|
|
5 Dec 2003, 18:25
|
#1
|
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
For the neutrals
I'm bored. So here's a quick look at the universe stats for you lot based on the major alliances (based on Elysium intel and current universe stats, not 100% accurate, but should be close enough).
Top 10:
Dragons: 4 (1 closed)
Eclipse: 0
Elysium: 1
FAnG: 4 (2 closed)
ToT: 0
Vision: 0
Top 25:
Dragons: 6
Eclipse: 3
Elysium: 3
FAnG: 6
ToT: 2
Vision: 1
Top 50:
Dragons: 9
Eclipse: 5
Elysium: 11
FAnG: 8
ToT: 4
Vision: 2
Top 100:
Dragons: 11
Eclipse: 12
Elysium: 18
FAnG: 17
ToT: 9
Vision: 6
Top 250:
Dragons: 19
Eclipse: 35
Elysium: 38
FAnG: 36
ToT: 20
Vision: 23
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
5 Dec 2003, 18:26
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: somewhere
Posts: 130
|
Re: For the neutrals
vision is mention, but nos aint.... kinda strange sicne nos is above Vision in rankings.... or do they don't have any t250 planets?
|
|
|
5 Dec 2003, 18:28
|
#3
|
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: For the neutrals
Nos, Wp, ND and whoever can add their own stats, I doubt mine are reliable enough for publication.
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
5 Dec 2003, 21:48
|
#4
|
Elysium Battle Commando
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 20
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by derry
vision is mention, but nos aint.... kinda strange sicne nos is above Vision in rankings.... or do they don't have any t250 planets?
|
That's because NoS is toying with the rankings; Taking another alliance within their ranks..
__________________
[21:48] * @aG|Ghostie is ook weg
[21:48] <@aG|Ghostie> krijg last van me pik
[21:48] <@aG|Ghostie> *pink
|
|
|
5 Dec 2003, 22:10
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Norway
Posts: 295
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guard
That's because NoS is toying with the rankings; Taking another alliance within their ranks..
|
But NoS is not the only alliance that been toying with the rankings this round. And if i remember it correctly, i think Xtothez said this weren't 100 % accurate.
|
|
|
5 Dec 2003, 22:17
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 475
|
Re: For the neutrals
xtothez only posted here what he thinks matters.. ie
EET vs evil FAnG / Dragons
just another propaganda thread
__________________
Still not banned wtf!??
-Lord Dain
|
|
|
5 Dec 2003, 22:40
|
#7
|
Inflate My Ego
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hengelo, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,011
|
Re: For the neutrals
To summarize... based on xtothez's intel
EET vs FAnG/Dragons/Vision Battles:
Top 10:
1 vs 8
Top 25:
8 vs 13
Top 50:
20 vs 19
Top 100
39 vs 34
Top 250
93 vs 80
"We aer teh l33t!!"
I was close to getting top250 myself, got my fleet caught twice now though...
Been having incoming for 2 or 3 weeks straight now . Apparently some people know how to give me the attention I need. Then again... it's more quantity than quality (And it hardly ever reaches me..)
__________________
'Forever' said he. And then he was gone.
Who keeps an arrow in his bow,
And if you prod him, lets it go?
A fervent friend, a subtle foe –
— Scorpio
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 02:14
|
#8
|
Ark-miner wannabe
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,005
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by derry
vision is mention, but nos aint.... kinda strange sicne nos is above Vision in rankings.... or do they don't have any t250 planets?
|
I dont speak for NoS but I can speak for hirr.
We exist in top50.
