|
|
2 May 2015, 14:49
|
#151
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
CT did hit ult whild the block was on BF.
|
CT "galraided" Ult. That's not the same as hitting them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
BF being crushed was to be expected.
If they had not had members raging over HCs cheating
|
lol. Trying to use the cheating accusation as a reason why BF got crushed. We got overwelmed by 4 (sometimes 5) tags and not because of any internal issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
and perhaps not choosed to hit p3ng when the block was going on ct, they would still been in the game.
|
We chose not to support CT as we felt they had just abandoned us. We weren't going to be CT's bitches. If they didn't want to support us then we sure as hell wasn't going to support them.
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 14:57
|
#152
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
CT "galraided" Ult. That's not the same as hitting them.
lol. Trying to use the cheating accusation as a reason why BF got crushed. We got overwelmed by 4 (sometimes 5) tags and not because of any internal issues.
We chose not to support CT as we felt they had just abandoned us. We weren't going to be CT's bitches. If they didn't want to support us then we sure as hell wasn't going to support them.
|
Hitting Ult forts is not gal raiding.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 15:22
|
#153
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 898
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
wtf, galraiding ults?? is it gal raiding if its only the ults in the gal we are hitting and we are hitting 3/4 gals????
__________________
R4-5 DDK
R6 Vanx
R7-R10 FAnG
R10 Eclipse
R10.5-R13 FAnG
R20-23 CT
R23 (CT BG) ToF
R24-R82... CT
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 15:24
|
#154
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
I think its fair to say that BF tried to regain roids/XP by attacking p3nguins, and it backfired.
It was a decent plan, i had not expected FL to go back up p3nguins either.
BF(If it wernt someone else) that p3ng was freeroids
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 15:30
|
#155
|
Error
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 359
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz
Been there and done it (twice in a row) got killed with our tactic choices the third attempt. We are happy re-building and causing problems
|
thats all =)
__________________
#braSilFTW
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 15:34
|
#156
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
I think its fair to say that BF tried to regain roids/XP by attacking p3nguins, and it backfired.
It was a decent plan, i had not expected FL to go back up p3nguins either.
BF(If it wernt someone else) that p3ng was freeroids
|
p3n was down 13% on the first night.
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 15:43
|
#157
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
p3n was down 13% on the first night.
|
Yes, it was a excelent tactic to go for them, just the wrong timing!
Perhaps going for Rogues first instead of P3ng first wouldve been better, looking at it now
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 15:56
|
#158
|
Legion Idle Master
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 425
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
p3n was down 13% on the first night.
|
And the rest of the week?
http://p3nguins.com/alliance/Black%2...story/summary/
http://p3nguins.com/alliance/p3nguins/history/summary/
I admit the first night you did take us by surprise and did do well. However seems the rest of the week wasn't as bad.. we even managed to be better on score growth on most days...
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56
p3nguin Founder
Last edited by Willzzz; 2 May 2015 at 16:04.
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 16:04
|
#159
|
Retard0r
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,164
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
CT "galraided" Ult. That's not the same as hitting them.
|
I thought they "galraided" Rogues, thats what i was told...
__________________
-Chimpie
* We do not exist *
* G-II * NoS * VsN * Ascendancy * Osiris * xVx * Ultores *
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 16:07
|
#160
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkenViking
I thought they "galraided" Rogues, thats what i was told...
|
No. BowS did some Rogues in the Ult gals CT was gal raiding.
Perhaps thats what you was told?
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 17:59
|
#161
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
Makes me wonder if you are just guessing or playing.
|
Neither.
Quote:
CT did hit ult whild the block was on BF.
|
Barely - a galaxy raid or two counts for very little. Did Conspiracy actually coordinate a proper hit with Black Flag on Ultores at any meaningful level?
Quote:
BF being crushed was to be expected. If they had not had members raging over HCs cheating, and perhaps not choosed to hit p3ng when the block was going on ct, they would still been in the game.
|
Conspiracy doing more to alleviate the pressure would do far more than those efforts combined. And had they done so, they would be facing defeat at this point in time. Hitting p3ng was a mistake but a fairly minor one when their chances were slim by that point in any event. The only thing I really agree with you on is Black Flag's reputation (which is absolutely their problem), which essentially means they were up against it. But it's interesting how their reputation doesn't matter any more when a round win is at stake.
