Mergers, etc

[furball]

Right then. MEX keeps deleting the old thread despite me restoring it a few times, so I've found an old irrelevant post of mine of this forum, made it into a new thread and added those posts about merging into it.



Discuss.

[wakey]

Originally Posted by MEX

As a HC from USO, i offer you a merge of our 2 alliances with the new name USO.
If you are interested and want another name, please tell me which one and why.

MfG, MEX

So based upon a four line post you have decided that this alliance, its members and its HC are a perfect fit for yours and hence are a perfect merger candidate?

Seriously guys while getting an easy increase of members is appealing it should be the last thing on your mind when deciding possible mergers. Both parties need to ask the following questions :-

• Do we have similar goals/beliefs?
  If one of you is happy to play socially where members login once a day for 20 mins and the other wants to be something more you’re not compatible. Both parties need to answer this true fully and realistically
  
  
• Does each command have compatible personalities?
  If you really can’t get along at command level it’s not going to work. You don’t need to be the best of friends but you have to be on speaking terms and have a working relationship. This is something your only learn by getting to know each other so perhaps consider first registering a joint command channel for all your HC and BC and then working on some joint attacks between the two alliances. Your soon realise if there’s any problems.
  
  
• Is your players account status compatible?
  Its somewhat unavoidable that free accounts drag paid account holders down from an alliance pov. So if one group is largely paid and ones largely free then unless you can get of them to pay or find someone to pay for them they are just going to be a drain on the alliance.
  
  
• Is your player’s activity levels compatible?
  Having one group of players really active and the rest inactive causes resentment, any alliance you merge with should have a similar activity level so the players gel. One can be more active than the other but just not be huge amounts
  
  
• Do your player’s activity times compliment each other?
  If you’re a euro based alliance whose members are mainly on from 1800-2200GMT and the alliance your merging with is the same then the merge probably doesn’t add anything to the alliance. On the other hand if the alliance is mainly none euros and their peak is later in the night its probably a useful merge.
  

If you answer yes to all of these and other such questions or you can find a middle ground that you can agree on then you are probably ready for a merge. Otherwise look elsewhere as remember a merge isn’t supposed to be there to get a quick member increase and a rank jump its there to make you a better alliance. I’ve seen too many alliances at your kind of level who have weakened both alliances by making a unwise merger that’s been about getting a higher rank and more members and not a stronger alliance

[MEX]

Originally Posted by wakey

So based upon a four line post you have decided that this alliance, its members and its HC are a perfect fit for yours and hence are a perfect merger candidate?

Currently USO is just a bunch of mostly HARMLESS inactive n00bs from serveral small alliances.
I am desperatly looking for some active members which will take care of them when i leave USO to join a better alliance.

By the way, i had already communicated with the alliance ZikUnion about a merge while both of our alliances were below the Top30 ... and they seem to have the same opinion about a merge than you.

More about the origin and history of USO will follow in my own recruitment thread for USO soon.

MfG, MEX

[wakey]

Originally Posted by MEX

Currently USO is just a bunch of mostly HARMLESS inactive n00bs from serveral small alliances.
I am desperatly looking for some active members which will take care of them when i leave USO to join a better alliance.

By the way, i had already communicated with the alliance ZikUnion about a merge while both of our alliances were below the Top30 ... and they seem to have the same opinion about a merge than you.

More about the origin and history of USO will follow in my own recruitment thread for USO soon.

MfG, MEX

So if your leaving the alliance why are you so insistant on them merging under the USO name. Surely its better that they find a home that can get the best out of them under whatever name than leave them stranded just because you want the name to continue?

Also by jumping ship and saying you want a 'better' alliance hardly put them in a good light

[furball]

MEX, going into other alliances' recruitment threads and proposing mergers (in the fashion that you have done) is not acceptable, especially so when you admit that you are going to form your new alliance by stealing members from other alliances.

Any more posts along this line from this point forth will be dealt with appropriately.



I attempted to send you a PM stating these things, but your user options prevent you from receiving PMs or e-mails. If you don't want all of this to be done in a public thread (or find me on IRC in #forums), you'll enable them. From my point of view, I'm quite happy to have a thread to make the users of AR aware of the situation, as opposed to just deleting your posts.


furball, AR mod.