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 03:45
|
#9
|
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpio
EET vs FAnG/Dragons/Vision Battles:
|
That wasnt really the point of the thread. Its not accurate unless you have:
Elysium/Eclipse/ToT/NoS vs Fang/Dragons-Seraphim/Vision/WP/VGN/ND
But hay, if you want quality vs quantity:
Quote:
Alliance Members Size Score Value Avg. Size Avg. Score
FAnG 135 184,963 124,777,873 481,949,381 1,370 924,281
Elysium 105 153,047 107,884,279 419,195,704 1,458 1,027,469
Dragons 130 144,938 97,592,823 373,276,765 1,115 750,714
|
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 03:48
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 54
|
Re: For the neutrals
It wasnt really the point, yet you elaborate on it and discuss? Should've ignored it really
Btw..wtf is up with this forumstyle? it SUX
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 10:16
|
#11
|
Ark-miner wannabe
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,005
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alastor
Btw..wtf is up with this forumstyle? it SUX
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Karmulian
The Forums have been upgraded to a new version of the software, a major change in the design means that the current styles will not work, as such i have currently disabled them.
I intend to have these fixed and back up within the next couple of days.
If you find any bugs/changes you want please feel free to email me.
In the meantime please bear with me.
Many Thanks Karmulian
|
It says on the forum-overview
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 11:18
|
#12
|
Retired?
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Norway
Posts: 289
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtothez
That wasnt really the point of the thread. Its not accurate unless you have:
Elysium/Eclipse/ToT/NoS vs Fang/Dragons-Seraphim/Vision/WP/VGN/ND
But hay, if you want quality vs quantity:
|
Funny, you make a deal out of Dragons-Seraphim, but forget NoS-hirr, Eclipse-Virus, and shouldnt Howling Rain be on one of the sides?
This new forumstyle realy sucks!
__________________
Played since round 3 in various alliances: G-II, Elysium, The Brotherhood, NewDawn, VisioN & more
Current status: Will never play again ever!
I was 3:2:2 in round 10 \o/
Last edited by Eventh; 6 Dec 2003 at 11:24.
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 11:44
|
#13
|
Ark-miner wannabe
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,005
|
Re: For the neutrals
Virus didnt join Eclipse, they disbanded and some (not all) of their members went to Eclipse.
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 12:42
|
#14
|
Elysium Battle Commando
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 20
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilatus
But NoS is not the only alliance that been toying with the rankings this round. And if i remember it correctly, i think Xtothez said this weren't 100 % accurate.
|
I was only talking about the NoS - VsN issue, this has nothing to do with other alliances :P ( Vision didnt take another alliance ingame did they?)
__________________
[21:48] * @aG|Ghostie is ook weg
[21:48] <@aG|Ghostie> krijg last van me pik
[21:48] <@aG|Ghostie> *pink
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 13:12
|
#15
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtothez
That wasnt really the point of the thread. Its not accurate unless you have:
Elysium/Eclipse/ToT/NoS vs Fang/Dragons-Seraphim/Vision/WP/VGN/ND
But hay, if you want quality vs quantity:
|
Xto, could you FOR ONCE stop being biassed and make a post with truth and nothing but the truth? You call this "for the neutrals" yet what you did was yet again promote EET and have a piss at FAnG.
FAnG has no deal with half the alliances you just named there. Did you forget Virus? Isn't it typical how you happen to "forget" to mention certain things so it looks better for you?
Ohhh and, the avg stuff you pasted = NICE, yet I couldn't care less what the outcome of that is.
Next time, don't try to make a thread being all honnest and fair and for the "neutrals". That coming from you is 1 big joke.
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 13:16
|
#16
|
Pr0f3ss10na1 P30n
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 221
|
Re: For the neutrals
I though WP and ND are neutral
__________________
Internet gamers can be split into 2 groups: people who are playing Planetarion, and people who had been playing Planetarion
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 13:31
|
#17
|
[=V=] Executive
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 154
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eventh
Funny, you make a deal out of Dragons-Seraphim, but forget NoS-hirr, Eclipse-Virus, and shouldnt Howling Rain be on one of the sides?
This new forumstyle realy sucks!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
FAnG has no deal with half the alliances you just named there. Did you forget Virus? Isn't it typical how you happen to "forget" to mention certain things so it looks better for you?
|
hah... tell me... how many members from ViruS joined Eclipse when we folded? Infact, i know of some in Fang, vision, etc ect.
