1UP winners of the free round (round 16) a given fact?

[Alki]

Originally Posted by Heartless

Oh right, I forgot that Angels ain't FAnG ... even though the people running it are the same. And the FAnG problem was already that the people running it were imcapable of enforcing some set rules. For instance, you'd never touch anyone who is a good friend of Irvine - no matter how bad he behaves - simply because Irvine is your backbone when it comes to DC'ing, and when you piss him off too heavily he'll just leave you hanging there.

Correct me if I am wrong on it.

that actually was the case in r13, which idd pissed me off immensely. Last round i handled offense, and he took care of defence, and i believe we did touch several of his friends, which he talked to me about, but i gave him reasons for why the hit was placed there and he understood. Alot has changed since then my friend. Also irvine isnt one to leave people hanging, if he says he will be there he will, and he even did 18hour dc'ing for quite a few days due to him not wanting any member to get screwed.

[furball]

Originally Posted by qebab

I learnt it from a round, in another game where my galaxy was all about winning. I was being secretive, trusted very few people, and played the game 100% hardcore, with the only aim of winning at all costs. In the end, it costed me a lot more than I had anticipated. When I realized that the relationships to my friends were being hampered by my lack of trust, I decided never to do such a thing ever again. It was a hard learnt lesson, but in hindsight, I value it over most other lessons.

And I think Angels could've made more of an effort in going for a number one spot, but it appears to me as the HC did not want to take those steps. I'm completely fine with that decision. A victory bought at all costs don't taste so sweet to me. I had my share of fun, even being repeatedly owned, losing nearly 6k roids, and falling from a top 20 position to a top 200 in less than a week, I managed to enjoy the round.

I'm glad that you enjoyed the round - and I really mean that. Games such as pia were ruined by blocking, and PA could have gone the same way if it wasn't for a movement to fluid politics.

My query to Angels HC is this: are all your members happy by you not taking the steps to get to number one?

[Alki]

Originally Posted by Stoom

eX was making great gains from that war but not roidwise, we got alot of 1up incs (and vice versa ofc.) so making our roidgains way less then when we would've gone for galraids. Same for 1up, so I don't really think that graph is a good example of showing who's best roider etc.
Also I do think Angels had alot of help with roiding so well because of the Ministry BG, they are know for their great starts. So next round if Ministry won't play or move somewhere else, Angels will have it alot tougher imo.


Not saying u need a disclaimer or anything, but if someone doesn't know you it might be difficult to figure out what tone your post has. (Someone like me for example).

actually i ran the ministry bg personally, they and myself ended up suiciding constantly and gaining **** all roids from it, because basically knew **** all about the game, and typical oversleeping, but idd there were great exceptions and im glad we took them on board, awesome players ministry for life<3

[Alki]

Originally Posted by furball

I'm glad that you enjoyed the round - and I really mean that. Games such as pia were ruined by blocking, and PA could have gone the same way if it wasn't for a movement to fluid politics.

My query to Angels HC is this: are all your members happy by you not taking the steps to get to number one?

i may have missed it in one of your previous posts, but are you talknig about last round? If so i dont see how we didnt take the neccessary steps to get #1 bar the last ~2weeks of the round

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by furball

My query to Angels HC is this: are all your members happy by you not taking the steps to get to number one?

What makes you assume we didn't try to? It's an insult if you'd assume we'd go for #2. We never will. We tried and did our best and always having in mind what's best for Angels. Just like everyone else, we can make wrong calls etc. But saying we didn't take the steps to win is wrong cause we did. Exi was just better.

[furball]

The post I quoted from

Originally Posted by qebab

And I think Angels could've made more of an effort in going for a number one spot, but it appears to me as the HC did not want to take those steps. I'm completely fine with that decision.

So - are all your members happy by you not taking the steps to get to number one?

[qebab]

Originally Posted by furball

The post I quoted from


So - are all your members happy by you not taking the steps to get to number one?

