Planetarion Forums

Planetarion Forums (https://pirate.planetarion.com/index.php)
-   Planetarion Suggestions (https://pirate.planetarion.com/forumdisplay.php?f=95)
-   -   Mil Centres (https://pirate.planetarion.com/showthread.php?t=200586)

wades209 6 Oct 2014 12:09

Mil Centres
 
Does anyone else think we should have a cap on Mil Centres? This round proved that just building them pays off and actually holding onto value and defending yourself doesn't get you anywhere.

booji 6 Oct 2014 12:26

Re: Mil Centres
 
No because xp should be a viable way to play. Instead I think there should be a way to destroy xp... I would have suggested it but I have no idea what that would be since I dont want it to happen at the same time value is destroyed! :p

Mzyxptlk 6 Oct 2014 14:22

Re: Mil Centres
 
"Defending doesn't get you anywhere"? What? 80% of the top 10 and 98% of the top 100 played standard value!

Plaguuu 6 Oct 2014 16:04

Re: Mil Centres
 
I'm against cap and also destroying score ;)
But I also think to get a t3 planet you should be forced to do some effort to keep value and roids, aswell as attacking

fortran 6 Oct 2014 16:59

Re: Mil Centres
 
Imo, the top 1 and 3 didnt get there because XP/Mcs are broken but because they were escorted by other 10~12 planets during 80% of the round. That may seem unfair, but it is not different than grounding 2 or 3 alliances in order to defend one planet/gal.

Also, the usual small club who seems to share the top spots every round are very determined to not let their rivals inside the club win, but do not care much about outsiders. In addition to that, the fight for gal and ally usually comes first in priority.

The usual groups who are doing this strategy are not in the main alliances, they don't have a backup that could protect their members and they dont have much value either. Dealing with them should be quite simple. So why nerfing MCs?

Plaguuu 6 Oct 2014 17:51

Re: Mil Centres
 
They got there both cause Xp formula is broken And escorts.
The thing is the way it works now its not easily dealt with, as you can sit on rank 1 and hit rank 200 and still get decent gains.
Good of them to spot it and use it for one round but people shouldn't get a advantage from crashing.

fortran 6 Oct 2014 18:01

Re: Mil Centres
 
It is not easy to gather a big group to play for you and manage them for an entire round. You make it sounds as it was less worthy than the usual tops.

Plaguuu 6 Oct 2014 18:30

Re: Mil Centres
 
And most of them didn't really "play" afaik they were inactive players who launched fakeattacks with all the benefits and none of the drawbacks from active launching when escorting. And yeah people should ofcourse do better with people helping out one single player, but there should be easier ways to keep them back then how it currently works. If a win is worthy or not is a discussion that wont lead anywhere, the winner wins. Anyway this is a discussion about mil centres and should be somewhat related to that and we're heading away from that topic now.

Mil centres are fine(probably), xp formula isnt. Capping milcentres would partly fix the problem but it would also remove some strategical elements.

Joseph 6 Oct 2014 18:37

Re: Mil Centres
 
So let me try to understand, create a planet only to send def entire round its ok, but escort some1 is ugly.
Gimme a break, p3ng escorted top planets, made entire alliance get roided day after day just to keep their roids, plussss planed some FC on us, and lost top planet. But thats not us being good, its the xp broken. Lol

Its lame see ppl pointing out us winning as a bad thing for the game. We played so many rounds helping our alliances to win, never asking help to def our top planets, nevers asking help to make a top gal, and, not escorting, we just did what we saw as a good oportunity, so fock of and in place of whine congrat us for being so amazing :)

fortran 6 Oct 2014 18:57

Re: Mil Centres
 
The formula is not broken, you can either increase your xp atking a sitting duck from a well naped ally being bred just to be farmed by rnd end or atking a top score planet. Which one is more common in naptarion??

Also when atking high profile players who can easily know when fleets are fake, it demands one using fake atks to be in a tag with controlled memberbase, which means a tiny tag, a drawback for any top player

Plaguuu 6 Oct 2014 18:58

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph (Post 3236392)
So let me try to understand, create a planet only to send def entire round its ok, but escort some1 is ugly.
Gimme a break, p3ng escorted top planets, made entire alliance get roided day after day just to keep their roids, plussss planed some FC on us, and lost top planet. But thats not us being good, its the xp broken. Lol

Its lame see ppl pointing out us winning as a bad thing for the game. We played so many rounds helping our alliances to win, never asking help to def our top planets, nevers asking help to make a top gal, and, not escorting, we just did what we saw as a good oportunity, so fock of and in place of whine congrat us for being so amazing :)

First of all escorting isn't ugly.. Who said that? And noone is saying that you winning is bad for the game.

