|
|
21 Jul 2003, 12:10
|
#1
|
The one and only
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: On the Highway to Hell
Posts: 73
|
The rise of the medium sized alliances
As several of the medium sized alliances (ND,VGN,ETY,ROCK) seem to have an extraordinary good round, I wonder why this happened? Are the bigger alliances falling apart or have the medium alliances all gained such an incredible amount of good players?
__________________
hal90000
10 times mightier than 2001
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 12:19
|
#2
|
pe0n
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Kindom of the Netherlands
Posts: 1,347
|
They recruited which can give you a lot of new members when there's a free round after a long time of payed rounds.
__________________
round 5 noob
round 6 noob
round 7 noob: rank 6.198 25:20:25 - VoC member
round 8 noob: rank 4.112 7:2:3 - TFD member
round 9 rank 941 23:1:9 - TFD HC
round 9.5 rank 860 22:7:3 - TFD HC
round 10: rank unknown (was #1 for a while) 5:2:5 - Vengeance pe0n
round 10.5: rank 683 19:10:2 - VGN member
round 11: rank 138 8:8:4 - VsN member
round 12: rank 515 - VGN 'special attack officer' -> jumped ship to Rock
round 13: rank 85: NoS
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 12:20
|
#3
|
Dum Di Dum Di
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 858
|
Probably both, not to mention random rounds in general are good for the medium sized alliances... unlike private rounds they aren't as disadvantaged at start due to planetplacement now...
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 12:26
|
#4
|
Bitch
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 3,848
|
Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by Backbone
Are the bigger alliances falling apart
|
No, but they are dwindling. Big alliances only take established players with vouches etc, there are less of these with every round so the bigger alliances slowly shrink. Every time an alliance dies it gives an injection to the remaining ones but that can't go on for ever.
Quote:
or have the medium alliances all gained such an incredible amount of good players?
|
This moves on from my first point, we haven't taken in a mass of really good players but we HAVE gained a lot of pretty good ones. As I said in my end of round post, we didn't have many high scores (only 1 in top 150) but we had an average over our active memberbase (not giving you numbers but we'd fit in the in game alliance system next round...just) that put our average member score in the top 25% of the universe.
Additionally there were no mass powerblocks this round. That meant the bigger alliances were hitting each other as much as the second tier. Last round was a feeding frenzy for NARWEET and everyone else got demolished, this round the playing field was much more even
__________________
ACHTUNG!!!
Das machine is nicht fur gefingerpoken und mittengrabben. Ist easy
schnappen der springenwerk, blowenfusen und corkenpoppen mit
spitzensparken. Ist nicht fur gewerken by das dummkopfen. Das
rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in das pockets. Relaxen und vatch
das blinkenlights!!!
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 12:34
|
#5
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by Gayle29uk
No, but they are dwindling. Big alliances only take established players with vouches etc, there are less of these with every round so the bigger alliances slowly shrink. Every time an alliance dies it gives an injection to the remaining ones but that can't go on for ever.
|
No, they honestly are getting worse.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 13:50
|
#6
|
Pr0nstar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Look at Galstatus
Posts: 1,006
|
Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
No, they honestly are getting worse.
|
your 100% right, the question is if that is good or bad
__________________
Ascendancy FTW !!!!!!
Reunion FDS !
Proud to be Founder and Member of VisioN
Honoured to have been [1up] Member
VfL Bochum >*
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 14:19
|
#7
|
Commander etc
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 436
|
Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
No, they honestly are getting worse.
|
__________________
Daevyll
Ostraka: It's a Social Club with guns (and K-Y)
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 17:06
|
#8
|
ND
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
|
LDK, Dragons and Eclipse will probably be the best 3 alliances next round. LDK will still be known and feared (if they play), Dragons are still a somewhat unknown force for PA X and Eclipse are not as good as Fury. I think they are getting worse, but the real reason medium sized allies like ND did so well is that its a random round, so they didnt get cnutted due to stagnation.
__________________
[ND]
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 17:56
|
#9
|
Smurf Forever
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Smurf Village
Posts: 104
|
Question is what happens when dragons really are acting like an alliance.. Meaning that their members can't be multi allianced like they are now.