[Kargool]

Well, atleast he's being open about it. I dont see why this should be viewed as a bad thing. He makes an offer in public and gets Wakey on his tail. I think its gutsy to offer a merge in public!

[furball]

Originally Posted by Kargool

Well, atleast he's being open about it. I dont see why this should be viewed as a bad thing. He makes an offer in public and gets Wakey on his tail. I think its gutsy to offer a merge in public!

It'd be gutsy to jump off the Eiffel Tower, but stupid. I'm not really seeing much difference here.

Wakey's correct in everything he's been saying. Mergers are tricky to handle at the best of time (remember SiNND?), even when the stars are aligned and you're wearing your magic shoes.


Furthermore, he's encouraging members of small alliances to join his alliance on a forum dedicated to alliances recruiting, and where each alliance's thread is generally their domain, subject to certain reasonable expecations and questions. Having been a user of these forums for over five years (this isn't my first account), and mod of this forum for almost a year, you get a supernatural sense like Spiderman's - and it's tingling!

[Kargool]

Well, just remember that not everyone has been around 5 -five- years on theese forums, and instead of hanging them out high and dry maybe you should try to be abit more receptive to new people trying to get into this game. I think that new players should be given the benefit of the doubt instead of being hung out high and dry by people trying to enlarge their e-penis.

[furball]

Originally Posted by Kargool

Well, just remember that not everyone has been around 5 -five- years on theese forums, and instead of hanging them out high and dry maybe you should try to be abit more receptive to new people trying to get into this game. I think that new players should be given the benefit of the doubt instead of being hung out high and dry by people trying to enlarge their e-penis.

Unfortunately I attach greater priority to the players who may be lost (the black hole outcome) than to MEX's well-being. Sorry about that.

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Kargool

Well, just remember that not everyone has been around 5 -five- years on theese forums, and instead of hanging them out high and dry maybe you should try to be abit more receptive to new people trying to get into this game. I think that new players should be given the benefit of the doubt instead of being hung out high and dry by people trying to enlarge their e-penis.

How was he 'hung out high and dry'?

Was he insulted and abused? No he wasn’t
Was he banned off the forums? No he wasn’t

As it was he hijacked other peoples thread with merger offers (actually I suspect a lot of it’s an attempt to get the 15 posts he needs to post a url) and received some advise on how to choose the right alliance to merge with from myself and some forum etiquette advise from furball which is hardly leaving him high and dry and instead helping guide him along the traitorous path that people have to follow to become a part of this community

Although I still find it highly strange that he’s trying to recruit for an alliance he runs or get other alliances to merge into his alliance when he’s clearly stated he’s not committed to it and is looking to jump ship asap

p.s Love your mixing up of sayings there Kargool, It starts out as “Hung out to dry” and ends as “left high and dry” :

[Kargool]

Originally Posted by furball

Unfortunately I attach greater priority to the players who may be lost (the black hole outcome) than to MEX's well-being. Sorry about that.

And you seem to be doing a fine job doing that.

[furball]

Originally Posted by Kargool

And you seem to be doing a fine job doing that.

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to insinuate here. At present the forum is essentially moderating itself with a combination of:

1. The general AR community pitching in where threads need more effort/input/information from the alliance's HCs;
2. wakey, in his capacity as an incredibly knowledgable veteran (he really has seen it all, and his memory never ceases to amaze me);
3. me - mod, to do the funky things like close threads and split them (like here).

If you think more is needed, please feel free to suggest it here.

[Amycus]

More isn't needed, just un-biased moderating and critisizm.

Problem is, that has never been the case on the PA forums. The other problem is that the majority in the community who are biased, are so toward issues that help their self serving goals, or whatever they think will make them look the best in the eyes of the readers here.

Which is why one should post only if they feel like arguing whether or not the sky is blue, and is also why I only have 79 posts in 19 rounds of play.

[Kargool]

Agreed, PA's AR forums will never be unbiased, but also remember, that the people that post new alliances here are the possible new Syntetic_Sids and the new Dingo's or anyone who wants to start a new alliance. To be met with insults and weak innuendos about their own lacking their confidence when starting a new alliance is at best severly demotivated. I think that people who wants to start an alliance should be allowed to. And that WE as "veterans" should try to remember back to when we took our very own unstable steps into the world of PA.