What I meant by that, was that the HC was apparently not willing to go as far as certain other alliances were to get the win. I think no member has complained about this.

[furball]

Ah. What exactly did you mean by the things that Angels HC could have done but didn't? (in order to go for number 1)

[qebab]

Originally Posted by furball

Ah. What exactly did you mean by the things that Angels HC could have done but didn't? (in order to go for number 1)

That is between me and Angels HC.

[furball]

I see - very tantalising. I suppose that Angels HC have been on your ass after my post sorry about that dude.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by furball

I see - very tantalising. I suppose that Angels HC have been on your ass after my post sorry about that dude.

Wrong, and it's childish infact to make that assumption.

[furball]

How is it childish? There's probably a few things you can infer if you try hard enough, but I didn't know childish was one of them.

[Sjor]

Originally Posted by Heartless

IOK, so Sjor got a bit more influence and 3 or 4 officers left, but in the end you and Irvine still try to be a HC.

Does this mean officers left cause i joined Angels?

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by Sjor

Does this mean officers left cause i joined Angels?

No.

God, Angels, you care way too much about my personal opinion.

[Sjor]

ok this is going to be a long post....

first Angels aint a typical ally, its more a community.
Angels is not based only about rules like some other Alliances. There are players that like more having strict rules, some like more freedom.
Angels cant be compared to any other ally
imho there are 3 kind of alliances:
1 is having 1 Big guy (sid, kaifux, tesla, Jurgen) setting strict rules all have to follow
2 is having a team of HC deciding all diploamticaly voting every single decission
3 is having just a bunch of good friends where all of them already did a lot for the ally and still do if they have the chance too or if its needed. to this group i consider Angels

Heartless was speaking of influence i have in Angels, well im just an peon and i dont think i have much influence. im trying to help if needed also for me Angels are more important than winning the round as planet, think i showed that in r13
i hardly ever leave an ally and try to help and be as nice as possible

Angels has (you might call it bad politics) but it has a the power to focus on its own strange and not need to rely on allainces with other ppl

about Irvine, he is either beeing loved or hated. he is for sure one of the best DCs arround i know. He also sticks to his friends. To be honest first time i met him didnt understand that all gosu listened to him so much. But soon i found it out
For Irvine i would pull my eta 1 attack that would give me a round victory

HK you are rigth, Kaifux is a BC Irvine is a DC and in a round where deffing is 3 times harder than attacking it was very much in favour of kaifux

Kargool Angels has the Ability to win the comming round same like arround 6 other alliances have.

To Heartless, i know you are a great DC, u saved OuZo almost alone in r 8 of pia
you did also great in FaNG, you give a lot for the ally u play, even to much (like Irvine) but you are one of the players needing to have strict rules and people following your orders without questioning them. You make no compromises and u are pretty stubborn.
YOu have a pretty subjectiv view on every alliance not beeing on level of 1up or exil
The reason u left OuZo and FaNG was that u wanted more Power (HC) but u didnt get it.
FaNG and OuZo are not an ally where a player like you fits well.

Damn a long post and that on a Friday

[Grog]

It's gotta be between Angels & 1up.
I certainly can't see any other contenders for it atm.

Putting LCH up as a contender to win is nuts, they're certainly not up to the caliber of either 1up or Angels.

[Phil^]

Originally Posted by Grog

It's gotta be between Angels & 1up.
I certainly can't see any other contenders for it atm.

Putting LCH up as a contender to win is nuts, they're certainly not up to the caliber of either 1up or Angels.

well, they did manage to completly repel one of 1ups larger attacks on one of their members, so i wouldnt rule them out completely.
For me, its between 1up, angels, dos, nd , and lch. There isnt at this moment a clear victor.

last round 1up's performance was well below what is considered normal for them so it might be premature to say they will easily walk this round.

angels has promise, so long as they dont keep overkill defending and draining all their def fleets, fakes can really really cripple them as it is.

dos - as others have said is the dark horse this round. will be interesting to see how they fare

nd - has some promise given their relative performance last round. wouldnt rule them out

lch - seems to have improved somewhat beyond what people expect for them and it will also be interesting to see how they do this round

[The_Fish]

1up are certainly the favourites. No eXi = 1up win as usual I reckon.

