Dear alliances, get a clue

[ChipZ^]

Originally Posted by Heartless

Maybe you would like to take a look at why it was a photo-finish. It certainly was not (and it won't be a foto finish, eXilition will have quite a huge lead at end of ticks) because "the blocks" were even. It more likely was because ND tried to stay out of everything and Angels/1up didn't simply turn over but kept on picking on eXilition so they would be unable to grow too fast. Maybe Angels/1up should have simply stopped hitting eXilition and go for the easy roids allowing eXilition to get their easy ride and thus showing eXi's lapdogs what an utterly shite move it was of them. </drivel>

*Sigh* You, like many others make it sound like htis "super block" has been here the ENTIRE round. It has not, it is only recently that any "deals" were made with allainces other than subh. If 1up/angels had ignored eX and gone for "easy" roids then there would never have been anyneed for eX to even approach any allainces for help. When u have the 2 best military powers (excluding ourselves ofc) attacking you then its not really a solo round is it?

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Forest

Thats it exactly.
I have found this round quite entertaining, nm what others think, but it doesn't stop the fact that we all know what COULD happen next.

And if it does, the game will once again, fall flat on its face.

My main problem, is I don't see how this can be avoided. Whilst in the main, alliances don't want to block, they do know that its a distinct possibilty that they will have to. That means they keep options open, and as mazzelaar stated a couple of posts up, its very likely to happen if people go into a round in that frame of mind.

Well, I'm slightly going out on a limb here but I'd say the first step towards not over-blocking would be to not create a huge ****-off block. Know your enemy, be aware of their capabilities, arrange appropriate measures in response. Was it before r11 or r12 that sid went around a good few (all?) alliances and got them to agree to give anyone who blocked a good twatting. That sort of politics is a nice approach. It's not a block, it doesn't have to last, nobody's betraying anyone if it splits up mid-round once it has done it's job but it can do the job it was created for quite well.

*offtopic* is there a reason I keep getting negrepped. I mean, what the fk is in this post that deserves one. Can we just get rid of the rep system JBG, or at elast make it so peoples nicks are signed automatically.

There was a big long discussion on GD about the rep system with a lot of people arguing that reps should be signed. In the end it was decided, by the mods and JJ, not to have rep visible. The only reason I can remember off the top of my head is that it would encourage "rep wars" which would defeat the point of reputation even more. If there's one thing that annoys me it's gray rep with no explanation. I don't mind being told my posts are shit but when I don't even know if it's criticism or praise it really irritiates me

[cbk100]

For once I think I will try to make a short post \o/ (dont believe me?)

This round has (nomatter what some ppl might say) been one of the best in PA history and I would for sure go as far as saying the best I have played which is since r4 (r7 excluded).
For each and every round there has been whining on these boards. Even if there was like 30 alliances being totaly equal with noone blocking or anything by the end of a round then there would still be whining because some ppl simply whine nomatter what. EX might win this round or they might not. Nomatter what it has been (and actualy still is) an open round. Some ppl might say that it has been settled and well I might agree to some degree at this time, but just look 1-3 days back and nothing was settled. When was the last time we had a totaly open round with less than a week left? When was the last time where the top alliance with few days left is an alliance which has had the most roids only shortly trough the round? When is the last time that the minor alliances has actualy been able to fight hard aggainst the big organized alliances, when have the small alliances been so close to the best alliances when it comes to roids? and finaly when have the small alliances actualy been able to form their own politics, going to war aggainst other minor alliances and not having to worry all that damn much about being bashed to 0 roids by the big alliances?
I have played more than 10 rounds now and have never seen a round as balanced as this one where everyone have roided everyone and where there has been LOTS of very equal wars with ups and down for every alliance in the universe.
EX might win and yes I am happy about that even though I can't take much credit (besides cyb0ring the ppl a lot to keep them active), but even if they lose this is still my view and has been my view long b4 EX made #1. So no I dont even want to hear anyone saying that its a biased view cause its not.