[MEX]

Originally Posted by furball

Right then. MEX keeps deleting the old thread despite me restoring it a few times, so I've found an old irrelevant post of mine of this forum, made it into a new thread and added those posts about merging into it.
.

Problem was that this post was from another topic, and moving it into a new topic let it look like i hat started this topic with such a silly post

When i deleted it, the entire topic was deleted, which wasnt my intention.

MfG, MEX

[MEX]

Originally Posted by furball

... when you admit that you are going to form your new alliance by stealing members from other alliances ...

I am NOT STEALING members !

I offered other alliances to merge with USO, if they are not satisfied in the way i am leading USO right now, they can discuss this with all our members in the forums of our alliance USO ... but until now nobody has complained to me or in a topic in our alliance forum !

If the majority of USO wants another name, i am willing to change this by the next merge.
But my current policy is to use the name USO agian for a merge between USO and another smaller alliance ... until we find a active alliance competent and experienced enough to lead USO better than i after a merge.

As soon as i see that someone is active in USO, i intend to promote him.
But until now i have not seen any sign of this as nobody has told me about their previously registered IRC channel and other stuff which are important for a ACTIVE alliance.

MfG, MEX

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Kargool

Agreed, PA's AR forums will never be unbiased, but also remember, that the people that post new alliances here are the possible new Syntetic_Sids and the new Dingo's or anyone who wants to start a new alliance. To be met with insults and weak innuendos about their own lacking their confidence when starting a new alliance is at best severly demotivated. I think that people who wants to start an alliance should be allowed to. And that WE as "veterans" should try to remember back to when we took our very own unstable steps into the world of PA.

No one is saying they cant start a new alliance or that these people cant be the next Sid but what you need to understand Kargool is that most of these people who start alliances are clueless about what it involves. They sit in front of their computer and have this eureka moment about starting their own alliance.

Now on one hand starting an alliance is a great thing to do as its giving back to the community but on the other hand it’s a disaster for the community. When you start an alliance you have to remember that by doing so your taking on a huge amount of responsibility as you hold your members ‘fun’ in your hands and if you go in blinkered without the ability or desire to put in the time needed and without the backup to form a command then your more than likely to see your alliance become a black hole for players.

When an alliance posts here and it is obvious that they haven’t really thought about what they are getting into its then our duty to help them by providing feedback and advice. Now I know you believe that we should let them be and learn by their own mistakes but there’s making mistakes which you learn from and become stronger from and there’s making mistakes which destroy your round, your members rounds and your alliance. The later don’t need to be made but rather than give advice people here would generally prefer to boost their post count by posting a simple but useless ‘gl’ reply. They need the advice and need to be made aware of the task they are taking on. If they choose to ignore what’s being said then c’est le vie but if it opens the eyes of a few people and reduces the amount of ‘black holes’ then that’s a good thing for the community. As for the ‘potential’ new Sid’s, any person in a position to make a good stab at running an alliance won’t be put off by a bit of hardwork and will listen and act upon advice offered something which they cant do if people stay quite.

[furball]

Originally Posted by Amycus

More isn't needed, just un-biased moderating and critisizm.

Can I claim to be totally unbiased? Probably not. Is it possible to be unbiased? Only by having no knowledge (or perfect knowledge) of the community or the players within it. Would such a person be a good mod? Almost definitely not, since the job inherently requires interaction with players.

Originally Posted by Amycus

Problem is, that has never been the case on the PA forums. The other problem is that the majority in the community who are biased, are so toward issues that help their self serving goals, or whatever they think will make them look the best in the eyes of the readers here.

Which is why one should post only if they feel like arguing whether or not the sky is blue, and is also why I only have 79 posts in 19 rounds of play.

My only goal is to have a fair forum with equal opportunities for all. Where a recruitment thread requires constructive criticism, it shall receive it - because I'm not the thought police and I'm not going to prevent sensible discussions of an alliance's policies, aims and goals.


And that's a rather hasty generalisation there. You're going to struggle to prove that the majority of posters are significantly biased, and deciding that you won't post based on that one fact strikes me as a little weak on your part.

[furball]

Originally Posted by MEX

I am NOT STEALING members !

Congratuations, you managed to edit from your post the information that I had to prove your plans to get members of pre-existing small alliances to leave those alliances and join yours.

