Angels/NewDawn

[Gimmick]

Originally Posted by Game^

So they should cut off their nose to spite their face then?

I fail to see how Subh and Angels would have a better chance of beating 1up with ND taken out the running. Especially given the fact Subh, LCH and Angels werent enough at the start of the round.......

its all an objective point of view who knows ;/ I guess we will just have to see how the round plays out.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

This is probably a question I'm liely to get flamed for but who cares.

Are DLR and ND going to admit to being allied and cooperating at every level now your planets staying open depends on it?

Well the rule seems to operate on the basis that if you're under alliance tags, it's inter-alliance cooperation so it's fine.

Or that's how I think it works

(please don't debate the support planets rule, I really hated trying to work out what it was and i'm still lost )

[olle]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

This is probably a question I'm liely to get flamed for but who cares.

Are DLR and ND going to admit to being allied and cooperating at every level now your planets staying open depends on it?

ND and DLR are doing things seperate.

DLR will hit the ones they benefit the most of(XP, score wise), atm its 1up. Im pretty sure if like Angels were on top DLR whould be hitting them instead.

But at some levels DLR and ND work together, thou like on raids, politics, and other stuff they do things indepent of eachother. As mentioned before, DLR are on there own in this free round

[wakey]

Originally Posted by aestuos

Can someone please explain to me what the 1up propaganda team are trying to achieve, all you seem to be doing is saying "why are all of these alliance teaming up on us" I honestly do admire the quality of your attacks AND defence you are all an extremely active well respected (for PA play) bunch of guys (and girls??) I dont think any1 would have been able to take you down alone so accept the fact that ppl realise you guys are good and help may have been needed. The ppl helping us cant catch you and do you think that their highest expectation is no 2 3 4 or 5??? No they want no 1. If we (ND) do get no 1 then you think the ppl helping us will go hmmm well we got 2nd (if they did) and be happy with it no. Its rediculous for you to think that. i HOPE than ND beats 1up not just to be no 1 but for the excitment of the game as it would end up like a free for all with whoever has the best intel wins.

Error

-Flying where angels fear to fly-

Atleast the 1up 'propaganda' is based on logic unlike ND's which seems to be based soley on desperation. If Angel or Subh or others jump into the attacks now they will basically ensure that they wont challenge for #1 spot themselves as they arent really ready to pull it off. They dont need 'tricked' into entering the war too early by ND's propaganda. They need to bide their time a bit and let 1up and ND back themseves down to a more realistic lead. Currently they are in a position where they may be able to help knock 1up off the top but to knock 1up off and then beat ND would be a fair challenge, especially when they would be prone to coming out of the 'war' with ND in first and themselves down in 8th or maybe even 9th (after all will ND keep at it long enough to ensure they are below subh or angels). A couple more days however would close both alliance righ up and maybe even give them enough of a lead over those below that they wont find themselves backed up in the chasing group later on thus giving them a clear and fairly even fight to the finish with ND, a fight they would stand a good chance of winning

Seeing as ND have exercised the right to wait till they have got themselves into a position to challenge and gain top spot before taking action in the past its the least they can do to let Subh and Angels and the rest get in the same viable position before they offer you help, because after all as alot of ND'ers keep saying "They are there to win, not to settle for second place"

[Ska]

Originally Posted by OK.:.VJ

ND and DLR are doing things seperate.

Except for joint channels, def, etc though right?

[pig]

Can I just say wakey that is a cracking post

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by lokken

Well the rule seems to operate on the basis that if you're under alliance tags, it's inter-alliance cooperation so it's fine.

Or that's how I think it works

(please don't debate the support planets rule, I really hated trying to work out what it was and i'm still lost )

I'm not going to debate it but it looks seriously like one rule for eXilition and another rule for everyone else. I'm more intrigued as to how PA team have defined that these two are allied after the constant repetition of ND/DLR being seperate entities and not working together in any way.

I've made my point so this is last I shall be posting on it.