The alliances they are in now will lose a lot of good members. (and with that some medium sized alliances will be the victim)
You're ND yourself fish. Who are you loyal too ?
__________________
War doesn't determine who's right only who is left
-=Caliban [ND HC]=-
rnd 3: If I only could remember - GIA HC/TGS
rnd 4: [30:14:3] (smurfs) - Fury/TGS HC || rnd 5: [21:4:16] (gauls) - TGS HC / WPO
rnd 6: [1:2:4] (LotR) - WP HC || rnd 7: [22:8:9] - WP HC
rnd 8: [55:8:9] - WP HC || rnd 9: [11:10:8] - WP HC || rnd 9,5: [x:y:z] -
WP HC rnd 10,11,12 etc cant be assed anymore to write it down here.
rnd 35, 36. 37: ND
Proud to be a Wolf in [ WolfPack]
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 18:02
|
#10
|
ND
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
|
hey Cali. I left Dragons yesterday, to show my loyalty to ND. Left on good terms though, I still have the utmost respect for the sexiest people I've ever played with (/me licks Bibi and liz) but I am loyal to ND, I enjoy myself there more, and I can make more of a difference there than in Dragons.
__________________
[ND]
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 18:24
|
#11
|
Smurf Forever
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Smurf Village
Posts: 104
|
If you did then I respect that..
However I do know that a lot will say that they "left" their battlegroup however in the end still will attack with them. So that nothing changes and they remain multi allianced
__________________
War doesn't determine who's right only who is left
-=Caliban [ND HC]=-
rnd 3: If I only could remember - GIA HC/TGS
rnd 4: [30:14:3] (smurfs) - Fury/TGS HC || rnd 5: [21:4:16] (gauls) - TGS HC / WPO
rnd 6: [1:2:4] (LotR) - WP HC || rnd 7: [22:8:9] - WP HC
rnd 8: [55:8:9] - WP HC || rnd 9: [11:10:8] - WP HC || rnd 9,5: [x:y:z] -
WP HC rnd 10,11,12 etc cant be assed anymore to write it down here.
rnd 35, 36. 37: ND
Proud to be a Wolf in [ WolfPack]
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 18:33
|
#12
|
ND
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
|
I said from about a week into R9.5 that I would be leaving Dragons at the end of the round, I stuck to my word, no regrets. It will be harder to stay with BG's next round with the in built alliances.
I was one of 2 ND Dragons, I believe the other ND Dragon (berten) will leave ND before Round 10.
__________________
[ND]
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 19:08
|
#13
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by Legator
your 100% right, the question is if that is good or bad
|
Bad if only LDK are maintaining the level. Plus, all alliances should seek to be competitive as possible. Anything below your best is just bad gameplaying.
There was no alliance outside LDK to 'fear' in r9.5 (though people were stupid and feared them too much) and that's not good enough to be honest.
Maybe it's good in the sense that people are taking the game are less seriously, although as you well know my galaxy was near under constant attack for weeks on end, so maybe I'm wrong.
Fact: there are many, many alliances from r6/r7 who would eat r9.5 for breakfast. The playing standard has decreased.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 19:26
|
#14
|
ND
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Amazingstoke
Posts: 2,235
|
__________________
[ND]
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 19:29
|
#15
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oslo
Posts: 279
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
There was no alliance outside LDK to 'fear' in r9.5 (though people were stupid and feared them too much) and that's not good enough to be honest.
|
Well , if all the people who joined ldk be4 this round, and throughout this round still is ldk next round, im adraid ldk will be too big to handle next round too.
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 19:31
|
#16
|
Imposter?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK / Canada
Posts: 717
|
Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by Backbone
As several of the medium sized alliances (ND,VGN,ETY,ROCK) seem to have an extraordinary good round, I wonder why this happened? Are the bigger alliances falling apart or have the medium alliances all gained such an incredible amount of good players?
|
No blocking at the start and very little later on + random round, simple really.
__________________
Æ - from the ashes of good intentions come forth lasting friendships... the Æternals.