I don't think anyone have won with only sending def yet. And if that was OP it should be fixed aswell.. To make it to the top one should be doing good attacks and be able to defend your gains, or xp land top planets alot. One shouldn't be able to get there by farming inactive r150s(not saying you did this)

And yeah getting fcd shouldn't be a good thing...

Joseph 6 Oct 2014 19:09

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Plaguuu (Post 3236394)
First of all escorting isn't ugly.. Who said that? And noone is saying that you winning is bad for the game.

I don't think anyone have won with only sending def yet. And if that was OP it should be fixed aswell.. To make it to the top one should be doing good attacks and be able to defend your gains, or xp land top planets alot. One shouldn't be able to get there by farming inactive r150s(not saying you did this)

And yeah getting fcd shouldn't be a good thing...

I dont thnk anyone have won with only sending escort fleets.
So, u guys FC Me 5x last round, made my value stay low, and now u blame us for not defend our gains?
How can we deal with a block with more then 100 planets fighthing against a 12 players tag? U r just making clear that small tags cant play, bcoz its impossible keep roids if being attacked and fc 1100 ticks.

Plaguuu 6 Oct 2014 20:01

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph (Post 3236396)
I dont thnk anyone have won with only sending escort fleets.
So, u guys FC Me 5x last round, made my value stay low, and now u blame us for not defend our gains?
How can we deal with a block with more then 100 planets fighthing against a 12 players tag? U r just making clear that small tags cant play, bcoz its impossible keep roids if being attacked and fc 1100 ticks.

Tbh Im not following you here.. And for every post I do answer you with, you come with more stuff which I haven't said.

Joseph 6 Oct 2014 21:49

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Plaguuu (Post 3236397)
Tbh Im not following you here.. And for every post I do answer you with, you come with more stuff which I haven't said.

Probably me english is worst then i thought.
U said defwhores never won a round, i said escort guys idem.
U said ppl must keep their gains to be top, i said no, u can land and be landed all round and stay un fight, for that ones who cant ask def for entir alliance.
U said ppl cant just attack #150 planets to win, i said yes, they can. Despite we didnt, as u know very well :)
The point here is why ppl still mad with MC AND XP
They should be all happy with a new way to play the game, not defending, sleeping at night, and being a pain in the ass of any alliance playing for win.
Btw, this was not invented by us. We just copied other guys strat and worked well.

ArcChas 6 Oct 2014 23:21

Re: Mil Centres
 
If escorting is (part of) the "problem" perhaps we should consider making fleets set to "Fake Attack" behave in the same way as those set to "Fake Defend" - that is recalling one tick before landing. At least that would mean that the escorters would have to put in the effort to be online to coordinate their recalls - and give the defender(s) the opportunity to stand their ground if any escorts pulled too early.

Joseph 6 Oct 2014 23:54

Re: Mil Centres
 
in other words, lets just blow up escorting, as we cant handle it.
same to SK with structure defence covering 100% of loses.

naptarion ftw =)

Caj 7 Oct 2014 00:24

Re: Mil Centres
 
I agree that the military centres are fine, the escorting got joseph n co to where they were, and the escorts were from people who quite confidently said they were inactive

ArcChaos hit the nail on the head.

Let's make fake attacks recall eta 2, same as fake defence.

Problem solved a little bit. Then active people can defend, and be online at the right time to assess whether it's a recall or land.

Plaguuu 7 Oct 2014 01:41

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph (Post 3236398)
Probably me english is worst then i thought.
U said defwhores never won a round, i said escort guys idem.
U said ppl must keep their gains to be top, i said no, u can land and be landed all round and stay un fight, for that ones who cant ask def for entir alliance.
U said ppl cant just attack #150 planets to win, i said yes, they can. Despite we didnt, as u know very well :)
The point here is why ppl still mad with MC AND XP
They should be all happy with a new way to play the game, not defending, sleeping at night, and being a pain in the ass of any alliance playing for win.
Btw, this was not invented by us. We just copied other guys strat and worked well.

We will just have to agree to disagree on this. Everyone on MC and XP whoring will kill this game fast and will remove the best parts of the game(the need for community) And I'm totally against this play I just think its too rewarding atm

Joseph 7 Oct 2014 02:04

Re: Mil Centres
 
Can u please explain why this strat will remove the need of community?

