|
|
27 May 2011, 00:57
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Alliances I would consider playing for
Ok, so I am bored.
I decided I want to make a list of alliances and whether or not I would play for them.
I am not going to include why.
I am interested to see who other players would/wouldn't consider playing for. But not why. Please if you decide to respond with who you would or wouldnt play for, dont include why (it will turn into a flame war, but those arent common on here, right?).
If a newer player happens to stumble onto this thread, I am hoping they can look at the responses and get a general idea of where players want to play. Then, they can go to that specific alliance channel and find out why/why not people want to play there.
I am splitting my choices into 3 different areas. Would consider playing for, Do not want to play for and Neutral.
Would consider playing for (in no specific order):
DLR
GROSS
TGV
CT
HeX (if they were running)
ODDR
Would not play for:
Apprime
NGO
HR
P3nguins
ToF
Neutral:
ND, ROCK,
Thats all the alliances I can think of right now. Reply if you want to. If you dont like this thread, go pound salt.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 01:25
|
#2
|
Finally retired
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Would consider playing for:
TGV
DLR
ND
Wouldn't play for:
Apprime
ODDR
another one hit wonder
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]
In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 04:14
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,143
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by zFerg
Would consider playing for (in no specific order):
ODDR
|
Weren't you one of those people who left them mid round r40?
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 06:15
|
#4
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Would consider playing for:
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 07:33
|
#5
|
h3ll's angels
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 273
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
I think the only tag I'd never join is Factory.
__________________
[18:04] * h3ll has quit IRC (Ping timeout)
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 08:09
|
#6
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by zebra
I think the only tag I'd never join is Factory.
|
I thought you were "DLR till I die" kind of player ?
If there was a few more catagories like ...
*I would consider if there was 1 or 2 thing changed
*I Would consider if 1 or 2 HC stepped down / left
I could have done the alliance list
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 12:06
|
#7
|
Old Skool
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 278
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Would play for:
Apprime
TGV
Wouldn´t play for:
The rest.
motivation: TGV worked perfect for me in rnd 41, Apprime just works every single time.
The rest I got noo real knowledge of, and since i´m a wuzz by nature, I wouldn´t put my online time there
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 12:10
|
#8
|
ToF
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 607
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
alliances i would consider playing for: Tides of Fire
alliances i wouldnt consider playing for: all the rest.
reasons, i want to take tides of fire as far as i can until we either disband or i quit pa, whicheva comes first.
__________________
[19:10] <coffee-> dont worry about Reincarnate he is an angry man
R1 - 9 none | R10.5 - 13 [ToF] | R14 [Reunion] | R15-17 [Subh] | R18 - 36 PA vacation | R37 [Evo] | R38 [NFI] | R39 & 40 [ToF] | R41 [Omega] | R42 - 47 [ToF][HC]
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 16:05
|
#9
|
Tides of Fire
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 318
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
I think the effect of this will be the exact opposite of the desired as it just puts people off alliances that others "wouldn't join" despite the reasons being purely personal in most instances. You then have all the big alliance fan boys stating Apprime, or anyone else who think think is half decent. (This round TGV, but historically wasn't this one of their best finishes?). It's just unnecessary and more confusing for new players.
If anything people should justify each each alliances position. It wouldn't cause a flame war unless people were immature about it, and at the end of the day it's all completely subjective, so I'd still disagree with the entire nature of this thread.
__________________
Quote:
"Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers."
|
Last edited by Zeyi; 27 May 2011 at 16:11.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 16:12
|
#10
|
ToF
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 607
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
shut up zeyi.
wheres my webbie?!!
__________________
[19:10] <coffee-> dont worry about Reincarnate he is an angry man
R1 - 9 none | R10.5 - 13 [ToF] | R14 [Reunion] | R15-17 [Subh] | R18 - 36 PA vacation | R37 [Evo] | R38 [NFI] | R39 & 40 [ToF] | R41 [Omega] | R42 - 47 [ToF][HC]
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 16:15
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
I think the effect of this will be the exact opposite of the desired as it just puts people off alliances that others "wouldn't join" despite the reasons being purely personal in most instances. You then have all the big alliance fan boys stating Apprime, or anyone else who think think is half decent. (This round TGV, but historically wasn't this one of their best finishes?). It's just unnecessary and more confusing for new players.