hmmm those who didn't trust me were right I guess :-(
FFS gotta learn to keep posts shorter and for those who made it all trough my post, please think about stuff again and consider weather you have anything to whine about or if you are just pissed because your alliance didn't win or your own planet just got roided or something.

cbk

[KweKweK]

What would you call a huge lead? For example the lead atm is... about 11 million. Mostly because eX added that last member and also because ND changed targeting I believe. But when was the last time the winner wasnt decided yet 1 week before tick stop? I cant recall it really. That in my opinion is a verry close round

[Forest]

No it wasn't really a clean start. 1up got absolutely hammered and would possibly of lost it altogether, if certain alliances didn't start hitting each others allies, instead of making sure 1up was finished.

And there is the problem. Wheras Lch started hitting Insomnia's allies, and vice versa, Exi are much too informed for that, and know that when the block has been started, that breaking it would be suicide. So the block stays, and then another block has to stay because of the first block etc etc. And then you end up with two big blocks, with one winning fairly quickly.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by ChipZ^

*Sigh* You, like many others make it sound like htis "super block" has been here the ENTIRE round. It has not, it is only recently that any "deals" were made with allainces other than subh.

[20:38:21] <Kaifux> we can get more allies, which will help killing em and i do have some, but the level of them aren't too high, that's why the effect wasn't so great so far

From your member meeting 3rd week of november.

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by ChipZ^

*Sigh* You, like many others make it sound like htis "super block" has been here the ENTIRE round. It has not, it is only recently that any "deals" were made with allainces other than subh. If 1up/angels had ignored eX and gone for "easy" roids then there would never have been anyneed for eX to even approach any allainces for help. When u have the 2 best military powers (excluding ourselves ofc) attacking you then its not really a solo round is it?

First of all it's a false assumption to say 1up played a solo round. 1up started solo, as usual. No naps, no alliances, no agreements.

Secondly, you make it sound like 1up/angels has been here the entire round, which aint true either. Yes Angels jumped in to help 1up when they saw how heavily 1up got hammered and how fast eXilition were pulling away.

Also, claiming that 1up could have avoided facing a block formed by eXilition by simply not targetting sounds like a very poor argument. It was not 1up who started the hostility, it was eXilition - and judging by how the def calls came in the first two weeks I'd even say it were eXilition and at least one other alliance hitting 1up coordinately. Yes, ok, you might have split that cooperation you most certainly had (note: I am assuming here. just stating it for the majority of eXilition's members which seem to fail miserably at understanding the fine differences coming with certain wordings in the english language). But by the time you might have split the rest of the universe would have been far behind eXilition and certain alliances you cooperated with would have been ranked behind you, yet unexpectedly high. From that hypothetical situation on those alliances which benefitted from a cooperation with you would for sure not have targetted eXilition in order to close a gap which would have existed by then.
All in all it is just a mindgame here, but there were not really other options left apart from hitting you back in order to keep eXilition in a range where they were beatable (note: this is an indirect compliment towards your alliance, dear eXilition members).

[cypher]

Originally Posted by RedCrab
We had a nap with Subh afaik, just like the one they offered to 1up. There was no coord sharing even.

if you're gonna state such things...also keep in account the shared channels you had to check each others coords HK? or isn't that true in which case you're calling your allies liars

[Incredible]

I'd just like to say thanks for the congratulations, was a fun round. I'll make sure Kaifux will name you in his speach.

[KweKweK]

[20:35:07]<mazzelaar> I am *** and I love mushrooms

Ment in a funny way, but still...

Your point beeing?