[Spritfire]

I eat all your roids

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid

Can't Newdawn stop hitting us, so we can win? Please let me win! Please! Im old and bald, and I need to win for myself esteem!

Translated.

[SteInMetz]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

This is probably a question I'm liely to get flamed for but who cares.

Are DLR and ND going to admit to being allied and cooperating at every level now your planets staying open depends on it?

Anyway, how come multihunters tell 1up what they are gonna do? isnt that leaking info? :S

Edit: Added a quote

[Spritfire]

Originally Posted by Ska

Except for joint channels, def, etc though right?

Noone of the DLR ppl are in our Def channel. I even proved that to Assasin.

[Kargool]

Originally Posted by Spritfire

Noone of the DLR ppl are in our Def channel. I even proved that to Assasin.

Is this something the multihunters have a right to know about at all?

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Spritfire

I suggest you shut it.

o, or what? Your dads gonna come and get me? Wtf, are you 12?

Originally Posted by Spritfire

DLR decides what to do on their own.

ND Dont tell DLR where to go.

We have a nap, so easy is that.

We are defending them on a fleet catch YES WE ARE!!! - Is that not allowed?

DLR are not support planets, they are an alliance.

Whatever you say Jack, you're the master race.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

Translated.

If Sid was that desperate to win easily, he'd just have brought back blocking to the extreme.

[Game^]

Is my screen missing a post by Spritfire somewhere?

[Gimmick]

Originally Posted by Game^

Is my screen missing a post by Spritfire somewhere?

either lok deleted it or spitfire did out of shame.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

If Sid was that desperate to win easily, he'd just have brought back blocking to the extreme.

Sid doesnt just want to win this round, he wants to win the next too. So blocking with maybe get him to win this round, but it would probably destroy 1ups posibilities next round.
I really thought you knew Sid.

[Game^]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

Sid doesnt just want to win this round, he wants to win the next too. So blocking with maybe get him to win this round, but it would probably destroy 1ups posibilities next round.
I really thought you knew Sid.

Blocking would mean he had allies for next round also. Any ally willing to enter into a block with 1up now knows they arent going to win the round, so you are not going to have the situation of them fighting it out........

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

Sid doesnt just want to win this round, he wants to win the next too. So blocking with maybe get him to win this round, but it would probably destroy 1ups posibilities next round.
I really thought you knew Sid.

Yes, which is why I know Sid isnt interested in the past repeating itself.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by wakey

Atleast the 1up 'propaganda' is based on logic unlike ND's which seems to be based soley on desperation. If Angel or Subh or others jump into the attacks now they will basically ensure that they wont challenge for #1 spot themselves as they arent really ready to pull it off. They dont need 'tricked' into entering the war too early by ND's propaganda. They need to bide their time a bit and let 1up and ND back themseves down to a more realistic lead. Currently they are in a position where they may be able to help knock 1up off the top but to knock 1up off and then beat ND would be a fair challenge, especially when they would be prone to coming out of the 'war' with ND in first and themselves down in 8th or maybe even 9th (after all will ND keep at it long enough to ensure they are below subh or angels). A couple more days however would close both alliance righ up and maybe even give them enough of a lead over those below that they wont find themselves backed up in the chasing group later on thus giving them a clear and fairly even fight to the finish with ND, a fight they would stand a good chance of winning

Seeing as ND have exercised the right to wait till they have got themselves into a position to challenge and gain top spot before taking action in the past its the least they can do to let Subh and Angels and the rest get in the same viable position before they offer you help, because after all as alot of ND'ers keep saying "They are there to win, not to settle for second place"

The issue is that on their own ND get pasted, 1up come out still first, with the ability to take shedloads of XP off their nearest rivals because they'll have stones to run away with, thereby waltzing into the distance. Such events have happened in round 11 and round 14 whereby people didn't take action against 1up where people were persuaded they weren't a problem in a situation, so I think piling in for the sake of giving themselves a fighting chance of winning is a capital idea. Even if they hit 1up, they won't be targetted - this has been made clear, so the gap will close just the same to ND, and even more to 1up. Infact, as they've been going at the moment, the gap is already closing for them by doing exactly as i've described.