If anything people should justify each each alliances position. It wouldn't cause a flame war unless people were immature about it, and at the end of the day it's all completely subjective, so I'd still disagree with the entire nature of this thread.
|
Sure, I will try that.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 16:34
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by zFerg
Ok, so I am bored.
Would consider playing for (in no specific order):
DLR- Best alliance I have played for. Fun, agressive, take no crap from anyone mentality
GROSS- Close 2nd. Never get involved in politics, everything done democratically- ie no HC, no drama.
TGV- Seem to have a good group of players, also seem to play true to their word.
CT- Played a 1/2 round there and was very impressed with the structure and positive atmosphere.
HeX (if they were running)- I think it is really unfortunate Hex isnt running next round. They really seemed to turn a corner, have (had), a great HC structure with Jink/Kai and are very tolerable with new members. If I were to decide to take a round or 3 to help develop players, it would probably be with this alliance.
ODDR- Again a decent HC structure, somewhat laid back though still active atmosphere. A play for fun/fun to play for alliance.
Would not play for:
Apprime- They play a very fierce game and are always at the top of the rankings, however the cost to be there, IMO, offsets the gain. Playing the game at a level of activity that borderlines close to desperation to be good is not enjoyable.
NGO- NGO seems like a great place for new players wanting to get a feel for the game to go. That however, is not me. Also, abadaljay or whatever his nickname's insistance on using seizure inducing font colours in recruitment threads has put me off for good.
HR- Nothing really bad to say about HR, they seem to do their thing every round, but I dont really know anyone there and would not consider playing for them.
P3nguins- No first hand experience, but I have heard somewhat negative reviews from a number of different people who's opinions I respect, which is enough for me to not want to play for them.
ToF- A case of not knowing anything about any members, I do not see myself playing there.
Neutral:
ND- Know some decent members from there and get along well with them. Never really appealed to me to join, however.
ROCK- Heard great things from people who have played in there, very fun atmosphere. However, there are many other alliances that I would consider playing for beforehand.
.
|
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 16:35
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by eksero
Weren't you one of those people who left them mid round r40?
|
You are correct, I did leave ODDR. I left with well wishes for those there that I enjoyed playing with, but there were a number of different reasons that led to me leaving.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 18:03
|
#14
|
Old Skool
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 278
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
You then have all the big alliance fan boys stating Apprime, or anyone else who think think is half decent. (This round TGV, but historically wasn't this one of their best finishes?). It's just unnecessary and more confusing for new players.
|
Sorry m8, I´ll be more specific, with the alliances I actually know a bit about
Alliances I wouldn´t play for:
Tides of Fire - Had one run in with two of their members crashing 1.6 mill value for 250 roids at my planet, taking both of them out of top 100 - It just don´t seem like an alliance strategy I would like to follow
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 18:24
|
#15
|
Tides of Fire
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 318
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killeah
Sorry m8, I´ll be more specific, with the alliances I actually know a bit about
Alliances I wouldn´t play for:
Tides of Fire - Had one run in with two of their members crashing 1.6 mill value for 250 roids at my planet, taking both of them out of top 100 - It just don´t seem like an alliance strategy I would like to follow
|
Troll harder.
We don't play for planet rankings, and with a 16 man tag there's not much to play for in the way of ally rankings, a lot of us crashed (not horrifically) for fun the last week.
I'll say nothing more on that because only an idiot would refer to such a thing as "alliance strategy".
Thank you for proving the points from my first post though, I still stand by it. This is a childish topic, and only stands to hurt the alliances.
It would be far better even if the topic was "What alliances have you played for?" and then you briefly described positive/negative experiences. Then at least you know you're reading comments from experience rather than derogatory drivel.
__________________
Quote:
"Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers."
|
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 18:34
|
#16
|
Old Skool
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 278
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
Troll harder.
|
Heh, I am not going to prove your point, infact I´m glad you did such a reply, I reckon the post was meant to reflect actions/agendas of alliances and why people posting would or wouldn´t join them. And I´m sure you´re right about the fact that some people wouldn´t care about rankings or thier planet values, and join you guys.