People keep saying ND are contenders, but they really aren't. I doubt they'll even have 50 members at tick start tbh. They aren't trying to win this round, they aren't taking it as seriously as ND took R12-15.

[-Blue Moon-]

Originally Posted by Grog

It's gotta be between Angels & 1up.
I certainly can't see any other contenders for it atm.

Putting LCH up as a contender to win is nuts, they're certainly not up to the caliber of either 1up or Angels.

I agree 100%. It will probably be whoever forms the 'best block'. Good luck to both of them!
tux

[lokken]

Anyone who takes this round seriously and goes at it full pelt, will have a chance of winning. Simply because there are alliance who probably are not.

[Nadar]

p2p-round and free-round counts equal. What does a p2p-round have that a free round doesn't? Nothing, except there's money in it. It's utter bull that alliances say "we cant take this round serious because it's a free round".

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Nadar

p2p-round and free-round counts equal. What does a p2p-round have that a free round doesn't? Nothing, except there's money in it. It's utter bull that alliances say "we cant take this round serious because it's a free round".

I didn't say anything about value. I just said because it's a free round, some alliances won't take it as seriously, because they don't believe in their credibility for one reason or another.

If alliances try, it's not their fault that others don't, they just win.

[Nadar]

Exactly what I'm thinking. If an alliance wins a free round it's just as well deserved and earned as in a p2p-round no matter who comes with the crap about "well we didn't take it seriously anyway".

[cura]

Just wanted to post that whatever fish (who isn't an ND member anymore) says on this thread - or actually whatever anybody has said on this thread so far - about NewDawn is purely his/their opinion.

[Kjeldoran]

To Furball, incase you were wondering ... I nor any other HC told Qebab what he could or couldn't post so there you have your answer.

Sjor, very nice post. You very well described our alliance. We're not the strict kinda format as 1up is. FAnG never was and Angels isn't either. It just doesn't fit in the way of working of most Angels. That's a simple fact.

Alot of pple, especially those who have been in such strict alliances like 1up, seem to think this form of alliance is inferior, is less effective or can in general not be equal to an alliance which is strict.

I mean, look at how most describe Angels. Everyone agrees we have the quality. I also believe we do. But most pple don't believe in our chances because we're not the strict format they're used to. They feel it's because of the internal issues or the bad politics or whatever reason they wanna give to it. Less is true. Last round we didn't screw up on politics, we didn't fall apart nor have we weakened for r16.

Heartless' posts are a very good example of this view that pple have on Angels because he's not comfortable with this type of structure.

Nway, I'm happy with the way we run things and I don't see a reason to change it and suddenly enforce strict rules on our members. That will only drive them away. Nonetheless some rules need to be applied but every Angel is more or less aware of that

[furball]

Well, I'm glad you don't censor your members. I personally believe that everyone should have their piece on AD, whether they agree with their HC or not. As HC (me and you), we may want to talk about what people have said on AD, but I would never ban someone from using AD unless they were as bad as Max.

[pig]

Originally Posted by -Blue Moon-

I agree 100%. It will probably be whoever forms the 'best block'. Good luck to both of them!
tux

1up dont really do blocking, however consider you lot are from exilition and p l a n e t i a, im sure you can do enough blocking for the rest of the universe.

Nothing quite like an alliance HC starting the round with a negative opinion that they arent going to win always gives other alliances faith. P R O P O G A N D A is just like saying P L A N E T I A.