Now lets say hypotheticly Kaifux said something remotly related to something you posted, then you would have 1 sentence out of a member meeting. Says all about the situation that was at hand ey... Exactly

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by cypher

Originally Posted by RedCrab
We had a nap with Subh afaik, just like the one they offered to 1up. There was no coord sharing even.

if you're gonna state such things...also keep in account the shared channels you had to check each others coords HK? or isn't that true in which case you're calling your allies liars

True cypher, but the point remains. There was a NAP in place, nothing fancy. You know a verry similar thing 1up had in r14

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

True cypher, but the point remains. There was a NAP in place, nothing fancy. You know a verry similar thing 1up had in r14

1up didn't have a nap right from the start in r14. Try to spot the difference.

[cypher]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

True cypher, but the point remains. There was a NAP in place, nothing fancy. You know a verry similar thing 1up had in r14

not saying anything about 1up... but i don't see 1up people denying that ( i haven't read it all as most of it is BS as usual) but i just read that and what he said is blatant lies.

on a sidenote, can't we just go back to appoco about whining about utter shite stats? as alliances are always gonna be lame/boring/whining about blocking/soloplaying etc etc and it'll never be totally solved as always some new ally will want to start making them again.

however try and fix the stats :P they CAN be solved whining at appoco is fun aswell btw :P

<3 appoco

[KweKweK]

Neither did eXilition. And someone who regularly has to deal with our arbiter I think I would notice when an alliance would have been tagged as friendly in it dont you think. But then again Heartless you might know it better

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

Now lets say hypotheticly Kaifux said something remotly related to something you posted, then you would have 1 sentence out of a member meeting. Says all about the situation that was at hand ey... Exactly

erm....what?

I can also give you the whole log if you like.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

Neither did eXilition. And someone who regularly has to deal with our arbiter I think I would notice when an alliance would have been tagged as friendly in it dont you think. But then again Heartless you might know it better

You must have missed the post by the SubH HC acknowledging the pre tick nap between eX and SubH.

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by cypher

not saying anything about 1up... but i don't see 1up people denying that ( i haven't read it all as most of it is BS as usual) but i just read that and what he said is blatant lies.

Fair anough, havent seen any 1up people denying it either but I do see certain people making a fuss about a NAP we had with Subh and when this occured.

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

erm....what?

I can also give you the whole log if you like.

Please do

[cypher]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

Neither did eXilition. And someone who regularly has to deal with our arbiter I think I would notice when an alliance would have been tagged as friendly in it dont you think. But then again Heartless you might know it better

subh asked 1up people ( i know cuz i was one of the people whom they asked) if 1up would nap them... i don't deal with politics so i sent him to HC and they refused to have any agreements as they didn't wanna start blocking atleast.

after that subh HC approached kaifux or other way around and you guys had a nap. ask your HC or subh HC about this kwekwek. i doubt either will tell you i'm lieing. i'm beyond caring if this is bad or not but don't blatantly lie while the facts are actually out there and you should/could/do know the truth.

[KweKweK]

Yes you're right on the when the NAP occured. My appologies for that. Yet I still dont see this as blocking.
tickstart situation was as follow. We were gonna go straight out for 1up because they were in our eyes the biggest threat. We had a NAP with Subh to cut down the random incomming. Still dont appear to be blocking imo. And still verry similar like your r14, tho some people dont happen to agree with me on that.

[ChipZ^]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

[20:38:21] <Kaifux> we can get more allies, which will help killing em and i do have some, but the level of them aren't too high, that's why the effect wasn't so great so far

From your member meeting 3rd week of november.

"we can get more allies" (at that time we had subh only)
"which will help killing them" (1up/angels)
"do have some" (in mind he missed out - everyone knows kaifux's english isnt that good no offence )
"but the level of them aint high" (all less than top 6/7)
"that's why the effect wasn't so great so far" (this agin refering to subh being realativly small compared to the other allies we were fighting)

Mazz as u are aware as u have the enitre log its sometimes hard to decipher wat kaifux was saying (<3 kaifux) but as ive ahd arbi access at the time i know that talks were underway but there were difenly not 4 allies half way thro november with allied or even friendly status in the arbi.