Tbh I did a 4 mill total of value crashing myself last round. However that doesn´t mean I´m all blazing about crashing my fleet, alas that was indeed the only point of my post. Atleast you have a reason from me why I wouldn´t want to join you .
On the other hand, we´re still missing your post m8 - why not stick to topic let´s hear your biased reasons for wanting to play in ToF, I for one would find it interresting.
P.S - this is a forum about PA, where subjects about PA are being discussed, it ain´t gonna jump and kill ya, so why not play along instead of the sour angle?
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 18:43
|
#17
|
Finally retired
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
I think the effect of this will be the exact opposite of the desired as it just puts people off alliances that others "wouldn't join" despite the reasons being purely personal in most instances. You then have all the big alliance fan boys stating Apprime, or anyone else who think think is half decent. (This round TGV, but historically wasn't this one of their best finishes?). It's just unnecessary and more confusing for new players
|
WRONG, TGV finished 2nd in round 22 too, which given the far bigger universe at that point in time was a better result than last rounds 2nd place.
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]
In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 18:44
|
#18
|
Up The Hatters!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
And we finished second r19 allbeit in a battlegroup with Omen
__________________
Planetarion veteran
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 18:50
|
#19
|
Tides of Fire
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 318
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
I'm not here to defend ToF, nor any of the other allies I haven been in. I came to comment on the thread and where I thought it would lead.
Everyone's welcome to their opinion, I've expressed my opinion on the thread, it would be hypocritical of me to start commenting on alliances now and join in wouldn't it
That being said I have only good things to say about the alliances I HAVE been in. Which is why I think a thread dedicated to where you have played may put out a more positive light.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Influence
WRONG, TGV finished 2nd in round 22 too, which given the far bigger universe at that point in time was a better result than last rounds 2nd place.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
And we finished second r19 allbeit in a battlegroup with Omen
|
Heh, Influence no need for the abruptness, I did question mark the statement and pluralised "finishes", to avoid insult or misinforming anyone. So if it is your 3rd best then I was actually fairly accurate? Granted the universe back then was much larger, and better, but then so were individual alliances. Anyway this is irrelevan and kind of my point, I brought TGV in as an example based on your success and quickly get 2 posts "correcting" me.
Give this thread more time and just wait for more poorly worded opinions and a nice buildup of hostility.
Quote:
P.S - this is a forum about PA, where subjects about PA are being discussed, it ain´t gonna jump and kill ya, so why not play along instead of the sour angle?
|
Sorry I'm just not a fan of this type of conversation where every opinion is biased and there is no productive goal or outcome.
__________________
Quote:
"Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers."
|
Last edited by Zeyi; 27 May 2011 at 19:06.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 18:52
|
#20
|
Finally retired
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 788
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Influence
Would consider playing for:
TGV - one of the strongest communities i ever played in, mix of experience and eagerness to learn.
DLR - superb strategists
ND - great bunch of players
Wouldn't play for:
Apprime - dislike their mentality towards the game.
ODDR - personal reasons
another one hit wonder - no particular reason
|
__________________
don't be an arse, join [TiT]
In the absence of the good old TiT alliance, look me up in VGN
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 19:06
|
#21
|
Up The Hatters!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
Sorry I'm just not a fan of this type of conversation where every opinion is biased and there is no productive goal or outcome.
|
If anything, your comments are counter productive as you could easily just have avoided both reading and commenting on this thread if it failed to meet your standards.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 19:06
|
#22
|
Old Skool
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 278
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
That being said I have only good things to say about the alliances I HAVE been in. Which is why I think a thread dedicated to where you have played may put out a more positive light.
|
I agree, a post about the alliances you´ve played in and the time you had there, would be far more precise and to the point. One shoulo be made asap
I still find it somewhat interesting how people see different allies, regardless of them playing there or not. It refers to reputation and community behaviour. I can perfectly understand if you don´t Zeyi, it´s a biased, flaming road which usually comes out wrong.
However I would still like to hear your opinion, **** hypocracy, it´s mans' second nature anyway. - As mr. sheen would put it - Bring It!!!