R2: XXV
R3: Æternals
R4: Fx9/Wolfpack
R5: Legion
R6: Legion BC
R7: Legion BC
R8: RaH BC
R9: RaH HC
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 20:04
|
#17
|
Ark-miner wannabe
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,005
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by das_experiment
Well , if all the people who joined ldk be4 this round, and throughout this round still is ldk next round, im adraid ldk will be too big to handle next round too.
|
Next round alliances are limited to 150 members though, and looking at various defences from LDK this round, I think its safe to say they have/had well over 500.
oh wait...its p2p in r10...nm then
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 20:15
|
#18
|
Pr0nstar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Look at Galstatus
Posts: 1,006
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
Bad if only LDK are maintaining the level. Plus, all alliances should seek to be competitive as possible. Anything below your best is just bad gameplaying.
There was no alliance outside LDK to 'fear' in r9.5 (though people were stupid and feared them too much) and that's not good enough to be honest.
Maybe it's good in the sense that people are taking the game are less seriously, although as you well know my galaxy was near under constant attack for weeks on end, so maybe I'm wrong.
Fact: there are many, many alliances from r6/r7 who would eat r9.5 for breakfast. The playing standard has decreased.
|
yea, indeed thats not good that there was noone next to ldk.
but also was it good to have fury and legion ? i mean good for the game ? they teamed up and twatted the rest.
besides those two there were never a real opposition. ok xanadu but those alone couldnt to much.
maybe its just all the same only that the names changed ?
after all, all is shrinking thats the main prob and root of all bad things.
__________________
Ascendancy FTW !!!!!!
Reunion FDS !
Proud to be Founder and Member of VisioN
Honoured to have been [1up] Member
VfL Bochum >*
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 20:39
|
#19
|
ensign forever
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,080
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
Bad if only LDK are maintaining the level. Plus, all alliances should seek to be competitive as possible. Anything below your best is just bad gameplaying.
There was no alliance outside LDK to 'fear' in r9.5 (though people were stupid and feared them too much) and that's not good enough to be honest.
|
If you look at the list of people who went to play for LDK last round ( the non lithauanians) it was clear they were all extremely experienced and mostly fairly good or excellent players from a whole bunch of alliances. Especially from r9 losers block vvomm. Many wanted some revenge on Eclipse and ToT and easily got that. If they all stay with LDK they will still be a force in PAX even though some will be leaving PA.
hAl
__________________
* Zeus recons a gal ic of yodo ontop of a roid saying "Steal my roid u will!"
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 21:10
|
#20
|
[=V=] Executive
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 154
|
the old BIG alliances are no longer BIG anymore because the community size has also decreased. and i tihnk its been seen that alliances with 250 members arent as efficient as they used to be.
so with the old big alliances cutting back memberbase for a tightknit "elite?" core, it leaves room for others to go elsewhere.
some also see it as fun to watch a growin alliance use its potential and eventual make its way to the top.
__________________
Retired as [1up]Aaranaf
Former ViruS Planetarion Executive [=V=]
-Infected from the Start... Infected till my end-
Former Eclipse Planetarion Military Officer
-Forever Lurking on the Darkside-
Round 10.5- 22:8:6 [ViruS]Playmates[Urwins] #1 Galaxy
========================
O' Canada!
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 21:43
|
#21
|
No, really...
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Out of my mind
Posts: 399
|
Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
No, they honestly are getting worse.
|
More directly I'd say they are getting lazier. Less and less people are wanting to spend 3 months with something that might as well be a 2nd job (sans the pay) just to say 'look at my cool planet and alliance'.
__________________
Stomp ten peasants to achieve burnination
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 22:46
|
#22
|
lol troll lol
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 54
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by SpazMonster
More directly I'd say they are getting lazier. Less and less people are wanting to spend 3 months with something that might as well be a 2nd job (sans the pay) just to say 'look at my cool planet and alliance'.
|
My thoughts exactly, the PA as a whole hasn't changed much and so once the bigger alliance's get to the stage they are now the HC/officers get lazier as well as the members, my guess is that in r10 we could possibly see them improving with new tactics/new features.