[Stoom]

Originally Posted by Alki

actually i ran the ministry bg personally, they and myself ended up suiciding constantly and gaining **** all roids from it, because basically knew **** all about the game, and typical oversleeping, but idd there were great exceptions and im glad we took them on board, awesome players ministry for life<3

Err you reflecting Ministry on yourself?

Originally Posted by pig

1up dont really do blocking, however consider you lot are from exilition and p l a n e t i a, im sure you can do enough blocking for the rest of the universe.

Nothing quite like an alliance HC starting the round with a negative opinion that they arent going to win always gives other alliances faith. P R O P O G A N D A is just like saying P L A N E T I A.

How do you 'don't really' block? As far as I know 1up has been in blockwars aswell previous rounds. And tux+rest of Dos is formed majorly from pia/eX players? I know that isn't true.

[Chika]

Originally Posted by qebab

Take a loot at this.

Seems like Angels was the alliance that made the most rapid growths last round, when they were not being hit, though NewDawn and eXilition had good nights as well, I see Angels as the most consistent roiders of the last round. Now, I realize this graph will not give a good measure of 1up, but I can't see why you would see 1up as so superior, except for a great organization, and a good HC. Skill and activity can only go to a certain amount - noone can land each attack no matter how much knowlegde of stats they have - noone can be on 24 hours a day all round. If it all comes down to stamina and morale, 1up might very well win, but it isn't a given that they will outroid the others on a way to victory. In fact, if the round will be all about galraids and roiding, I can see both Dos, Angels and LCH growing at very rapid pace, as that will be all about actvity. Ship combo's and setup's will be common knowledge anyway.

However, the politics is what will determine the round. I fear ninja-napping/allying more than I fear being outroided. I know my own alliance can stand up against most others (of the current alliances, mind you) in a 1 vs. 1 scenario, but there's bound to be intervention from the outside. Like last round showed, some alliances are a lot better at having the politics go their way - Angels was not one of those alliances, and I believe we will play on our own strength again, rather than begging others for help (ie. nap/full alliance). I think we will, once again be forced to wage wars, while others remain unaligned, benefitting from easy roids from all sides.

While I do not agree with your usage of last round as a form of comparison to any alliances skill level, I do however, agree with the remainder of your post. Angels is known as strong and fast roid grabbers, and also, quite efficient at keeping them. Vice the over defending irvine is sometimes prone to doing.

***** Hint for irvine******
When you over defend, sometimes it forces an early recall, so you can defend someone else. But what happens when the attacker is diciplined, and keeps his fleet going.....

[Stifler]

Originally Posted by Stoom

How do you 'don't really' block? As far as I know 1up has been in blockwars aswell previous rounds. And tux+rest of Dos is formed majorly from pia/eX players? I know that isn't true.

They dont start the block wars, they only get a block together if no other choice?

People from P lanetia appear to think you have to have allies/naps to go into a round and cat start alone

[Chika]

Originally Posted by Stifler

They dont start the block wars, they only get a block together if no other choice?

People from P lanetia appear to think you have to have allies/naps to go into a round and cat start alone

To bad that tactic has been winning the round for them. :S
sucks right.

[Veedeejem!]

Blocking before the round has started is pretty lame imo.
I can agree with naps though, but blocking is bad.

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by Veedeejem!

I can agree with naps though, but blocking is bad.

One step leads to another.

If alliance X naps alliance Y they both already agree on turning the playing fields starting situation into their favour - after all, they get a certain amount of incoming less which in return gets distributed on the rest of the universe. Ultimately, the other alliances can then also form naps - which means alliances X and Y will consider to form an alliance to re-gain the advantage they lost with the rest of the universe forming similar naps and - bang! - we are halfway on the road to blocks.

Of course there are some more points toward this, but in the end this is the way to create blocks.

[furball]

I'm as opposed to pre-round NAPs as I am to pre-round blocks.

[Stoom]

Originally Posted by Stifler

They dont start the block wars, they only get a block together if no other choice?