ViruS as a whole did not join Eclipse- seraphim joined dragons as an entity for whatever reason
NoS-hirr is like Dragons-Seraphim i suppose though
__________________
Retired as [1up]Aaranaf
Former ViruS Planetarion Executive [=V=]
-Infected from the Start... Infected till my end-
Former Eclipse Planetarion Military Officer
-Forever Lurking on the Darkside-
Round 10.5- 22:8:6 [ViruS]Playmates[Urwins] #1 Galaxy
========================
O' Canada!
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 13:35
|
#18
|
Inflate My Ego
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hengelo, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,011
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtothez
That wasnt really the point of the thread. Its not accurate unless you have:
Elysium/Eclipse/ToT/NoS vs Fang/Dragons-Seraphim/Vision/WP/VGN/ND
But hay, if you want quality vs quantity:
|
You're kidding right?
I'm merely basing it on your info, I didn't write anything new. If it isn't accurate, or the point of this thread... then you shouldn't have started the thread.
__________________
'Forever' said he. And then he was gone.
Who keeps an arrow in his bow,
And if you prod him, lets it go?
A fervent friend, a subtle foe –
— Scorpio
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 14:30
|
#19
|
Fightin-irish for life
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: guinness brewery
Posts: 2,177
|
Re: For the neutrals
just curious but why did u only note the fang and dragons closed planets in the list
__________________
Ascendancy, now with added Irish
"In the absence of orders, find something and kill it."
-Rommel
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 14:37
|
#20
|
Inflate My Ego
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hengelo, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,011
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by gzambo
just curious but why did u only note the fang and dragons closed planets in the list
|
I refer to the posts made by Kjeldoran and Jackal2112
__________________
'Forever' said he. And then he was gone.
Who keeps an arrow in his bow,
And if you prod him, lets it go?
A fervent friend, a subtle foe –
— Scorpio
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 15:48
|
#21
|
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
FAnG has no deal with half the alliances you just named there. Did you forget Virus? Isn't it typical how you happen to "forget" to mention certain things so it looks better for you?
|
Virus didn't join Eclipse as an entity, as you know. They officially disbanded. Would you like me to count the members of disbanded alliances still in Elysium? Because Elysium-Cell-Silver-4S-Olympians would sound alot nicer for you. Just shout up if thats what you want. So long as FuriousAngels-NG-LDK-MadCows-Fury is happy, then so am I :o)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
Ohhh and, the avg stuff you pasted = NICE, yet I couldn't care less what the outcome of that is.
|
Of course you couldn't. That would mean having to admit publically that recruiting to #1 is a lame way to win. We can't have that can we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
Next time, don't try to make a thread being all honnest and fair and for the "neutrals". That coming from you is 1 big joke.
|
I honestly thought it would be interesting for them. Being able to troll you was just a delicious bonus. Cheers Dave.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gzambo
just curious but why did u only note the fang and dragons closed planets in the list
|
I only checked the top10. I really cba to check further. I know Elysium didn't have any planets closed at the time of posting because all closed planets were removed ingame. If you want to enlighten me on Ecl/ToT/Fang/Dragons/Vsn closings beyond t10 then feel free.
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 17:03
|
#22
|
Retired?
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Norway
Posts: 289
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaranaf
hah... tell me... how many members from ViruS joined Eclipse when we folded? Infact, i know of some in Fang, vision, etc ect.
ViruS as a whole did not join Eclipse- seraphim joined dragons as an entity for whatever reason
NoS-hirr is like Dragons-Seraphim i suppose though
|
i was under the impression that ViruS hc fixed a deal with eclipse, so their members could easy join there if wanted?? i know atleast 1 virus joined vsn instead of eclipse
My and Kj points still stand, with NoS+hirr and Howling Rain.
__________________
Played since round 3 in various alliances: G-II, Elysium, The Brotherhood, NewDawn, VisioN & more
Current status: Will never play again ever!