Originally Posted by MEX

As soon as i see that someone is active in USO, i intend to promote him.
But until now i have not seen any sign of this as nobody has told me about their previously registered IRC channel and other stuff which are important for a ACTIVE alliance.

MfG, MEX

You've made it clear in your other posts that you're going to leave USO as soon as you get an offer from a bigger alliance. That makes me sad.


(ps - get an IRC channel yourself!)

[Kargool]

Originally Posted by wakey

As for the ‘potential’ new Sid’s, any person in a position to make a good stab at running an alliance won’t be put off by a bit of hardwork and will listen and act upon advice offered something which they cant do if people stay quite.

And your advices as how to run a successfull alliance should really be held high for someone ambitious about his own alliance.

[MEX]

Originally Posted by furball

Congratuations, you managed to edit from your post the information that I had to prove your plans to get members of pre-existing small alliances to leave those alliances and join yours.

You've made it clear in your other posts that you're going to leave USO as soon as you get an offer from a bigger alliance. That makes me sad.

(ps - get an IRC channel yourself!)

ad3: As you need 2 supporters to get a registered IRC channel, it isnt possible to get a IRC channel yourself, as someone as experienced as you should already know
Because i intend to leave USO and join another alliance before the end of r19, i dont think it would make sense if i register a IRC channel for USO.

ad2: It makes me sad too, but i play PA to have fun and it isnt fun if you are the only one ACTIVE in your alliance

ad1: I wonder why you hate me so much that you want to spread lies about me
Are you one of those vile Legionnaires which forced me to abandon PA years ago by destroying any fun for me in playing PA ?
I never planned to force members of other small alliances to leave their alliances, as it was my policiy until now to merge with other small alliances to form a bigger small alliance.
Which advantage do you gain from hindering me in merging with other small alliances, as you invest so much energy into it ?

MfG, MEX

PS: It is my opinion that it is better for the members of USO if they are in a single alliance with more members where it is easier to find a active member in their alliance, instead of beeing divided into several small alliances with 1-3 members only where it is much harder to find matching partners, for roiding or other activities.

[robban1]

merges should be banned in pa

[furball]

Originally Posted by MEX

ad3: As you need 2 supporters to get a registered IRC channel, it isnt possible to get a IRC channel yourself, as someone as experienced as you should already know

I'm looking on the alliance rankings and seeing 10 members of USO. It was therefore logical to hope that you might have made efforts to get at least two of them onto IRC.

Originally Posted by MEX

Because i intend to leave USO and join another alliance before the end of r19, i dont think it would make sense if i register a IRC channel for USO.

Well, it's not too difficult to change the ownership of a channel - that's what #cservice exists for.

By the way, what are you going to do if you get to the end of r19 and no-one is around to replace you?

Originally Posted by MEX

ad1: I wonder why you hate me so much that you want to spread lies about me
Are you one of those vile Legionnaires which forced me to abandon PA years ago by destroying any fun for me in playing PA ?
I never planned to force members of other small alliances to leave their alliances, as it was my policiy until now to merge with other small alliances to form a bigger small alliance.
Which advantage do you gain from hindering me in merging with other small alliances, as you invest so much energy into it ?

MfG, MEX

PS: It is my opinion that it is better for the members of USO if they are in a single alliance with more members where it is easier to find a active member in their alliance, instead of beeing divided into several small alliances with 1-3 members only where it is much harder to find matching partners, for roiding or other activities.

Although I now understand what you're trying to do, there are several problems with it. For starters, any small alliance (<20 members) that wants to merge with you is probably having activity problems of its own. There's not much to attract them to you other than the hope that your activity will rescue the situation. These alliances generally consist of inactive players and worn-out HCs, for whatever reason. Your eventual departure is really the key here: it's unlikely that any active members that you do find will be prepared to take over as HC of an inactive alliance.

Finally, I'm not trying to hinder you in any substantial way. You're taking the initiative and doing something, which can be rare. However, I'm still not convinced that you're going the right way about it.

[wakey]

Originally Posted by Kargool

And your advices as how to run a successfull alliance should really be held high for someone ambitious about his own alliance.

This may sound a bit pompous but there are probably very few people in this community who are better placed to give advice on how to run a ‘successful’ alliance to posters on this forum. You have to remember after all that we aren’t talking about alliances who’s leader’s name alone attracts a significant number of high quality people. We are talking about alliances that are generally starting from scratch with either just the poster on board or the poster and a couple of friends. This is a completely different situation to running an alliance that’s more hardcore in nature and is more of a threat and requires different tactics.