__________________
The Ministry
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 23:42
|
#23
|
[F.E.A.R.]
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 1,412
|
Quote:
Originally posted by The_Fish
LDK, Dragons and Eclipse will probably be the best 3 alliances next round.
|
There might be new alliances next round capable of competing with these 3, and competing won't be so one dimensional either.
But if nothing changed, you'd be right.
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
The playing standard has decreased.
|
For this round it did as some people took it less seriously and some members took time off, or put in less effort. I don't agree that overall the playing standard has decreased.
__________________
"And when people tell me what is ok and what is not it should not be an unexpected scene seeing I extend my middle right hand digit and say: 'Eyy, would you like lemon or lime with that piece of advice, mister?'"
Funny Film Reviews :: SWOS
|
|
|
21 Jul 2003, 23:46
|
#24
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 475
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by Legator
after all, all is shrinking
|
pervert. not all is shrinking. it goes on and off (shrinking and swelling) occasionaly :eek:
__________________
Still not banned wtf!??
-Lord Dain
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 00:10
|
#25
|
Raaaaaaaah!
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,296
|
Playing standards have been falling at an alarming rate since Round 6. Other than LDK there are no elite alliances around anymore which are capable of running a well oraganised and sustained campaign. The main reason for the fall in big alliance standards is due to the fall in the number of good BCs, the lame attempts to take LDK down this round proved that.
__________________
Hicks
Mercury & Solace
Always [Fury]
Last edited by Hicks; 22 Jul 2003 at 00:16.
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 00:26
|
#26
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by Legator
but also was it good to have fury and legion ? i mean good for the game ? they teamed up and twatted the rest.
besides those two there were never a real opposition. ok xanadu but those alone couldnt to much.
maybe its just all the same only that the names changed ?
after all, all is shrinking thats the main prob and root of all bad things.
|
It was good in the sense that they've set standards for alliances to live up to. Their teaming up set the balance in their favour, they've only failed to win one round together (r6) and that's because the universe was hell bent to attack them (insert random Deus attention whoring sentence here).
The main problem is exactly what you describe. This game doesn't need overhauls etc it needs publicity. It needs to be cheap, simple and attract new players. Even maybe as simple as r3/4. In a 50k + universe the game would be far more open, I certainly wouldn't have had people attempting to bash me day in day out.
As for Scouse's point, just read Hicks post. I mean try to take out a bigger enemy by attacking one planet (especially when its LDK). wtf?
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 06:28
|
#27
|
Pr0nstar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Look at Galstatus
Posts: 1,006
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
It was good in the sense that they've set standards for alliances to live up to. Their teaming up set the balance in their favour, they've only failed to win one round together (r6) and that's because the universe was hell bent to attack them (insert random Deus attention whoring sentence here).
The main problem is exactly what you describe. This game doesn't need overhauls etc it needs publicity. It needs to be cheap, simple and attract new players. Even maybe as simple as r3/4. In a 50k + universe the game would be far more open, I certainly wouldn't have had people attempting to bash me day in day out.
|
indeed, maybe even 50 k arent needed.
remember a paid round with 15 k planets, i mean real planets not like r9,5.
with the old system of the 4 races. (well wont blame the new pa before ive seen it).
simple etc and maybe if u have good multihunters (which work all round) you can win a few planets each rounds.
new alliances would arise etc. but an universe with 3 k planets isnt fun. people get quickly roided, lose motivation. quit
__________________
Ascendancy FTW !!!!!!
Reunion FDS !
Proud to be Founder and Member of VisioN
Honoured to have been [1up] Member
VfL Bochum >*
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 08:33
|
#28
|
sexy honky chic
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 287
|
i think alot of oldtimers might think that rd 3. 4 and 2 were the funnest rounds of PA as well. The mechanics haven't changed much just the ppl playing imo
__________________
Now and forever love will never stop
Ex-Silver BC
Forever in Elysium
i have [FAITH] in myself, [FAITH] in my galaxy, and [FAITH] in my alliance
do you?
