![Reply](STYLES/Planetarion2/buttons/reply.gif) |
|
20 Feb 2015, 19:55
|
#601
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoXiouS
You keep yelling how our naps reduce our incs... We were #3 in incs last round, #1 the round before that, #3 the round before that... Maybe we're not napping enough, ULTs numbers aren't that much lower compared to anyone else either, and most likely they will have the most incs this round. (yes, bows had most incs per member one round, I'm only speaking about the total incs).
|
I think most of the time you focus too much on "easy" roids early on, when the roids are as easily capped from Ultores as they are from HR.
If you DONT go after your biggest competition early on, it will be more of a struggle later.
Ultores went after p3nguins pretty early this round, and ND kept holding CT down with their suicide waves. It paid off, now learn from it.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 19:58
|
#602
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
I think most of the time you focus too much on "easy" roids early on, when the roids are as easily capped from Ultores as they are from HR.
If you DONT go after your biggest competition early on, it will be more of a struggle later.
Ultores went after p3nguins pretty early this round, and ND kept holding CT down with their suicide waves. It paid off, now learn from it.
|
I found this quite entertaining. Telling NoXiouS how to run an alliance when your own alliance is barely launching 10 fleets a night.
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 20:01
|
#603
|
Mordar, Keel, Reip
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 333
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
eh, the more even the incs spread, the easier they are to cover... it's the incs in the peace time that matter the least.
and no, we usually aim for the top50 fattest or so early, 2 waves per planet. after that (if I BC), I tend to target the fattest galaxies that are not our forts.
__________________
Wolf in a pirates clothing to the highest degree, standing behind the curtains.
All the war propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting. - George Orwell
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 20:14
|
#604
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
I disagree when it pushes the incs up past what you would get when being p-targetted by another alliance
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 20:15
|
#605
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
I found this quite entertaining. Telling NoXiouS how to run an alliance when your own alliance is barely launching 10 fleets a night.
|
Last round BF sent out around 12-13 fleet more daily than bows, does that mean BF is only sends out 22 fleets a night?
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 20:19
|
#606
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
Last round BF sent out around 12-13 fleet more daily than bows, does that mean BF is only sends out 22 fleets a night?
|
Come on. You're not that stupid. We both know I'm referring to this round.
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 20:20
|
#607
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
Come on. You're not that stupid. We both know I'm referring to this round.
|
Yeah, and the round stats has not yet be given out?
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 20:22
|
#608
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
Yeah, and the round stats has not yet be given out?
|
I'm talking from experience though. When you were still "fighting" us, I counted not more than 10 fleets on a nightly basis. But maybe we should blame that on the classic "inaccurate intel" excuse.
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 20:33
|
#609
|
Paso Leaute
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 919
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
I found this quite entertaining. Telling NoXiouS how to run an alliance when your own alliance is barely launching 10 fleets a night.
|
That cant be true because Golden sends out 10 fleets a night on his own ![Wink](images/smilies/wink.gif)
And takes at least 10 def fleets too
__________________
An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why must the pessimist always run to blow it out?
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 20:40
|
#610
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
I'm talking from experience though. When you were still "fighting" us, I counted not more than 10 fleets on a nightly basis. But maybe we should blame that on the classic "inaccurate intel" excuse.
|
Id assume our total fleet movement could be up to 4k total this round. So it will be around perhaps 80 daily, wich is still not very good.
But we can also blame your ability to count correctly too.
Ofc its not as good as last round, but it has its reasons, we started out the round with 25 people more or less.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 21:10
|
#611
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
Id assume our total fleet movement could be up to 4k total this round. So it will be around perhaps 80 daily, wich is still not very good.
But we can also blame your ability to count correctly too.
Ofc its not as good as last round, but it has its reasons, we started out the round with 25 people more or less.
|
When you were the only ones hitting us, Rainbows only sent out maximum 15 fleets. Unless of course we weren't your only targets!