I was 3:2:2 in round 10 \o/
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 17:08
|
#23
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtothez
Virus didn't join Eclipse as an entity, as you know. They officially disbanded. Would you like me to count the members of disbanded alliances still in Elysium? Because Elysium-Cell-Silver-4S-Olympians would sound alot nicer for you. Just shout up if thats what you want. So long as FuriousAngels-NG-LDK-MadCows-Fury is happy, then so am I )
Of course you couldn't. That would mean having to admit publically that recruiting to #1 is a lame way to win. We can't have that can we?
I honestly thought it would be interesting for them. Being able to troll you was just a delicious bonus. Cheers Dave.
I only checked the top10. I really cba to check further. I know Elysium didn't have any planets closed at the time of posting because all closed planets were removed ingame. If you want to enlighten me on Ecl/ToT/Fang/Dragons/Vsn closings beyond t10 then feel free.
|
ok, first of all. Fact that avg rankings don't matter to me is simply cause at the start of the game, everyone played for the overall rankings but since Elysium somehow failed to stay at the top this round, I suddenly see Ely pple talking about the avg score bullshit etc. Imo that's not a big surprise, how else can you justify the efforts if at the end you achieved nothing? Now you can atleast desperatly hold on unto your "avg score" victory, which infact EVERY alliance can (by just kicking low score pple ...). Odd that I had alot of respect for Ely a few weeks ago (Stress can dig up his pm's if you wanna hear it from someone else) but I must say, your desperate attempts to sabbotage a possible victory of FAnG is just lame. I guess, amonst alot, you just cannot deal with the fact that FAnG is more then the bunch of cheaters you like to call us.
About that recruiting to #1, let me tell you that before this round started, I had 65 members top. so yes, I recruited about 50 and more BEFORE the round started to make FAnG competitional. There's nothing wrong with that, Ely did at some point recruit pple in the past aswell to attain your current membercount. FAnG has recruited during the round, as Eclipse has, as Elysium has, as Dragons has, as even Tot has ...
FAnG didn't take in Seraphin, didn't take in Virus, didn't take in NOS, hirr or your recent guess, Vision. Infact, alot of FAnGer's did go to Eclipse etc.
And, the intitial idea of this thread is idd interesting Xto, only problem is, you gave your BIASSED opinion of the facts. You gave FAnG allies we never had, you didn't mention alliances that fought at your side, you mention closed FAnG and Dragons planets while you know for 200% that Eclipse has a closed planet aswell (ifnot more, not sure). You KNEW all this Xto, you're not a noob, yet you decided not to mention it.
If you could have made this post in all objectivity then I wouldn't have reacted, but to me (and alot other pple) this just looks like Elysium command promoting EET again and adding very subtle digs at FAnG.
You must also not forget, that for alliances such as ely and Eclipse, ending in top3 is almost a habit (well Ely never actually won, but close nway). For FAnG however, this is actually the first round where we will end in the top 3. For FAnG, this round is already a victory, imo I believe alot of outsiders will confirm this. So I do understand why it's so impossible for pple like you to accept the fact that other alliances receive abit of positive attention aswell (atleast after r8, when Fury etc quit).
Ohh and, it surprises me that someone like you actually tries to troll on AD. Not only did you use alot of means to obtain intel (whether it's legal on not, I do not wish to go into that again) but now you've lowered yourself to trolling and trying everything possible to make sure IF FAnG wins that pple will not accept it or will think it's worth less etc. I don't think you have much integrity left m8.
waiting for the next flame, signing off
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 17:13
|
#24
|
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: For the neutrals
tl;dr
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 17:28
|
#25
|
Inflate My Ego
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hengelo, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,011
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by xtothez
tl;dr
|
what's that mean?
__________________
'Forever' said he. And then he was gone.
Who keeps an arrow in his bow,
And if you prod him, lets it go?
A fervent friend, a subtle foe –
— Scorpio
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 17:39
|
#26
|
Sh33p h3rd3r
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 132
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
ok, first of all. Fact that avg rankings don't matter to me is simply cause at the start of the game, everyone played for the overall rankings but since Elysium somehow failed to stay at the top this round, I suddenly see Ely pple talking about the avg score bullshit etc. Imo that's not a big surprise, how else can you justify the efforts if at the end you achieved nothing? Now you can atleast desperatly hold on unto your "avg score" victory, which infact EVERY alliance can (by just kicking low score pple ...)
rgds Kj
|
From what I have read and seen they only reason Ely is not #1 is because they dropped a bunch of inactive planets. Would this be true with FAnG? Can you honestly say your total member base are all fully active. If so cudos to you FAnG. If not can you truthfully claim victory?