When it comes down to it collaboration makes a difference in this game, and Ultores and Faceless have done it far better than Conspiracy and Black Flag. One side looks fairly united, the other doesn't.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 18:21
|
#162
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
No. BowS did some Rogues in the Ult gals CT was gal raiding.
Perhaps thats what you was told?
|
Maybe you should just be quiet
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 18:27
|
#163
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by lokken
When it comes down to it collaboration makes a difference in this game, and Ultores and Faceless have done it far better than Conspiracy and Black Flag. One side looks fairly united, the other doesn't.
|
Yes. But only because the smaller allies actually made a big difference to the result this round. Both CT and BF chose to hit non full tag allies at various stages. Ult and FL should be patting their non full tag partners on the back for their assistance in giving them a better opportunity to fight for the win during the final week.
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 19:14
|
#164
|
Bi-Winning
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: nfi
Posts: 290
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
You want to reduce the tag size so Clouds can have a competetive tag?
So far this round we have almost recieved as much incs from two tags 14 and 10 members who are playing mainly to FC and SK people as we have from a close to 50 man tag thats been warring us for large parts of the round.
We have had to let many of these SK and FC waves land cus we simply cannot deffend against certain lol waves.
If any one has influence over, or choose to make a troll tag on the side with their spare members, these tags would wreck the round of a 30 man alliance IF you get the tag limits dropped. Even suggesting it is madness
|
id take 10 people vs anyone in here tbfh, id take them same 10 people to tags like you who think they need 60 to do well.
__________________
ѵսȽցΛґ
H-A ☆ ODDR ☆ Apprime ☆ xVx ☆ VisioN ☆ HEROES ☆ Ultores
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 19:15
|
#165
|
Inquisitor
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: England
Posts: 2,207
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krypton
Yes. But only because the smaller allies actually made a big difference to the result this round. Both CT and BF chose to hit non full tag allies at various stages. Ult and FL should be patting their non full tag partners on the back for their assistance in giving them a better opportunity to fight for the win during the final week.
|
Actually,
Incoming from Black Flag on the other allies like p3n. Rogues and HR were fairly low considering things.
__________________
----------
That uniform you're wearing
So hot I cant stop staring.
Zhil
[Spore] Executive
[1up]
[Fury]
Inquisitorial Lord Protector of His Emperor's Glorius Empire
[20:19:04] <mazzelaar> I have to say a big up to Zhil - without those 8 def calls you covered we would've been screwed. | r12 End Ceremony
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 19:16
|
#166
|
Inquisitor
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: England
Posts: 2,207
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz
|
Well, straight after that night the block hit Black Flag for several nights. Please don't make it out like it was P3n verses Black Flag as it clearly wasn't and you'd be misinforming the audience.
__________________
----------
That uniform you're wearing
So hot I cant stop staring.
Zhil
[Spore] Executive
[1up]
[Fury]
Inquisitorial Lord Protector of His Emperor's Glorius Empire
[20:19:04] <mazzelaar> I have to say a big up to Zhil - without those 8 def calls you covered we would've been screwed. | r12 End Ceremony
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 19:38
|
#167
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krypton
Yes. But only because the smaller allies actually made a big difference to the result this round. Both CT and BF chose to hit on full tag allies at various stages. Ult and FL should be patting their non full tag partners on the back for their assistance in giving them a better opportunity to fight for the win during the final week.
|
It's more that Ultores and Faceless work together when it matters - they can put together attacks that hurt their opposition. All the small alliances do is put more pressure on Conspiracy and Black Flag to work together more.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 19:44
|
#168
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
It is more a ship strat thing. They basically napped anyone with a ship strat other than de, meaning they only have to build one def ship class whilst everyone else has to split there strat, halving the defence pool.
pretty clever
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 19:53
|
#169
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
I think more of the issue Lokken was that BF at some point was hitting FL, and CT was hitting Ult.