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 19:10
|
#23
|
Valle is my hero
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,581
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Would:
NewDawn - dunno why just would
TGV - seem pretty close knit
HeX - obvious reasons
Wouldnt:
ODDR - just think the whole alliance setup and mentality is crap tbh
Apprime - too hardcore for me
xVx - i dont like there inconsistency as an alliance - you never know if there gonna be good or rubbish
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 19:21
|
#24
|
Tides of Fire
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 318
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
If anything, your comments are counter productive as you could easily just have avoided both reading and commenting on this thread if it failed to meet your standards.
|
How are my comments counter productive?.. they don't deliver to the original purpose of the thread, yes. However they still contribute to the discussion. If anything making a post about me, rather than the discussion at hand is counter-productive.
And not commenting here..?
You're now you're saying don't think I deserve to post my opinion? That's not very nice Kargool
__________________
Quote:
"Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers."
|
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 20:57
|
#25
|
mz.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 8,587
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
You then have all the big alliance fan boys stating Apprime
|
I count one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
It wouldn't cause a flame war unless people were immature about it
|
Is this your first time on AD?
__________________
The outraged poets threw sticks and rocks over the side of the bridge. They were all missing Mary and he felt a contented smug feeling wash over him. He would have given them a coy little wave if the roof hadn't collapsed just then. Mary then found himself in the middle of an understandably shocked family's kitchen table. So he gave them the coy little wave and realized it probably would have been more effective if he hadn't been lying on their turkey.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 21:08
|
#26
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
I think the effect of this will be the exact opposite of the desired as it just puts people off alliances that others "wouldn't join" despite the reasons being purely personal in most instances. You then have all the big alliance fan boys stating Apprime, or anyone else who think think is half decent. (This round TGV, but historically wasn't this one of their best finishes?). It's just unnecessary and more confusing for new players.
If anything people should justify each each alliances position. It wouldn't cause a flame war unless people were immature about it, and at the end of the day it's all completely subjective, so I'd still disagree with the entire nature of this thread.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by zferg
I am interested to see who other players would/wouldn't consider playing for. But not why. Please if you decide to respond with who you would or wouldnt play for, dont include why (it will turn into a flame war, but those arent common on here, right?).
If a newer player happens to stumble onto this thread, I am hoping they can look at the responses and get a general idea of where players want to play. Then, they can go to that specific alliance channel and find out why/why not people want to play there.
|
Zeyi, you essentially did exactly what I was requesting people not to do (though I figured someone would), which was to turn the thread OT and drag it into people insulting each other.
Even if a player doesnt want to play for an alliance for 'personal' reasons, if there is no comment, its just a player not wanting to play for an alliance, regardless. If many players are posting that they do not want to join the same alliance, even if the reasons are 'entirely personal,' it would generally signal that maybe there is a problem within the alliance- alliances should be able to work out personal issues with their members, or at least come to a mutual agreement to depart if they want to be successful, no?
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 21:12
|
#27
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley
I thought you were "DLR till I die" kind of player ?
If there was a few more catagories like ...
*I would consider if there was 1 or 2 thing changed
*I Would consider if 1 or 2 HC stepped down / left
I could have done the alliance list
|
So do the list like that, maybe your suggestions would have a positive effect on players choosing a good alliance, or even an alliance making a positive change.
Maybe not calling out HC though, I am sure they wouldn't like that.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 21:22
|
#28
|
Tides of Fire
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 318
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by zFerg
Zeyi, you essentially did exactly what I was requesting people not to do (though I figured someone would), which was to turn the thread OT and drag it into people insulting each other.
Even if a player doesnt want to play for an alliance for 'personal' reasons, if there is no comment, its just a player not wanting to play for an alliance, regardless. If many players are posting that they do not want to join the same alliance, even if the reasons are 'entirely personal,' it would generally signal that maybe there is a problem within the alliance- alliances should be able to work out personal issues with their members, or at least come to a mutual agreement to depart if they want to be successful, no?
|
No, I read your original post and certain comments within it caught my attention;
Quote:
I decided I want to make a list of alliances and whether or not I would play for them.
I am not going to include why.
|
Quote:
Reply if you want to. If you dont like this thread, go pound salt.
|
and that's why I felt more inclined to post because you made no sense. You can't make a thread like this - which revolves around bias and then ask people not to justify their statements (like you did!).
