To learn how to pick ourselves up"

That's all i have to say on the subject(s) atm tbh

[I am Idler]

F-crew is the place where recruits are trained before they join a real alliance

[jerome]

like the one you currently reside in idlerboi?

[jerome]

Originally Posted by Proxi

I suppose not, which is why they have to be educated by the more experienced members of their gal.

yes, this is exactly what they have to do! "welcome newbie! to the game where your fellow players are either, utter idiots and overkill just for the plain fun of it! or, they're forced to bottom-feed as it's the easiest way to grow in this game now with xp more or less negligble and zero-loss defence so rampant!"

[furball]

Originally Posted by I am Idler

F-crew is the place where recruits are trained before they join a real alliance

No.


Times have changed, F-Crew are now a real alliance with a specialism in training new players. Their score gains and roid gains reflect this.

[Rc mayhem]

Originally Posted by furball

Times have changed, F-Crew are now a real alliance with a specialism in training new players. Their score gains and roid gains reflect this.

Wow. If only I can convince Wakey of this.... Glad someone else thinks it appart from me