Last edited by Clouds; 20 Feb 2015 at 21:23.
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 21:30
|
#612
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
When you were the only ones hitting us, Rainbows only sent out maximum 15 fleets. Unless of course we weren't your only targets!
|
We only realy hit you a few times this round, after you had declared war on us, and that was only for a few days.
Im pretty sure i got some convo where you accused BowS of targetting BF, therefor you were targetting us back, but it all comes together now....
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
20 Feb 2015, 23:57
|
#613
|
Retard0r
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,164
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Forest, do you think the stats released after the ticker stops will support your maths, looking at each ally's incs? I know for one that i've steered tier 2 tags through rounds without naps or allies making sure they've had the least incs per member by far, so simplifying it by maths doen't tell the whole story either. Total incs does tell the story, exception might be rounds like the one where spore got gangbanged the last 14 days after securing one of the biggest leads for ages. R56 was it? And that wasn't even incs to stop spore from winning, that was a random unmotivated universe bored and more or less randomlaunching just for the hell of it. Total incs combined with total att and def fleets launched kinda does tell most of the story imo.
__________________
-Chimpie
* We do not exist *
* G-II * NoS * VsN * Ascendancy * Osiris * xVx * Ultores *
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 00:45
|
#614
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkenViking
Forest, do you think the stats released after the ticker stops will support your maths, looking at each ally's incs? I know for one that i've steered tier 2 tags through rounds without naps or allies making sure they've had the least incs per member by far, so simplifying it by maths doen't tell the whole story either. Total incs does tell the story, exception might be rounds like the one where spore got gangbanged the last 14 days after securing one of the biggest leads for ages. R56 was it? And that wasn't even incs to stop spore from winning, that was a random unmotivated universe bored and more or less randomlaunching just for the hell of it. Total incs combined with total att and def fleets launched kinda does tell most of the story imo.
|
Well as we all know, whatever stats come out, can be 'manipulated' to suit whoever is discussing, so it is hard either way. It also doesnt show size. For instance (and this is NOT complaining/critisisim in any way), stats will prob show pen/bf have similar incs. I also think that pen have incs from mainly top 5 alliances (bf/ult/nd a lot + some randoms from ct), whilst bf mainly lower tiered alliances (due to being napped with most of top 5 all round). So in that respect, stats will look false.
My maths were a simplistic way to show how a couple of 'innocent naps' can completely skew a round and hand a win to someone else. I stand by my thoughts on that.
As for this round, I don't know what they will show. My thoughts are there will be a lot less launches this round.
For the top 5 I believe:
Ult - A lot less incs than they normally get and VERY high levels of ingal defence. Low attack launches.
BF - Less incs than average, high levels of ingal defence. Average attack launched.
P3n - High incs, average def in/out of gal, average attacks.
CT - High-ish incs. High def compared to usual for ct, but lower than ult/bf. High attacks.
ND - Highest incs, average def, high attacks.
I am sure others will see it differently though.
How do you see the top 5?
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 00:53
|
#615
|
a bucket
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chatham, UK
Posts: 1,073
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forest
Ult - A lot less incs than they normally get and VERY high levels of ingal defence. Low attack launches.
|
Less than they normally get maybe but still likely higher than anyone else. p3n's attacking may be less active than in previous rounds but I am sure a week of ptargeting by p3n and ct will have built up.
I would be surprised if ND overall has the highest incs despite their long war with ct.
__________________
Proud to have been TGV!
aargh! died in Jenova! | idled in ROCK | disappointed in Audentes | been Roguish | p-p-previously a p-p-p3nguin
Ascendancy
Otterly an Otter.