If we were talking about hardcore alliances here then yes you would probably be right, the advice I could give wouldn’t be worth as much as the advice others can give but we aren’t talking about these alliances and as such impling that my advice is useless is wrong.

Originally Posted by MEX

ad3: As you need 2 supporters to get a registered IRC channel, it isnt possible to get a IRC channel yourself, as someone as experienced as you should already know

Wrong, if you were organised enough you would have got yourself and another USO hc member access to the #alliances group. You would have then be able to talk to an alliance rep in there and get as many #uso.name (ie #uso.public , #uso.private, #uso.attacks. #uso.defence, #uso.scans ect ect) as you needed, plus upto 30 defence relay channels while needing just yourself and your alliances second rep to support the applications

Originally Posted by MEX

Which advantage do you gain from hindering me in merging with other small alliances, as you invest so much energy into it ?

If he encourages you and those your trying to merge with to actually think about the proposed mergers, make sure they are of a real benefit and aren’t just ways to increase rank and ensure that there’s a stronger alliance comes out of it and it isn’t just some kind of ego boosting exercise before you piss off elsewhere then he’s helping by ensuring you don’t damage other alliances and players unnecessarily.

Originally Posted by MEX

PS: It is my opinion that it is better for the members of USO if they are in a single alliance with more members where it is easier to find a active member in their alliance, instead of beeing divided into several small alliances with 1-3 members only where it is much harder to find matching partners, for roiding or other activities.

In theory your right, but more members doesn’t make something better. It has to strengthen the alliances not just make it bigger for it to benefit the players. And you sit there and seemingly feign concern for your members while trying to engineer a move for yourself which doesn’t look good. If you really cared surely you wouldn’t be abandoning them or imposing the restriction of using the USO name only for the merged alliance

[MEX]

Originally Posted by wakey

... If he encourages you and those your trying to merge with to actually think about the proposed mergers, make sure they are of a real benefit and aren’t just ways to increase rank and ensure that there’s a stronger alliance comes out of it and it isn’t just some kind of ego boosting exercise before you piss off elsewhere then he’s helping by ensuring you don’t damage other alliances and players unnecessarily...

Because of the current restrictions about leaving and joining alliances, merging alliances and the missing possiblility to rename a alliance without merging it, i strongly miss the STARTUP ALLIANCE some other games like PA are providing for their players.

I think it would be a good idea if EVERY new created account would be automatically places into such a STARTUP ALLIANCE. If somone leaves a alliace, or a alliance gets disbanded, these players should also automatically get back into this STARTUP ALLIANCE. Instead of leaving this STARTUP ALLIANCE alliance, you should have the option to create your own 1 man ally.

This would have the following advantages:

1. as nobody can attack a alliance mate, everyone active will try to be in another alliance after protection has worn off after tick 72.
Even thouse which dont intend to go roiding will try to get into another alliance to avoid beeing attacked from other alliances.
As in my opinion PA is a relativly simple game, where communication and politics are the key components for success, this will weed out new players which dont understand this even faster, but gives the others better chances to discover how PA really works as this pressure of getting into another alliance or get roided down to ZERO will force inactive players to get more active.

2. it would make it much easier for the multihunters to discover farms.
As alliances usually try to get rid of inactive planets, farms of multies will end either in this STARTUP ALLIANCE, or in small alliances filled with farms which makes it much easier for multihunters, or other active players which are looking for targets, to find them.

3. as players leaving their alliance will have to stay for at least 72 ticks in the STARTUP ALLIANCE before they can join or create a new alliance, there will always be enough experienced players in this alliance to teach n00bs the basics of PA.

MfG, MEX

PS: Currently USO, which is merging with other alliances with 1-3 players, is similar to such a STARTUP ALLIANCE, although the experienced players moving from one alliance to another are missing.
As the members from these small alliances will have to leave their alliance anyway if they want to get into a better alliance, and have to wait 72 ticks before getting back into their old alliance if the new one doesnt want them anymore after this period, they loose nothing and we currently have more interesents than are able to merge with us because of some strange errors resulting from missing or faulty semaphores.