2-3 days in on the one week siege on BF, CT NAPed Rogues, claiming that CT was hitting Rogues while BF was under fire is at best, only partly true if you look at obvious evidence.
And even if CT was targetting Rogues, wouldnt it be likely to belive they were gonna lose roids?
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 21:12
|
#170
|
Legion Idle Master
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 425
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zh|l
Well, straight after that night the block hit Black Flag for several nights. Please don't make it out like it was P3n verses Black Flag as it clearly wasn't and you'd be misinforming the audience.
|
Perhaps 2 nights? Not "several" if we look at cts weeks stats:
http://p3nguins.com/alliance/Conspir...story/summary/
I'd say they were been hit by the block more then bf were? (Plus I know for a fact they were) but there we go you only stopped hitting us last night.
Plus the fact from what butcher keeps posting on these forums rainbows are been hit by rogues and hordors etc.. You (bf) chose to hit p3ng which made us retaliate.. So really isn't much of a "block" as the only 3 allies to hit you is faceless and of course ult other then obviously us, which as I mentioned above are also hitting ct I presume (not us) so..
I wasn't making out it was one on one.. I was simply replying to clouds post making it sound like you "dominated" p3nguins
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56
p3nguin Founder
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 21:21
|
#171
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
I think more of the issue Lokken was that BF at some point was hitting FL, and CT was hitting Ult.
2-3 days in on the one week siege on BF, CT NAPed Rogues, claiming that CT was hitting Rogues while BF was under fire is at best, only partly true if you look at obvious evidence.
And even if CT was targetting Rogues, wouldnt it be likely to belive they were gonna lose roids?
|
It's not about what was happening earlier or who agreed what - it's about doing what you need to do to win. And my point is that Conspiracy let Black Flag fail far too easily.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 21:23
|
#172
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest
It is more a ship strat thing. They basically napped anyone with a ship strat other than de, meaning they only have to build one def ship class whilst everyone else has to split there strat, halving the defence pool.
|
I'm not actually playing myself, but I hear regular complaints in Ultores' private channel that Black Flag & co essentially have pure anti-Ultores fleets, so that cleverness goes both ways.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 22:04
|
#173
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by lokken
It's not about what was happening earlier or who agreed what - it's about doing what you need to do to win. And my point is that Conspiracy let Black Flag fail far too easily.
|
When the block moved off BF they were still 2nd, you are making it sound like CT ensured that BF was out of the race, wich aint true at all.
They did some political choices of their own, to go hit p3ng instead of hitting Ult/FL, wich led em to be in the position they are in atm. Wich infact aint that dire, its only about 6 million up to FL, who in fact are only 1-2 million behind Ultores.
It was a failed political/strategical attempt hitting p3ng, wich put em in 4th, not CT not "helping out their friends"
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
2 May 2015, 23:02
|
#174
|
Paso Leaute
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 919
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
I think more of the issue Lokken was that BF at some point was hitting FL, and CT was hitting Ult.
2-3 days in on the one week siege on BF, CT NAPed Rogues, claiming that CT was hitting Rogues while BF was under fire is at best, only partly true if you look at obvious evidence.
And even if CT was targetting Rogues, wouldnt it be likely to belive they were gonna lose roids?
|
CT did hit Rogues before Rogues napped them, and the nap was because rogues was losing and begged for peace. CT was admittedly only going half strength on rogues, c.60 fleets a night at a time when everyone was on BF so CT was free to hit out with 100 plus fleets a night, i assumed at the time those other fleets were hitting FL but that was just guesswork.
__________________
An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why must the pessimist always run to blow it out?
Last edited by [B5]Londo; 2 May 2015 at 23:07.