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 00:56
|
#616
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
I think ND will prob show as highest incs. Time will tell I guess
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 01:29
|
#617
|
Retard0r
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,164
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
I don't think you're too far off Forest, tho i doubt ND has the highest incs(without knowing what constellations they faced apart from CT). My bet is that CT or Ult had the most incs and the most def sent. And that Ult forced the most recalls of anyone percentage wise(maybe BF challenge this?). I also doubt Ult had noticably more ingal def than other people
__________________
-Chimpie
* We do not exist *
* G-II * NoS * VsN * Ascendancy * Osiris * xVx * Ultores *
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 03:00
|
#618
|
Don't make me declare war
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 2,913
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrunkenViking
I don't think you're too far off Forest, tho i doubt ND has the highest incs(without knowing what constellations they faced apart from CT). My bet is that CT or Ult had the most incs and the most def sent. And that Ult forced the most recalls of anyone percentage wise(maybe BF challenge this?). I also doubt Ult had noticably more ingal def than other people
|
When stats are released i will start a new thread and quote my post, then we can dissect which bits i was wrong on and why
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 03:20
|
#619
|
Bi-Winning
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: nfi
Posts: 290
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
wonder if all the people in here saying "DERP THIS IS HOW THE GAME SHOULD BE PLAYED IMO" actually realize how much their opinion matters to anyone but themselves.
LOOKED imagine telling people on the internet how to play a game and still assuming your mind werks
and so much thinking and assumptions blaming on stats blaming it on everything but your own ability to play the cards you are handed... what a bunch of mongoloids
talk about skill, talk about politics, the majority of politics is saying PLZ DONT HIT ME IM A PUSSY! so GG etc and skill is pretty much non existent.
bunch of pussy's playing a war game, that's what this is pure and simple.
__________________
ѵսȽցΛґ
H-A ☆ ODDR ☆ Apprime ☆ xVx ☆ VisioN ☆ HEROES ☆ Ultores
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 11:29
|
#620
|
Dictator
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 634
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Nd
P3n
Ult
Ct
Bf
Rain
Hr
Predictions for incoming
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 12:26
|
#621
|
Finally retired
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Keep in mind ND has been low on roids all round so they will have had barely any random inc.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]
In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 14:14
|
#622
|
Leader Of The Gang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 455
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
incoming predictions
CT
ULT
ND
P3N
BF
__________________
Round 60 - Ultores - Rank 67th.
Round 75 - CT - Rank 19th - Galaxy Win.
Round 80 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 81 - Ultores - Rank 73rd.
Round 83 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 91 - Lucky7 - Rank 50th.
Round 92 - Lucky7 - Rank 39th.
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 14:26
|
#623
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 898
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
P3n - 4000
Ct - 3000
Ult - 2000
Bf - 2500
Nd - 2500
Rain - 2300
Hr - 2300
my guess
__________________
R4-5 DDK
R6 Vanx
R7-R10 FAnG
R10 Eclipse
R10.5-R13 FAnG
R20-23 CT
R23 (CT BG) ToF
R24-R82... CT
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 14:30
|
#624
|
Leader Of The Gang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 455
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by [DDK]gm
P3n - 4000
Ct - 3000
Ult - 2000
Bf - 2500
Nd - 2500
Rain - 2300
Hr - 2300
my guess
|
stupidest guess i have seen.
__________________
Round 60 - Ultores - Rank 67th.
Round 75 - CT - Rank 19th - Galaxy Win.
Round 80 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 81 - Ultores - Rank 73rd.
Round 83 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 91 - Lucky7 - Rank 50th.
Round 92 - Lucky7 - Rank 39th.
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 14:42
|
#625
|
Dictator
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 634
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adapt
stupidest guess i have seen.
|
No where near as bad as yours tbh
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 14:47
|
#626
|
Retard0r
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,164
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
trollol
__________________
-Chimpie
* We do not exist *
* G-II * NoS * VsN * Ascendancy * Osiris * xVx * Ultores *
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 14:52
|
#627
|
Leader Of The Gang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 455
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munkee
No where near as bad as yours tbh
|
Mine is half realistic and im sure a few of them are right we will have to wait and see eh?..HR and bows more inc than ult!? dont fool yourself ![Thumbs Up](images/icons/icon14.gif) lol
__________________
Round 60 - Ultores - Rank 67th.