[^Miksu^]

Originally Posted by MEX

Because of the current restrictions about leaving and joining alliances, merging alliances and the missing possiblility to rename a alliance without merging it, i strongly miss the STARTUP ALLIANCE some other games like PA are providing for their players.

I think it would be a good idea if EVERY new created account would be automatically places into such a STARTUP ALLIANCE. If somone leaves a alliace, or a alliance gets disbanded, these players should also automatically get back into this STARTUP ALLIANCE. Instead of leaving this STARTUP ALLIANCE alliance, you should have the option to create your own 1 man ally.

This would have the following advantages:

1. as nobody can attack a alliance mate, everyone active will try to be in another alliance after protection has worn off after tick 72.
Even thouse which dont intend to go roiding will try to get into another alliance to avoid beeing attacked from other alliances.
As in my opinion PA is a relativly simple game, where communication and politics are the key components for success, this will weed out new players which dont understand this even faster, but gives the others better chances to discover how PA really works as this pressure of getting into another alliance or get roided down to ZERO will force inactive players to get more active.

What if people want to play without alliance? It doesn't do any good to force people to belong into a massive "trash alliance" and reduce their targeting possibilities at the same time. Again this would be bigger problem for new players than for old ones that already has "contacts" and some knowledge about how things work.
And what comes to inactive players being roided to zero, it's happening all the time and it doesn't force them to be any more active. Inactive people generally don't a)care, b)know about how to play this game the way so called active players want to play or how they want other people to play.

Originally Posted by MEX

3. as players leaving their alliance will have to stay for at least 72 ticks in the STARTUP ALLIANCE before they can join or create a new alliance, there will always be enough experienced players in this alliance to teach n00bs the basics of PA.

My experience is that often the most difficult task is to make inactive people to want to learn or to be active. It wouldn't change anything if active players would be forced to be 72 ticks in the same tag with several hundred inactives which even don't want to communicate/learn.
You can't make anyone "learn" if he don't want to.

I might be bit "negative" but I just can't see any advantages in gathering all the crap under the same tag. Also there is own topic for this startup alliance discussion somewhere.
Anyway, best help for new players(those who want to learn) is that some established alliances give them a chance and maybe take a small risk with them.

[MEX]

Originally Posted by ^Miksu^

What if people want to play without alliance? It doesn't do any good to force people to belong into a massive "trash alliance" and reduce their targeting possibilities at the same time.

Then they simply create a 1 player alliance and dont have any restrictions at all.

Originally Posted by ^Miksu^

My experience is that often the most difficult task is to make inactive people to want to learn or to be active. It wouldn't change anything if active players would be forced to be 72 ticks in the same tag with several hundred inactives which even don't want to communicate/learn.
You can't make anyone "learn" if he don't want to.

I share your opinion that it is the most difficult task to make inactive players more active. There is only one solution: wait until they want to be more active. But usually at this time any active players are already gone, so i thought that this would be a good idea for having a steady influx of active players which they can easily contact in this STARTUP ALLIANCE.

Originally Posted by ^Miksu^

Anyway, best help for new players(those who want to learn) is that some established alliances give them a chance and maybe take a small risk with them.

They usally only take players which apply to join them, but dont merge with small alliances with 1-3 players. Which is one of the reasons why i kept USO to merge with such alliances.

MfG, MEX

[wakey]

Originally Posted by MEX

hey usally only take players which apply to join them, but dont merge with small alliances with 1-3 players. Which is one of the reasons why i kept USO to merge with such alliances.

MfG, MEX

If you actually took any notice of what’s being said to you on this thread you would understand full well WHY alliance will take individuals but not merge. You can go around merging left right and centre but unless the merges are the correct ones you are most likely screwing all the alliances over. Membership numbers doesn’t equal quality after all and more members can and often does cause more problems than it solves.

Additionally the reason people won't merge with USO is most likely down a lot to you. First of all you have your condition of mergers being under the USO name. While it may wash with the really insignificant alliances run by inactive and full of inactive any alliance with a bit of dedication and quality no doubt has a much more significant name that holds some kind of weight at some level in pa.

Then there’s the issue of your rank after the merge, you would expect and you would probably have to get the same position in the merged alliance as you currently hold. Now I know personally I wouldn’t want you on my HC. While my only contact with you has been this thread afaik the view I get is your 'power hungry'. You don’t seem to care about the alliance but about raising your importance which isn’t the kind of HC any established alliance is going to be eager to have.