[Forest]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

Yes you're right on the when the NAP occured. My appologies for that. Yet I still dont see this as blocking.
tickstart situation was as follow. We were gonna go straight out for 1up because they were in our eyes the biggest threat. We had a NAP with Subh to cut down the random incomming. Still dont appear to be blocking imo. And still verry similar like your r14, tho some people dont happen to agree with me on that.

So exi nap subh to hit 1up.

1up in return get exi incoming + random that exi is avoiding.

so 1up nap someone.

So exi do the same, and before you know it, we have blocks.

Everyone is geting so caught up in petty squables, they are forgetting to try and avoid blocks.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by ChipZ^

"we can get more allies" (at that time we had subh only)
"which will help killing them" (1up/angels)
"do have some" (in mind he missed out - everyone knows kaifux's english isnt that good no offence )
"but the level of them aint high" (all less than top 6/7)
"that's why the effect wasn't so great so far" (this agin refering to subh being realativly small compared to the other allies we were fighting)

Mazz as u are aware as u have the enitre log its sometimes hard to decipher wat kaifux was saying (<3 kaifux) but as ive ahd arbi access at the time i know that talks were underway but there were difenly not 4 allies half way thro november with allied or even friendly status in the arbi.

The point I was making (and relying on Kaifux's english skills is a fairly way poor to argue the point away) is that there were already multiple alliances in place, whether it be two or three or four or five. And as much as people think so having arb access isn't the be all and end all of proof of no friendlies.

Evidently you know who these alliances were otherwise you wouldn't know they were all outside top 6/7?

I also just noticed the bit about only having Subh at the time. His english isn't that bad that he suddenly starts pluralising a single alliance.

[KweKweK]

As you seem to have the whole log no reason to keep internal things internal and lett me explain the situation to you because you fail to grasp what was going on which is how things escalate.

[20:37:23] <Kaifux> so current biggest problem is politics:
[20:37:33] <Kaifux> 1up/angels dedicated this r15 to stop eX

We surely had to do something to change the unslaught from 2 of the most capable military aliances in the game otherwise we wouldnt be where we are now.

[Forest]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

[20:37:23] <Kaifux> so current biggest problem is politics:
[20:37:33] <Kaifux> 1up/angels dedicated this r15 to stop eX

We surely had to do something to change the unslaught from 2 of the most capable military aliances in the game otherwise we wouldnt be where we are now.

Haha

Angels came into this round with the sole intention of winning
1up always intend to win everything they can

[KweKweK]

I agree, but formulating it this way in a member meeting surely got the fire up our asses to work harder then we did before. I guess its paying off even not completly accurate as I surely know 1up and Angels went for no 1 spot and did a hell of a good job trying to reach it. Like I said before I never would have thought of this beeing such an intense, good and close round as it was.

[Forest]

But in the second to last post u said u bloocked BECAUSE angels/1up had solely put the round down to stopping u win. Then in your last post you said it was just said to put fire into ur bellies.

Please make up your mind.

P.S. are you SURE you was in RB, im sure we would of wanted to roid someone as nooby as you within seconds of meeting you ;p

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by Heartless

1up didn't have a nap right from the start in r14. Try to spot the difference.

Try to spot the difference between these 2 words.

Same and similar and you'll have your answer

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by Forest

But in the second to last post u said u bloocked BECAUSE angels/1up had solely put the round down to stopping u win. Then in your last post you said it was just said to put fire into ur bellies.

Please make up your mind.

P.S. are you SURE you was in RB, im sure we would of wanted to roid someone as nooby as you within seconds of meeting you ;p

Exactly where did I said we BLOCKED, all I said was something had to be done. Lett me be a bit more specific. Changes had to be made in the political arena. Like for example cut down random inc.

As for that personal attack. Something can be said about the alliances you ran in the past . Yet this is utterly not to the point and completly irrelevant like that last statement you made.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

We surely had to do something to change the unslaught from 2 of the most capable military aliances in the game otherwise we wouldnt be where we are now.