Round 75 - CT - Rank 19th - Galaxy Win.
Round 80 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 81 - Ultores - Rank 73rd.
Round 83 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 91 - Lucky7 - Rank 50th.
Round 92 - Lucky7 - Rank 39th.
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 15:01
|
#628
|
Dictator
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 634
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
We will see but it doesnt sound completely unrealistic. The war with p3ng early in the round was probably a total of 500 fleets sent at ult by p3ng, no one else was hitting ult back then.
The second time around it was ct hitting ult for 3 days and then p3ng and ct for 5? Considering we were sending 30-40 fleets a day and ct at best 80? then its not making for big numbers.
I dont see who else has been hitting ult based on the agreements they have had throughout the round.
I see clouds mentioned a night of up to 290 inc, which just doesnt happen anymore.
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 15:23
|
#629
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 898
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
maybe i was being a bit insulting to ND saying 2500, we hit them a lot so probably more than 3000
__________________
R4-5 DDK
R6 Vanx
R7-R10 FAnG
R10 Eclipse
R10.5-R13 FAnG
R20-23 CT
R23 (CT BG) ToF
R24-R82... CT
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 15:33
|
#630
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,386
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
I'm happy to release Black Flag's incoming statistics. Please note that these numbers are according to intel we have. There are random incoming that is unaccounted for due to lack of intel.
Faceless (26/26)
Total Incoming to date: 89
Conspiracy (65/60)
Total Incoming to date: 293
Howling Rain (37/47)
Total Incoming to date: 243
NewDawn (57/60)
Total Incoming to date: 12
ODDR (16/21)
Total Incoming to date: 87
p3nguins (64/58)
Total Incoming to date: 498
RainbowS (53/57)
Total Incoming to date: 542
Ultores (61/60)
Total Incoming to date: 107
Vikings (29/25)
Total Incoming to date: 127
Total: 1998
It'll be interesting to see others too.
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 15:42
|
#631
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 898
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
1 - NewDawn - 866
2 - Ultores - 696
3 - Black Flag - 253
4 - p3nguins - 223
5 - Vikings - 196
6 - Howling Rain - 143
7 - <Unknown> - 142
8 - Faceless - 112
9 - RainbowS - 58
10 - ODDR - 45
Total 2794 reported to tools
__________________
R4-5 DDK
R6 Vanx
R7-R10 FAnG
R10 Eclipse
R10.5-R13 FAnG
R20-23 CT
R23 (CT BG) ToF
R24-R82... CT
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 15:53
|
#632
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 110
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by [B5]Londo
I think you have rather misunderstood your stat advantage...
We went into the CR/BS strategy fully aware of the difficulties in facing a FR alliance.
What we stupidly did not expect was your CR strategy!
We failed to appreciate that 3-4 rogue building ziks would cripple the BS half of our alliance since they fake the rogues 3 times over and each can stop at team of two, then three planets ends up stopping 18 (all credit to the activity of these people by the way; I have launch recalled three times in a row and been stopped by the same set of rogues each time!).
With half of p3n stopped by rogues its not hard for your FR to defend against the CR.
If we had had the forethought and activity to set up a half dozen xan planets to spam broadswords and PL 3 def fleets each night you would be as troubled attacking us as we are attacking you!
In fact it is in PL def that i see the big gap between us... despite P3n's CR/BS strategy there has been almost no PL def with them. OTOH I see PL broadswords and devastators in ult all the time.
With that sort of thing the measure of the activity gap between us it wouldnt not have mattered which strategies either alliance took, Ult would likely still have won... barring political incompetence.
Politics ofc is an area where our Strategy seems to have counted against us.. but I wont start on that!!
|
Thanks for the credit! Me, Sard and Josh are very satisfied with our rogues.