[FAITH][SILVER]
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 09:02
|
#29
|
nub since 2002
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: .de
Posts: 349
|
The "rise" (show me they guys in top100 from those allies ;p) of the smaller alliances can be explained by the small interests of R9-dominating alliances and their small aim just to have fun lead to only half of their members really playing. In addition ofc, the member theirself wanted some recreation and didnt take it any serious...
__________________
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to keep them for yourself
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 10:06
|
#30
|
power of evil
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: forever free
Posts: 231
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
The playing standard has decreased.
|
The playing standard has increased. It's the the standard of the actual players that has decreased.
__________________
Baptized in Fire. Returned to Honor. Turned to Evil.
Zen of Evil
Ω
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 10:27
|
#31
|
Wearer of The Hat
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
Posts: 252
|
Quote:
Originally posted by -QS-
(show me they guys in top100 from those allies ;p)
|
#20 Rock
#33 Templar
#44 ND
#48 Templar
#94 Templar (doesn't really count, Dragons as well)
Edit: ETY was in the original topic as well so:
#25 EnTitY
#83 EnTitY
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 10:34
|
#32
|
[F.E.A.R.]
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 1,412
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by AlbinoSquirrel
The playing standard has increased. It's the the standard of the actual players that has decreased.
|
I don't think that, either. The playing standard has increased (this bit I agree on), as in, more people (% wise) are playing 'professionally' than ever and so competition is harder.
lokken and Hicks are right in the sense that perhaps the command members aren't as good anymore, but like I said this round is different, lots of people taking breaks and alliances not putting in as much effort. But some of the decisions from supposed 'elite alliance' command members from this round have been nothing short of laughable.
It is the command that runs alliances (obviously), if they are crap the members can't do anything to change that without leaving.
There is probably less 'exceptional' players, but that's bound to happen when there is less people about, but the basic member standard has been the same from round 6 ish, for the entire game.
__________________
"And when people tell me what is ok and what is not it should not be an unexpected scene seeing I extend my middle right hand digit and say: 'Eyy, would you like lemon or lime with that piece of advice, mister?'"
Funny Film Reviews :: SWOS
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 13:33
|
#33
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Scouse
There might be new alliances next round capable of competing with these 3, and competing won't be so one dimensional either.
|
I'm sure there will be other alliances around that can compete with the 3 above mentionned alliances.
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 14:31
|
#34
|
SHW
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: @home
Posts: 228
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by lokken
Fact: there are many, many alliances from r6/r7 who would eat r9.5 for breakfast. The playing standard has decreased.
|
I don't doubt that, but I think it can just as well be out of boredom, as lack of skill..
PA is after all not a increadibly complicated game, and I have serious doubts that the players have become so much worse in a couple of rounds..
__________________
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.
SHW, ReBorn, Wolfpack, NoS, Eclipse, Ascendancy
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 14:35
|
#35
|
SHW
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: @home
Posts: 228
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Hicks
Playing standards have been falling at an alarming rate since Round 6. Other than LDK there are no elite alliances around anymore which are capable of running a well oraganised and sustained campaign. The main reason for the fall in big alliance standards is due to the fall in the number of good BCs, the lame attempts to take LDK down this round proved that.
|
I am not sure I agree. I agree with the fact that many good BC's have left the game, but I think LDK got an easy win in part because many "elite" players saw r9.5 as a break, more then a real round. I could be wrong of course.
I still think that PA can never be the same as it was. I think a lot changed when Fury/Legion dissapeared. Yes they where hated by many, but they also seemed to keep people on their toes in the constant battle to throw Furgeon from their thrown..
__________________
Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover.
SHW, ReBorn, Wolfpack, NoS, Eclipse, Ascendancy
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 15:24
|
#36
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 181
|
The old farts' discussion about how good it was back in their time again. So nice
__________________
LDK
|
|
|
22 Jul 2003, 17:47
|
#37
|
Inquisitor
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: England
Posts: 2,207
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ferox
The old farts' discussion about how good it was back in their time again. So nice
|
Better than your drivel.
__________________
----------
That uniform you're wearing
So hot I cant stop staring.