Not going all out from T72 to hit us probably would've been the best way to do that. 1up had far bigger ideals than stopping eX winning, you gives your selves far too much credit. eX were the ones who were hell bent on smashing 1up into the floor to prove whatever point it is they have.

Angels didn't join in this fight until eX had started getting a lead so purposely started hitting them to peg them back.

Your points are all baseless and wrong, it's about time you stopped believing whatever propoganda people have been ramming down your throat and actually took a little look at what has actually happened during the round instead of vomitting whatever made up version of events you've had fed to you back up to the AD populace.

[pig]

For someone who hasnt done wrong KweKweK you are rather defensive on these forums, guilty conscience?

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

Try to spot the difference between these 2 words.

Same and similar and you'll have your answer

I assumed you'd be inprecisely speaking as with the difference you mention now, your previous comment makes one ponder what your point is except for eXilition not being interested in a level playing field for all alliances?

1up didn't have a NAP from the start to cut down on random incoming, 1up made a NAP a few weeks after round started to ensure not to face too overwhelming numbers. There is no way you can compare mid-round agreements with pre-round agreements, for the simple reason that pre-round agreements mean you don't want to start on a level playing field, and mid-round agreements try to level the playing field again which got imbalanced by the superiority of one (or more) alliance(s).

[god113]

Originally Posted by Methedrine

Yes, yes ... it is once again the time that I feel like commenting on those boards.

...

Will we see alliances get back to sane thinking and having balls enough to compete on their own in round 16 - or will we see a PA Team which forces alliances to compete on their own for largest parts?

Wasn't the break through with the beginning of 1up that alliance politics had to be fluid, so people didn't stay loyal in blocks and not break them up? As far as i'm concerned, if two alliances are attacking one alliance, and those two alliances are winning, the other alliance has to do something. If it can't manage, and can't stop the two attacking it together, then it has to make friends. I don't really think any alliance would just sit and take the beating, however honorable they were.

I'm not aware of the exact allies of Exilition, but what I do know is that there have been plenty of different wars. And right now the round hasn't been 'killed'. It's not like it's been really stagnated for weeks, and the 'block' refuse to split up. Exilition have JUST taken the lead. Maybe i'm not aware of some things, but as I see it it's never a straight 1 on 1 fight, and there's not been huge stagnation, Exilition just politically out maneuvered everyone else (at the last minute?).

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Not going all out from T72 to hit us probably would've been the best way to do that. 1up had far bigger ideals than stopping eX winning, you gives your selves far too much credit. eX were the ones who were hell bent on smashing 1up into the floor to prove whatever point it is they have.

Angels didn't join in this fight until eX had started getting a lead so purposely started hitting them to peg them back.

Your points are all baseless and wrong, it's about time you stopped believing whatever propoganda people have been ramming down your throat and actually took a little look at what has actually happened during the round instead of vomitting whatever made up version of events you've had fed to you back up to the AD populace.

Thats all verry nice, but again you forget that we were at war with 1up, by stepping into it we were outnumbered what ever way you want to spin this thing.

Originally Posted by KweKweK

I agree, but formulating it this way in a member meeting surely got the fire up our asses to work harder then we did before. I guess its paying off even not completly accurate as I surely know 1up and Angels went for no 1 spot and did a hell of a good job trying to reach it. Like I said before I never would have thought of this beeing such an intense, good and close round as it was.

This surely means that I never believed 1up nor Angels were playing this round just to twat eX. Lookin at 1up's past and Angels there preperation for the round it was fairly obvious they were going for number 1 spot. I would have been dissapointed if it wasnt the case.


And as for pig... Thats 1 way to look at it, but if someone was accusing you of for instance you beeing a thief wouldnt you feel the need to defend yourselve.

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by Heartless

I assumed you'd be inprecisely speaking as with the difference you mention now, your previous comment makes one ponder what your point is except for eXilition not being interested in a level playing field for all alliances?