Sending, resending def-fleets was made easier for my part due to a vacation in mexico. Always easier to launch/re-launch when you don't have to be called in the middle of the night to do it =)
__________________
[G-II][Quha][LDK][Apprime][Ultores] - Xerxes
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 16:12
|
#633
|
a bucket
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chatham, UK
Posts: 1,073
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
p3nguins (64/58)
Total Incoming to date: 498
Total: 1998
It'll be interesting to see others too.
|
One of the slightly annoying things about p3n tools is we don't have any good easy to get incoming totals!
[15:06] <booji> .surprisesex p3n
[15:06] <p3ngu> Top attackers on alliance p3nguins are (total: 1606) NewDawn - 551 | Black Flag - 381 | Ultores - 284 | Unknown - 102 | Conspiracy - 93
Rather low.
On the other hand ingame if I look at the intel for Black Flag I get a total of 739. Though since we have 63 planets marked as BF ingame that probably overstates it. Also oddly given p3ngu says ND has attacked us more looking ingame ND looks to have attacked us considerably less than BF. Needless to say ingame is probably closer to the real figure.
Edit: I say oddly it is not odd at all. ND prelaunch much more than BF. p3ngu is picking up all those jgps done from 22:00-02:00 to check for incs that night. So wont pick up many more BF launches than ND as most people don't jgp before each tick during incs to check for new ones.
__________________
Proud to have been TGV!
aargh! died in Jenova! | idled in ROCK | disappointed in Audentes | been Roguish | p-p-previously a p-p-p3nguin
Ascendancy
Otterly an Otter.
Last edited by booji; 21 Feb 2015 at 16:22.
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 17:28
|
#634
|
Dictator
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 634
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by booji
One of the slightly annoying things about p3n tools is we don't have any good easy to get incoming totals!
[15:06] <booji> .surprisesex p3n
[15:06] <p3ngu> Top attackers on alliance p3nguins are (total: 1606) NewDawn - 551 | Black Flag - 381 | Ultores - 284 | Unknown - 102 | Conspiracy - 93
Rather low.
|
<munkee> newdawn is 653 with a couple also missing ingame
<munkee> ultores = 738 with 3 missing planets and also not counting traitors
<munkee> as bf are at war with us now
<munkee> i added all new intel to ingame
<munkee> so ure numbers will be pretty accurate now if u look
<munkee> 706
So from nd/bf/ult its roughly looking to be 2100 ignoring any other allies incoming on us
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 19:19
|
#635
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clouds
I'm happy to release Black Flag's incoming statistics. Please note that these numbers are according to intel we have. There are random incoming that is unaccounted for due to lack of intel.
RainbowS (53/57)
Total Incoming to date: 542
It'll be interesting to see others too.
|
We only sent 10 fleets at you nightly when we were targetting you, please explain how you can come up with such a high number
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 19:28
|
#636
|
Leader Of The Gang
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 455
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
We only sent 10 fleets at you nightly when we were targetting you, please explain how you can come up with such a high number
|
i think he was trying to point out how shit you guys are
__________________
Round 60 - Ultores - Rank 67th.
Round 75 - CT - Rank 19th - Galaxy Win.
Round 80 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 81 - Ultores - Rank 73rd.
Round 83 - Ultores - Rank 16th.
Round 91 - Lucky7 - Rank 50th.
Round 92 - Lucky7 - Rank 39th.
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 19:36
|
#637
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
We only sent 10 fleets at you nightly when we were targetting you, please explain how you can come up with such a high number
|
I would say the figure would include fleets from standard gal raids + ptargetting
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 19:42
|
#638
|
Propaganda Chief
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Under the Rainbow
Posts: 4,740
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
BF 560
Viks 250
p3ng 220
FL 130
ND 110
HR 110
Ult 100
CT 90
ODDR 80
BowS 40
Terra 30
Fairly quiet round, around 1700 incs i suspect so far.