What kind of debate asks for no justification? I didn't provoke any flaming so you can sod off with the accusations at me. Your thread warrants flaming, the suggestions I made were to make it more positive. I haven't flamed anyone, and if anybody has thrown a trollish or insulting comment at me then it's probably because they lack the intellect to debate.
Oh, and my posts aren't off-topic as they relate to the discussion behind your thread. This one might be, but that's because you people have dragged me into personal comments, by addressing me personally rather than discussing points in my posts.
The sad thing is you assume I meant for trouble when I was merely trying to send the thread in a more positive direction.
__________________
Quote:
"Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers."
|
Last edited by Zeyi; 27 May 2011 at 21:35.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 21:49
|
#29
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
You know, most posts were exactly in the format I was hoping for until you posted yours, so I really do not hold any merit to you 'I didn't provoke any flaming' comment.
The way it was set up was for people to give lists, there were no debates. I was asking people for lists. LISTS MAN. If you really had that much issue with the way I wrote my thread subject, instead of ruining it, why not PM me?
Yes, your posts are OT, as I ask for a list and you decide you need to tell me what is wrong with it. Did I ask you to critique the way I made this thread? I dont seem to recall doing that. Hell, I even tried to justify your post and give some reasons for each alliance. By that time, you had sabatoged the thread further accusing others of flaming and then refusing to post your own list. WELL THEN BRIGHT EYES, IF YOU WERENT EVEN INTENDING TO POST A LIST IN THE FIRST PLACE, WHY POST AT ALL?
If you were that certain this thread was bound for failure, why not sit back and watch silently.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 21:52
|
#30
|
Old Skool
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 278
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
You can't make a thread like this - which revolves around bias and then ask people not to justify their statements (like you did!).
|
Why not? , Infact you seem to be the only person claiming one can´t. - I agree that providing the reasons would be better, but statistics and fact polls like this thread are made on a daily basis around the world - did you never had those phonecalls asking if you drink coffee or tea etc, etc. Reasons are good but not essential m8.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
Oh, and my posts aren't off-topic as they relate to the discussion behind your thread. This one might be, but that's because you people have dragged me into personal comments, by addressing me personally rather than discussing points in my posts.
|
I agree let´s keep to the posts, just made my comment on yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeyi
The sad thing is you assume I meant for trouble when I was merely trying to send the thread in a more positive direction.
|
It´s all good, now let us have your list Zeyi - you ain´t getting off the hook until you provide it
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 21:59
|
#31
|
Tides of Fire
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 318
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Point well proven I think:
ME:"The sad thing is you assume I meant for trouble when I was merely trying to send the thread in a more positive direction."
YOU:"If you were that certain this thread was bound for failure, why not sit back and watch silently."
I'm sorry but that post is outrageously stupid. You talk like I have to conform to your post as if they were rules and as if I had no freedom of speech. Your understanding of off-topic is completely wrong, and the PM system is for personal disputes which I didn't have.
Lists are a structure for storing data, without information on the data it's meaningless.
However I'm done here, your hostility is pathetic and I hope you all the best for you in the future.
EDIT: For Killeah, who was willing to actually discuss my points <3
Quote:
Why not? , Infact you seem to be the only person claiming one can´t
|
OK sure, I agree you don't have to but in an IDEAL WORLD. Something I will always strive for, and fight for. Because we live in a shit world full of greed, hate and lies.
As you ask so much, i will provide but my list would only be short.
ToF, my oldest and favourite alliance, full of old friends, they brought me back last round and I'll probably remain there now. (see bias!:P)
Apprime - Played their first few rounds, friendly people (they get too much unnecessary hate from my experience). They go here just because it's the only other alliance I've actively played for and enjoyed. No idea what it's like now though.
Who I wouldn't play for?
I wouldn't not play for anyone unless they gave me reason too...
__________________
Quote:
"Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers."
|
Last edited by Zeyi; 28 May 2011 at 01:30.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 22:12
|
#32
|
Class Clown
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 149
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Just when I thought AD could go no lower. Oh well, like mz said..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzyxptlk
Would consider playing for:
|
__________________
<@Sun_Tzu> nolez is correct
Round 13 - Angels - Boulevard of Broken Dreams - Rank 21
Round 16 - Ascendancy - when im gd im not gd of when im bad i suck - Rank 56
Round 28 - Ascendancy - The Olympic Glory of Michael Phelps - Rank 21
Round 38 - [NFI] - Boulevard of Broken Dreams - Rank 30
Round 39 - Imperia - Purdue of Boilermakers - Rank 59
Round 40 - xVx - An Shi Rebellion of the Tang Dynasty - Rank 2
I'll always give you a hand.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 22:17
|
#33
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Good riddance.