1up didn't have a NAP from the start to cut down on random incoming, 1up made a NAP a few weeks after round started to ensure not to face too overwhelming numbers. There is no way you can compare mid-round agreements with pre-round agreements, for the simple reason that pre-round agreements mean you don't want to start on a level playing field, and mid-round agreements try to level the playing field again which got imbalanced by the superiority of one (or more) alliance(s).

A few weeks into a round doesnt strike me exactly as mid round. Once again it was well known that eXilition was gonna go all out on 1up when protection was over (no BP with 1up allowed) Thus having a NAP from tickstart is valid to try not to face overwhelming numbers.

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

A few weeks into a round doesnt strike me exactly as mid round. Once again it was well known that eXilition was gonna go all out on 1up when protection was over (no BP with 1up allowed) Thus having a NAP from tickstart is valid to try not to face overwhelming numbers.

eXilition: ~80 Members (+ their friends out of tag which they claim to have)
1up: ~80 Members

What overwhelming numbers did eXilition fear?

edit: and just for the fun of it... what do you define as mid-round if not the time that can be described as "a few weeks into the round"?

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

Thats all verry nice, but again you forget that we were at war with 1up, by stepping into it we were outnumbered what ever way you want to spin this thing.

What on earth are you talking about? You made a claim, including quotes from Kaifux that 1up and Angels were only out to spoil eX's round. I counter this with factual evidence and you turn it into something that you weren't saying in the first place.

Originally Posted by KweKweK

This surely means that I never believed 1up nor Angels were playing this round just to twat eX. Lookin at 1up's past and Angels there preperation for the round it was fairly obvious they were going for number 1 spot. I would have been dissapointed if it wasnt the case.

Then why did you make a post with quotes from Kaifux supporting that idea? Do you even know what point it is you're trying to make any more or are just going to resolutely stick to the "YOU TEAMED UP FIRST SO WE HAD TO BLOCK!!!!111"

I'm finding picking holes in your posts and then you changing the direction of the thread entirely quite tiresome, ergo I shall not be responding to you any more.

[KweKweK]

You seem to get stuck on the reason that Kaifux gave that Angels and 1up were hitting eXilition, the reason I quotted that bit Kaifux said was because you so adequattly left out when you posted something from a members meeting log that both 1up and Angels were giving us heavy incs. As I said before the sentence you posted is completly invalid if you dont show the whole picture. Where did I say again that there was a need to block on our side when that happened? Exactly nowhere. What I did say was that to change the fact that we were beeing twatted something had to be changed in the political arena.

P.S. If Angels and 1up had any deals when Angels started hitting us I do not know nor do I care, the fact remains that we had heavy inc from 2 of the most military capable alliances around.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

You seem to get stuck on the reason that Kaifux gave that Angels and 1up were hitting eXilition, the reason I quotted that bit Kaifux said was because you so adequattly left out when you posted something from a members meeting log that both 1up and Angels were giving us heavy incs. As I said before the sentence you posted is completly invalid if you dont show the whole picture. Where did I say again that there was a need to block on our side when that happened? Exactly nowhere. What I did say was that to change the fact that we were beeing twatted something had to be changed in the political arena.

P.S. If Angels and 1up had any deals when Angels started hitting us I do not know nor do I care, the fact remains that we had heavy inc from 2 of the most military capable alliances around.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, so you're trying to justify getting more alliances on board when 3 against 2 weren't enough while 1up were already being beaten. God forbid you might actually have to face a challenge.

[Geezer77]

I would like to say that to my knowledge no agreements were made or at least made concrete between Ex/SubH before tick start, at least i had absolutely no knowledge and i did have alot of information on the political situation at that time.

Second i believe a super block is a bit out of order in it's description. The early stages of the round Exilition were in a impossible situation to stay alone as 2 of the top3 alliance were hitting us daily. Organised or not, i still don't believe in coincidence, the tactics this round have been difficult as one wrong decision and you were essentially dead. But when hasn't a round been won on the basis of who made the best political decision at the right time. Why can;t we just agree this was a good round, a well played round by a good majority of alliances and players credit goes to the top 4/5 especially Exi/1up/Angels and ND.