__________________
RainbowS
RB Ely MISTU Angel Fusi0n 1up ToF VisioN CT FAnG ROCK
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 21:35
|
#639
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 898
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
..............CT - Bow - P3ng - Ult - ND- BF
Ult ....... 733 - 100 - 773 - xxx - 65 - 107
BF ....... 254 - 560 - 706 - 120 - 9 - xxx
p3ng .... 241 - 220 - xxx - 775 - 480 - 498
CT ........ xxx - 90 - 227 - 871 - 953 - 293
ND ...... 915 - 110 - 695 - 63 - xxx - 12
Viks ..... 221 - 220 - 12 - xxx - 180 - 127
FL ....... 116 - 130 - 19 - xxx - 154 - 89
HR ....... 173 - 110 - 116 - 89 - 70 - 243
ODDR ..... 49 - 80 - 109 - xxx - 53 - 87
BowS ..... 76 - 40 - 137 - 138 - 133 - 542
Terra ...... 17 - 30 - 27 - xxx - xxx - xxx
lets get this table filled for the top 5 alliances at least, will be interesting to see and maybe settle arguments. no excuses over intel as it is all in the pastebin below, just import into PA replacing all intel.
http://pastebin.com/1NR49ujR
Most numbers from alliance tools so not fully accurate.
__________________
R4-5 DDK
R6 Vanx
R7-R10 FAnG
R10 Eclipse
R10.5-R13 FAnG
R20-23 CT
R23 (CT BG) ToF
R24-R82... CT
Last edited by [DDK]gm; 21 Feb 2015 at 22:44.
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 22:10
|
#640
|
Error
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 359
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Ofc, quiet Round...
Quiet Quiet Round
__________________
#braSilFTW
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 22:54
|
#641
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 898
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
http://i.imgur.com/pJyKiIJ.png
in a spreadsheet, red is > 500 incs
__________________
R4-5 DDK
R6 Vanx
R7-R10 FAnG
R10 Eclipse
R10.5-R13 FAnG
R20-23 CT
R23 (CT BG) ToF
R24-R82... CT
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 23:18
|
#642
|
over 9000
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 37
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by BloodyButcher
Thinking on how many of those 200k planets was Legion/RB/Fury bots/multies/farms, i do find it unfair.
|
I don't think there was alot of shenanigans going on in those alliances, and if it were it was uncoordinated. A couple of bots more or less won't make a dent on a 200k playerbase.
But as the universe was a lot bigger, it was a lot easier to keep gaining roids/score/ships every day and thus enlarge the difference between activity, organised groups and non or lesser organised groups.
Combine that with a longer round, being able to actually roid/kill a planet/fleet longer and easier, you have the ingredients that a small block can end up and dominate a large playerbase.
The end of round launches on the top planet however showed every time, if those 199k other people worked together, they'd be able to bring down anyone :P
For history's sake, here's the r2 legion memberlist; during somewhere near end of round.
http://legionhq.org/stef/PA-online%2...tvts-rnd2.html
|
|
|
21 Feb 2015, 23:22
|
#643
|
Shadows and Dust
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Black Bastion
Posts: 329
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
__________________
Nick: Swing
R3 or so - Cell/Elysium
Looong break
R20 - Orbit
R21 - Subh (Finished rank 58)
8 year break
R60 - ND -> Ultores (Finished rank 48)
R61 - Rogues
14:05 <Swing> I wear a cape and a burger king paper crown when i play pa
14:10 <Zwanstic> u also talk alot of shit
14:14 <Blue_Esper> you're a weird unit
12:33 <hone> oddr is where we send all the semi retarded and gay bashing ult has beens LOL
12:34 <hone> thats where u should be swing lol
|
|
|
23 Feb 2015, 00:51
|
#644
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Posts: 673
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adapt
Mine is half realistic and im sure a few of them are right we will have to wait and see eh?..HR and bows more inc than ult!? dont fool yourself ![Thumbs Up](images/icons/icon14.gif) lol
|
Don't know there should be enough hate for BB to get him alone more incoming than rats.