Zhil
[Spore] Executive
[1up]
[Fury]
Inquisitorial Lord Protector of His Emperor's Glorius Empire
[20:19:04] <mazzelaar> I have to say a big up to Zhil - without those 8 def calls you covered we would've been screwed. | r12 End Ceremony
|
|
|
23 Jul 2003, 11:47
|
#38
|
power of evil
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: forever free
Posts: 231
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by Scouse
lokken and Hicks are right in the sense that perhaps the command members aren't as good anymore, but like I said this round is different, lots of people taking breaks and alliances not putting in as much effort. But some of the decisions from supposed 'elite alliance' command members from this round have been nothing short of laughable.
It is the command that runs alliances (obviously), if they are crap the members can't do anything to change that without leaving.
There is probably less 'exceptional' players, but that's bound to happen when there is less people about, but the basic member standard has been the same from round 6 ish, for the entire game.
|
It's not just this past round.
There has been a constant decline in alliance dedication, on the average level, since the earliest rounds. Rather than grabbing zealous and dedicated players, most alliances are content to keep the ones they have, even when they stop playing at the level needed to keep an elite alliance at that level.
I only really started to notice it around round 8, though R7 should have been a tipoff. I know it's rather pointless to argue the point with you, Captain Titans, but I know that a truly dedicated Fury would have wiped the floor with you and LDK together. Another amusing corollary is that the rise of powerblocks coincided with the lessening of the dedication of alliance membership and leadership. Rather than work hard, get more allies. Then there's the battlegroup thing, which just further dilutes the alliance membership...
It's just a shame that this game requires your soul in order to keep your alliance at the top.
__________________
Baptized in Fire. Returned to Honor. Turned to Evil.
Zen of Evil
Ω
|
|
|
23 Jul 2003, 12:20
|
#39
|
Raaaaaaaah!
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,296
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Ferox
The old farts' discussion about how good it was back in their time again. So nice
|
Handing LDK their asses every round was quite a good laugh.
__________________
Hicks
Mercury & Solace
Always [Fury]
|
|
|
23 Jul 2003, 13:08
|
#40
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
lot
Quote:
Originally posted by AlbinoSquirrel
It's just a shame that this game requires your soul in order to keep your alliance at the top.
|
it is indeed a shame that there is soo much required from a player these days. and I also agree that a dedicated Fury would probably wipe the floor with any alliance that has existed in these 9 rounds. But I wouldn't state that the alliance standards have dropped that much. Ofc it's undeniable that the overall standard has dropped a bit but there are very simple reasons for that.
The most obvious reason is the reducing number of players we see playing PA. Alot of the old guard left PA and there simply aren't enough new players to keep a steady playerbase.
Another reason, imo, is that there simply are like twice asmuch alliances then there were in the past. And with that I mean dedicated alliances. We also see BG's who lately seem more popular then alliances itselves.
Fact is, pple aren't that loyal anymore then in the early rounds. Pple now pledge loyalty to their alliance, to their P and C alliance, to their BG and stuff like that.
And a 3th reason is the powerblocking ofc. If an alliance wants to simply win a round on its own (and I don't mean LDK r9.5) then it has to make sure that it simply has the best players and most dedicated players in PA.
When you play in a block, then numbers and tactics are more important then purely good players.
nway, that's my opinion about all this.
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
23 Jul 2003, 14:03
|
#41
|
Romanian Warrior
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: romania
Posts: 61
|
:P
alliances aren't what they used to be....and in rnd10 the big ones will suffer a lot cuz of spinner`s idea of having 150members /alliance ... getting back to the point... if medium/small alliances merge ...the actual big alliances will...go down ?
__________________
Fragile...handle with care
Victuri Te Salutant
ex: glx/legion/eclipse/daous dava
current: random
|
|
|
23 Jul 2003, 15:28
|
#42
|
[F.E.A.R.]
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 1,412
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by AlbinoSquirrel
I know that a truly dedicated Fury would have wiped the floor with you and LDK together.
|
"I know my dad would wipe the floor with your dad."
__________________
"And when people tell me what is ok and what is not it should not be an unexpected scene seeing I extend my middle right hand digit and say: 'Eyy, would you like lemon or lime with that piece of advice, mister?'"