This isn't about who decided to do what when, it's about necessity for all parties involved. Because you're all drinking at the last chance saloon, at the decisive point at the round. It is simply the time where you decide to give yourself a shot at #1 by closing 1up down and opening up competition with less prestigious adversaries, or by allowing 1up a victory against ND where they jump up and twat the next one in the queue and it's round over.

[Paddy]

Ok I'll admit I haven't read every post on this thread as it was just expanding way to quickly and I've been out all day. One thing has stuck out to me though from what I've read:
People seem to believe that other allies are not already hitting 1up.

People have said that the war is fairly even and that "staying out of it" is in the best interests of Subh/Angels. The fact is that they are already in it to a degree. Already 1up have the upper hand, and that is with other allies helping ND. If these allies stop hitting 1up what will happen? The only even vaguely plausible outcome is that 1up hammer ND and win the war in a few days.

Where does this leave Subh/Angels? Either of them might be ranked 2nd, but they would then be up against a highly motivated, confident 1up. Noone would disagree that even now 1up would easily beat any ally playing this round 1v1. If they were even more motivated and confident what chance would either Subh or Angels have against them?

The only option Subh and Angels have if they want a chance of winning this round is to continue hitting 1up and maybe even increase their targetting of 1up. If they do this then ok there is a possibility that 1up will switch targetting to them when ND become poor targets. However they will still have a far greater chance of getting the number 1 spot than if they let ND fight 1up alone.

If all 3 allies go all out on 1up and keep it going there is very little chance of 1up winning the round (of course it is still a possibility). If 1up find themselves in this position what will they do? I would fully expect them to make sure the alliance that made them lose the #1 spot didn't win (namely ND). This actually gives either Subh or Angels an incredibly good chance of winning the round, as ND will firstly be weakened by the war with 1up and secondly will have continued 1up incomings even after 1up are knocked off the #1 spot.

Now you might ask what is in this for ND in the first place. If ND hadn't taken the initiative to hit 1up it was fairly obvious how the round would have played out. 1up would have won, probably with a scrap between ND, Angels and Subh for 2nd place. ND have been 2nd for the past 2 rounds and are still in search of a 1st place finish. By hitting 1up we at least give ourselves a glimmer of a hope of winning, even if the chance is not a particularly high one. We've prooved we can finish 2nd, we wanted to go for 1st.

[cypher]

paddy, the thing which you and most other ND members are forgetting, PA is about making friends. You think you took the initiative, but in reality you did NOT. Subh did and angels maybe, at that point you left them in the cold and didn't want to help them. (you being ND) Meaning you didn't make good friends there... Now it's the other way around however. You needing them, instead of them needing you. You suddenly expect them to jump for joy at the chance to help you. See the logic here?

[mazzelaar]

I also think playing the ultra altruistic "we, Nd, will happily take being bashed to death to allow you fantastic folks in subh/angels a chance to win the round. See how kind and fluffy we are? You should come help us because we're doing it for YOUR benefit" is taking it just a bit too far.

[Paddy]

Where in my post did I say that it hugely benefitted ND for Subh and Angels to hit 1up? If anything because ND are hitting 1up it gives Subh and Angels something to aim for in the round. If it had played out with noone hitting 1up then they most Subh/Angels could hope for was 2nd place. If ND had hit 1up by themselves then ok Subh/Angels only have to fight each other for 2nd place as ND will be out of the running. If Subh/Angels help ND hit 1up then it gives them a shot at winning the round.

As I said in my previous post it doesn't even help ND hugely as by doing this ND are effectively giving up a very strong chance of 2nd place for a tiny chance of winning the round. If Subh/Angels hit 1up it will help ND yes but if they do then their chance of winning will almost certainly be higher than ND's.