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 00:19
|
#175
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk
I'm not actually playing myself, but I hear regular complaints in Ultores' private channel that Black Flag & co essentially have pure anti-Ultores fleets, so that cleverness goes both ways.
|
The difference being, ult can build anti-de knowing only de will hit them, whereas ct have to cover against co from ult and cr/bs from fl and so it halves the size of each def fleet
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 00:37
|
#176
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by [B5]Londo
CT did hit Rogues before Rogues napped them, and the nap was because rogues was losing and begged for peace. CT was admittedly only going half strength on rogues, c.60 fleets a night at a time when everyone was on BF so CT was free to hit out with 100 plus fleets a night, i assumed at the time those other fleets were hitting FL but that was just guesswork.
|
This - so be quiet b-b because your speculation means nothing. CT/BF cost themselves and it was nice to see some non full tag allies step up and not let themselves be bullied into chosing a certain political side. Ult and FL avoided the likes of p3ng and rogues to my knowledge and this decision meant that these allies made a significant difference to how the round looks in the home stretch
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 00:41
|
#177
|
Finally retired
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest
It is more a ship strat thing. They basically napped anyone with a ship strat other than de, meaning they only have to build one def ship class whilst everyone else has to split there strat, halving the defence pool.
pretty clever
|
Not really, it was a matter of locking up the smaller allies before others could. At least from Faceless end. A lot of politics were at the hands of Faceless rather than Ultores this round.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]
In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 00:47
|
#178
|
Finally retired
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
I think its fair to say that BF tried to regain roids/XP by attacking p3nguins, and it backfired.
It was a decent plan, i had not expected FL to go back up p3nguins either.
BF(If it wernt someone else) that p3ng was freeroids
|
funny enough, it was always the plan to only give BF one night off to see what they would do. tbh, i had not expected BF to go for p3n rather than Faceless at that point. The only reason Ultores didn't go for BF again too that night was due to a misscommunication between Ultores HC's.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]
In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 02:18
|
#179
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz
I'd say they were been hit by the block more then bf were? (Plus I know for a fact they were)
|
Then you have been misinformed because the block hits on BF were more consistent than they were on CT. CT actually did well to avoid FL/Ult/co cooperation. We took the hit while CT were allowed to grow, it's how they are #1 at the moment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz
Plus the fact from what butcher keeps posting on these forums rainbows are been hit by rogues and hordors etc.. You (bf) chose to hit p3ng which made us retaliate.. So really isn't much of a "block" as the only 3 allies to hit you is faceless and of course ult other then obviously us, which as I mentioned above are also hitting ct I presume (not us) so..
|
I think you need to understand that BF had been in a long standing war with a block of alliances. When BF hit p3n, Ult/FL went straight back on to BF. Also, BF was no longer active by the time p3n "declared war".
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 06:06
|
#180
|
Legion Idle Master
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 425
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
Then you have been misinformed because the block hits on BF were more consistent than they were on CT. CT actually did well to avoid FL/Ult/co cooperation. We took the hit while CT were allowed to grow, it's how they are #1 at the moment.
I think you need to understand that BF had been in a long standing war with a block of alliances. When BF hit p3n, Ult/FL went straight back on to BF. Also, BF was no longer active by the time p3n "declared war".
|
If you bothered to read my post I was referring to that week. Not previously. So therefore the block wasn't hitting BF all week. From the evidence I provided somone was hitting CT while you guys were hitting us.
I think what you need to understand is BF chose to hit p3nguins because BF thought it could gain easy roids/xp. It failed. After the first night when BF did actually take a heavy hit on us we pulled it back. It's not really relevant if you consider bf "active" or not during this altercation. Fact of the matter is you have 11 (at the time) more planets then us. With the option of 3 fleets each that's potentially 33 more fleets which could of been sent.
Don't get me wrong as I said to zhil it wasn't a one on one war, I have no doubt you were hit by the block. But it wasn't consistently all week. Plus we didn't exactly only have bf hitting us either. Swings both ways.
__________________
Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56
p3nguin Founder
Last edited by Willzzz; 3 May 2015 at 06:12.
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 09:12
|
#181
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
I don't see any difference between this round and every other round, ULT finding a full tag alliance as an unbreakable alliance and letting said alliance escort them to the win.
