Failed predictions
 

I'm not going to say names but ...

"Take this round for example, week 6 ended on Friday, Vikings already have the ally win sewn up, which was done in week 6. 2:6 have the gal win sewn up which has happened mostly in this last week but some shocking lack of balls against them has allowed this. Golan has the planet win sewn up too, something that has happened in week 6 aswell. Starting week 6 none of these were guaranteed but coming into week 7 they all are. Which makes week 7 AGAIN a complete waste of a week."

2/3 wrong and changed in the last week. Good round for those who kept fighting.

This attitude of 'we haven't won' by week 6 is what kills alliances ... for one lets say your ally is allied to the number 1 alliance or 'blocked' half of your alliance has given up because it cant possibly win. If you are number two or three you might have a shot to win but members have given up ... from personal experience of the last round ND won ... I don't think I have ever had to say 'we still have a chance' so many times trying to just keep people around to work through the end lol. If you can keep it up till the last week lots of things can change.

Re: Failed predictions
 

This also has an effect for the under dogs, Say Nr 1 alliance has been dominating all round with another strong ally ... the next 8 alliances probably can 'gang bang' them but due to the give up attitude so many have, they really arent the force you would expect from 8 allies.

Re: Failed predictions
 

some people thought i was drinking too much when i said we can win this two weeks ago... they might of been right :P

Re: Failed predictions
 

I think the last week of this round had been one of the best ends to a round that I have played. For the last 4-5 days I felt that CT had the edge, but I wouldn't have put any money on which way it would go.

Also, disregarding any uncertainty over final outcome (which there was a great deal of through the week), your point about smaller alliances is very valid. Spore has to be classed as a smaller alliance this round and for us the last week has been by far the most fun of the round. Overall I think it has been an utterly shit round that was ruined by the gal setups, however the last week has gone some way towards repairing that. The final war against Vikings really helped Spore to come alive and feel a sense of purpose. Vikings made us fight harder than most of our members thought we could and we managed to come out the other side feeling like we made a difference and with our heads held high.

Anybody who says these situations are boring and pointless is frankly just a grumpy sod.

Re: Failed predictions
 

Wait Wait...did i actually see a bit of praise for vikings in there?!?!?! Who are you and what have you done with bashar? Praising vikings is not allowed, only throwing mud and dirt at us and making stuff up :D

Re: Failed predictions
 

Just to be clear (for the benefit of those who might miss the point) making rounds shorter is not a good idea. Please don't let it become a regular occurrence.

Re: Failed predictions
 

1. I give praise where praise is due and criticism where criticism is due. I criticise the politics involved with hitting us because it was deserved. However I praise the way you fought as it deserves praise, you fought hard and gave us a real challenge. I hope you enjoyed the fight as much as we did as it was a cracking fight. I have nothing against Vikings per se and I am confident that I have always dealt fairly with you.

2. I only throw mud if it sticks; I have not made anything up, point to anything I said that was factually incorrect.

Re: Failed predictions
 

Some rounds deserve to be shorter, others deserve to be longer. I don't think I like the idea of setting a timescale for a round before it starts. I realise that it adds the extra challenge of time pressure, but I think this could be better achieved by setting victory goals such as:

1. The round ends as soon as #1 alliance reaches 130% of #2 alliance score.
2. The round ends as soon as one alliance has been #1 continuously for 1 week.

This approach would allow each round to run its course as well as providing encouragement to attack #1 alliance.

Re: Failed predictions
 

I would set minimum number of ticks too, such as 500 or so

Re: Failed predictions
 

Yes, fair play. I said that and this week has been great for a neutral standpoint but it is a very rare thing in PA these days. Lets bear in mind that if CT hadnt been allowed to free roid FanG in the last 5 days then the the comment that you started this thread would have stood firm.

What was basically farming swayed the round away from a Viking win and a Golan victory.

Dont get me wrong its tick 1176 and CT are 1st so fair play to them BUT if FanG had actually played properly until tick end then CT wouldnt have been within 20 mill of FanG or Vikings, this needs to be noted.

Re: Failed predictions
 

If you ask Fang, I am sure they would say they did play properly. Just because you don't like the way they played doesn't mean that they cheated you of victory. In the end, I suspect it simply comes down to the fact that Vikings had annoyed Fang so much that Fang's HC only had eyes for one alliance and were willing to sacrifice what little they had left to ensure that alliance did not win. A similar situation to the one Spore was in. We didn't care who else attacked us at the end, priority was defending against and attacking Vikings, we were happy to let other attacks through to stop Vikings. As your tactics and strategies have to be judged against their impact on your goals, you cannot say that isn't playing properly.

Re: Failed predictions
 

yet before fang/vik hit ct, ct had closed the gap from 17mil to 12mil... they got worried about our growth.

Re: Failed predictions
 

Yes GM, roiding 30 man tags while FAnG/Viks warred must have been really hard to close that gap ;)

Re: Failed predictions
 

It was for Vikings :o





(sorry, I just couldn't resist rising to that bait).

Re: Failed predictions
 

Quite frankly, if it hadn't been for FAnG getting hungry for your roids i doubt you could have won, and it would have been FAnG winning by a rather large margin. You would have passed Vikings tho. With the calculations i did just before FAnG asked Vikings to hit CT together, FAnG would have been ~10m ahead of CT, and ~15m ahead of Vikings.

I commend you on a round well played!