Edit - Formatting

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Paddy

Where in my post did I say that it hugely benefitted ND for Subh and Angels to hit 1up? If anything because ND are hitting 1up it gives Subh and Angels something to aim for in the round. If it had played out with noone hitting 1up then they most Subh/Angels could hope for was 2nd place. If ND had hit 1up by themselves then ok Subh/Angels only have to fight each other for 2nd place as ND will be out of the running. If Subh/Angels help ND hit 1up then it gives them a shot at winning the round. As I said in my previous post it doesn't even help ND hugely as by doing this ND are effectively giving up a very strong chance of 2nd place for a tiny chance of winning the round. If Subh/Angels hit 1up it will help ND yes but if they do then their chance of winning will almost certainly be higher than ND's.

For the love of god, use the enter key

I'ts been a long, long day and my eyes hurt

Edit: <3 - ta

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

I also think playing the ultra altruistic "we, Nd, will happily take being bashed to death to allow you fantastic folks in subh/angels a chance to win the round. See how kind and fluffy we are? You should come help us because we're doing it for YOUR benefit" is taking it just a bit too far.

What, have you never heard of mutual benefit? In fact if 1up and ND hit each other so much subh or angels could storm away with this round!


PS Happy international surprise sex day everyone

[ChipZ^]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

PS Happy international surprise sex day everyone

I surprised a woman with sex on the way home from the pub. The police tell me it counts as rape . Life is so unfair.

[ReligFree]

Sorry but im in 1up. I run an AG in 1up and yet i completely see this as bullshit. Last round i organised some fleetcatches on eXi planets and they got def from there flack alliances because they couldnt cover it themselves and absolutely nothing happened in regards to closures etc. Now it seems that DLR get fleetcaught and admin decide to intervene? What an utter load of bullshit. Either admin need to sort there lives out and make the rules completely set in stone, you def your alliance and thats it, or make it so you can defend who you like. With the game mechanics as they are at the moment it encourages to an extent the possibility to defend other people. And so ofc ND/DLR used this, who wouldnt?

This is utter crap and the fact that DLR have been threatened with closure for what happened i feel is utterly outrageous.

I was DLR for 3 rounds, some of the guys i met in my very first week on IRC and still know them very very well and basically if they tell me (which they have) that ND and DLR are not co-operating to any serious extent other than there NAP then i believe it. DLR hit 1up gals, fair enough, ND hit 1up planets, thats there agenda. What is wrong with that? All top alliances have allied alliances who hit gals that they ask them too, it happens. Sort it out

[furball]

1) One fleetcatch on eXil. Yes, alliances allied to eXil agreed to help defend it. It's natural for all possible defenders to be sought out in the event of a fleet-catch when it's very difficult for a single alliance to cover it itself.

2) No admin has threatened DLR/ND, it was just vaguely mooted by one of the posters in this thread. However, there possibly was concern over DLR being a mere extension of ND and not a separate alliance. I don't know the details.


The two scenarios are entirely different. The fact that ND still hasn't got over last round really can't be helping it politically either - if this is the attitude its members and ex-members have towards alliances such as Subh and VGN who co-operated with eXilition successfully.

[Achilles]

I had thought not to post on this at all, but I wanted to outline the details of the incident refered to above for those who are uninformed.

It relates to a (fair size)1up fleetcatch on a DLR target. It was of the nature that DLR would not be able to send effective defence (due to their limited fleet compositions) and was large enough that ingal def would have proved impossible.* To save his fleet the DLR planet asked ND to defend him. Which they did, quite comprehensively.**

*The galaxy defence that was launched in the end was, admittedly, impressive.
** I wonder how many of their own members have seen 6 def fleets lately

[Grog]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Exactly how is joining an alliance you already have very strong ties to like recruiting to win a round of PA?