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 18:22
|
#27
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 16
|
Re: For the neutrals
some facts from my best knowing:
FAnG and Dragons+seraphim are allied, and napped or whatever to vision, newdawn, wolfpack, vgn
EET= Ely, Eclipse and ToT with cooperation with NoS/hirr+HR.
lets have a closer look on the second block
Ely and Eclipse r fighting hard against dragons and FAnG, ToT is quite inactive (not to judge, game sucks, and not an excuse, that EET is weaker cos of this).
NoS has special agreements with FAnG and Dragons, too. at least Kal's planet has protection from them, and thats why FAnG and Dragons dont have much incomings from NoS/hirr/HR
NoS is in war with vision, thats it, nearly no attacks on FAnG/Dragons.
then someof old virus members joined EET side, but not that many. fang/dragons.... got also members from there.
On the other side FAnG and Dragons are supported by vsn, nd,wp vgn. Those alliance hit EET every night, when dragons or FAnG have heavy incomings those alliances counter etc. not denieable, or?
or is it an accident, that now wolfpack is countering Elysium? only an example from many....
now to summarise:
EET(+virus) is hitting dragons/fang/vsn/vgn/seraphim/newdawn/wolfpack
dragons/fang/vsn/vgn/seraphim/newdawn/wolfpack is hitting ely/eclipse/tot
NoS/hirr/HR r avoiding dragons/fang but hit vision, little private war
RaH is in war with dragons
did i miss something?
(not ment as flame thread, those r the facts, that i know, perhaps some little points r false(i'm not perfect ) but mainly it will be the truth)
__________________
R3 NOOB (and proud )
R4 Cell #2000
R5 Legion #500
R6 Legion #3000 then ritired
R10 The returning of da Evil
Bring back R4
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 18:29
|
#28
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: For the neutrals
Darkstar, you're wrong. FAnG has no deals with half the alliances you mentionned. Kal has no protection at all, I even was pissed when some pple tried to recall an attack on him. I even had NOS incs yesterday so the whole NOS story is a lie.
Then, talk to WP, ask them if they are allied napped with FAnG? Ifso, that would be a first for me.
We have no agreement with nos, hirr or hr. We do however only attack eclipse and ely mainly, cause those are our biggest treath. Ely, eclipse and Tot have on their turn aimed at mainly FAnG and Dragons because we're their main enemies.
I never talked to a vgn member in my life, so I doubt they got a deal with us aswell.
I know you didn't mean to flame, but hardly anything of what you just said is correct, sorry
And lockhead, you of all pple (as former FAnG and a good friend) I'd have epxected abit more support. Yes even with the bunch of inactive pple, IF we win, it'll be a more then deserved victory imo. And tbh, nobody outside FAnG knows how active/inactive we are so plz don't make suggestions about that either.
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 18:46
|
#29
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 16
|
Re: For the neutrals
ofc its nearly nothing correct
__________________
R3 NOOB (and proud )
R4 Cell #2000
R5 Legion #500
R6 Legion #3000 then ritired
R10 The returning of da Evil
Bring back R4
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 19:24
|
#30
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpio
what's that mean?
|
too long; didn't read
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 19:32
|
#31
|
Inflate My Ego
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hengelo, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,011
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
too long; didn't read
|
typical him then...
post long bs threads, but can't be bothered to read a long answer or clarification.
ignorant fool he is
__________________
'Forever' said he. And then he was gone.
Who keeps an arrow in his bow,
And if you prod him, lets it go?
