Political Situation
In the interests of openness and to remove unnecessary speculation about 1up's current political situation I reproduce below a post made on 1up forums by myself. It would undoubtedly leak anyway - so I'd rather make sure that what became public was the full, unabridged version of my post than some bastardised version or chinese-whispered summary of it.
I would also request that 1up members DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS THREAD. If other alliances wish to comment, let them do so without spamming it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Below here is exact copy of post made on 1up forums (complete with spelling mistakes etc) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Political Situation ------------------- By now I'm sure most of you have noticed that lately we've received more than our fair share of incs. Many of you probably already know what's happening - and no doubt those of you that don't would like to. Firstly, we should take it a compliment that alliances feel the need to gang up vs us this early in the round. We always expected it from LCH - blocking is their way of life and they're realistic enough to know they lack the quality to compete at the top solo. If they'd just stuck to working with Hydra that would make life interesting, but are now also working with Insomnia. That makes 3 top 10 alliances - with a combined score/roids of more than double ours - all working together to attack 1up. And that's still not a big enough block for them - we know for sure they've been inviting other alliances in (though as yet we have no firm evidence that any others have accepted). They will claim it's not a block. Hydra HC, when asking other alliances in have referred to it as a "faction". But if they're coordinating atatcks (they are) and they're not hitting one another's planets (which is the case) then they can call it what they want - but it's a block by any reasonable definition. A block that already contains around 20-25% of all paid planets in the game and which is trying to grow even bigger. Not only does this block threaten 1up, it also harms all the alliances not in it - as they get proportionally more incs than the blockers do due the blockers having incs from 2 less alliances than everyone else. Until this point 1up has had no NAPs and no cooperation on attacks with other alliances. You will all have noticed that in your AG raids, all planets (other than 1up members) have been valid targets. This may change now. Whereas 1up would have preferred to stay solo - even given some small degree of blocking by other alliances - given the size of this block we now have to consider all available options. Accordingly, your AGs may find that at some point in the future certain non-1up targets will be excluded from attack. In-Galaxy Defence ---------------------- When your galaxy is attacked and the 1up members are not atatcked you MUST check with HC before sending ingalaxy defence. You must also ALWAYS check before defending a member of an alliance defined as hostile to 1up (that is, an alliance that is intentionally focussing its attacks towards us). If 1up doesn't need defence, and the attackers on them are not associated with us then defence may be allowed. Planetary NAPs ------------------ When we attack hostile planets in 1up galaxies we generally need to attack most/all non-1up members there to minimise in-galaxy defence. This is wasteful for us (it uses up attack fleets we would far rather were sent at genuine hostiles). It is also unfortunate for those galaxy members who are in smaller alliances that may struggle with defence and who have no wish to embroiled in our battles. Accordingly, 1up is happy to grant planetary protection to these galaxy members IF THEY WANT IT. The terms of such protection are very simple: they agree not to attack 1up members or to defend hostiles ingalaxy vs 1up. In return they will NEVER get atatcked by 1up. They may also defend members of non-hostile alliances ingalaxy vs 1up without risk of being counter-attacked by us. Most galaxy members obviously won't want to accept these terms - in which case respect them for it and don't try to force them to agree. For the moment, they will need to check whether a target is 1up with a 1up in their galaxy before attacking. We will try to work out a better system later. If any of your galaxy want this protection then you need to inform a HC so it can be noted in our tools. Although this planetary protection is intended for members of smaller/neutral alliances, we will extend it to ALL member of your galaxy - even those whose alliances are hostile. If enemy HC aren't able to stop their members from fence-sitting then it's hardly our job to do so In Closing ------------ Feel flattered that the opposition admit our superiority by blocking this early in the round when we've stayed totally solo. Keep your activity up and we can pull through this - and hopefully demonstrate, as we have before, that ultimately quantity is not a substitute for quality. |
Re: Political Situation
I can only think of one word, but i cant spell it so I wont even try to post it.
|
Re: Political Situation
I think it's normal for the other alliances who want a shot at #1 to gang on 1up temporarily to avoid them taking a big advantage so early in the round.