How is it any different?
It is the EXACT same thing. The only difference would be in scale & timing.
So its perfectly fine for 1up & any other alliance to kick inactives & add in actives with better score throughout the round, but if its all done at once theres something wrong with it?
I've gotta say that's one big pile of crap.
If its wrong, its wrong. Scale & timing can't change something from being perfectly acceptable to something deplorable.

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

What TomKat did may not be entirely ethical from a DLR point of view but if he doesn't want to play your very distinct style of play for this round (let's not forget you even tried to demand which race he went) then why shouldn't he go somewhere else?

Well I actually find nothing unethical with TomKats actions, but he was aware of what our style of play would be & what my expectations were before he joined. In fact I believe TomKat quite enjoyed his stay with us & his only reason for leaving was because his top 10 score had suddenly become attractive enough to 1up for them to accept him.

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

This is no way comparable to playing a whole round with the ideals of gaining as much score as humanly possible simply to give an alliance an undeserved win at the end simply by kicking a few inactives and taking in the high score planets.

Again it is completely comparable, it is the exact same thing. OK so 1up kicks inactives & adds recruits once a week or whatever it is. Instead of waiting & doing it all at once. Again the only difference would be on the matter of scale & timing.
I'm beginning to see why you're defending TomKats hypocrisy, it seems you have a case of it yourself.

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

For the record I don't believe this is the case and I do not think that DLR will be joining the ND tag at any point but to call tomkat names just because he went to an alliance he'd rather be in is fairly juvenile.

I didn't at any point call TomKat names, I like TomKat, I found him to be a good guy to have around during his stay with us.
I simply pointed out the hypocrisy of something he posted.

[ChipZ^]

So during the course of this thread, the DLR/ND relationship has gone from definatly no co-operation on any level, to NAP, to alliance? (defending another allaince is clearly more than a NAP)

I beleive that if DLR and ND are allied then ofc they can defend eachother, but if not, then they should get atleast a warning from MH.

[ChipZ^]

Also 1up only like tomkat when he has a big planet

[Grog]

Originally Posted by ChipZ^

So during the course of this thread, the DLR/ND relationship has gone from definatly no co-operation on any level, to NAP, to alliance? (defending another allaince is clearly more than a NAP)

I beleive that if DLR and ND are allied then ofc they can defend eachother, but if not, then they should get atleast a warning from MH.

DLR is NOT co-operating with ND in it's war with 1up.
I think over the last 2 nights 1up has at the most had 10 DLR fleets hitting them, probably more like 6.
Out of the 40 odd attack fleets we launch every night, they've recieved a very small %.

We've thrown more then that at them on many nights earlier in the round & I know for a fact that both Angels & subh have had more DLR incoming then 1up has.
Yes Gate had a fleet hitting elviz, yes 1up tried to catch him & yes ND defended Gate.
It was afterall 400 BS & thats not an easy loss to swallow. It was well established last round that there is nothing at all wrong with another alliance defending against a fleet catch.

[ChipZ^]

Originally Posted by Grog

DLR is NOT co-operating with ND in it's war with 1up.
I think over the last 2 nights 1up has at the most had 10 DLR fleets hitting them, probably more like 6.
Out of the 40 odd attack fleets we launch every night, they've recieved a very small %.

We've thrown more then that at them on many nights earlier in the round & I know for a fact that both Angels & subh have had more DLR incoming then 1up has.
Yes Gate had a fleet hitting elviz, yes 1up tried to catch him & yes ND defended Gate.
It was afterall 400 BS & thats not an easy loss to swallow. It was well established last round that there is nothing at all wrong with another alliance defending against a fleet catch.

Even alliances that arn't cooperating atall? thats a piss take.

[intrance]

Originally Posted by ChipZ^

Even alliances that arn't cooperating atall? thats a piss take.

he didnt say they were not cooperating at all. he said they were not cooperating in attacks on 1up.

Its funny how people only read what they wana read...

[Gate]

Because, strategically speaking, donating 420 BS to 1up is in ND's best interest?

Hence the 3 (rather than 6) defence fleets from ND; the rest coming from ex galmates, friends of friends etc.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by Gate

Because, strategically speaking, donating 420 BS to 1up is in ND's best interest?

Hence the 3 (rather than 6) defence fleets from ND; the rest coming from ex galmates, friends of friends etc.

Poor reasoning as anyone could reason with this track of logic to go against the support planet rules set by the multihunters last round.

You're essentially playing as an ND member Gate - outside the tag. Sounds an awful lot like a support planet to me considering the type of build your planet has.

But I don't mind too much really - after all, you probably got more defense fleets sent to you than most REAL ND members have and that surely can't reflect too good.

[Tomkat]

Originally Posted by ChipZ^

Also 1up only like tomkat when he has a big planet

They like me because of my big penis too

[Gate]

'(f) Support Accounts are accounts which are dedicated to undertaking specific
and repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit for a
planet/organisation, where an organisation is defined as an alliance or galaxy.'

This is the definition of support planets that mh have to work by, and they have to use this definition, not one that is made up by you, and they have to use their opinion on 'unfair', rather than yours.

Do I undertake specific & repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit? I hit 1up. Quite a lot recently in fact, and I use the resources available to me. So your implication is that I should not hit 1up, as this would be supporting ND? Or that if mates from any alliance come and tell me 'xxx has his anti BS out', I should ignore this and allow xxx to keep his roids? If mh wish to close me on this point as an ND support planet, then I suggest all subh and angels planets that also hit 1up or used joint intelligence on 1up fleet movements to perform retals or fleetcatches should also immediately be closed the moment they repeat this action.

Do NDers undertake specific and repeated actions resulting in an unfair benefit? Well, until any ND member repeats sending defence to me, it would be impossible to convict them of this.

[bwtmc]

Originally Posted by ReligFree

Sorry but im in 1up. I run an AG in 1up and yet i completely see this as bullshit. Last round i organised some fleetcatches on eXi planets and they got def from there flack alliances because they couldnt cover it themselves and absolutely nothing happened in regards to closures etc. Now it seems that DLR get fleetcaught and admin decide to intervene? What an utter load of bullshit. Either admin need to sort there lives out and make the rules completely set in stone, you def your alliance and thats it, or make it so you can defend who you like. With the game mechanics as they are at the moment it encourages to an extent the possibility to defend other people. And so ofc ND/DLR used this, who wouldnt?

This is utter crap and the fact that DLR have been threatened with closure for what happened i feel is utterly outrageous.

I was DLR for 3 rounds, some of the guys i met in my very first week on IRC and still know them very very well and basically if they tell me (which they have) that ND and DLR are not co-operating to any serious extent other than there NAP then i believe it. DLR hit 1up gals, fair enough, ND hit 1up planets, thats there agenda. What is wrong with that? All top alliances have allied alliances who hit gals that they ask them too, it happens. Sort it out

More than one alliance was involved in the organisation of the fleetcatch, thus it made sense to offer support.

There's a real question of intent here. Given DLR's physical presence in ND for some rounds now, you have to expect a degree of resistance against this kind of play. DLR have intentionally, happily stepped into a grey area that's never really been given enough attention.

The problem right, is that alliances like Vengeance, who offered ~3 defence fleets for that catch last round did so according to politics that evolved during the round itself.

DLR however, quite clearly set out it's objectives, which include to support NewDawn to a rather large extent, before the round even began. There's very little difference between this and a second tag for a full alliance. That's where the problem is. A 15 man tag is a battle group, it's not an alliance. The implications of that, I really truly don't know but it doesn't lead the game in a better direction, that i'm certain of.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Grog

How is it any different?
It is the EXACT same thing. The only difference would be in scale & timing.
So its perfectly fine for 1up & any other alliance to kick inactives & add in actives with better score throughout the round, but if its all done at once theres something wrong with it?
I've gotta say that's one big pile of crap.
If its wrong, its wrong. Scale & timing can't change something from being perfectly acceptable to something deplorable.

It's the scale and timing that makes it entirely different, surely you aren't too dim to see that. Adding planets throughout the round is soemthing everyone does and is part of the game. Adding 14/15 very high scoring planets close to the end with the intention of gaining ranks is not.

Originally Posted by Grog

Well I actually find nothing unethical with TomKats actions, but he was aware of what our style of play would be & what my expectations were before he joined. In fact I believe TomKat quite enjoyed his stay with us & his only reason for leaving was because his top 10 score had suddenly become attractive enough to 1up for them to accept him.

By definition of the world hypocrisy you don't like what he did and therefore you _do_ have a problem with it. Possibly unethical was the wrong word but it still got up your nose.

TomKat did apply to 1up before ticks started and we did want to take him because he has a good history with all the 1up command. However, there were concerns about his activity which, given the nature of limited alliance places, made the decision a dificult one ultimately ending in 1up turning down his app in favour of someone we thought would be more active. In the end he showed his activity was good and he would be a bonus to 1up, why should we take him?

Originally Posted by Grog

Again it is completely comparable, it is the exact same thing. OK so 1up kicks inactives & adds recruits once a week or whatever it is. Instead of waiting & doing it all at once. Again the only difference would be on the matter of scale & timing.
I'm beginning to see why you're defending TomKats hypocrisy, it seems you have a case of it yourself.

You're really graspign at straws here. If you you're genuinely saying kicking 3/4 inactives during the round and adding a real applicant with vouches and interviews is comparable with waiting until late in the round to remove inactive and add appraoching a third of the total number of permissable members in a bid to achieve a ranking you didn't deserve is comparable then you're either stupid or just have no argument. I, personally, don't think it's the former.

Originally Posted by Grog

I didn't at any point call TomKat names, I like TomKat, I found him to be a good guy to have around during his stay with us.
I simply pointed out the hypocrisy of something he posted.

To call someone a hypocrite is to call someone a name. Last I heard freedom of choice was the right of everyone. If TomKat preferred 1up of DLR thats your loss and our gain.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Whatever you say Jack, you're the master race.

Just to clear something up.

If this offended anyone then I apologise but it wasn't my intention.

It's a quote from Highlander that I just thought was both funny and applicable given the tone of the post from Spritfire.

Worth noting that spritfire is a dutch schmuck

Given the neg reps I thought I'd best explain myself and say sorry to whomever it might have upset.

[Gate]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Worth noting that spritfire is a dutch schmuck

Spritfire's DUTCH!?

Why did no-one tell me this?

[Nadar]

Thought he was half danish and half norwegian

[furball]

Probably a good thing that you cleared that up mazz

[gzambo]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

I also think playing the ultra altruistic "we, Nd, will happily take being bashed to death to allow you fantastic folks in subh/angels a chance to win the round. See how kind and fluffy we are? You should come help us because we're doing it for YOUR benefit" is taking it just a bit too far.

nd pissed people of with their tactics/politics last rd
nd pissed people off with their tactics/politics this rd

a pattern is forming here

[Achilles]

Originally Posted by Gate

If mh wish to close me on this point as an ND support planet, then I suggest all subh and angels planets that also hit 1up or used joint intelligence on 1up fleet movements to perform retals or fleetcatches should also immediately be closed the moment they repeat this action.

I believe this is a very narrow sighted view of this issue. It does not take into account the fact that the rules must apply to all equally.

It is claimed (by DLR and ND both) that DLR are in no way a support alliance for ND and will not aid them substantially in gaining first spot at any point in the round. In this case defending DLR planets during fleetcatches etc would not be a violation of the OOGOOA rule.

It is claimed (by many) that DLR are most assuredly a support alliance of ND with the aim of helping ND to #1 by any and all means necessary. In this case defending DLR planets during fleetcatches etc would be a violation of said rule.

Now, the problem is that until the round has fully played out the multihunter team have absolutely no way of knowing which scenario is true. If they do nothing and DLR later turn around and kingmake ND a lot of people would have a very serious grievance. Even if DLR do not do this, every time they do do something that even indirectly benefits ND this issue will raise its head again.

As a direct example. Gate freely admits he has been hitting 1up lately. This is, ofc, perfectly acceptable. However, every time we see now see 400 DE/BS from Gate we can argue that the only reason this is possible is because ND defended him out of tag. Does this mean that every attack on 1up by Gate could now be construed as a 'specific and repeated action' resulting in 'an unfair benefit for [ND]'?

A further point is this. If this kind of defence were to be ruled permissable what is to stop any alliance from immediately forming wings, mass recruiting them and using them primarily as OOGOOA def planets. As the alliances would both be under their own tags and nominally have a different command you could argue the situation is exactly the same as the ND/DLR one.

At the very least I believe this situation could only end with every alliance ultimately forming uber-blocks to increase their defpool through shared defence channels. Now, this is nothing new to PA, but it has not been a feature of the post PAX era and I do not believe that many want it to become one.

ps It is my personal opinion that DLR and ND are not hatching a devious conspiracy to wtfpwn the whole universe through support play. However, I cannot know this to be true. And neither can anyone else, including PATeam.

[Grog]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

It's the scale and timing that makes it entirely different, surely you aren't too dim to see that. Adding planets throughout the round is soemthing everyone does and is part of the game. Adding 14/15 very high scoring planets close to the end with the intention of gaining ranks is not.

Dim? No Mazz one thing i'm certainly not is dim.
If you remove inactives throughout the round & add new higher scoring planets. Is it not with the intention of improving your alliances score & gaining ranks?
You're trying to claim that somethings wrong, but only if done on a certain scale. That's absurd. Something is either wrong or it isn't. Moral or immoral, honorable or dishonorable, scale never has anything to with it.

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

By definition of the world hypocrisy you don't like what he did and therefore you _do_ have a problem with it. Possibly unethical was the wrong word but it still got up your nose.

hy·poc·ri·sies
The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.

It has nothing at all to do with me liking it or not. It's a matter of him stating that it would be dishonorable for us to do something that he himself had already done. Perhaps you were unaware of the definition of the word?

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

You're really graspign at straws here. If you you're genuinely saying kicking 3/4 inactives during the round and adding a real applicant with vouches and interviews is comparable with waiting until late in the round to remove inactive and add appraoching a third of the total number of permissable members in a bid to achieve a ranking you didn't deserve is comparable then you're either stupid or just have no argument. I, personally, don't think it's the former.

I'm simply looking for some logic in your arguement.
The only reasoning you seem to have for it to be wrong is that you don't like it. It's obviously not wrong, as its commonly accepted practice throughout several alliances.
Is there some invisible line that gets crossed somewhere when you've crossed the line from whats acceptable & whats despicable?

3/4 members is fine, 15 is obviously to many.
So where's the line? Who gets to decide the line? Do we take a vote? Or do you just know it when you see it?
Please, show me some sort of actual logic to your arguement.

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

To call someone a hypocrite is to call someone a name. Last I heard freedom of choice was the right of everyone. If TomKat preferred 1up of DLR thats your loss and our gain.

Yes to call some a hypocrite is to call someone a name.
I didn't call TomKat a hypocrite, I said what he had posted was hypocritical. Surely you must be able to comprehend that someone can make a hypocritical comment without actually being a hypocrite.
It happens all the time, generally when someone isn't thinking through what they are saying.

[Grog]

Originally Posted by Achilles

It is claimed (by DLR and ND both) that DLR are in no way a support alliance for ND and will not aid them substantially in gaining first spot at any point in the round.

You have your information wrong.

DLR is not a support alliance for ND.
We are a seperate entity & at this point in time we are not helping ND in there war with 1up.

That however may change at any time.
We have made no statements at all about what our future plans may be.
Do not put words into our mouths.