Maybe if u give us some good reasons we all can understand why u so dissapointed with xp whores.

I can tell u something about inactive players, some rounds, ppl just cant play seriously, rl problems, work, lot of things. So i used a argument to convince them to play, " u can check your planet 2x day, help some friends, and keep in touch with us, and i promisse we are not going to call u in the midle of night asking ships"
How can this ruin the game? Is a option to ppl play without being hardcore, in big alliances, and still have some fun with friends.

Caj 7 Oct 2014 02:31

Re: Mil Centres
 
maybe ill get some rl friends to signup and build fleets to escort me heh.

Caj 7 Oct 2014 02:32

Re: Mil Centres
 
also back to the point of the topic - we have a cap on Finance Centres (the value option) in the interests of balance perhaps we should also have a cap on Military Centres...


...or perhaps even more interesting...

Why don't we remove the cap on Finance Centres.. surely that would encourage more value orientated play?

fortran 7 Oct 2014 02:45

Re: Mil Centres
 
I suggest we get the score from the #1 (11232623) and the #20 (8620624) from last round. Then divide one by the other 8620624 / 11232623. It is 0.767, but let's round down for safety to 0.7 and apply to the Xp formula: XP = 0.7 * roids capped * 10 * bravery factor

This way we will make a change in the root cause of the problem and there is no need to mess with other aspects (fc limit, etc)

Joseph 7 Oct 2014 02:55

Re: Mil Centres
 
U want to compare a planetarion player that cant be avaible one or two rounds with some1 who never played?
But i fully encorage u to invite them to play. Probably they wont. But if they come, will be very good for community.

Cochese 7 Oct 2014 03:32

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Caj (Post 3236423)
also back to the point of the topic - we have a cap on Finance Centres (the value option) in the interests of balance perhaps we should also have a cap on Military Centres...


...or perhaps even more interesting...

Why don't we remove the cap on Finance Centres.. surely that would encourage more value orientated play?


Only if they cost the same (resources and CU) and provided the same relative benefit.

Plaguuu 7 Oct 2014 09:09

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by fortran (Post 3236426)
I suggest we get the score from the #1 (11232623) and the #20 (8620624) from last round. Then divide one by the other 8620624 / 11232623. It is 0.767, but let's round down for safety to 0.7 and apply to the Xp formula: XP = 0.7 * roids capped * 10 * bravery factor

This way we will make a change in the root cause of the problem and there is no need to mess with other aspects (fc limit, etc)

Fortran this is more in the lines of where I'm thinking yours was perhaps abit drastic tho.

-

Joseph Im not dissappointed with xp whores, hey Ill probably be one myself this round. I just believe that xp whoring is too strong atm and needs to be nerfed.

Motti 7 Oct 2014 09:28

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Plaguuu (Post 3236434)
Fortran this is more in the lines of where I'm thinking yours was perhaps abit drastic tho.

-

Joseph Im not dissappointed with xp whores, hey Ill probably be one myself this round. I just believe that xp whoring is too strong atm and needs to be nerfed.

I don't feel that xp whoring is to strong.

To successfully accomplish this, like Joseph did just last round. Or Hellkicker the round before (?) actually require a fair share of effort.

You need a group of people willing to disregard your own planet, while spending time contributing to your planet.

It is not that powerful if you fly around solo trying to cap XP.

It has been powerful lately simply because some players have had a group of pals who were willing to do this - and in Joseph case he not only had his pals escorting him willingly every day, he also (without asking) had App hitting top planets competing with him.

It is a viable strategy that is only powerful if you have a small community willing to flagship you, not due to fake attacks and MCs alone, those are just elements required to make it all work.

Joseph 7 Oct 2014 11:45

Re: Mil Centres
 
Motti said all i wanted.

TheoDD 7 Oct 2014 11:56

Re: Mil Centres
 
And i strongly disagree, I find your point(s) irrelevant.
It does not require effort.
It does not require having a bunch of nubs escorting you all round, without landing themselves.

Maybe most players in pa don't mind playing like shit, but the so called "strategy" you are on about is so far from good. 10+ players to make 1! look "good". While the others may aswell delete as they are far away from any noteworthy rank. Nor do you really play planetarion this way. Anyone could do the same with 1 minute daily and a few "cousins/friends/whatever"

Quote:

It is not that powerful if you fly around solo trying to cap XP.
Actually... it is! This is what i usually do when i bother to play.