I ran out of fingers trying to count on them the number of times you have contradicted yourself through this thread.
Though, I will make 1 change to my list:
Quote:
Originally Posted by zFerg
Would not play for:
ToF- I only have interacted with 1 of their members, and after my experience with that member, I do not see myself playing there. Ever. Not even for free credits. Not even if 1000 fan boys recommended them on this thread.
|
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 22:29
|
#34
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
I'd only play for an alliance where I liked the people. Any other reasons seem a bit secondary to me.
__________________
"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."
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 22:30
|
#35
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
You dont think people would join an alliance in an attempt to win?
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 22:31
|
#36
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by zFerg
You dont think people would join an alliance in an attempt to win?
|
I edited my post but happy to answer this: I think people joining an alliance just so they can win are by and large turncoats who piss off at the first sign of trouble and thus aren't really good company.
__________________
"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."
Last edited by lokken; 27 May 2011 at 22:38.
|
|
|
27 May 2011, 22:41
|
#37
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Agreed, probably why those 'one hit wonder' alliances always seem to tag out.
|
|
|
28 May 2011, 00:00
|
#38
|
FAnG Battle Commander
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 95
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Would consider playing for (in no specific order):
DLR - love the players and the strategy
ND - cats daughter is hot, and i love cat as wel
CT - gm is sexy
FAnG - alch was hot in his shades
Would not play for:
Apprime - despite loving the alliance for the way they perform, i feel that i would have to give up part of my soul, or my first born child to be a part of CarDi's servants
Neutral:
the rest
__________________
Baddars
===================================================
"life isnt certain, except for those paths that we lay before our feet. Take time on this road, dont falter, you never know whether this path will be the last one you walk."
===================================================
|
|
|
28 May 2011, 01:54
|
#39
|
Bi-Winning
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: nfi
Posts: 290
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Would consider playing for: any
Wouldn't consider playing for: none
Reasons: although it's fun to get on the side of "bah such an alliance are so shit etc etc" they most likely think the same back, all in all it's just a game. Take it personal? FU and FU twice.
__________________
ѵսȽցΛґ
H-A ☆ ODDR ☆ Apprime ☆ xVx ☆ VisioN ☆ HEROES ☆ Ultores
|
|
|
28 May 2011, 11:41
|
#40
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 279
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by vuLgAr
Would consider playing for: any
Wouldn't consider playing for: none
Reasons: although it's fun to get on the side of "bah such an alliance are so shit etc etc" they most likely think the same back, all in all it's just a game. Take it personal? FU and FU twice.
|
The only logical answer so far
__________________
HA-ND-EC-DLR-APP-ODDR-Kittenz-Carisan-Tal Shiar-Carnage-ODDR
Co founder ODDR
|
|
|
28 May 2011, 13:23
|
#41
|
Holland is GVD het HARDST
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Holland!
Posts: 39
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baddars
Would not play for:
Apprime - despite loving the alliance for the way they perform, i feel that i would have to give up part of my soul, or my first born child to be a part of CarDi's servants
Neutral:
the rest
|
true i sold my soul to cardi.. but its worth it..
dont think i would leave apprime for any other ally
__________________
WHEN THEY THINK WE ARE HISTORY, WE WILL SHOW THEM THE FUTURE -=i am youre alpha and youre omega=-
WP SiN eXilition 1up CT SubH Ascendancy Apprime
|
|
|
28 May 2011, 13:30
|
#42
|
red looks good on me eh
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 424
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
play for:
APPRIME: we play strong, not smart
ODDR: they dont letter bigger alliances walk over them
HEX: good HC
NGO: upcoming talent with alot of potential
not play for:
ND: digitalzero
TGV: kargool
DLR: grog
CT: remy
p3ng: assassin
__________________
[eXilition] [Omen] [Quha] [Apprime] [Ðragons]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tesla
I signed up to make sure eX didnt win the round, thanks to your HCs last decision it looks like I succeeded
|
Apprime
|
|
|
28 May 2011, 15:39
|
#43
|
Class Clown
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 149
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxMilliaN
play for:
ODDR: they dont letter bigger alliances walk over them
|
Oh man. Rich!