People from P lanetia appear to think you have to have allies/naps to go into a round and cat start alone

Well that certainly ain't the way I think, though I'm from that game. (Haven't you played it aswell? )

[Wishmaster]

Block wars! yay

edit: to all the nubs that neg repped me, I dont like block wars, and I also think they ruin the game, atleast in extremes. ^^

[demiGOD]

An AD-material version of my last post;

If the purpose of this thread is to propagandize a pre-round block against 1up, and if it does create pre-round blocks because of this, then our dreams of a decent round next round is down to drain.

[Wishmaster]

if 2 alliances decide to work againstr 1up preround, I dont think this will ruin the round aslong this cooperation continues on and on and on and on and on......and that these 2 alliances are -ace.- (read alliances like Angels and LCH / Dos )
I dont c either happen, so 1up will go for #1

anything else will surprise me.

I m willing to bet 50£ that 1up will win..whos willing to give me some decent odds?

[Chika]

well, there was a mass block pre-round last round. The only alliance whose round was ruined was 1up. SO actually, not very bad for the game, considering they are supposed to be the best. The best lost. Thats if we are speaking facts. So a block against the best, really isn't bad for the game overall. Lets say, a block against for example, Angels, or Newdawn, would not be good for the game, as it wouldn't be a fight.

edit: had to add the "not"

[cypher]

even tho i think angels could do quite well. they aint the best military power around (mind you i've often enough said 1up was shite aswell last couple of rounds as quite basically we've been falling a bit lower ever since r12 when alot of our players left.)

kjeldoran's constant trying to improve angels by screaming hardest is also quite funny heh I thought he got over that attitude, but it seems to be back it's quite amusing keep it up. I think if they really want to win they should make their members attack an alliance all the time, which did NOT happen, no matter how much kjel can scream they did. It might have been the case early in the war but later on they went for fat other targets alot aswell.

as for DCing, i think part of your problem is actually in there... even tho irvine is an active DC he's hardly one of the best tbh, which is why this made me laugh alot

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Irvine's not playing r16 ... Irvine is an HC and the best DC in this game.

if you really think that then that's either your angels mentality or you haven't seen real good dc's ever. simple fact is he is active and that's his biggest bonus. also a known fact is tho he overcovers alot and he takes care of his friends quite well which in turn screws over others. (not trying to insult him or something, cuz i think he's a nice guy, but just not one of the best dc's around)

but with a proper political playing field i think angels has quite a good chance of winning, don't see why they can't tbh.

[cypher]

Originally Posted by Veedeejem!

Blocking before the round has started is pretty lame imo.
I can agree with naps though, but blocking is bad.

lol naps in planetarion these rounds is basically the same as a block no matter what people say.

With the alliance eta -1 deffing outside of alliance (not counting gal and cluster is annoying to find out) it's quite hard to def other alliances. also after you are napped you almost automatically fight the same enemies, which simply means you are blocked. Even tho you can scream quite hard you aint.

Besides that it shows you're weak tbh if you can't do it without naps (unless others really blocked against you)

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by Chika

well, there was a mass block pre-round last round. The only alliance whose round was ruined was 1up. SO actually, not very bad for the game, considering they are supposed to be the best. The best lost. Thats if we are speaking facts. So a block against the best, really isn't bad for the game overall. Lets say, a block against for example, Angels, or Newdawn, would not be good for the game, as it wouldn't be a fight.

edit: had to add the "not"

Where exactly is the difference?

The only alliance whose round would be ruined is Angels (or NewDawn, or whoever else is blocked against). One of the main problems with blocking, however, is that it's always the same which get blocked against which in return makes the players of that certain alliance wonder whether it's worth it or not to keep on playing a game which is more or less decided pre-round, leading to players leaving the game, leading to alliances disbanding, ultimately leading to a smaller playerbase.

[jerome]

1up lack their best ingredient who consolidated all their previous wins this rnd & therefore automatically lose.

