Planetarion Forums - View Single Post

Synthetic_Sid · 2 Mar 2006, 16:43

As this post doesn't reflect on 1up's strategy the content are my personal views - not necessarily views showed by all 1up HC.

DLR - Support planets?
----------------------

My understanding of what defines a support planet in general is that it's a planet that doesn't play for itself. When dealing with planets in an alliance that principle would logically extend to a planet that plays for an alliance other than the one whose tag it belongs to.

I do NOT believe that DLR are a support alliance alliance for ND.
I DO, however, believe that Gate's planet specifically may have been playing as an "out of tag" member of ND. I base this on him attacking targets set by ND rather than by DLR (including at least one joint attack with ND members - not a piggyback as solo neither him or the NDs would have got past target's own ships). And on him then receiving defence from ND but not from DLR when fleet-caught in direct response to him attacking with (and on behalf of) ND. I conclude that he attacked with ND not DLR due to the targets he hit being in the ND target list for a night but NOT in the DLR target list (both of which I have seen) - and due to on one occasion that I know about for sure his wave on a planet being booked within ND and him being the only attacker to show up for that landing tick.

I do NOT believe that was he was doing was part of some formal agreement between DLR/ND - which is precisely why the situation is different to two cooperating alliances.

If a planet in one alliance attacks with a different alliance with whom their own alliance has no attack cooperation, and does so on a regular basis, then it hard to see how that planet can be defined as anything other than a support planet. When that planet also receives defence from the alliance they aren't a member of then that becomes even more clear.

Where I, however, see a problem in this is in who to punish - if indeed the MH determine that an offence has been committed. Punishing the defenders seems rather strange - as they may not know they're defending a support planet: for all they know it could be someone out of tag in their 72 tick waiting period who it is entirely valid to defend. Similarly you can't punish a planet for receiving out of alliance defence - as how do you know they requested it? It would be ludicrous to reach a situation where you could get a planet in another alliance closed just by getting someone else to atatck it then sending it defence.

My personal view is that planets IN a tag should not be allowed to receive defence from other planets other than those in their tag, their galaxy and their cluster. Planets NOT in a tag should be able to receive defence from anyone. This would remove all the ambiguity, reduce the whining and ease the load on MHs. Cooperating alliances could then help on fleet-ctaches - but with in-cluster def only.

DLR/ND merging
---------------

I don't believe this will happen - and I'm sure DLR HC gain plenty of amusement from those who think it will. I wouldn't be surprised to see a couple of DLR's join ND later though.

Any win achieved within the rules is a win. Some may be more "deserving" than others - but as the losers will always find something to whine about that's not going to change anyone's decisions all that much.

I DO see a difference between mid-round recruitment to replace losses and a last minute mass addition to improve rank. The biggest difference, to me, is if you kick members out of your tag that you otherwise wouldn't to allow in higher score planets. The ones who kick from tag - even if they remain in your channels - are NOT in the winning alliance more. So people who have fought all round for you are now rewarded by NOT having won the round.

I also see a difference between recruitment to gain the member - and recruitment to gain the score. But I accept that the difference is fine, the distinction hard to define and that there's no practical way of defining clearly when a recruitment is one, the other or both.

2 Mar 2006, 16:43	#645
Synthetic_Sid Registered User Join Date: Sep 2000 Posts: 537	Newdawn/DLR As this post doesn't reflect on 1up's strategy the content are my personal views - not necessarily views showed by all 1up HC. DLR - Support planets? ---------------------- My understanding of what defines a support planet in general is that it's a planet that doesn't play for itself. When dealing with planets in an alliance that principle would logically extend to a planet that plays for an alliance other than the one whose tag it belongs to. I do NOT believe that DLR are a support alliance alliance for ND. I DO, however, believe that Gate's planet specifically may have been playing as an "out of tag" member of ND. I base this on him attacking targets set by ND rather than by DLR (including at least one joint attack with ND members - not a piggyback as solo neither him or the NDs would have got past target's own ships). And on him then receiving defence from ND but not from DLR when fleet-caught in direct response to him attacking with (and on behalf of) ND. I conclude that he attacked with ND not DLR due to the targets he hit being in the ND target list for a night but NOT in the DLR target list (both of which I have seen) - and due to on one occasion that I know about for sure his wave on a planet being booked within ND and him being the only attacker to show up for that landing tick. I do NOT believe that was he was doing was part of some formal agreement between DLR/ND - which is precisely why the situation is different to two cooperating alliances. If a planet in one alliance attacks with a different alliance with whom their own alliance has no attack cooperation, and does so on a regular basis, then it hard to see how that planet can be defined as anything other than a support planet. When that planet also receives defence from the alliance they aren't a member of then that becomes even more clear. Where I, however, see a problem in this is in who to punish - if indeed the MH determine that an offence has been committed. Punishing the defenders seems rather strange - as they may not know they're defending a support planet: for all they know it could be someone out of tag in their 72 tick waiting period who it is entirely valid to defend. Similarly you can't punish a planet for receiving out of alliance defence - as how do you know they requested it? It would be ludicrous to reach a situation where you could get a planet in another alliance closed just by getting someone else to atatck it then sending it defence. My personal view is that planets IN a tag should not be allowed to receive defence from other planets other than those in their tag, their galaxy and their cluster. Planets NOT in a tag should be able to receive defence from anyone. This would remove all the ambiguity, reduce the whining and ease the load on MHs. Cooperating alliances could then help on fleet-ctaches - but with in-cluster def only. DLR/ND merging --------------- I don't believe this will happen - and I'm sure DLR HC gain plenty of amusement from those who think it will. I wouldn't be surprised to see a couple of DLR's join ND later though. Any win achieved within the rules is a win. Some may be more "deserving" than others - but as the losers will always find something to whine about that's not going to change anyone's decisions all that much. I DO see a difference between mid-round recruitment to replace losses and a last minute mass addition to improve rank. The biggest difference, to me, is if you kick members out of your tag that you otherwise wouldn't to allow in higher score planets. The ones who kick from tag - even if they remain in your channels - are NOT in the winning alliance more. So people who have fought all round for you are now rewarded by NOT having won the round. I also see a difference between recruitment to gain the member - and recruitment to gain the score. But I accept that the difference is fine, the distinction hard to define and that there's no practical way of defining clearly when a recruitment is one, the other or both. __________________ Synthetic Sid [1up]