However, I would be quite disappointed if they insist on keeping the "block" for longer than it takes to level the odds again. |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
I could have sworn, last round, 1up was blocked with up to 6 of the top 10 alliances at various points of the round. So i think the statement above is a little hypocritical. The round before that they came into the round blocked already The thread seems like a nice peice of propaganda and I hope the blocked alliances dont fall for 1ups poor me act and keep the pressure on. I also hope that if the "block" does in fact keep the pressure up, that 1up is able to find a stable ally to help balance everything out a little. But are there any quality alliances left that could help 1up in this matter? If there are, then I ask myself why, 1up did not come into the round with them. All this comes down to is the fact that 1up is a superior alliance who may have burned alot of bridges amongst past allys. Not due to mis treatment, but due to agendas. If the rest of the uni needs to block to bring 1up back to the rest of the unis playing field, then so be it. |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
agreed |
Re: Political Situation
Ally vs. Gal politics sux
Nice joke tho :) |
Re: Political Situation
Considering 1up still managed to gain asteroids this past day it cannot be much of a block. :(
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
kinda soon to have a winner, don't you think? |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
How big a block is needed to counter one alliance that is slightly ahead in the rankings? Is 2.5 times the members, double the score and double the roids really needed? And does the block still need to be trying to add more members? Duration is always the problem. One thing that's very clear from PA history is that it's FAR easier to make a block than to break one. Here's what the natural progression of a block seems to be: 1. It starts with HC saying something along the lines of "Aliiance X are bigger/better than us or are hostile to both of us so why don't we share targetting information". 2. It then progresses to the "it's silly us atatcking one another when we have the same enemies" so let's not attack one another's planets. 3. This then necessitates an exchange of coordinates - immediately adding one impediment to the block splitting, as if a block splits then suddenly whole members coords are in non-allied hands. In a few simple steps, basic attack coordination turns into a fully fledged block. The main problems with a block splitting are as follows: 1. What is the criteria for splitting? Knock the enemy down below the biggest alliance in block? Knock it below the smallest alliance in block? 2. Whereas a block may be formed for one objective (which is typically more beneficial to some in the block than to others) the temptation is always there to deal with other enemies before splitting. 3. Smaller members of a block have little incentive to split it - it's hardly in their interests to help a partner to the top then get dumped and roided into the ground by their ex-ally as reward. Blocking isn't of itself a bad thing - it can level the playing field. In practice blocks DON'T try to level the playing field: they try to change a slight imbalance one way into aa huge one in the opposite direction. |
Re: Political Situation
Insomnia is in no block. We did however have the guts to attack 1up to prevent the winner to be determined after 12 days into the round. I'm glad others did the same.
-Jonas- |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
We started the round solo because that's what we wanted to do. It wasn't for lack of offers of allies - I can think of 6 alliances that had asked for or offered to ally with 1up pre-round. I'll repeat it again - as it's clearly an alien concept to you and needs some reinforcement. 1up doesn't believe that being in a block is better than being solo - so despite many offers we went solo. It can't be THAT hard to understand, surely? |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
What else do YOU think is needed for something to be a block? |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
peon #1
5 more to go^^ |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
1 Firstly, we should take it a compliment that alliances feel the need to gang up vs us this early in the round. My comment: Last round you formed a 5 alliance block before ticks. 2 We always expected it from LCH - blocking is their way of life and they're realistic enough to know they lack the quality to compete at the top solo. My comment: It's not our way of life, it's our way of reacting to your blocking actions last round, the round before that, AND the round before that. We allied or napped with Exil last round, and before that 2 rounds with VSN. Is that a block? In your first 1up round you stated that anything bigger then 2 was a block i think i remember. You personally, as co-leader of Fury, have been blocking, napping, allying and sliming our ass off constantly. Just because its called 1Up now doenst delete your history. About the solo/quality thing, i don't care what you think :-) 3. If they'd just stuck to working with Hydra that would make life interesting, I know Hydra-Rain from the forums, not anyone else from Hydra (at least not to my knowledge). We have not been approached and have not approached hydra. 4. .... but are now also working with Insomnia A person i knew from ely now in insomnia asked me to have LCH attack a 1up planet after him, as a personal favor. That was today. You are referring to that? For the rest, i dont think they have been approaching us or vice versa. 5.That makes 3 top 10 alliances - with a combined score/roids of more than double ours - all working together to attack 1up. So, thats just your false point of view. Last rounds we had a lot of incs too, we didnt whine. ___________________ Sid, you are well known for twisting the truth to your own liking and to reach goals that benefit you and 1Up. (Its called propaganda) You even made a remark that LCH will deny any of this. By making that remark you try to discredit any answer we give. Well, i don't give a rats ass (Sorry TheRat :P) Why you wud post this on AD can have several reasons: - You try to discredit us by point the blocking finger at us, how ehvul we are - You try to make yourself look like the victim, and again we are ehvul - You miss all the attention and thought of some random sentences - You try to disctract attention from your own blocking machinations by accusing us of it. - You try to get the blood of your members cooking in fury against the ehvul blockers There are other reason why you get attacked by more then one alliance: - 1Up arrogant behaviour in the past has drawn too much hostile attention for the coming 10 rounds. - Some alliances simply target the highest ranked alliance - 1Up s coord list has leaked and alliances use that to the fullest (not that im aware of such a list tho) Finally, why did i even care to react? Because you discredit LCH too much. Personally, i dont think you are worth noticing, but i can imagine some of my members being truely offended/hurt/pissed. btw, i didnt bother to read the rest of your post, this part i reacted on was enough rubbish for one round |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
Ive seen rounds where alliances have run away with the win and the rest of the uni questions why something wasnt done earlier. Quote:
One thing ive deduced from your quoted post is that you are quite arrogant. Believe or not I can read and understand things quite readily. From our pm discussion last round I thought you a clown. All youve done here is reenforced the notion. |
Re: Political Situation
Why making this sort of a post……..the ones you are aiming at aren’t that stupid that they fall for this attempt of political drivel?
