24%

[baggy]

24.8%

15k..

what happened?

[Mzyxptlk]

Gangbang and terrible defense.

[RexDrax]

WOW 3 different threads possibly 4 on pretty much the same topic. Man oh man, your making the DS HC's head grow.

[baggy]

the first isn't an excuse, gangbangs happen and is the way this game is played now. its ur response as an alliance that sets you apart. given the attacking strat on a top alliance is to be gangbanged alliances should really be developing a strarergy against it.

don't get me wrong - you'll always lose roids but 24% is a lot..

also I know Ds grounded last night so does that make it worse?

[baggy]

Originally Posted by RexDrax

WOW 3 different threads possibly 4 on pretty much the same topic. Man oh man, your making the DS HC's head grow.

actually this points out thier failings and I thought might prompt a discussion about tactics against gangbangs and who copes best with this sorta thing..

[RexDrax]

It could have been worse but from the way I understand it, we had CT, ND, Haven, DFWTK, xVx, Pwned and Apprime incoming. So basically the majority of the active universe. Not 100% sure of how many fleets xVx, pwned, DFWTK sent at us but I know for a fact that quite a few CT, ND, Haven planets were 3 fleet attacking since they knew they wouldnt get any incoming if at all.

Not making an excuse, our defence could definitely have been better and DS is kinda similar to CT in that its very good at attacking but our defence is lacking compared to our attack capability. However having said that CT (59), Haven (49), ND (59), xVX (47), DFWTK (59), PWNED (33), App (54) gives us a grand total of 360 planets vs DS (57). I think its fair to assume overall each planet sent 2.3 fleets to attack DS; some 3 fleeted, others 2 fleeted and some 1 fleeted or didnt even send out an attack.

That gives us 828 incoming vs 171 DS defence fleets (57*3). With a more active members last night we should have been able to keep our losses at 13-16% but that didnt help. Of course it doesnt help either that in-gal defence from the said alliance was pretty much non-existant. Ult would have done better and they would also have had some in-gal defence to rely on.

Oh well. Another historical day for PA thats for sure. Kinda funny how DS, a relatively new alliance, is getting quite the attention.

[baggy]

yeah its a lot of incomming and you're right, you could have probably done better but anyone would have lost roids..

smart covering and high actvity could have laid 100 defence fleets at ur feet, how do you distribute them?

against 800 you wont ever win

is this now an accepted eventuality for alliances up top?

[Mzyxptlk]

Originally Posted by RexDrax

Kinda funny how DS, a relatively new alliance, is getting quite the attention.

The #1 ranked alliance always gets attention. Alliance age has nothing to do with it.

[TheoDD]

Originally Posted by RexDrax

It could have been worse but from the way I understand it, we had CT, ND, Haven, DFWTK, xVx, Pwned and Apprime incoming. So basically the majority of the active universe. Not 100% sure of how many fleets xVx, pwned, DFWTK sent at us but I know for a fact that quite a few CT, ND, Haven planets were 3 fleet attacking since they knew they wouldnt get any incoming if at all.

Not making an excuse, our defence could definitely have been better and DS is kinda similar to CT in that its very good at attacking but our defence is lacking compared to our attack capability. However having said that CT (59), Haven (49), ND (59), xVX (47), DFWTK (59), PWNED (33), App (54) gives us a grand total of 360 planets vs DS (57). I think its fair to assume overall each planet sent 2.3 fleets to attack DS; some 3 fleeted, others 2 fleeted and some 1 fleeted or didnt even send out an attack.

That gives us 828 incoming vs 171 DS defence fleets (57*3). With a more active members last night we should have been able to keep our losses at 13-16% but that didnt help. Of course it doesnt help either that in-gal defence from the said alliance was pretty much non-existant. Ult would have done better and they would also have had some in-gal defence to rely on.

Oh well. Another historical day for PA thats for sure. Kinda funny how DS, a relatively new alliance, is getting quite the attention.

Fair to assume?
Those numbers are only showing what could have been if optimized, but reality they are far off.

[RexDrax]

Originally Posted by TheoDD

Fair to assume?
Those numbers are only showing what could have been if optimized, but reality they are far off.

I was the main scanner for the 1st 4/5 waves and I noticed quite a few planets that sent 3 attack fleets. Most people usually send 2 and keep 1 home for defence while a few send 1 and keep 2 for defence so I think its safe to say that 2.3 fleets were incoming from every planet. But if you disagree with that statement that's fine so lets go to 1.8 which I think you will agree with me is a good compromise. So that would be 648 vs 171 then. If we were better at defending we should have been able to keep our losses at 12-16% and also if people responded to SMS and came online when called. Alas if I was a hot stud I would have girls lined up around the corner instead of trying to hook up with some mail order bride, ifs are about as useful as .... =)

[tobbe]

Originally Posted by RexDrax

Not 100% sure of how many fleets xVx......................

xVx had 2 small DS on raid, so wouldnt be to much from us

[RexDrax]

Originally Posted by tobbe

xVx had 2 small DS on raid, so wouldnt be to much from us

k thanks for the correction. After checking about 30 coords I stopped and went with what the rumor mill was telling me and also what was going in the channels.

[baggy]

Originally Posted by TheoDD

Fair to assume?
Those numbers are only showing what could have been if optimized, but reality they are far off.

but so are his defensive figures so it evens out. even with a 2:1 ratio it becomes very difficult to cap losses at less than 5 - 8%

agree or not?

[Influence]

Originally Posted by RexDrax

Alas if I was a hot stud I would have girls lined up around the corner instead of trying to hook up with some mail order bride, ifs are about as useful as .... =)

And mPulse would still have a bike

[RexDrax]

Originally Posted by baggy

but so are his defensive figures so it evens out. even with a 2:1 ratio it becomes very difficult to cap losses at less than 5 - 8%

agree or not?

ahem.. how are my defensive figures off? I think at the time we had 57 members in the alliance 57*3=171 so that gives us a potential of 171 fleets to work with. The key word is potential since some planets are small and dont have enough fleet value to fake properly or the terrans cannot make certain eta so the likelihood of using all 171 fleets efficiently is slim. But then again my assumption of 1.8 or 2.3 fleets per planet is also a bit of a guess work and with some experience. Its a given when people talk about numbers on the forums that its quiet a bit of guess work with what knowledge they have picked up over the years of alliance tendencies and the mechanics of the game. Anyways.....

In regards to your 2nd statement, I think ult has managed to keep roid losses quite low in the past. Mz is the numbers guy with access to all relevant history so he can probably answer that question better than me.

Originally Posted by Influence

And mPulse would still have a bike

Nope, bike is long gone but his .... is still around



171 DS defence fleets (57*3).

[Mzyxptlk]

Launch/recall/relaunch.

[Maxi]

Originally Posted by tobbe

xVx had 2 small DS on raid, so wouldnt be to much from us

DFWTK split a gal with xVx so I think we had 2 Med sized ds planets and only 1 fleet attacking. No ptarget from us.

[HeimdallR]

So ultores has one of its main contenders hit, while having to do nothing themselves, smart move.