I would also like to add that this so called 'super block' was hardly introduced in force untill late on. Maybe the fact some alliances chose not too, or failed too react to the changing tides in the numerous wars this round has made them somewhat feel regret or bitterness.

I do agree with Forest though, we can;t allow the blocking of pre-PaX to start creeping back into the game, however i don't think this round can be used as a start of it.

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

[...] Where did I say again that there was a need to block on our side when that happened? Exactly nowhere. [...]

Wrong, you said it here:

Originally Posted by KweKweK

[...]
Once again it was well known that eXilition was gonna go all out on 1up when protection was over (no BP with 1up allowed) Thus having a NAP from tickstart is valid to try not to face overwhelming numbers.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Geezer77

I would like to say that to my knowledge no agreements were made or at least made concrete between Ex/SubH before tick start, at least i had absolutely no knowledge and i did have alot of information on the political situation at that time.

Subh HC have already confirmed it.

Originally Posted by Geezer77

I would also like to add that this so called 'super block' was hardly introduced in force untill late on. Maybe the fact some alliances chose not too, or failed too react to the changing tides in the numerous wars this round has made them somewhat feel regret or bitterness.

I keep seeing people from eX saying it is only lately that this block was brought into force but in the post before they are all saying how hard it was fighting off two alliances early in the round and something had to be done about it. Are we to believe that you fought off the combined forces of 1up and Angels and then decided to form a block? Or are you desperately trying to tell everyone how hard you had to had in a bid to justify getting a team of more than 4 alliances together to allow you to win the round?

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by Heartless

Wrong, you said it here:

Oh lol, since when is having 1NAP blocking??? please enlighten me.


2 against 3, who are these alliances suppose to be? Where did you get that this round hasnt been a challenge for us? I guess you havent been watching sandmans at all. We lost quite some roids during this round and enough times barely been in green. 1up, Angels, eXi, etc. all had a hard round. I guess that makes your statement kind off invalid.

http://www.sandmans.co.uk/?p=viewall...ry=all#history

P.S. Angels moving on eXi was a good move imo, I wouldnt have done it differently.

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Subh HC have already confirmed it.



I keep seeing people from eX saying it is only lately that this block was brought into force but in the post before they are all saying how hard it was fighting off two alliances early in the round and something had to be done about it. Are we to believe that you fought off the combined forces of 1up and Angels and then decided to form a block? Or are you desperately trying to tell everyone how hard you had to had in a bid to justify getting a team of more than 4 alliances together to allow you to win the round?

Again you fail to read my posts properly. I say something had to be done in the political arena and you turn it into a block again. There are alot more politcal scenario's then blocking that could take the heat a bit off for us. For example ND only benefitted from 1up, eX and Angels kicking eachothers ass. And so they did. In between the 1up and Angels inc I had some ND inc aswell. Numerous Angels said to have experienced the same about the ND inc. ND played that one verry well.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

Again you fail to read my posts properly. I say something had to be done in the political arena and you turn it into a block again. There are alot more politcal scenario's then blocking that could take the heat a bit off for us. For example ND only benefitted from 1up, eX and Angels kicking eachothers ass. And so they did. In between the 1up and Angels inc I had some ND inc aswell. Numerous Angels said to have experienced the same about the ND inc. ND played that one verry well.

erm..... it wasn't your post that I was quoting so I guess I'm not the only one who can't read, eh?

Also if there are a lot more scenario's why not list them? What you've stated there isn't a scenario, it's what happened.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

2 against 3, who are these alliances suppose to be? Where did you get that this round hasnt been a challenge for us? I guess you havent been watching sandmans at all. We lost quite some roids during this round and enough times barely been in green. 1up, Angels, eXi, etc. all had a hard round. I guess that makes your statement kind off invalid.