It is now my preference that we concede the round to Ult and go after Faceless, and then every single round we simply ignore ult incoming and go after whatever alliance decides to escort ult to the win.
Some of you guys are having a go at BF here, but fk that, BF had the balls to go for a win (something FL don't) and I would rather alliances like BF try and fail, than just go back to the bad old days of Ult getting escorted to the win round after round after round.
I sense a hodors style alliance in the making, solely to hit anyone allied to Ult.
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 10:12
|
#182
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willzzz
If you bothered to read my post I was referring to that week. Not previously. So therefore the block wasn't hitting BF all week. From the evidence I provided somone was hitting CT while you guys were hitting us.
I think what you need to understand is BF chose to hit p3nguins because BF thought it could gain easy roids/xp. It failed. After the first night when BF did actually take a heavy hit on us we pulled it back. It's not really relevant if you consider bf "active" or not during this altercation. Fact of the matter is you have 11 (at the time) more planets then us. With the option of 3 fleets each that's potentially 33 more fleets which could of been sent.
Don't get me wrong as I said to zhil it wasn't a one on one war, I have no doubt you were hit by the block. But it wasn't consistently all week. Plus we didn't exactly only have bf hitting us either. Swings both ways.
|
Ahahaha, who other than BF was hitting p3ng then?
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 10:16
|
#183
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
Then you have been misinformed because the block hits on BF were more consistent than they were on CT. CT actually did well to avoid FL/Ult/co cooperation. We took the hit while CT were allowed to grow, it's how they are #1 at the Moment.
|
Ah, yeah, those ungratefull CTs that was able to grow fat under blackflags mighty wings.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 11:11
|
#184
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 77
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
lol you sound equally dissapointed every round when things dont go your way forest
Faceless is equally playing for #1 just the same as black-flag ever did, we are in the race for #1 atm, and can win, its just a matter of the best xp lands now. We did have a few crashes last days, including a 900.000k crash today who is destroying our chanses but we are not handing the win to ult, we play to win but if ult lands more than us and dont crash yes they will win!
Black-flag and ct was always gonna roid faceless after ult was dead and inactive. the universe is so small and they would never turn on eachother before faceless was roided dry, so saying we had other chanses than supporting ult is dumb, and they have helped us back when we got the better end of the incomings.
people have to stop seeing the round just from their own point of view, other alliances will offcourse fight back and do whats needed for their own chanses, just looks like bf and ct did not work very well together so now either Ult or Faceless will win!
And to whoever wins, its much deserved! even if it is ct! but i dont think thats possible
whenever ct has some asians in the top3, the rest of the allie is free roids
__________________
Skydivenaked
Recent rounds:
Round 68 - #1 Gal Rank #6 planet
Round 67 - #1 Gal
Round 65 - Rank #3 Norsemen
Round 61 - Rank #37 Faceless
Round 60 - Rank #14 Ultores
Round 58 - Rank #35 Allieless xp play
Round 56 - Rank #14 Vikings
Round 54 - Rank #5 Vikings
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 12:25
|
#185
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDN
lol you sound equally dissapointed every round when things dont go your way forest
|
I am glad. I hate losing and it happens way too often on here.
If you arent disappointed in losing, then no point in playing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDN
Faceless is equally playing for #1 just the same as black-flag ever did, we are in the race for #1 atm, and can win, its just a matter of the best xp lands now. We did have a few crashes last days, including a 900.000k crash today who is destroying our chanses but we are not handing the win to ult, we play to win but if ult lands more than us and dont crash yes they will win!
|
This is debatable. We will see though, as only time will tell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDN
Black-flag and ct was always gonna roid faceless after ult was dead and inactive. the universe is so small and they would never turn on eachother before faceless was roided dry, so saying we had other chanses than supporting ult is dumb, and they have helped us back when we got the better end of the incomings.
|
I am not in a position to argue
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDN
people have to stop seeing the round just from their own point of view, other alliances will offcourse fight back and do whats needed for their own chanses, just looks like bf and ct did not work very well together so now either Ult or Faceless will win!
|
Very true
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDN
And to whoever wins, its much deserved! even if it is ct! but i dont think thats possible
whenever ct has some asians in the top3, the rest of the allie is free roids
|
I think Ult have won and and yes, they deserve it
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 14:54
|
#186
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDN
lol you sound equally dissapointed every round when things dont go your way forest
Faceless is equally playing for #1 just the same as black-flag ever did, we are in the race for #1 atm, and can win, its just a matter of the best xp lands now. We did have a few crashes last days, including a 900.000k crash today who is destroying our chanses but we are not handing the win to ult, we play to win but if ult lands more than us and dont crash yes they will win!