Your alli are nr:1 and more then one obviously want that to stop……easy, gain up and put them down .Do you really think that this post will make them reconsider? You might have been pulling this stunt before but the ones in charge today isn’t falling for that any more! We, the rest also know that you got several other alliances “up your sleeve” that will join your side and help you out… so stop this drivel and bare the times which obviously coming. |
Re: Political Situation
Let me be the one to say it: Here roles the 1up-crap-banana-shaking-propagandalized-biatching-on-the-ads-train, again.. Btw, your a funny guy Sid :P
:banana: |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
So what you are telling me is that 1up did not come into the round already blocked? I really dont think that is the truth. |
Re: Political Situation
Why did you post this Sid?
As much as you weren't blocked at the start of this round, I can't see a good reason for you to post this. But then again i've been stupid for years, so enlighten me. |
Re: Political Situation
Btw as a side note; all the big egos in 1up who aren’t allowed to answer in this thread must be pulling their hairpieces off reading this ….:D
|
Re: Political Situation
In-Galaxy Defence
---------------------- When your galaxy is attacked and the 1up members are not atatcked you MUST check with HC before sending ingalaxy defence. You must also ALWAYS check before defending a member of an alliance defined as hostile to 1up (that is, an alliance that is intentionally focussing its attacks towards us). If 1up doesn't need defence, and the attackers on them are not associated with us then defence may be allowed. ------- So 1ups are not allowed to have a good relationship with their own gal? |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
By the way, are we clear that a block = 3+ alliances? |
Re: Political Situation
Well, at the moment 1up has a lead of 100K avg score over the second best alliance, and bit more than 6k in total roids. Hitting them is well justified.
Agree, the problem is when to break the cooperation, I'd say a cooperation of 3 alliances should not last more than 3 days, i think 3 days is enough to reduce the roids advantage, or to even turn it in favor of another alliance. But then again, i am not an HC :P |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
Once again i agree 100% with your post. But as sid questioned, how does one realistically break up the block once it is initiated? |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
I fail to see the meaning of this post. My only guess is that Sid is giving a premature warning for them to block with alliances if the alliances hitting 1up dont stop hitting 1up. However, I think that theese political gestures are merly a ploy for the gallery to justifiy their own allready agreed upon allies.
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
Quote:
VGN is not casting its lot in with 1up, and has no intention of doing so. We worked with 1up/SiNND/WP/HR/others in Round 13 only in a futile effort to hold back eXilition. All policies have been reset, and we have made it clear that we are solo. We will only cease to be solo if truly necessary, and that will be when we decide, not when others do. That time has not yet come. |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
Is it REALLY that hard to be honest and say something like "1up were leading so we felt we needed some help to bring them down a bit. At the moment there's only 3 alliances in our group but hopefully if we can get a couple more on our side we'll have what we think is a level playing field. We reckon if if we can get 50% of the paid planets on our team and nap another 25% we stand a fair chance of getting #1." |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
Just because some people tell you that they were approached about this hardly makes it gospel. Yes LCH's hc could be telling lies and in fact this is happening but unless you have some further proof I dont see how you can suddenly declare that LCH's denials are lies. It could be these alliances saying they were contacted playing you, it could be someone trying to cause trouble for someone else and impersonating people ect ect and if all you have to go on is someones word your hardly in the position to convict LCH of said acts. As kargool said all you seem to be doing (something you have done in the past) is trying to justify you blocking in responce to some alliances trying to challenge you, a block thats no doubt been in the works for a long time just waiting for the momet to put positive spin on the sitiauation |
Re: Political Situation
So what if LCH decides to gang up with Hydra & Insomnia to attack 1up, they'd be stupid if they didn't do something to take them down a bit caus atm 1up is running away with it.