Joseph 7 Oct 2014 12:27

Re: Mil Centres
 
we had 12 players,
1 scanner 1 covop
top 1 player
top 3 player
top 98 player
and all rest of them ended ok imho.

so, can u organize your idea again about 10 players doing nothing for 1 look ok?

we had 30% of tag very very well ranked!

TheoDD 7 Oct 2014 12:40

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Joseph (Post 3236441)
we had 12 players,
1 scanner 1 covop
top 1 player
top 3 player
top 98 player
and all rest of them ended ok imho.

so, can u organize your idea again about 10 players doing nothing for 1 look ok?

we had 30% of tag very very well ranked!

You had 2 players very well ranked. Saying rank 98 is very well is just wrong. And Tche is only one else that ended ok, after atleast getting 1 - 1.5m worth of value from gal donations.

Not sure what you are trying to point out Joseph, but it seems to me you are trying to justify your own planet rank... WHEN NOONE IS QUESTIONING IT! We all know what happend.

fortran 7 Oct 2014 12:49

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Plaguuu (Post 3236434)
Fortran this is more in the lines of where I'm thinking yours was perhaps abit drastic tho.

It is drastic, but it is simple and lean. A real life solution. The changes to the game would be reduced to a minimum.

I wanted to suggest this factor to be called the "Whining Factor" alongside the bravery factor in the formula, but that would be trolling.

==============

On the other hand I can see the points of the old players about this issue. PA for those who saw Joseph's strategy harmful to the game is not about winning at all costs, but winning in a way all the ones who usually fight for the top (a small part of the community) agree it is acceptable. It is like a gentlemen's agreement.

The standard path to the top includes:
- being active
- being the least hated
- being in a good gal with good players to support you, helping you fencing the gal
- being able to leech and being preferred among the leechers from your ally
- being able to get pnaps

The later 3 requirements are not something that any player can afford without putting a few years of dedication to the game and not something you get playing in a small and closed group.

I only don't get why you didn't crush his strategy easily ingame and chose to crush it in forums. To never have to deal with it again maybe? Coz, even nerfing fakeatks and xp formula there is no guarantee it won't happen again. The safest route is to ban Xp.

Joseph 7 Oct 2014 13:06

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheoDD (Post 3236442)
You had 2 players very well ranked. Saying rank 98 is very well is just wrong. And Tche is only one else that ended ok, after atleast getting 1 - 1.5m worth of value from gal donations.

Not sure what you are trying to point out Joseph, but it seems to me you are trying to justify your own planet rank... WHEN NOONE IS QUESTIONING IT! We all know what happend.

jayzinho ended top 98, and yes, its very well imho, maybe not in yours, tche was raped in the final ticks, so make sure u know what u talking about =)

and no, u know im not trying to do this, as i dont need to, im just trying to make sure ppl kill a nice way to play, btw, im not even playing seriously next rounds, so, its ok anyway

booji 7 Oct 2014 13:07

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by fortran (Post 3236444)
I only don't get why you didn't crush his strategy easily ingame and chose to crush it in forums.

Mostly because it was not easy to crush ingame! Joseph said he was fleetcaught 5 times - for most players any one of them would end their chance of number 1. Joseph (or XiCoT not sure which) also crashed against suicide defences a couple of times, again something that would usually end someone's T3 chances.

Clearly more attention could have been paid to doing these things earlier in the round but I imagine most players thought as you say here that it will be easy to crush later so no need to worry about it!

fortran 7 Oct 2014 13:11

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by booji (Post 3236446)
Mostly because it was not easy to crush ingame! Joseph said he was fleetcaught 5 times - for most players any one of them would end their chance of number 1. Joseph also crashed against suicide defences a couple of times, again something that would usually end someone's T3 chances.

Clearly more attention could have been paid to doing these things earlier in the round but I imagine most players thought as you say here that it will be easy to crush later so no need to worry about it!

You have to FC the escorters, Joseph's value was on his escorters. How could he keep atking efficiently without his value. One could even FC and steal the resources after that. Easy for an organized full tag ally against a 12 planets tag full of inactives, it wouldnt take more than a couple of days.

booji 7 Oct 2014 13:32

Re: Mil Centres
 
The escorters did not exactly have good value either so fleetcatching them late round was pretty irrelevant. Theoretically it would have made the attacks easier to cover but in practice the attacks were only difficult to cover because they came on the end of attacks by other alliances so there were never any ships available.