Black-flag and ct was always gonna roid faceless after ult was dead and inactive. the universe is so small and they would never turn on eachother before faceless was roided dry, so saying we had other chanses than supporting ult is dumb, and they have helped us back when we got the better end of the incomings.
people have to stop seeing the round just from their own point of view, other alliances will offcourse fight back and do whats needed for their own chanses, just looks like bf and ct did not work very well together so now either Ult or Faceless will win!
And to whoever wins, its much deserved! even if it is ct! but i dont think thats possible
whenever ct has some asians in the top3, the rest of the allie is free roids
|
Bingo.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 15:16
|
#187
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
If BF/CT was always gonna roid Ult/FL inactive, they would still be doing.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 15:31
|
#188
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest
The difference being, ult can build anti-de knowing only de will hit them, whereas ct have to cover against co from ult and cr/bs from fl and so it halves the size of each def fleet
|
That just means Ult's incomings are more concentrated than CT's. Ult has to stop 2 alliances worth of anti-De, while CT has to stop 1 alliance worth of Co and one alliance worth of Cr/Bs. It balances out.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 17:19
|
#189
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk
That just means Ult's incomings are more concentrated than CT's. Ult has to stop 2 alliances worth of anti-De, while CT has to stop 1 alliance worth of Co and one alliance worth of Cr/Bs. It balances out.
|
I thought BF had large amounts of FR? Mz again doing (not so) qualified guesses again.
Half their allie cant even build DE.
Demographics for Black Flag - 16 Cat Val(4031k) Score(5211.8k) Size(992) XP(19.7k) | 12 Etd Val(4056.8k) Score(5106.1k) Size(927) XP(17.5k) | 1 Ter Val(763.5k) Score(1838k) Size(300) XP(17.9k) | 12 Xan Val(3575.5k) Score(4618.2k) Size(1050) XP(17.4k) | 13 Zik Val(4065.7k) Score(4880.8k) Size(729) XP(13.6k)
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 17:56
|
#190
|
Retard0r
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,164
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Just undelines mz's point tho...
Forest is a fair bit off in any case. I can speak for ult when i say that we've had to fight off a fair amount of fi/fr/de/cr/bs fleets, and i think the DE acounts for less than 50% of those.
__________________
-Chimpie
* We do not exist *
* G-II * NoS * VsN * Ascendancy * Osiris * xVx * Ultores *
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 19:57
|
#191
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 67
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest
I don't see any difference between this round and every other round, ULT finding a full tag alliance as an unbreakable alliance and letting said alliance escort them to the win.
It is now my preference that we concede the round to Ult and go after Faceless, and then every single round we simply ignore ult incoming and go after whatever alliance decides to escort ult to the win.
Some of you guys are having a go at BF here, but fk that, BF had the balls to go for a win (something FL don't) and I would rather alliances like BF try and fail, than just go back to the bad old days of Ult getting escorted to the win round after round after round.
I sense a hodors style alliance in the making, solely to hit anyone allied to Ult.
|
So Faceless are escorting ult to win?
Its not what incan see in rankings..
Ult can win.. faceless too.. ct too... even BF still have chances.
was a fun round btw!
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 22:06
|
#192
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
I thought BF had large amounts of FR? Mz again doing (not so) qualified guesses again.
Half their allie cant even build DE.
|
Forest's point was a version of the general "alliances that overwhelmingly get incomings in one class have an easier time than alliances with incomings split among two or more classes". I disagree, and used his own information (right or wrong) as an example. Nothing more.