If they feel like they need to stop 1up before it's too late, it's their choice... Otherwise we'll have flameposts all over AD when it's halfway through the round and everybody realises it's too late to take down the big 1up. I'm interested to see how 1up will perform when they come under attack by LCH Hydra & Insomnia at the same time |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
A block is 2 or more alliances of decent size going together to ensure the win for one, or all of the involved alliances. 2 or more alliances with the aims of becoming #1 attacking current #1 to make sure they dont outgrow the rest is not a block. Its a short-term cooperation. |
Re: Political Situation
Im not sure what is going on fully atm apart from 1up are obviously being targetted due to there recent large growth. But in the end of the day, this is exactly what 1up and a few other alliances last round were doing to EXilition, and it has been happening like this for quite awhile now. 1up have blocked R11, R12 and R13 in some sort of way to take down or in R13 try to take down the largest alliance at a certain point in the game. This round is different as 1up have been #1 from the start.
Although im not saying other alliances aren't guilty of blocking, we all know it happens, usually it gets out of hand aswell. But this thread seems pretty pointless, it just makes you (Sid) sound like a Hypocrit which im sure was not your intention!! |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
In this case though, I believe Sid that 1up have received plenty of incomings due to ND members in 1up gals receiving decent sized incs whilst the 1up get hit, and the ND in LCH gals getting roided (you heartless bastards, 1up. Those were my roids. :( ) too. And; ND has not been approached by 1up to help them out, or by Hydra/LCH/Insomnia for the purpose of joining this 'faction' and attacking 1up; nor have we approached them. |
Re: Political Situation
It's ridiculous to expect Sid to start telling us who has told him about their alliance being approached. It'd wreck 1up relations with that alliance, probably send them straight over to the opposing side. He's not dumb (as we all know).
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
For all the bleating and moaning and gnashing of teeth about 1up and our pre round political outlook I feel I must add a very important piece of information as, in Sids absence, I took care of any political matters and am the only person, other than those who pm'd me, who has undisputable knowledge to back up Sids statements.
A week or more before the round started I got a pm from an LCH HC requesting that 1up allow the current LCH memberbase be merged into our alliance. I declined. I was offered multiple NAP's and alliances (you know who you are). I declined. That is the final word on how 1up entered the round. Anything beyond this is just plain fiction. I might also ask that Remy had the spine to admit to doing something that 1up have advocted since it's very inception. The truth is that we are currently getting ahead and quite comfortably. This, as laid out so many times in posts from Sid and many 1up "spokespersons", is where "fluid politics"* should come into play and temporary arrangements should be made. Just have the balls to admit it. Hell, we all know it's for the best and will only enhance the round. * By fluid politics I mean the *temporary* arrangements of alliances to peg back someone running away with the round not causing detriment to the round as a whole. In this instance a block of this size, for the very reasons sid outlined in an earlier post, will neither be temporary (in my opinion) and will definately have a negative impact on the round. 1up are all for a fair fight but we certainly won't give in to plain bullying and gang banging. |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
1: You don't need to justify your actions on AD. Fact that you post this somehow shows you think at some point that you needed to justify it (why else would you give a fk about what AD thinks about your political situation). But hey, I've done it aswell so I guess that's just human nature ... 2: I like it how you keep giving these subtle hints that 1up are far superior quality (even with insulting the quality of LCH) ... I think last round showed that the quality in 1up isn't higher then other elite small membercore alliances, you just happen to run and exploit it far better then others so far. |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
Exilition had already allied/nap'd half the universe last round |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
Mission accomplished. |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
and it did work, cause once the talks between Sid and [Irvine] were initiated the hostilities as a whole between 1up and Angels dropped dramatically as you went after a bit of everything rather than focusing on 1up as you did for a little while. |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
|
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
He claims a number of the alliances were approached so he wouldnt be selling one person out or highlighting them as 1ups informer and he obviously has a reason for believing what informants have told him so he should post whom he thinks is involved and why he beleives its true and not someone playing with 1up |
Re: Political Situation
Quote:
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:34. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018