[Light]

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

What if we didn't donate to him, but just did not build up, he build up some and we escorted him with fakes? Is that allowed?

Yes as your not donating to him, you're simplying giving him the spoils of victory. Attacking someone for roids is allowed and so is deciding to recall to allow someone else to get those roids but you'll also note that donating roids to someone is not allowed. There is a difference, please stop trying to imply there isnt.

What I am trying to tell you is that what we did was focussing all our galaxy score in one point, making him pretty much invincible for the first few days and then we slowly build up and got donated back from cov op operations.
It is all teamplay.

So, making a planet invcible for the first few days is balanced in terms of planets, how exactly?

The flaw in the plan is to just galraid such a galaxy the moment it happens. It is not as if you can hide it that well. Attack, 3 attacks get covered, some stupid fakes get outbuild, the rest lands for free. That were all free roids you could take. But noone dared.

How does a gal raid stop the planet? It just stops the galaxy, which may or may not be playing properly either way. No-one dared as it isnt a good galaxy to hit due to the insanely high score planet.

Originally Posted by Alki

Light/Hut - get better at planetarion

Via donations.

I actually hope it stays how it is, and loads of people do it next round, it'll be even easier roids than before at the start! All the whining about how its unfair is seriously retarded, it is fair, its within the rules, its a team effort as opposed to 'omg he can get 7 planets to signup donate to him and never play again' do you actually see that happening?

You want loads of people to do it next round, so PA becomes a game of donations? [applause]

Seriously, I got moaned at this early but can you clarify fair? as how is within the rules fair? If the rules get changed next round does that make BlueArmys tactic unfair? Its not balanced at all.

Again, whats to stop 7 planets signing up next round and then not playing? What do you propose happends? Stop talking about this round as no-one wants a rule change or for him to be closed this round.

What do you have to say about walldo's gal? Im pretty sure 2 planets took donations in that gal, not only that but the have 2 cov oppers constantly feeding them, is that 'fair?'

Nope.

What a retarded arguement, ****ing man up.

Your argument is retarded. Being inside the rules does not make something fair or balanced especially if its a unintended consequence of new gameplay mechanics.

Originally Posted by Heartless

What? Are you insane? For a start, of course every galaxy has the same strategies available at the beginning. Is there any galaxy which does not start with 0 roids or without a donation button? No? See, that is my whole point. Everyone can start in the same setup. Obviously this strategy involves several planets taking a bump in their growth to promote a single planet in that galaxy with a huge fleet. But that is something where the team has to make a decision about its strategy, especially with regards to who wants to or should be the promoted planet. And even within those constraints everyone theoretically has the same chance, unless you are just some sorry little being that obeys some wannabe-dictator-on-the-internet's idiocies. So how you can now claim that my previous statement is not true?

Again, this is not an argument for it being balanced or fair. Everyone can recruit as many players as they like but we have alliance limits. Everyone can donate as many resources as they like but we have donation limits.

Starting with the same chance does not make the tactic balanced. As everyone likes to pick other games to draw from, its like in Starcraft if Zerg race comes up with a imba tactic (which is unbalanced) its not automatically balanced as everyone can pick zerg and do that tactic.

This is simply not balanced in the planet rankings. Im sure you've seen the universe page before where this isnt just a galaxy game but also a planet ranking game and a alliance ranking where all 3 have to be balanced as much as possible.

And ultimately I would really like to see everyone else applying this flagship planet strategy next round, as we in Ascendancy could then go and laugh our asses off while showing you guys how to turn what you perceive as an advantage into something that can be quite some disadvantage as well... at least for those few galaxies which will actually manage to pull this off.

Yes, Asc is awesome.

Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk

If (and I've been saying this for quite a while now) this strategy turns out to be overpowered, it should be nerfed until it fits in with other strategies. What I am arguing against, however, is banning strategies because they don't conform to your personal preferred mode of play.

How are you going to determine if its overpowered? If bluearmy wins the round it means its overpowered? I hope you're not going to suggest that.

I'd really like clarification on how you'll determine weither its overpowered or not? As far as i can see, you should be able to determine that now 290 ticks into the game weither he's got a clear advantage over everyone else who went an alternate strategy?