Funny Film Reviews :: SWOS
|
|
|
23 Jul 2003, 16:12
|
#43
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by Scouse
"I know my dad would wipe the floor with your dad."
|
maybe because alby's dad isn't a member of the WorldWide Wresting Federation?
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
23 Jul 2003, 22:56
|
#44
|
power of evil
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: forever free
Posts: 231
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by Scouse
"I know my dad would wipe the floor with your dad."
|
Like I said, pointless to argue with you about it. Fury was a shadow of its former self after round 4, no matter what they all tell you. If Fury in any of the later rounds had the same motivation and competent leadership (in the form of an active and willing Sid) as we did in R2+3...well, draw your own conclusions.
Bleh, but leaving you to draw your own conclusions about this topic is like handing a blowtorch to a blind man and saying "be careful"...
__________________
Baptized in Fire. Returned to Honor. Turned to Evil.
Zen of Evil
Ω
|
|
|
24 Jul 2003, 09:20
|
#45
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 181
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Zh|l
Better than your drivel.
|
Same level actually.
My grandmother beats Hick's dad too.
__________________
LDK
|
|
|
24 Jul 2003, 09:49
|
#46
|
Time Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 86
|
Lets just wait and see what happends this round
__________________
The Master: And so it came to pass that the human race fell, and the Earth was no more. And I looked down upon my new dominion as Master of all
|
|
|
27 Jul 2003, 22:05
|
#47
|
Rock Head of High Council
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 8
|
purposes in life
Quote:
Originally posted by -QS-
The "rise" (show me they guys in top100 from those allies ;p) of the smaller alliances can be explained by the small interests of R9-dominating alliances and their small aim just to have fun lead to only half of their members really playing. In addition ofc, the member theirself wanted some recreation and didnt take it any serious...
|
heh, *playing* for any other reason than fun sounds pretty unhealthy to me, to be honest. Doing well is nice, winning is even nicer, but there's a point where the price becomes too high, and it's up to every individual as well as his alliance to determine where that point is exactly.
__________________
So much bandwidth, so little time...
|
|
|
27 Jul 2003, 22:42
|
#48
|
The Twilight of the Gods
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 23,481
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Hicks
The main reason for the fall in big alliance standards is due to the fall in the number of good BCs, the lame attempts to take LDK down this round proved that.
|
Utterly correct.
|
|
|
28 Jul 2003, 17:16
|
#49
|
Fightin-irish for life
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: guinness brewery
Posts: 2,177
|
whereas previously the mid-sized alliances were swamped by the sheer numbers of the larger alliances , as each rd progressed they have learnt to adapt and even compete with the bigger alliances while the bigger alliances have grown lethargic and stale because they are win based and not community based as most of the mid-sized alliances are
__________________
Ascendancy, now with added Irish
"In the absence of orders, find something and kill it."
-Rommel
|
|
|
29 Jul 2003, 05:48
|
#50
|
Bored
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: A Persistant Universe
Posts: 1,583
|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The rise of the medium sized alliances
Quote:
Originally posted by AlbinoSquirrel
Like I said, pointless to argue with you about it. Fury was a shadow of its former self after round 4, no matter what they all tell you. If Fury in any of the later rounds had the same motivation and competent leadership (in the form of an active and willing Sid) as we did in R2+3...well, draw your own conclusions.
Bleh, but leaving you to draw your own conclusions about this topic is like handing a blowtorch to a blind man and saying "be careful"...
|
While I do agree with you for the most part, Later round Fury was a different beast, you cant really argue with the fact that they were still the dominant alliance in the game. And in rounds 5-7 there was no significant decrease in performance from rd 2+3 Fury, simply a shift in structure and makeup that we all could see was leading to what occured in round 8 and more so what would have occured had Fury not retired when they did. Then again I would imagine that if Fury would have stayed it would have had to change alot and I would trust that it probably would have done so and come out to be better than any alliance currently in the game.
__________________
Germania
Fury
Mercury & Solace
Conspiracy Theory, Wrath, 1up, ICD, Eclipse
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:18.
| |