A fervent friend, a subtle foe –
— Scorpio
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 19:34
|
#32
|
Retard0r
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,164
|
Re: For the neutrals
/me pets FAnG hostile fleets named "NoS roids are more sexeh"
__________________
-Chimpie
* We do not exist *
* G-II * NoS * VsN * Ascendancy * Osiris * xVx * Ultores *
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 20:32
|
#33
|
Blood
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The States that are United
Posts: 424
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
And lockhead, you of all pple (as former FAnG and a good friend) I'd have epxected abit more support. Yes even with the bunch of inactive pple, IF we win, it'll be a more then deserved victory imo. And tbh, nobody outside FAnG knows how active/inactive we are so plz don't make suggestions about that either.
rgds Kj
|
That wasn't Lockhead (unless he changed his name to LocknLoad? I honestly don't know.)
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 23:17
|
#34
|
Resurected
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Elysiums Green Fields
Posts: 238
|
Re: For the neutrals
to end your constant blabbering dave. FanG, house Cheators, that cannot be closed due to cwardly multi hunters....
they are still Cheaters....
u know it, I know it. And the Pa team knows it.
and if u doubt it .. refer to the . planets are closed if there is conclusive proof they have cheated statement.
and the fact that even tho, they have shamed your alliance. they still have a home in FanG. is against everything u have ever spoken to me about in PM...
and about subtile digs ? what is that long ass thread of yours then ?
FanG cannot win this tound, they did not fight alone
Ely newer won a round alone. but as VeX
Did u ever consider that some would actually se those stats as inntresting ?
A little tip KJ, if u are to comment on somone elses behaviour, dont display the same thing yourself, espeshially not in the same post / thread.
and if u wanna replay, send me a PM with the same post, I dont travel a lot at these paths anny more. The first stated in my post, made me so sick of this game, that i dont care anny more.
so here, have a loss on me
__________________
Only through absolute uniformity of purpose
can Victory be achieved. Herosim on the battlefield
is as dangerous as cowardice.
Last edited by Stress; 7 Dec 2003 at 01:10.
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 23:17
|
#35
|
Retired?
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Norway
Posts: 289
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkstar
(not ment as flame thread, those r the facts, that i know, perhaps some little points r false(i'm not perfect ) but mainly it will be the truth)
|
If you dont want to make this a flame thread, why do you write so much bullshit?
__________________
Played since round 3 in various alliances: G-II, Elysium, The Brotherhood, NewDawn, VisioN & more
Current status: Will never play again ever!
I was 3:2:2 in round 10 \o/
|
|
|
6 Dec 2003, 23:58
|
#36
|
Bad Girl
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: right here..right now
Posts: 1,055
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkstar
NoS has special agreements with FAnG and Dragons, too. at least Kal's planet has protection from them, and thats why FAnG and Dragons dont have much incomings from NoS/hirr/HR
NoS is in war with vision, thats it, nearly no attacks on FAnG/Dragons.
dragons/fang/vsn/vgn/seraphim/newdawn/wolfpack is hitting ely/eclipse/tot
NoS/hirr/HR r avoiding dragons/fang but hit vision, little private war
RaH is in war with dragons
did i miss something?
(not ment as flame thread, those r the facts, that i know, perhaps some little points r false(i'm not perfect ) but mainly it will be the truth)
|
Well i'm sure Fang and Dragons will be so pleased to know this... So are HR.. we shall be demanding recalls when we get incomming from them in the future ! (this is sarcasm just in case no-one noticed)
__________________
R1 - noob
R2,3,4, - ICD | R5 -ICD HC |R6 - HR Command | R7 - HR Command/NoS
R8,9,9.5,- HR HC /NoS Exec | R10 - HR HC | R10.5 - HR HC (FYTFO with LCH)
R11 -> NOW HR HC
(a round history not condusive to suceeding in exams, having a life or much sleep )
I'm not misunderstood ... I'm EVIL
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 01:00
|
#37
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stress
to end your constant blabbering dave. FanG, house Cheators, that cannot be closed due to cwardly multi hunters....
they are still Cheaters....
u know it, I know it. And the Pa team knows it.
and if u doubt it .. refer to the . planets are closed if there is conclusive proof they have cheated statement.
and the fact that even tho, they have shamed your alliance. they still have a home in FanG. is against everything u have ever spoken to me about in PM...
so here, have a loss on me
|
lol, I know it's hard to see yourself failing miserably this round, esp when you hoped those planets cheated but after all didn't. And the only logical thing to do, like Xto, is blame it on your enemy
you're no loss, cause for that, you'd have to be worth something, which you clearly aren't
have a nice round, down there ...
rgds Kj
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 01:10
|
#38
|
1Up
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 302
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
Then, talk to WP, ask them if they are allied napped with FAnG? Ifso, that would be a first for me.