__________________
At some point the world shits on everybody. Pretending it ain't shit makes you an idiot, not an optimist."
If life hands you lemons, drink more tequila
After the game is over the king and the pawn end up in the same box
HA - asc -rdm-asc-VR- #ODDR - APP
Finally retired
|
|
|
23 Feb 2015, 11:50
|
#645
|
Mordar, Keel, Reip
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 333
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Thanks Rampage, found my r/p in there... should have had a nick too, as I can't recall at all what I was playing with that round, can prolly come up with 1 or 2 nicks I played under in the first 16 or so rounds
There was some shenanigans going on, but it definitely wasn't everyone doing it (some had a cousin or two), but a few individuals controlling a shitload of bots each and that wasn't "openly allowed", maybe silently approved tho. Still much fun those rounds.
__________________
Wolf in a pirates clothing to the highest degree, standing behind the curtains.
All the war propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting. - George Orwell
|
|
|
24 Feb 2015, 06:50
|
#646
|
Mordar, Keel, Reip
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 333
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Seems P3n and bows are willing to fix our rather low inc count ![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif) I thank thee for bending the stats for Forests liking ![Biggrin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Again, even if I actually can understand the motivation behind this, I will have to play the hypocrite card: How does hitting the #2 help the #1 not to win, and if #2, #3 and so on do not count, why try to help CT get #2? And do not take this as a whine, just genuinely interested. I am actually rather amused. Keep 'em coming lads and lassies \o/ (that's me, welcoming you with open arms).
__________________
Wolf in a pirates clothing to the highest degree, standing behind the curtains.
All the war propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting. - George Orwell
|
|
|
24 Feb 2015, 07:36
|
#647
|
Dictator
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 634
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
You hit us with nd and ult the last 4 days.. Why not hit you?
|
|
|
24 Feb 2015, 08:06
|
#648
|
a bucket
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Chatham, UK
Posts: 1,073
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
We are much obliged NoXiouS
Lets be honest here though, no matter how much we might hit ult in the last three days you are not going to overtake them... unless you and ct and others are willing to hit em too. Even then I would be surprised. They are just too far ahead.
Unfortunately the only motivation you (particularly BF) have left us is attempting at ruining (and by the looks of it failing).
__________________
Proud to have been TGV!
aargh! died in Jenova! | idled in ROCK | disappointed in Audentes | been Roguish | p-p-previously a p-p-p3nguin
Ascendancy
Otterly an Otter.
|
|
|
24 Feb 2015, 09:31
|
#649
|
KK
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 662
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoXiouS
Seems P3n and bows are willing to fix our rather low inc count ![Smile](images/smilies/smile.gif) I thank thee for bending the stats for Forests liking ![Biggrin](images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
Again, even if I actually can understand the motivation behind this, I will have to play the hypocrite card: How does hitting the #2 help the #1 not to win, and if #2, #3 and so on do not count, why try to help CT get #2? And do not take this as a whine, just genuinely interested. I am actually rather amused. Keep 'em coming lads and lassies \o/ (that's me, welcoming you with open arms).
|
You are either in that much self denial, clueless, ignorant or all of the above
|
|
|
24 Feb 2015, 10:07
|
#650
|
Mordar, Keel, Reip
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Finland
Posts: 333
|
Re: R60 mid round turmoil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krypton
You are either in that much self denial, clueless, ignorant or all of the above
|
Haha, like I said, I understand it and I might have pulled something similar in the past. Maybe next time I'll add the sarcasm-tags so you'll spot it easier too. And the end part of my last post was mostly towards BB.
We did hit you, and that has been discussed before, can't see a reason to go back there.
The politics played like they played, not particularly happy about finishing second (or third) again, but that's what happened this round. We will ramp up our game for next round and see what comes. The changes atm will make it interesting, multi-tick attacks planned and all.
__________________
Wolf in a pirates clothing to the highest degree, standing behind the curtains.
All the war propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting. - George Orwell
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 14:48.
| |