You have to hand it to them; They knew most alliances would be more concerned with ally rank or incs from bigger alliances so would mostly ignore them until too late. You say it would only take a couple of days; which alliance had a couple of days to spare undertaking a series of fleetcatches on an alliance that is not in contention for alliance win? P3n had the chance in the last week of the round when the ally conflict was winding down but I fail to see how fleetcatching the escorters one by one at this stage rather than Joseph would have altered the outcome.

bass 7 Oct 2014 13:39

Re: Mil Centres
 
How about making FCs more efficient instead? That would help no?^^ And be more fun.

booji 7 Oct 2014 13:46

Re: Mil Centres
 
Why would you make FCs more efficient rather than refineries? Surely it is better to help players at the bottom more than those at the top who collect loads of roids and sit on them!

Hunterrrr 7 Oct 2014 13:48

Re: Mil Centres
 
Yah let's limit planetarion even more! The only thing that should count to score should be value from roids, initiated roids and naps :salute:

Motti 7 Oct 2014 13:50

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheoDD (Post 3236438)
And i strongly disagree, I find your point(s) irrelevant.
It does not require effort.
It does not require having a bunch of nubs escorting you all round, without landing themselves.

Maybe most players in pa don't mind playing like shit, but the so called "strategy" you are on about is so far from good. 10+ players to make 1! look "good". While the others may aswell delete as they are far away from any noteworthy rank. Nor do you really play planetarion this way. Anyone could do the same with 1 minute daily and a few "cousins/friends/whatever"



Actually... it is! This is what i usually do when i bother to play.

True,

You proved it this round. You flew around 3x solo as a xan. Ranked high due to that.

But my point really is still standing. Anyone can't fly around doing this and ending high. It requires some sort of dedication, a portion of luck or knowledge of where to hit efficiently.

Stand alone the MCs and/or fake attacks will not make any given planet a t3 rank. You have to activly pursue this tactic to make it pay off with high rankings (if that is your goal).

One option is what Joseph did this previous round.
Another option is how you played it out - constantly relaunching on same alliance that you know give you high chance of landing (correct me if wrong).

Joseph was not xan, so he did not have the option of sending pod attacks in the same way as you could as xan.

A third option I remember is Budious (??) who atleast previous rounds kept on sending 3x pod fleets as a Ter, mixed classes. He usually ended up decent ish - simply because he betted on targets screwing up, forgetting to fight or gal/alliance not bothering to cover incs because they assumed it was selfcover.

I still think it is not to powerful, and having the option of competing without relying on value mainly is something we need in this game.

As mentioned above, playing for a top ranking using the "correct" strategy, which is accumulating roids and value - and keeping it throughout the round is definatly out of reach for the common player.

By reducing the impact MC and/or fake attacks could have, are we not just favouring the experienced crowd only?

Krypton 7 Oct 2014 14:23

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by fortran (Post 3236447)
You have to FC the escorters, Joseph's value was on his escorters. How could he keep atking efficiently without his value. One could even FC and steal the resources after that. Easy for an organized full tag ally against a 12 planets tag full of inactives, it wouldnt take more than a couple of days.

Pretty hard to fc the escorters when majority of them are under the value/score cap to be hit by top 50% of ally. Trust me, I was one of ones actively looking and organising. The bottom 50% normally aren't playing for anything so are either too inactive or their fleets are helping out ally defending. It's pretty hard to balance the goals of top ally and top planet in the current era, but we gave it a pretty good go nonetheless

Hunterrrr 7 Oct 2014 14:51

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Krypton (Post 3236454)
Pretty hard to fc the escorters when majority of them are under the value/score cap to be hit by top 50% of ally. Trust me, I was one of ones actively looking and organising. The bottom 50% normally aren't playing for anything so are either too inactive or their fleets are helping out ally defending. It's pretty hard to balance the goals of top ally and top planet in the current era, but we gave it a pretty good go nonetheless


Huehue 12 planets 27 mil value
P3ng 60 planets 277 mil value

So.....

Mzyxptlk 7 Oct 2014 15:11

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Plaguuu (Post 3236418)
We will just have to agree to disagree on this. Everyone on MC and XP whoring will kill this game fast and will remove the best parts of the game(the need for community) And I'm totally against this play I just think its too rewarding atm

XP whoring is too strong when more than half the top 10 and the top 100 is made up of them. Until it actually happens, there is no problem.

RaUlZiToS 7 Oct 2014 16:30

Re: Mil Centres
 
Reflecting the thinking of most in this post: "2 Brazilians finish Top 3 .. they are noobs that cant happen ... we have to change something...."

Xp whores will kill the game?