I never talked to a vgn member in my life, so I doubt they got a deal with us aswell.
|
oohh so the wp in my gal can defend me? I had fang incoming and when a wp defended me he got like i don't know how many mails from fang threatening to kill him cause he was defending a allied attack. Weird.
and, ofc you didn't talk to a vgn member, why talk to a member when a hc deals with stuff like that
hi kjel btw.
__________________
[Fury] Exec
[Eclipse] HC
[1up] HC
[Spore] HC
Former Public Relations Officer of QQ
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 01:13
|
#39
|
Resurected
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Elysiums Green Fields
Posts: 238
|
Re: For the neutrals
IIf u truly believe that all of those closed where clean...
i have a bridge i want to sell u....
quit this game ages ago if u havent noticed
feel free to Guess why.
as to your 'victory' u will have none. U did not fight alone.
Same situation as every round.
but im sure, this time you wont be the first one to shout that.
__________________
Only through absolute uniformity of purpose
can Victory be achieved. Herosim on the battlefield
is as dangerous as cowardice.
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 01:20
|
#40
|
I see you!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In any girl
Posts: 2,825
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stress
as to your 'victory' u will have none. U did not fight alone.
|
So you're basically saying no alliance ever won a round?
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 01:22
|
#41
|
Resurected
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Elysiums Green Fields
Posts: 238
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadar
So you're basically saying no alliance ever won a round?
|
aye. more or less. there is one or 2 rounds that can be debated
most rounds where won by coalitions of alliances.
__________________
Only through absolute uniformity of purpose
can Victory be achieved. Herosim on the battlefield
is as dangerous as cowardice.
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 01:28
|
#42
|
I see you!
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In any girl
Posts: 2,825
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stress
aye. more or less. there is one or 2 rounds that can be debated
most rounds where won by coalitions of alliances.
|
I understand your point tho.. but remember that the EET block is far bigger than the F/Ð/WP/VsN/ND//VGN(/ironicmode) hehe..
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 01:58
|
#43
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stress
IIf u truly believe that all of those closed where clean...
i have a bridge i want to sell u....
quit this game ages ago if u havent noticed
feel free to Guess why.
as to your 'victory' u will have none. U did not fight alone.
Same situation as every round.
but im sure, this time you wont be the first one to shout that.
|
did eclipse won r9? according to alot, yes ...
Did they play alone that round? hardly
point proven, thx, bye (and don't take your frustrations out on us)
rgds Kj
p.s. to KG, nice try
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 03:16
|
#44
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: For the neutrals
Eclipse didn't win r9, it was effectively handed to them on plate.
The problem in any round is that there are players that look like they are cheating, but actually can't be closed because otherwise they might have to be given their money back. Usually I'd guess there's a fair number of 'em cheating.
The real winners have quit because they've nothing left to achieve, or playing without a care.
__________________
"Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 03:32
|
#45
|
Proud ex EnTitY bc
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: cornwall, england
Posts: 244
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
did eclipse won r9? according to alot, yes ...
Did they play alone that round? hardly
point proven, thx, bye (and don't take your frustrations out on us)
rgds Kj
p.s. to KG, nice try
|
No.....kj bad example use fury\vts in r3 they had a block....which was made up of ReBorn Fury Legion CpV
O yeah WTF has this thread got cheating involed in it the subject was not bout cheating at all.
