Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
Past rounds history has to be taken into account.
R59 we had a quite bad political round. (if i remeber correctly)
P3nguins/Ultprime/Black-Flag sat in the top3, refusing to hit each other, claiming they were having a relaxed round to concetrate feeding off the bottom. Why? Because it pays out as much to attack planets from smaller alliances as bigger alliances, cap and XP gain is the same. Why risk hitting someone that can hit you back harder than other targets can?
R60, quite similiar, except this round we(BowS) made with other full tags in the start included a clause that nobody was gonna make deals with p3nguins(winner of the two previous rounds).
Black-Flag and Ultores refused to hit each other and the round winner was never realy challenged.
R66 Everyone NAPed Black-Flag(more or less), and they recieved less incs than everyone else below them untill rank6.
R67 The top3 tags NAPed the entire round, what incs BowS got was too little, too late, and too poor(Nelito crashed the entire BF tag at one wave)
R68 Ultores NAPed BowS for the first half of the round, and Norse for the entire round.
All attempts made was too little, too late.
Last round was also pretty poor, Ult/Norse being NAPed with apprime the entire round(more or less).
----
Now we can look at what rounds people found enjoyable, and interesting.
Im sure these rounds i listed would fall into the cathegory most unenjoyable and booring.
Now, i wasnt around when the development of PaX started, or when it was finished, but im pretty sure that one of the ideas behind XP was that it should reward the attacker landing "harder" planets, wich would made a lot of sense for those that played pre-PaX.
Planet holders were more indipendent, and rankings was more based on individual effort than depending on your alliance. You could hold several alliance memberships, and get unlimited out of tag defence.
Today PA is played quite diffrently, and its played mostly based around what your alliance decides for you. A lot of alliances will kick you out regardless of planet ranks if you goes against the alliance rules regarding defending/attacking certain planets.
Why shouldnt "bravery factor" be based around what alliance you attack?
|
It is amazing what type of insane suggestions you come up with, we in the bigger alliances put up massive amounts of effort and hours to do well, we do not only put in a ton of time but we also have to deal with being massively outnumbered.
Then when we make deals to get just a tiny bit of peace it is unfair and we just nap our way out of things.
It is very clear you have never been in an alliance who had 250+ incs for 3-500 ticks.
The tiny bit of inc ult+ast gave bows for a few days wasnt even close to the amount of shit thrown at us and now you want it to pay off massively for Rainbows and the princess gang to gangbang everyone, if you suggestion came to be it would ruin the game.... And no, the game is not ruined now, we are just the ones who put in the time and effort to actually do shit, unlike some others, but its cool, Rainbows and the princess gang is just a training block, clearly, cause when you cant do damage 300 vs 90 then you must need practice of some sorts