1up/Angels
eX/vgn/subh and more added rapidly after

A challenge is when you beat everything while the playing field is even or slightly against you. With the number of allies you had the outcome was a foregone conclusion irrsepective of any graphs you might want to throw into the equation. The only impressive bit here is 1up and Angels holding out as long as they did.

[Geezer77]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Subh HC have already confirmed it.



I keep seeing people from eX saying it is only lately that this block was brought into force but in the post before they are all saying how hard it was fighting off two alliances early in the round and something had to be done about it. Are we to believe that you fought off the combined forces of 1up and Angels and then decided to form a block? Or are you desperately trying to tell everyone how hard you had to had in a bid to justify getting a team of more than 4 alliances together to allow you to win the round?

If the SubH confirmed it then fair enough, i did however have no knowledge of it at the time, of course i knew discussion were in place. Considering i was Head-DC there was no co-ordination at that time.

And in no way did i say we fought off the combined forces of 1up and Angels, i think the facts and stats pointed out the fact that we were losing badly quite a few nights in a row. We never gave up, but saying that we were fighting off the combined forces is ludicrous and optimistic of anyone. From my personal knowledge we struggled handling just 1up incoming at the start of the round for a number of reasons. And when Angels did start attacking at the same nights as 1up then we had in the best of terms no chance in hell. Especially as Angels launched 1-2 ticks after all 1up fleets were launched. Not saying this was organised but just clever play by Angels command and BCs, Fair play.

And justify, no need to justify anything, politics if half the game, you can argue about fairness but when has a war been won alone, you can fight doggedly (like 1up i must say) but if your ambition was to win which was the case of Exi from tick start, then sitting around just accepting the 1up and Angels incoming (aswell as the odd random/gal attacks from other allies) then that would be just accepting defeat. You can say 1up didn't want to form blocks with anyone, but in my opinion that is just accepting defeat or lack of ambition to try and win. I have always respected 1up as an alliance though, end of the day it was a choice you guys made and is purely a matter of opinion whether it was the wrong one or not.

[KweKweK]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

erm..... it wasn't your post that I was quoting so I guess I'm not the only one who can't read, eh?

Also if there are a lot more scenario's why not list them? What you've stated there isn't a scenario, it's what happened.

I specificly commented on 1 particular bit of what u said. So far for the readin part

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

1up/Angels
eX/vgn/subh and more added rapidly after

A challenge is when you beat everything while the playing field is even or slightly against you. With the number of allies you had the outcome was a foregone conclusion irrsepective of any graphs you might want to throw into the equation. The only impressive bit here is 1up and Angels holding out as long as they did.

When did all of this exactly happen? You keep calling it an 1 sided war, but you fail to notice that its still undecided who the winner of round 15 will be. 4 more days to go and last I looked it was an 11 million score difference between eX and ND

[Forest]

Originally Posted by Forest

Just to add to that, coming into R11/12/13/14/15, all alliances had a CHOICE on how they would maneuvere politically.
I personally believe that this CHOICE is now removed.

And that single 'fact/opinion' is why I believe it has been bad for PA in general.

To answer the question from yet ANOTHER anonymous neg rep...

The choice is gone because allainces in some quarters have shown they will block to win pre-tick starts, and alliances not willing to block have shown to be twatted.
Therefor it stands to reason that in order to win, blocks need to be formed pre-tick start. And that is the end of fluid politics.

Now please, I am trying to provide reasons for my thinking, by just neg-repping anonymously, you really are showing lack of discussion skills.
If you dont agree with what I am saying, try and explain it heer, you really are doing yourselves no favours :/

[Forest]

Originally Posted by KweKweK

When did all of this exactly happen? You keep calling it an 1 sided war, but you fail to notice that its still undecided who the winner of round 15 will be. 4 more days to go and last I looked it was an 11 million score difference between eX and ND

We all know this round was over as a contest at least a week ago.