Pretend there's a big IF at the start if that makes you feel better.
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 22:15
|
#193
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk
Forest's point was a version of the general "alliances that overwhelmingly get incomings in one class have an easier time than alliances with incomings split among two or more classes". I disagree, and used his own information (right or wrong) as an example. Nothing more.
Pretend there's a big IF at the start if that makes you feel better.
|
Think his point was that Faceless was mainly FI/CO, with a small portion of CR, and Ult more or less the same.
Ult/FL can correct me if im wrong.
FI/CO def is mostly the same ship (beetles), and FR/DE def is more spread?
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 22:28
|
#194
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
No Myz is right on my point.
Imagine this...
Ult build anti-de. They get hit by de-alliance A and can cover because all def anti-de and use 100% def ships. They get hit by de-alliance B and can cover because all def anti-de and use 100% def ships. They get hit by both and get roided from sheer numbers.
CT build 50% anti-cr/bs and 50% anti-co. They get hit by cr/bs alliance and can only cover only 50% and the other 50% def ships are idle. They get hit by co alliance and can only cover only 50% and the other 50% def ships are idle. They get hit by both and get owned.
Also imagine, both blocks hitting one alliance from the other block at most times = the other is grounded or reduced retal = ult can use 100% def ships whilst ct use 50%.
Crude numbers I know but thats the point im making, rightly or wrongly
|
|
|
3 May 2015, 22:40
|
#195
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Well most CR/BS def is in DE no? So if thats your attack fleet you got no def
I think the ship stats this round is brilliant, too bad they will prolly feck it up by rerunning IsildurXs stats again next round
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
4 May 2015, 04:31
|
#196
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
apart from the emp being completely broken, and scarabs being way too op, and the def ships that can solo stop a huge team up
__________________
Did some stuff, played here n there done just about all there is to do
Last edited by Blue_Esper; 4 May 2015 at 05:34.
|
|
|
4 May 2015, 08:46
|
#197
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,143
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest
No Myz is right on my point.
Imagine this...
Ult build anti-de. They get hit by de-alliance A and can cover because all def anti-de and use 100% def ships. They get hit by de-alliance B and can cover because all def anti-de and use 100% def ships. They get hit by both and get roided from sheer numbers.
CT build 50% anti-cr/bs and 50% anti-co. They get hit by cr/bs alliance and can only cover only 50% and the other 50% def ships are idle. They get hit by co alliance and can only cover only 50% and the other 50% def ships are idle. They get hit by both and get owned.
Also imagine, both blocks hitting one alliance from the other block at most times = the other is grounded or reduced retal = ult can use 100% def ships whilst ct use 50%.
Crude numbers I know but thats the point im making, rightly or wrongly
|
DE incs are maybe 50% of our incs at most
|
|
|
4 May 2015, 16:24
|
#198
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue_Esper
apart from the emp being completely broken, and scarabs being way too op, and the def ships that can solo stop a huge team up
|
I think EMP is fine.
I doubt that you will find T1 over 175% average on any ships.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
4 May 2015, 16:26
|
#199
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 77
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
emp was fine, the scarab was just ridiculously good.
Everyones agrees the scarab is a broken ship, well now except for you B-B
__________________
Skydivenaked
Recent rounds:
Round 68 - #1 Gal Rank #6 planet
Round 67 - #1 Gal
Round 65 - Rank #3 Norsemen
Round 61 - Rank #37 Faceless
Round 60 - Rank #14 Ultores
Round 58 - Rank #35 Allieless xp play
Round 56 - Rank #14 Vikings
Round 54 - Rank #5 Vikings
|
|
|
4 May 2015, 16:54
|
#200
|
Paso Leaute
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 919
|
Re: mass NAPing- yawn boring
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
I think EMP is fine.
I doubt that you will find T1 over 175% average on any ships.
|
Viper av 177% vs DE
However, yes it is not generally the individual effectiveness that is the issue, its clearly the huge number of scarabs you can have in an attack fleet.
__________________
An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why must the pessimist always run to blow it out?
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:14.
| |