Additionally you have stated you’re on a free account which isn’t appealing, how could the alliance demand members defend each other with you on the HC who due to the free limits wouldn’t be able to contribute.

It’s just not an appealing proposition to get stuck with you and possible other none vetted members whose activity and compatibility is unknown and unappealing.

To put things simply these alliance haven’t spent time getting their alliance organised to have it screwed up just so they can merge with a group they know nothing about and to give this group a say in the running of the alliance. Even alliances like F-Crew and Rock want to make sure that those they recruit meet a certain quality level which the merger cant guarentee

[MEX]

If you actually took any notice of what I said,
you would have already noticed that i am not interested in beeing HC !
I only do it as currently nobody else active enough is doing it in USO.

All i want to do in r19 is to get into a really good alliance with my free account, so that i can decide if it is worth to invest my time into this alliance in r20.
I intend to get a paid account for the next round, or not playing PA at all again if i dont get into a good alliance.
Of course i would be satisfied with even a normal member rank in any really good alliance, as i dont like having too much work as HC.
I prefer just to have fun in a good alliance with people that understand me and tolerate my sometimes agressive speech, as this is the way i am and i am too old to change

Originally Posted by wakey

If you actually took any notice of what’s being said to you on this thread you would understand full well WHY alliance will take individuals but not merge. You can go around merging left right and centre but unless the merges are the correct ones you are most likely screwing all the alliances over. Membership numbers doesn’t equal quality after all and more members can and often does cause more problems than it solves.

Additionally the reason people won't merge with USO is most likely down a lot to you. First of all you have your condition of mergers being under the USO name. While it may wash with the really insignificant alliances run by inactive and full of inactive any alliance with a bit of dedication and quality no doubt has a much more significant name that holds some kind of weight at some level in pa.

Then there’s the issue of your rank after the merge, you would expect and you would probably have to get the same position in the merged alliance as you currently hold. Now I know personally I wouldn’t want you on my HC. While my only contact with you has been this thread afaik the view I get is your 'power hungry'. You don’t seem to care about the alliance but about raising your importance which isn’t the kind of HC any established alliance is going to be eager to have.

Additionally you have stated you’re on a free account which isn’t appealing, how could the alliance demand members defend each other with you on the HC who due to the free limits wouldn’t be able to contribute.

It’s just not an appealing proposition to get stuck with you and possible other none vetted members whose activity and compatibility is unknown and unappealing.

To put things simply these alliance haven’t spent time getting their alliance organised to have it screwed up just so they can merge with a group they know nothing about and to give this group a say in the running of the alliance. Even alliances like F-Crew and Rock want to make sure that those they recruit meet a certain quality level which the merger cant guarentee

Which is excactly the point WHY i have kept USO until now, other alliances usually only take single members and dont merge with other alliances fearing sabotage.
As there is no organisation in USO until now, we dont have to loose much so we can merge USO with other small alliances.

The purpose of USO is to merge with other small alliaces, to create some sort of STARTUP ALLIACE for those which have already created a small alliance for their RL friends with 1-3 members and prefer tow wait 24 ticks to merge with USO instead of waiting 72 ticks and then maybe only partly beeing allowed to join another alliance after leaving their old small alliance.

As i am concerned about sabotage, i usually promote the HC from merging alliances to BC, at least until i know more about them, and see that they are active players which intend to take care of USO.

MfG, MEX

[wakey]

Originally Posted by MEX

If you actually took any notice of what I said,
you would have already noticed that i am not interested in beeing HC !
I only do it as currently nobody else active enough is doing it in USO.

All i want to do in r19 is to get into a really good alliance with my free account, so that i can decide if it is worth to invest my time into this alliance in r20.
I intend to get a paid account for the next round, or not playing PA at all again if i dont get into a good alliance.
Of course i would be satisfied with even a normal member rank in any really good alliance, as i dont like having too much work as HC.
I prefer just to have fun in a good alliance with people that understand me and tolerate my sometimes agressive speech, as this is the way i am and i am too old to change

It’s hard to see that though as you say one thing but on the other hand your actions are displaying classic ‘attention seeking’ properties. It’s like you’re after raising your status either by getting lost of people under your control or by getting into a good alliance.