[Veedeejem!]

Originally Posted by cypher

lol naps in planetarion these rounds is basically the same as a block no matter what people say.

With the alliance eta -1 deffing outside of alliance (not counting gal and cluster is annoying to find out) it's quite hard to def other alliances. also after you are napped you almost automatically fight the same enemies, which simply means you are blocked. Even tho you can scream quite hard you aint.

Besides that it shows you're weak tbh if you can't do it without naps (unless others really blocked against you)

You're not automaticly fighting the same enemies.
If alliance x naps alliance y, then that doesn't mean they have to attack the enemies of alliance y. There's still alliance a,b,c,d,... to attack & those may be friendly or hostile to alliance y.
Though I do agree that a nap can lead to a block, they're not the same by definition. It's a good way to get a little bit less incoming so you can focuss more on your own goals, if they're the same or different from the ally you've napped.

And napping is not a sign of weakness, it's just politics & last time i checked pa was about politics & war. If politics & napping are a sign of weakness then why do we have alliances? If pa was merely a test of strength then there shouldn't be alliances but just 3k players going for rank 1 all by themselves.

[jerome]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Irvine is the best DC in this game.

sup hippo. i assume this statement was based on dedicated research of every decent alliance in the game and not just a ridiculously silly assumption because he's the best dc of your alliance?

edit:

Originally Posted by Phil^

well, they did manage to completly repel one of 1ups larger attacks on one of their members, so i wouldnt rule them out completely.

ah yes, one attack repelled !!!!
sorted.

[cypher]

Originally Posted by jerome

sup hippo. i assume this statement was based on dedicated research of every decent alliance in the game and not just a ridiculously silly assumption because he's the best dc of your alliance?

it made me and the rest of pa's playerbase laugh atleast i'm sure

he deserves posrep for such comedy tbh

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by jerome

sup hippo. i assume this statement was based on dedicated research of every decent alliance in the game and not just a ridiculously silly assumption because he's the best dc of your alliance?

funny, how you make a fuss about my opinion. Yes I THINK he's the best DC I've worked with or have seen working. Next time I'll say my opinion, I'll ask for a global investigation to be started just so you, jerome, won't be annoyed by it.

The biggest asset of a DC is activity. He can be as good as he can be, if he's not active he's useless. He can be shit but utter active, and he'll be atleast abit useful.
Irvine is good at it (doing it for 9 rounds now?), he's more active then most of you ever will be (as he dc's 18 hours straight if needed).
But who are you to judge him jerome, I doubt you ever talked to him or saw him in action ...

I think every Angel will agree that Irvine is (for Angels) one of the best ones out there. We honnestly don't give a fk whether you think he is or not. In the end, he gets the job done and that speaks for him.

[Morden]

I'll say one thing for him, he is consistent.

I know a lot of DC's/BC's who will stay awake for 2-3 days straight if needed, but most of the time, they cant be bothered to do this for long periods of time. whereas irvine seems happy to do this round after round.

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

The biggest asset of a DC is activity. He can be as good as he can be, if he's not active he's useless. He can be shit but utter active, and he'll be atleast abit useful.

Discussing the role of a DC in general, I'd disagree on that point. I'd rather have no DC at all instead of having one which is uberactive and keeps crashing my def fleet / overcovering 3 people leaving the rest of the alliance dry like a desert.

[furball]

I've seen a lot of DCs in my time, but I'm not going to stand up as official e-penis measurer in this sad contest. Activity is the most important thing for a DC, but they must must must be good at it. Someone who seriously overcovers will never be able to cover as many calls as they should. Someone who undercovers won't be a DC for long, since attackers will land and kill defenders' fleets.

I suppose that Irvine is invaluable because he does the job of multiple DCs, thus relieving the pressure on that department. For activity, he may well be the best. Skill-wise, the fact that his skill's been disputed probably means there has been better DCs around for skill.