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 03:41
|
#46
|
Elysium
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 167
|
Re: For the neutrals
Some time ago, at the start of the round, first thing on my mind in the mornings was my planet 'Must check for incoming', 'Must start new construction/research', 'Must spend resources before evul cov-oppers get their mits on em' etc..... But now I have a new light in my life, and it gives me such pleasure I fear I may forget my planet altogether. When I wake in the mornings (and several times through the night) I have an immense desire... 'must check what utter crap Kj is posting on AD at this moment'.
Just what about XTo's original post was biased? As far as I can tell he posted some accurate, intertesting intel that the average player doesn't have access to, and that even many HC won't have compiled in such a digestable way. As I read it I was kind of dissappointed, 'Why's he pointing out that FAnG/Dragons are owning us in the top10 and top25' I thought. Because it's stuff like this that draws the average (neutral or otherwised) player into the game more, keeping them interested, and that can only be a good thing at this stage. The only remotely inflammatory thing about his post was the signature.
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 04:43
|
#47
|
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blazde
Just what about XTo's original post was biased?
|
He's upset I didnt mention the cheating Ely planets in the top ranks. We should get on that right away, whats your login?!?!?!?!?!
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 04:55
|
#48
|
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sept 2057
Posts: 1,813
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
lol, I know it's hard to see yourself failing miserably this round, esp when you hoped those planets cheated but after all didn't.
|
One word - "Touriquet"
Your peons would bug me incessantly at the start of the round to kick him because of him being a known cheater. They didn't provide proof, but they thought he was Killmark2 and expected me to follow through on that to be 'honourable' or some shit.
Later in the round he is demoted from Ely BC for inactivity, then permantly excluded after directly asking if he could run 2 planets (one being his 'schoolmates account' ), one joining fang by which he would pass intel to us, and one ingame Ely to give def (it was also at this point we realised a planet he had vouched into ely had been sending def on the calls he was covering, despite never logging into IRC). His Ely access and both planets were swiftly removed, and a list of evidence supplied to the multi-hunters. But hey, seems if you use a good proxy you're an innocent guy!
Touriquet now resides happily in Fang alongside zerocore, Waku, Kaifux, Kann, and a bunch of other guys with advanced http-anonymity skills or very inventive alibis.
The multi-hunting team is a joke, and you are a hypocrite. Good day sir.
__________________
in my sig i write down all my previous co-ords and alliance positions as if they matter because I'm not important enough to be remembered by nickname alone.
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 06:28
|
#49
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 145
|
Re: For the neutrals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
FAnG has no deals with half the alliances you mentionned.
|
care to enlighten the neutrals as to exactly which alliances you are allied to?
eclipse, ely tot and nos-hirr don't really seem to deny their part
so ... exactly which half are your allies, nap, etc?
__________________
without peons, hc's are ****ing ****s
without hc's, peons are.....still peons
|
|
|
7 Dec 2003, 09:13
|
#50
|
100% irresistible
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Suomi
Posts: 192
|
Re: For the neutrals
Amusing poke at denial, kj; "I didn't handle all our pacts personally, so they never happened."
You're not giving the proper alliances due credit that have killed their planets for fang to achieve its ranking this round. I can still remember the time vengeance landed about a dozen members of theirs on a big planet of ours, losing most of their BS, but causing naturally noticeable damage to us as well. I couldn't believe the lengths the troops gathered around f/d went, even landing futile attacks just to pawe way for these same alliances to have a chance at gathering Elysium roids. Good use of the masses sending them first, atleast give them credit for that - so these alliances have a memory of PaX, even as a shield for f/d.
Maybe you have forgotten deals set around 12th of November which set nd, vsn, fang, wp, dragons and vgn to solely attack Elysium (which lasted over 2 weeks). Attacks like these http://koti.mbnet.fi/~wasted/elyvseveryone_small.gif (coords removed due AD rules) were daily routine to us, not to mention being countered by any of these alliances fang does not acknowledge to have ties with, whenever we hit a fanger.
Pleading to ignorance will not change the past, as it's not like fang was able to fight Elysium with only two allies and trying to deny all this can only be regarded as lies.
__________________
- cheerios -
Part of the Elysium legacy.
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:12.
| |