And your acting like it’s your god given right to get into a top alliance. It takes some people rounds to get into a good alliance and they don’t do it by expecting to get in. They do it by earning it, showing that they are dedicated to the game by playing at the lower levels and showing commitment and skill down there. If you’re not being successful in applying for alliances then you maybe have to look in the mirror and take a long hard look at yourself. They clearly look at you, see a free account so aren’t of any immediate use and probably see from the interview that your activity doesn’t make you a candidate for them investing money into you

So perhaps before expecting to waltz into a good alliance and then deciding if you’re going to stay and play you make the effort first. Get yourself into a solid lower level alliance, purchase an account upgrade (hey for £10 you get 3 credits, which seeing as they are £5 each that’s a credit for next round, the round after and one free which can be used this round and your then hardly losing anything) and start showing you have some commitment and you will then find it a lot easier to find a new home.

Which is excactly the point WHY i have kept USO until now, other alliances usually only take single members and dont merge with other alliances fearing sabotage.
As there is no organisation in USO until now, we dont have to loose much so we can merge USO with other small alliances.

The purpose of USO is to merge with other small alliaces, to create some sort of STARTUP ALLIACE for those which have already created a small alliance for their RL friends with 1-3 members and prefer tow wait 24 ticks to merge with USO instead of waiting 72 ticks and then maybe only partly beeing allowed to join another alliance after leaving their old small alliance.

As i am concerned about sabotage, i usually promote the HC from merging alliances to BC, at least until i know more about them, and see that they are active players which intend to take care of USO.

MfG, MEX

There’s still no organisation and that’s the problem, USO have you who wants out, your merging with groups of players who don’t have the required attributes to ever break through the initial barriers and whose problems mirror the same problems USO have. This just compounds the problems as you gain mass. You now find yourself being a pretty big ‘black hole’, you can’t support your members, you can’t really improve their skills and you certainly don’t help make the game more fun for them. A few may get out but most just quit and their inactive planets remain as part of your alliance. These planets then give you enough members to start attracting ‘walk in’ applications as the view is often “they are fairly big, they must be pretty good”. They don’t see or know the internal problems you have from the lack of structure or activity and this means you suck even more people into your ‘black hole’ to never be seen again. While you may be trying to create something ‘good’ for PA your inability to realise the fundamentally flaws in your alliance and those your merging with makes you more of a problem than a help. You’re unable to make any kind of stab at working around them at the start and they are going to get more out of control the more merges you do and the more unchecked recruitment you do. Alliances at all levels if they are to survive need structure. dedication, knowledge , commitment, activity and willingness (yes I know 3 of those basically mean the same thing but that’s probably the most vital part) and USO is lacking most if not all of those

So you really need to make up your mind, your either in or your out. If you’re in you need to stop worrying about quantity so much and you need to start worrying about achieving a certain level of quality in your infrastructure and your activity coverage. Find a few ‘Right’ alliances to merge with that compliment the existing members and not just any old alliance and while you may be smaller on the member count your be a better alliance

If you’re out stop using USO and its members as something to toy with while you’re waiting. Tell them you’re leaving and make your last act one to undo the situation you have got them in. There’s a number of alliance who aren’t bothered about score as long as they show a willingness to learn and help out so try and help them find a home in these alliance. One alliance probably wont take them all but you can probably find any player who has any real intention of playing pa (and isn’t just signed up and logging in for 5 mins just for the sake of it) a new home that can do a lot more for them without any real trouble

[MEX]

Originally Posted by wakey

If you’re out stop using USO and its members as something to toy with while you’re waiting. Tell them you’re leaving and make your last act one to undo the situation you have got them in. There’s a number of alliance who aren’t bothered about score as long as they show a willingness to learn and help out so try and help them find a home in these alliance. One alliance probably wont take them all but you can probably find any player who has any real intention of playing pa (and isn’t just signed up and logging in for 5 mins just for the sake of it) a new home that can do a lot more for them without any real trouble

I have waited long enough, and all the problems you have with USO merging with small alliances will be solved in 15 ticks from now ... :xmasgrin:

MfG, MEX

PS: I am sure not all members of USO will be satisfied with my actions, but at least it was the best i could do for them, now their fate in PA depends on their own abilities and activity.