View Single Post
Unread 1 Oct 2010, 10:14   #23
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: Alliance Points Breakdown

Quote:
Originally Posted by Light View Post
I dont really see the points in APS, what is wrong with ranking the alliances based on strength (value)?

Why are we trying to construction a ranking system where everyone has a chance? regardless of size, strength or skill?
It's a traditional attempt to please the losing side telling them they weren't actually that bad but in the end really should've won. It's consistent with the statement of making value count for less and less (see: value measures power. it started counting for less when xp was implemented. xp is a measure of how well you can hit bigger targets. this is a downwards spiral where it's innately easier for less powerful people to do this, since there are more people above them).

The point of the system seems to be to construct a ranking that is based upon some narrow definition of "activity" and "military ability" but one that also means that a powerful alliance can never win simply due to the fact that losers really need this for comfort.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote