|
|
26 May 2006, 08:20
|
#351
|
InSomniac
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 1,473
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä
Knowing all this, what would have been the point of ever cooperating with Insomnia and ND on 1up, as the inevitable result would have been coordinated incomings from them? Logic?
|
you would have got attacked if we killed 1up anyway. you expect us to say "oh well, 1up down...lets just leave omen alone"?
__________________
Runner up in the InSomnia 'Drunkest HC' competition - Currently on the wagon
Elysium | HR | eXilition | OuZo | ND | InSomnia | DLR
db battlegroup founder and spiritual leader
Sexytime HC of Belgians (#s3xytime)
Not so retired anymore....
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 08:56
|
#352
|
Good Son
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
You might want to read furball's post earlier on this thread. What you are writing is exactly why there was little interest in our ranks to go after 1up, as we know what would have followed anyways. You talk a lot about Omen's responsibilities, but you seem to fail to see that there really no use for us to gang on them with you if it means we'll get ganged - possibly in the middle of the war - by you. Perhaps you should have attacked 1up together with ND, then returned to sort Omen? Or maybe done it the other way around?
__________________
"Oh, wretched race of a day, children of chance and misery, why do ye compel me to say to you what it were most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is for ever beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. The second best for you, however, is soon to die". Silenus, tutor to Dionysos, speaking to King Midas.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 09:08
|
#353
|
InSomniac
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 1,473
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä
You might want to read furball's post earlier on this thread. What you are writing is exactly why there was little interest in our ranks to go after 1up, as we know what would have followed anyways. You talk a lot about Omen's responsibilities, but you seem to fail to see that there really no use for us to gang on them with you if it means we'll get ganged - possibly in the middle of the war - by you. Perhaps you should have attacked 1up together with ND, then returned to sort Omen? Or maybe done it the other way around?
|
mabey you as a HC should have gathered some balls and attacked them. at the moment i see you still not concentrating on 1up and you have the audacity to accuse us of playing for 2nd?
people wont do your dirty work for you, and to think that we would is very very arrogant of you.
__________________
Runner up in the InSomnia 'Drunkest HC' competition - Currently on the wagon
Elysium | HR | eXilition | OuZo | ND | InSomnia | DLR
db battlegroup founder and spiritual leader
Sexytime HC of Belgians (#s3xytime)
Not so retired anymore....
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 09:24
|
#354
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mek
mabey you as a HC should have gathered some balls and attacked them. at the moment i see you still not concentrating on 1up and you have the audacity to accuse us of playing for 2nd?
people wont do your dirty work for you, and to think that we would is very very arrogant of you.
|
well aparently your ball is away too as you still got your heads in the sand and just poking around
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 09:25
|
#355
|
Good Son
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mek
mabey you as a HC should have gathered some balls and attacked them. at the moment i see you still not concentrating on 1up and you have the audacity to accuse us of playing for 2nd?
people wont do your dirty work for you, and to think that we would is very very arrogant of you.
|
You are still dodging the point. Theory. Had we attacked 1up with ND/Insomnia as the vanguard, taking some hits from 1up, eventually coming on top. At the point where we're winning, suddenly, ND and Insomnia gangs on us, and take us out, ending on top of both 1up and Omen.
Who did the dirty work for who? I am rather sick of reading your rants about Omen trying to have other people do their dirty work, while you would have just wanted Omen to take down 1up, then backing off and charging on Omen.
If you are seriously aiming for #1, I don't see you doing nothing but waiting for someone else doing your dirty work too. Correct if I am wrong - also if you are just aiming for #2, yes, you're on it now. You'll just need to take out ND.
__________________
"Oh, wretched race of a day, children of chance and misery, why do ye compel me to say to you what it were most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is for ever beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. The second best for you, however, is soon to die". Silenus, tutor to Dionysos, speaking to King Midas.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 09:35
|
#356
|
Adelante
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 855
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazzelaar
FYI
A number of 1up planets have been roided multiple times by ND .
Just setting the record straight
|
Gate took my roids =(
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 09:37
|
#357
|
Registered Awesome Person
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Describing Omen's request for ND and Insomnia to launch earlier as 'flak' is a misconception.
No war is going to end in one night. It would have taken over a week to really shred some value from 1up - and 1up's retals would have hit both Omen and ND/Ins in any event. I'm sure that Omen would have been happy to commit to the same sort of action in the next couple of days as thanks for proving their friendship, wouldn't they Keizari?
The only person outside of Omen who really seems to see it from Omen's perspective appears to be myself. They weren't looking to pull a fast one, they were just trying to make sure that they weren't stabbed in the back - no-one wants to end up being gang-banged by 1up/ND/Ins.
Again, it's understandable that ND/Ins didn't see this from Omen's point of view. However, it remains my belief that if either ND or Insomnia was to win this round, they would have required Omen's assistance in taking down 1up. I don't think they could have done it themselves.
__________________
Finally free!
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 09:39
|
#358
|
a pain
Join Date: May 2005
Location: .ro
Posts: 260
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
oi. gate took your roids, why didn't you turn that into a personal vendetta and block with 2 other alliances to roid his whole gal into oblivion? (and then arrogangly brag about it as if it were a real accomplishment)
__________________
needles and pins
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 10:06
|
#359
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 260
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
Well, here's one really easy answer to that.
Planet X has a huge stockpile of resources.
He's in Alliance Y.
He leaves the tag.
Alliance Y's score doesn't change.
70 ticks later he spends the resources.
Then rejoins alliance Y.
A few ticks later the new ships come out and alliance Y gets score for resources it already got score for previously.
|
Here is another scenario, though.
Planet X is in alliance Y.
He, and some friends in the same alliance, have an agreement with alliance Z.
1 tick before round end, they all leave for alliance Z.
Alliance Z wins.
Alliance Y is f*cked.
I think that's far more abusable. Losing the score if a member decides to leave should not be an option, but there certainly should be regulations to close that and other loopholes.
__________________
(XelNaga) Everybody please vote for Planetarion at http://www.mpogd.com !!!! We are second, we have to get first place back!
(SethMace) omg 2nd!!!
(SethMace) we must block with 3rd to take them down!!!11
(Marneus) also the damn thing aint always right 4 + 79 = i type 81 and it kicked me back to the login again grrr
Last edited by XelNaga; 26 May 2006 at 10:12.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 10:13
|
#360
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
No war is going to end in one night. It would have taken over a week to really shred some value from 1up - and 1up's retals would have hit both Omen and ND/Ins in any event.
|
Not according to Sid.
Quote:
The only person outside of Omen who really seems to see it from Omen's perspective appears to be myself. They weren't looking to pull a fast one, they were just trying to make sure that they weren't stabbed in the back - no-one wants to end up being gang-banged by 1up/ND/Ins.
|
They did end up getting gang-banged by 1up/ND/Insomnia. What the hell could have gone worse for them?
Quote:
Again, it's understandable that ND/Ins didn't see this from Omen's point of view. However, it remains my belief that if either ND or Insomnia was to win this round, they would have required Omen's assistance in taking down 1up. I don't think they could have done it themselves.
|
And here we have the marvellous example of a round with many equally powerful alliances at the top of the rankings that actually managed to make political play virtually impossible leading to a rather dull round. Omen NAPing angels worried ND and insomnia who because 1up were initially politically non-existent were only left with each other. (Oh yes they finally made a monkey!)
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 10:22
|
#361
|
Drink is Good
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,122
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerome
i agree with wishie that if exi used the donation thing they would've been hounded. i can't think of even one half-reasonable reason why the PAteam allow it. i mean it's funny really, considering all the 1up players talking about playing pa "the way it was meant to be played" - good job! don't get me wrong, i have nothing against the action itself as it's legal and using all ingame features legally to improve yourself in innovative fashion is always great in my eyes, but hypocrisy is just as fantastic too
|
qft.
__________________
Can we please have a moment of silence...........
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 10:23
|
#362
|
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by XelNaga
Here is another scenario, though.
Planet X is in alliance Y.
He, and some friends in the same alliance, have an agreement with alliance Z.
1 tick before round end, they all leave for alliance Z.
Alliance Z wins.
Alliance Y is f*cked.
I think that's far more abusable. Losing the score if a member decides to leave should not be an option, but there certainly should be regulations to close that and other loopholes.
|
That problem is exactly the same currently. They could even leave 73 ticks before the end and and add their score to alliance Z.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 10:28
|
#363
|
Registered Awesome Person
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
Not according to Sid.
|
But - it was accepted that if Omen kept gaining on 1up, 1up would have to switch its fire to Omen. This would thereby present the opportunity to ND/Ins.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
They did end up getting gang-banged by 1up/ND/Insomnia. What the hell could have gone worse for them?
|
You're talking about something completely different.
I was talking about Omen/ND/Ins blocking together to hit 1up, and then ND/Ins turning on Omen. You're talking about all 3 alliances generally doing sod-all, and then 1up/ND/Ins hitting Omen. No Omen block = no similarity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
Omen NAPing angels worried ND and insomnia who because 1up were initially politically non-existent were only left with each other. (Oh yes they finally made a monkey!)
|
Omen's NAP with Angels may well be one of the least defendable events in PA's history.
__________________
Finally free!
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 10:36
|
#364
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austria, Vienna
Posts: 326
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä
Knowing all this, what would have been the point of ever cooperating with Insomnia and ND on 1up, as the inevitable result would have been coordinated incomings from them? Logic?
|
ok i'll try to explain: now u have to fight for #1 against 1up, ND and Insomnia with 1up beeing hardest to kill imo. If u had taken down 1up together with ND and Ins there would be 1 big threat less to deal with.
another possible szenario if u would have choosen the cooperation: the war against 1up takes longer than expected and afterwards ND and Ins don't have enough time to overtake Omen in the ranks and therefor your ally wins.
but the way you did choose left u without any chances.
__________________
eXilition
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 10:39
|
#365
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
But - it was accepted that if Omen kept gaining on 1up, 1up would have to switch its fire to Omen. This would thereby present the opportunity to ND/Ins.
|
No they wouldn't. 1up generally don't give a shit where they finish if they don't finish first. If they maintain even the slimmest chance of finishing number one overall through hitting ND/insomnia ahead of Omen I rather think they will. There was a thread vaguely around this topic last round I think.
Quote:
I was talking about Omen/ND/Ins blocking together to hit 1up, and then ND/Ins turning on Omen. You're talking about all 3 alliances generally doing sod-all, and then 1up/ND/Ins hitting Omen. No Omen block = no similarity.
|
I know, my point was the effect was the same. Omen don't win, probable range of finishes #2-#4 not much different.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 10:59
|
#366
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 260
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned
That problem is exactly the same currently. They could even leave 73 ticks before the end and and add their score to alliance Z.
|
How could I not see that. Damn me.
/me goes hide
__________________
(XelNaga) Everybody please vote for Planetarion at http://www.mpogd.com !!!! We are second, we have to get first place back!
(SethMace) omg 2nd!!!
(SethMace) we must block with 3rd to take them down!!!11
(Marneus) also the damn thing aint always right 4 + 79 = i type 81 and it kicked me back to the login again grrr
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 11:08
|
#367
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Almeida
ok i'll try to explain: now u have to fight for #1 against 1up, ND and Insomnia with 1up beeing hardest to kill imo. If u had taken down 1up together with ND and Ins there would be 1 big threat less to deal with.
another possible szenario if u would have choosen the cooperation: the war against 1up takes longer than expected and afterwards ND and Ins don't have enough time to overtake Omen in the ranks and therefor your ally wins.
but the way you did choose left u without any chances.
|
think you and all other nubs missed the key event here or just ignore it somhow.
after the first initial contacts thet omen said ok too, target was switched from galraids to more 1 up oriented targets and suprise suprise, we got a nice and decent planned incomming, well coordinated from ins and nd. so the issue here did the ins/nd hc who made the deal just do it scew over omen for cheap roids? or hand over the victory to 1up? or was it a case of boosting internal morale? dont get it :/
so why should we trust you guys more then you morons finally noticed the 1up treat and took contact the second time?
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 11:10
|
#368
|
Drink is Good
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,122
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
I wondered when 1up would start posting again
__________________
Can we please have a moment of silence...........
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 11:17
|
#369
|
Registered Awesome Person
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
No they wouldn't. 1up generally don't give a shit where they finish if they don't finish first. If they maintain even the slimmest chance of finishing number one overall through hitting ND/insomnia ahead of Omen I rather think they will. There was a thread vaguely around this topic last round I think.
|
I expect it's in the 800+ reply thread, so I'm not going hunting.
I accept that 1up would have hit ND/Insomnia before Omen. This is a given. However, I don't believe that 1up would have kept not hitting Omen if Omen was, say, just 2 million score behind them. I believe that their targetting would switch, following your own premise on the probability of finishing #1 overall.
__________________
Finally free!
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 11:21
|
#370
|
;D!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,810
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoo
oi. gate took your roids, why didn't you turn that into a personal vendetta and block with 2 other alliances to roid his whole gal into oblivion? (and then arrogangly brag about it as if it were a real accomplishment)
|
There was no cooperation between any alliances in hitting that galaxy. At all.
If there was, why would the 'blocked' alliances allow their biggest planet to receive some large waves? Oh wait, you don't need logic.
__________________
[ND]
Kicked from Ascendancy
Proud to have been a Dark Lord Rising.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 11:22
|
#371
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
I expect it's in the 800+ reply thread, so I'm not going hunting.
I accept that 1up would have hit ND/Insomnia before Omen. This is a given. However, I don't believe that 1up would have kept not hitting Omen if Omen was, say, just 2 million score behind them. I believe that their targetting would switch, following your own premise on the probability of finishing #1 overall.
|
The problem it's not a sole hit x, y or z for greater effect, rinse and repeat formula. If you can use the concept of MAD appropriately you increase your chances of winning.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 11:45
|
#372
|
Registered Awesome Person
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
The problem it's not a sole hit x, y or z for greater effect, rinse and repeat formula. If you can use the concept of MAD appropriately you increase your chances of winning.
|
I agree. Any alliance who chooses to hit 1up must accept that 1up may choose to destroy their round as a reward for so doing.
It's for the other alliances to find a way past this. In this situation, I'd say that overwhelming force (fleets) conquers all, the best defence is a best offence, insert redundant cliche here, etc.
__________________
Finally free!
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 11:51
|
#373
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
I agree. Any alliance who chooses to hit 1up must accept that 1up may choose to destroy their round as a reward for so doing.
It's for the other alliances to find a way past this. In this situation, I'd say that overwhelming force (fleets) conquers all, the best defence is a best offence, insert redundant cliche here, etc.
|
But it's not really is it? 1up are extremely value heavy with pretty big fleets. They could roid any secondary alliance into the dust. This is an essential point that emerges due to the -1 alliance def bonus.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 12:01
|
#374
|
Registered Awesome Person
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
But it's not really is it? 1up are extremely value heavy with pretty big fleets. They could roid any secondary alliance into the dust. This is an essential point that emerges due to the -1 alliance def bonus.
|
It depends on how the block acts. If we had competent alliances making up the block, I'd arrange a hell of a lot of fleetcatches on those 1up members returning from hitting whichever secondary alliance 1up chooses to hit.
Of course, that's one hell of an if. One that we've already seen doesn't apply in the present situation :crymeariver: .
__________________
Finally free!
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 12:04
|
#375
|
Vitriolic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: #public
Posts: 1,506
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
No they wouldn't. 1up generally don't give a shit where they finish if they don't finish first.
|
Correctamundo. "If it ain't first then who cares?" is our attitude with regards to 1ups final rank.
__________________
Chief [ 1up] Chimp.
<@JBG> by the way is mazzelaar a community account that everyone in 1up logs into when they're feeling angry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
mazzelaar has always reminded me of a hungry hungry hippo. Except instead of eating marbles he just bites the heads off new AD posters
|
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 12:10
|
#376
|
Vitriolic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: #public
Posts: 1,506
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
It depends on how the block acts. If we had competent alliances making up the block, I'd arrange a hell of a lot of fleetcatches on those 1up members returning from hitting whichever secondary alliance 1up chooses to hit..
|
You make it sound incredibly easy. That level of organisation has never, ever been used for any reasonable length of time in PA. The amount of organisation and planning that goes into a single fleetcatch for a single alliance it rather large, as I'm sure you're aware. To do this accross multiple alliances on multiple planets with multiple fleetclasses is a headache not a single MO would ilke to endure for more than a day at the most.
And define a "helluva lot". Fleetcatches are, more often than not, unsuccessful and, as JBG says, we are value heavy thus you must use more of a given ship type. You must cut down on gal defence somehow and you must have all your members idling about just waiting for a given opportunity.
If you say it really reall quckly then yeah, it's dead simple. In reality it's not particularly feasible in the medium term, never mind the long term.
__________________
Chief [ 1up] Chimp.
<@JBG> by the way is mazzelaar a community account that everyone in 1up logs into when they're feeling angry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
mazzelaar has always reminded me of a hungry hungry hippo. Except instead of eating marbles he just bites the heads off new AD posters
|
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 12:29
|
#377
|
Registered Awesome Person
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazzelaar
If you say it really reall quckly then yeah, it's dead simple. In reality it's not particularly feasible in the medium term, never mind the long term.
|
You're right. It would be a huge challenge, one that hasn't been met for a very long time. In fact, I don't believe that the present alliances have the ability to do this, excluding yourselves and those who have come from pia (eXilition and Omen).
The block in question would need a decent swathe of BC/MOs across the block with responsibilty for each type of fleetcatch. Unfortunatly reality indeed hits us, and tells us that it's just not possible to strip value from a stronger alliance with the present alliance situation.
__________________
Finally free!
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 12:45
|
#378
|
InSomniac
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 1,473
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by robban1
well aparently your ball is away too as you still got your heads in the sand and just poking around
|
mabey you should actually have a clue about whats going on before you make your next post, there are some idiotic posters in omen...you are 1
__________________
Runner up in the InSomnia 'Drunkest HC' competition - Currently on the wagon
Elysium | HR | eXilition | OuZo | ND | InSomnia | DLR
db battlegroup founder and spiritual leader
Sexytime HC of Belgians (#s3xytime)
Not so retired anymore....
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 13:05
|
#379
|
Vitriolic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: #public
Posts: 1,506
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
You're right. It would be a huge challenge, one that hasn't been met for a very long time. In fact, I don't believe that the present alliances have the ability to do this, excluding yourselves and those who have come from pia (eXilition and Omen).
The block in question would need a decent swathe of BC/MOs across the block with responsibilty for each type of fleetcatch. Unfortunatly reality indeed hits us, and tells us that it's just not possible to strip value from a stronger alliance with the present alliance situation.
|
I'd doubt whether ourselves or exil could keep it up for more than a day or perhaps two. Fleet catches are exhaustive in terms of fleet and hugely intensive in terms of staffing. I think I count on one hand the ones I've seen successful in the PAX era. Everything in current PA is against this in my opinion. An alliance of 60 members has to be very active and organised to pull off a single fleetcatch so I think even if alliances were working together the potential for successfully catching multiple fleets by mutiple alliances is tiny and fleets would be better used getting out there attacking and retalling.
__________________
Chief [ 1up] Chimp.
<@JBG> by the way is mazzelaar a community account that everyone in 1up logs into when they're feeling angry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
mazzelaar has always reminded me of a hungry hungry hippo. Except instead of eating marbles he just bites the heads off new AD posters
|
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 13:18
|
#380
|
Drink is Good
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,122
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mek
mabey you should actually have a clue about whats going on before you make your next post, there are some idiotic posters in omen...you are 1
|
maybe insomnia should have a better PR person because you're just going round in circles
__________________
Can we please have a moment of silence...........
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 13:35
|
#381
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austria, Vienna
Posts: 326
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by robban1
think you and all other nubs missed the key event here or just ignore it somhow.
after the first initial contacts thet omen said ok too, target was switched from galraids to more 1 up oriented targets and suprise suprise, we got a nice and decent planned incomming, well coordinated from ins and nd. so the issue here did the ins/nd hc who made the deal just do it scew over omen for cheap roids? or hand over the victory to 1up? or was it a case of boosting internal morale? dont get it :/
so why should we trust you guys more then you morons finally noticed the 1up treat and took contact the second time?
|
well, iirc Omen, ND and Ins haven't been napped; so why are u so upset that u got hit in random gal raids? just because YOU THINK the incs have been well coordinated doesn'T neccessarily mean that they really were.
calling all ND/Ins morons will clearly help you to win the round ^^
__________________
eXilition
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 13:36
|
#382
|
Old Timer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Your sisters panties
Posts: 201
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
PA has become a game for the lazy. You want PA Team to place all the restrictions on the game so you know exactly what your competition is doing from the getgo without having to do any of the intel work yourself. Maybe PA Team should join United Nations and tell countries how many men are allowed to be in their armies and that they cant hide any of their bases becuase its unfair to country X not knowing its there.
__________________
Round 1-6: ND, Xanadu(RedBull)
Round 13: LCH
Round 14-18: [1up]
Round 19-20: Ascendancy
Round 21: Quit
Round 30: Ascendancy
Round 75-81: DLR
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 13:54
|
#383
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Almeida
well, iirc Omen, ND and Ins haven't been napped; so why are u so upset that u got hit in random gal raids? just because YOU THINK the incs have been well coordinated doesn'T neccessarily mean that they really were.
calling all ND/Ins morons will clearly help you to win the round ^^
|
i got full info on the events that happens those days so wtf you on is a damn mystery really
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 14:20
|
#384
|
Your typical Troll
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 414
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mek
mabey you should actually have a clue about whats going on before you make your next post, there are some idiotic posters in omen...you are 1
|
speaking about idiotic posters...
Making a post that could be summarized by a simple sentence "You are one of you alliance's ideots" does not charecterize you as all that smart of a poster yourself. Making a post like that with a sole purpose to insult alliance and one of our posters neesd a bit mor eeffort and thought that u, clearly, lacked in your post. Tbh, why waste your time on posting a one liner that would attract more negativity for yourself, then for a person you are trying to insult. Makes you look, whats would be the proper word... "stupider"... then most is not really an insult. If you looks over the long list of people's posts yours is the simplest, most useless, most irrelevant in this thread up to date. So, apparently, your alliance has some idiotic posters... you are 1
__________________
[Destiny] awaits, ex- [Omen]
Nothing on the top
but the bucket and the mop
And an illustrated book about birds
See alot up there
But dont be scared
who needs action, when you got words....
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbg
reading this line is explicit acceptance of my superiority over you
|
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 15:08
|
#385
|
LDK
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,220
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoaT
PA has become a game for the lazy. You want PA Team to place all the restrictions on the game so you know exactly what your competition is doing from the getgo without having to do any of the intel work yourself. Maybe PA Team should join United Nations and tell countries how many men are allowed to be in their armies and that they cant hide any of their bases becuase its unfair to country X not knowing its there.
|
1up screamed when eXi used out of tag planets to help them.
Now they exeed the 60 man limidt themselves, and all is ok.
Why didnt u make this post when the OOGOOA was made?
__________________
[Omen]
Quote:
Originally posted by Newt
I would give me right testicle to be in a gal with you wishmaster!!! wonder if thatd be enough to bribe spinner with hmmmm
|
<JC`> i sent him a msg saying Wishmaster 0wns, so he recalled
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 15:14
|
#386
|
Old Timer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Your sisters panties
Posts: 201
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishmaster
1up screamed when eXi used out of tag planets to help them.
Now they extend the 60 amn limidt themselves, and all is ok.
Why didnt u make this post when the OOGOOA was made?
|
well like sid said before, we never had 60 total members at all. And none of the out of tag helped anyone. eX had members out of tag well over the limit, whose only purpose was to be caths to mass build the best def ship against the best attacking ships hitting them. 1up didnt have a defense program, and werent all one race focusing on one ship. Although it was never proven, I would bet my left nut several of those def planets were multis.
__________________
Round 1-6: ND, Xanadu(RedBull)
Round 13: LCH
Round 14-18: [1up]
Round 19-20: Ascendancy
Round 21: Quit
Round 30: Ascendancy
Round 75-81: DLR
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 15:19
|
#387
|
LDK
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,220
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoaT
well like sid said before, we never had 60 total members at all. And none of the out of tag helped anyone. eX had members out of tag well over the limit, whose only purpose was to be caths to mass build the best def ship against the best attacking ships hitting them. 1up didnt have a defense program, and werent all one race focusing on one ship. Although it was never proven, I would bet my left nut several of those def planets were multis.
|
U had more than 60.
They might not have sent defence, but they sent resources to alliance fund.
While other alliances have made their REAL members donate to fund to scanners, 1up have been getting free scans from SUPPORT planets.
How on earth can it be any different? Both used out of alliance planets to help them. And the planets which u claim to be support planets / multies for eXi where scanners out of tag.
__________________
[Omen]
Quote:
Originally posted by Newt
I would give me right testicle to be in a gal with you wishmaster!!! wonder if thatd be enough to bribe spinner with hmmmm
|
<JC`> i sent him a msg saying Wishmaster 0wns, so he recalled
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 15:25
|
#388
|
Old Timer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Your sisters panties
Posts: 201
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishmaster
U had more than 60.
They might not have sent defence, but they sent resources to alliance fund.
While other alliances have made their REAL members donate to fund to scanners, 1up have been getting free scans from SUPPORT planets.
How on earth can it be any different? Both used out of alliance planets to help them. And the planets which u claim to be support planets / multies for eXi where scanners out of tag.
|
do you just make this stuff up? Real members donated funds for scanners. I myself had to do it. We didnt get any 'free' scans. Sid already explained who was in tag and what they were there for. If you chose not to believe it, thats your problem. I guess all alliances should be closed for having scanners out of tag. Those are actually helping the alliances they are not in a tag of. Our out of tag didnt do anything. By your vague definition ALL alliances have support planets since they are over the limit with scanners out of the tag.
and LOL @ you claiming all those eX def whore planets were scanners!
__________________
Round 1-6: ND, Xanadu(RedBull)
Round 13: LCH
Round 14-18: [1up]
Round 19-20: Ascendancy
Round 21: Quit
Round 30: Ascendancy
Round 75-81: DLR
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 15:28
|
#389
|
LDK
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,220
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoaT
do you just make this stuff up? Real members donated funds for scanners. I myself had to do it. We didnt get any 'free' scans. Sid already explained who was in tag and what they were there for. If you chose not to believe it, thats your problem. I guess all alliances should be closed for having scanners out of tag. Those are actually helping the alliances they are not in a tag of. Our out of tag didnt do anything. By your vague definition ALL alliances have support planets since they are over the limit with scanners out of the tag.
and LOL @ you claiming all those eX def whore planets were scanners!
|
No I dont. I got logs to proove it even.
1up had several planets in tag who did NOTHING else than donating res to alliance fund. SURE THATS NOT BEING A SUPPORT PLANET!?!?!?
so yes - u DID get free scans, or atleast alot cheaper than others.
Several of the closed eXi planets where scanners, some where cov opers like lizardking etc etc.,..not playing that round active for various reasons
__________________
[Omen]
Quote:
Originally posted by Newt
I would give me right testicle to be in a gal with you wishmaster!!! wonder if thatd be enough to bribe spinner with hmmmm
|
<JC`> i sent him a msg saying Wishmaster 0wns, so he recalled
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 15:30
|
#390
|
Old Timer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Your sisters panties
Posts: 201
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishmaster
No I dont. I got logs to proove it even.
1up had several planets in tag who did NOTHING else than donating res to alliance fund. SURE THATS NOT BEING A SUPPORT PLANET!?!?!?
so yes - u DID get free scans, or atleast alot cheaper than others.
Several of the closed eXi planets where scanners, some where cov opers like lizardking etc etc.,..not playing that round active for various reasons
|
sorry complete bullshit. You believe whatever you want. Your mightly eX doesnt have the endurance to play anymore anyway.
__________________
Round 1-6: ND, Xanadu(RedBull)
Round 13: LCH
Round 14-18: [1up]
Round 19-20: Ascendancy
Round 21: Quit
Round 30: Ascendancy
Round 75-81: DLR
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 15:40
|
#391
|
LDK
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,220
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
[17:29:42] <Columbo> i was donating res into 1up fund only
---
whatever. do u really think I tell u lies m8?
__________________
[Omen]
Quote:
Originally posted by Newt
I would give me right testicle to be in a gal with you wishmaster!!! wonder if thatd be enough to bribe spinner with hmmmm
|
<JC`> i sent him a msg saying Wishmaster 0wns, so he recalled
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 15:44
|
#392
|
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Just for the record, Ascendancy has a few planets that do nothing but donate to the alliance fund. 1up is hardly unique in having a few planets around to make the alliance fund useful.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 16:00
|
#393
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 537
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoaT
do you just make this stuff up? Real members donated funds for scanners. I myself had to do it. We didnt get any 'free' scans. Sid already explained who was in tag and what they were there for. If you chose not to believe it, thats your problem. I guess all alliances should be closed for having scanners out of tag. Those are actually helping the alliances they are not in a tag of. Our out of tag didnt do anything. By your vague definition ALL alliances have support planets since they are over the limit with scanners out of the tag.
and LOL @ you claiming all those eX def whore planets were scanners!
|
This is precisely WHY 1up members were instructed not to post on AD about 1up - as you don't know all the facts so end up making an idiot of yourself. Yes, some of the planet in tag DID donate resources to the fund - some of them donated quite a lot.
Which isn't to say that everything you said is wrong - some of the exi defence planets the other round had no scan techs and no amps. But why on earth discussing what exi did in earlier rounds is of any relevance totally beats me.
Of course if Wishmaster is trying to claim that Omen have only 60 planets this round, including scanners, then I doubt his veracity.
__________________
Synthetic Sid
[1up]
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 16:07
|
#394
|
Inactive peon
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
I'm going to say something in response to an earlier post about what the objective of playing the game is.
In a given round the objective of the game is to get the highest possible score be that for a planet, alliance or galaxy.
Some people do this by methods that others think are dodgy - providing an action does not violate the eula it is perfectly legal IF one alliance is doing something that people think should be cheating or abusing the game then in short they can complain all they want but in the end its their own fault for not playing the current game as well as the alliance they are complaining about.
To me finding the optimum strategy that is within the rules is one of the most interesting parts of the game and any alliance that does so well fully deserves to win.
That said.... just becuase a strategy is allowed this round does not mean it will be allowed next round - after all the top alliances need new challenges...
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 16:07
|
#395
|
Your typical Troll
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 414
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned
Just for the record, Ascendancy has a few planets that do nothing but donate to the alliance fund. 1up is hardly unique in having a few planets around to make the alliance fund useful.
|
The difference is, asc is not quite on top of their game atm, unless the pull another one of those last round stunts and come up with some ridiculous amount of high scoring planets out of tag, but thats whole another topic of discussion and lets not highjack this semi entertaining thread into other, less amuzing direction
__________________
[Destiny] awaits, ex- [Omen]
Nothing on the top
but the bucket and the mop
And an illustrated book about birds
See alot up there
But dont be scared
who needs action, when you got words....
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbg
reading this line is explicit acceptance of my superiority over you
|
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 16:12
|
#396
|
Vitriolic
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: #public
Posts: 1,506
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mighteh
The difference is, asc is not quite on top of their game atm
|
Ah, so they're ok doing it because they aren't beating Omen at this moment in time?
__________________
Chief [ 1up] Chimp.
<@JBG> by the way is mazzelaar a community account that everyone in 1up logs into when they're feeling angry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyBGood
mazzelaar has always reminded me of a hungry hungry hippo. Except instead of eating marbles he just bites the heads off new AD posters
|
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 16:18
|
#397
|
Bragpack™
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 815
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGoaT
do you just make this stuff up? Real members donated funds for scanners. I myself had to do it. We didnt get any 'free' scans. Sid already explained who was in tag and what they were there for. If you chose not to believe it, thats your problem. I guess all alliances should be closed for having scanners out of tag. Those are actually helping the alliances they are not in a tag of. Our out of tag didnt do anything. By your vague definition ALL alliances have support planets since they are over the limit with scanners out of the tag.
and LOL @ you claiming all those eX def whore planets were scanners!
|
LOL @ you for making a total ass out of yourself!
All you say is based on AD material, you make it sound eX had dozens of 'support' planets while apart from maybe 2/3 guys max who were playing inactive and who can be classsified as such support planets, the closed planets were scanners. End of round we had 1 maybe 2 scanners left. While I don't blame 1up (or any other alliance for that matter) for donating to the fund purely for other members, since PAteam is to blame for this loophole, your replies are just complete nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal
I'm going to say something in response to an earlier post about what the objective of playing the game is.
In a given round the objective of the game is to get the highest possible score be that for a planet, alliance or galaxy.
Some people do this by methods that others think are dodgy - providing an action does not violate the eula it is perfectly legal IF one alliance is doing something that people think should be cheating or abusing the game then in short they can complain all they want but in the end its their own fault for not playing the current game as well as the alliance they are complaining about.
To me finding the optimum strategy that is within the rules is one of the most interesting parts of the game and any alliance that does so well fully deserves to win.
That said.... just becuase a strategy is allowed this round does not mean it will be allowed next round - after all the top alliances need new challenges...
|
Yet, why do some loopholes stay there for the round, while others get midround changes even though the impact could be quite as big.
Last edited by Stoom; 26 May 2006 at 16:24.
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 16:27
|
#398
|
Your typical Troll
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 414
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazzelaar
Ah, so they're ok doing it because they aren't beating Omen at this moment in time?
|
Nothing to do with Omen.
They can do whatever, as long as it does not work, it leaves no impact on overall gameplay of the comunity, it just leaves that as inside tactics, and its not illegal, technically, whatever rocks their boats. I dont care if they hire a circus clowns to run their accounts for them, as long as they dont make an impact on current standings.
And, again, it has nothing to do with omen's current situation. I would have uphelp this opinion if Omen would be ranked 30th or 1st. This is one of those rare not fully biased oppinions of mine ;p enjoy it...
__________________
[Destiny] awaits, ex- [Omen]
Nothing on the top
but the bucket and the mop
And an illustrated book about birds
See alot up there
But dont be scared
who needs action, when you got words....
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbg
reading this line is explicit acceptance of my superiority over you
|
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 16:28
|
#399
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 537
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Omen's NAP with Angels may well be one of the least defendable events in PA's history.
|
I disagree with you there. Angels' NAP with Omen may well be one of the least defendable acts in PA history - but from Omen's perspective it wasn't such a terrible move.
Omen potentially gained from it, Angels didn't. In theory it could have improved Omen's chances of winning - but it could only reduce to minimal any chance of Angels winning. If Angels genuinely believed they were a better alliance than Omen then it made sense for them - but if they did, then they were probably the only people in the game to believe that.
Which isn't to say I think it was a good move by Omen - I don't. But I can understand why they thought it was, and could defend the move from their perspective very easily.
__________________
Synthetic Sid
[1up]
|
|
|
26 May 2006, 16:47
|
#400
|
.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,382
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
there is absolutely nothing wrong with the donating thing, it was verified by the PATeam, why would it be? the only point anyone can hold against 1up for it would be to make the whining morons of last round seem like nothing more than hypocritical kids who can't take losing.
the concept of the donations is innovative, no matter how you want to putit and the only people who look silly with regards to it, are the ones who didn't do it, and the pateam for allowing it in the first place
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 23:07.
| |