The HCs who build a gal and keep a full ally playing to the top gal is better?

We like to win too... But we're out of the winning groups... We donīt want to be one more in the game who play for the same players finish in top 3 all round.

Xp and MC is a good way to give us some chances to play... talk about change that is ridiculous.

You say is easy to finish top 3 playing for Xp, but i can see only 2 players in all top 20 who played for Xp... And had alot of people spaming MC, not only us.
IF it was that easy, all top 10 will be from xp whoring.


*sory about my poor english, make a efort to understand :D

TheoDD 7 Oct 2014 16:36

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RaUlZiToS (Post 3236465)
Reflecting the thinking of most in this post: "2 Brazilians finish Top 3 .. they are noobs that cant happen ... we have to change something...."

Xp whores will kill the game?

The HCs who build a gal and keep a full ally playing to the top gal is better?

We like to win too... But we're out of the winning groups... We donīt want to be one more in the game who play for the same players finish in top 3 all round.

Xp and MC is a good way to give us some chances to play... talk about change that is ridiculous.

You say is easy to finish top 3 playing for Xp, but i can see only 2 players in all top 20 who played for Xp... And had alot of people spaming MC, not only us.
IF it was that easy, all top 10 will be from xp whoring.


*sory about my poor english, make a efort to understand :D

You are like Joseph on this topic, trying to justify their planet ranks when noone is questioning it. And don't say it isn't easy... As all those of us that are capable of thinking knows it is.

Hunterrrr 7 Oct 2014 17:21

Re: Mil Centres
 
If the top allies had decent def this wouldn't be possible... so try to improve that and stop crying.

TheoDD 7 Oct 2014 17:26

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hunterrrr (Post 3236475)
If the top allies had decent def this wouldn't be possible... so try to improve that and stop crying.

Depends on stats... Some classes in some sets, just cant be stopped without taking major loss on the defside. Like last round... Where BS pretty much were unstopable.

fortran 7 Oct 2014 17:28

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheoDD (Post 3236467)
You are like Joseph on this topic, trying to justify their planet ranks when noone is questioning it. And don't say it isn't easy... As all those of us that are capable of thinking knows it is.

Not as easy as fighting the mining page for 80% of the round.

As a matter of fact it is SO easy and broken that most of the top 100 and all top 3 planets have been XP based planets these last 10 rounds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheoDD (Post 3236467)
Depends on stats... Some classes in some sets, just cant be stopped without taking major loss on the defside. Like last round... Where BS pretty much were unstopable.

Lancers/Clippers. Actually even without many xans BF had a good anti-BS def btw.

booji 7 Oct 2014 17:31

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RaUlZiToS (Post 3236465)
You say is easy to finish top 3 playing for Xp, but i can see only 2 players in all top 20 who played for Xp... And had alot of people spaming MC, not only us.
IF it was that easy, all top 10 will be from xp whoring.

You make it sound like no one else in the T20 went for xp at all which is not the case, just that many of them went for both value and some xp:
The 16th ranked planet was 3rd in xp
18th was 10th in xp
10th was 15th in xp
19th was 24th in xp
14th was 44th in xp
7th was 53rd in xp
4th was 93rd in xp
13th was 94th in xp
8 of the top 20 excluding you two were in the T100 for xp, which is pretty good going given how much more difficult it is for players with high value to get large amounts of xp.

RaUlZiToS 7 Oct 2014 17:36

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TheoDD (Post 3236467)
You are like Joseph on this topic, trying to justify their planet ranks when noone is questioning it. And don't say it isn't easy... As all those of us that are capable of thinking knows it is.

Dont cry, try to do better if you think its easy.

As i sayd, this round have many people playing spaming MC to try a top only with XP, and only we did that... so i assume thatīs not easy.

Maybe you dont have all this capable to think that you have said.

RaUlZiToS 7 Oct 2014 17:38

Re: Mil Centres
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by booji (Post 3236479)
You make it sound like no one else in the T20 went for xp at all which is not the case, just that many of them went for both value and some xp:
The 16th ranked planet was 3rd in xp
18th was 10th in xp
10th was 15th in xp
19th was 24th in xp
14th was 44th in xp
7th was 53rd in xp
4th was 93rd in xp
13th was 94th in xp
8 of the top 20 excluding you two were in the T100 for xp, which is pretty good going given how much more difficult it is for players with high value to get large amounts of xp.

We are talking about people who played ONLY with xp.
Play with Xp AND value is the normal stuf...


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:41.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Đ2002 - 2018