__________________
<@Sun_Tzu> nolez is correct
Round 13 - Angels - Boulevard of Broken Dreams - Rank 21
Round 16 - Ascendancy - when im gd im not gd of when im bad i suck - Rank 56
Round 28 - Ascendancy - The Olympic Glory of Michael Phelps - Rank 21
Round 38 - [NFI] - Boulevard of Broken Dreams - Rank 30
Round 39 - Imperia - Purdue of Boilermakers - Rank 59
Round 40 - xVx - An Shi Rebellion of the Tang Dynasty - Rank 2
I'll always give you a hand.
|
|
|
28 May 2011, 20:32
|
#44
|
The brother of Spammer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Paisley - Scotland
Posts: 2,352
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
I'm going to try and write this in a way where I am not going to flame grill but try and make it as constructive as possible. Hopefully writing this out might give me an idea where I am going to play next round.
(In alphabetical order)
Apprime ... Think of CarDi what would like but He is a very good tactically both as an individual PA player and in Leadership. Apprime have a great defence culture + know how to attack.
What is stopping me to apply to apprime is I feel that a few of the members (not fair to tar all members with the same brush) are too dirty for my liking ... not in terms Fleetcatching and similar legitimate tactics but more in the way they conduct themselves I.E. seem to attract alot of MH attention. Should this change I would consider applying.
CT ... Having played at CT for r40, I Know they have a good offense and a good bunch socially, Some Decent HCs but quite a few deadwood aswell, CT's defence culture needs fixed.
I have never seen such DC apathy that wasn't a training ally or wasn't folding.
I would Consider applying for CT this round If GM is prepared to do what is nessesary to fix the defence culture.
DLR ... Grog runs a tight ship at DLR and is very much the captain, a good tactician both individually and in leadership. Good bunch with good displine but Piss them off at your own peril.(R14 I got 24+ hours non stop ptargetting off them for landing sks on one of their planets and r17 I went from ~6k roids down to ~1250 on the same day because I was GC in a gal that had a "Duck Licking Retards" gal banner) Although they do have a good defence culture, due to their smaller numbers they are very open to being fleetcaught (I remember my r35 all too well). I would consider applying in BG form within an ally 50+ members or solo 50+ members.
HeX ... From what I have been told, good bunch socially but I would not consider HeX an option.
HR ... 3 way race between Cat (ND) Night Sky (xVx) and misty (HR) for nicest HC personality award. I would consider HR an option for when I am ready for chucking it and go semi inactive if the time comes but not for R42.
ND ... Leadership is a mixed bag, DZ has arguability made of the most of his hand given when it came to politics historically. The grape(no pun intended)vine hasn't rated Williams much for R41. Members are a good bunch socially, decent defence culture but lack punch when it comes to offense and could use someone like Grog to fix it (DLR was Historically in ND)
Unless ND HCs take measures to fix their attack and explore more "out of the box" options I would not consider ND an option
Ng0 ... full marks to wizard for effort judging by the recruitment threads, but no idea on how he runs the alliance or his track record.
I'm not willing to chance it and I was hoping to hear more from wizard as per http://pirate.planetarion.com/showpo...41&postcount=1
but I would not consider Ng0 an option.
ODDR ... After R40 my confidence In ODDR's leadership is at best shaken. If I was the Belgium Brothers I would be thinking how to reinvent ourselves ... For a mid tier alliance The defence culture needs fixed and not the best in offense and now have limited maneoverability in politics.
Perhaps my old subh buddies Rext and Badd can provide some counsel / assistance there... give them the opportunity
Currently I would not Consider ODDR an option.
P3ng ... I don't envy Assassins task of rebuilding p3nguins, I've nothing against him personally, I do believe he does have some tactical ability.... I haven't heard much from the grapevine about estimated numbers and that. If I was Assassin and the other HCs I would have left the p3ng name alone and named the alliance something else.
I would not consider p3ng an option for R42.
TGV ... I've heard good things about TGV on the grapevine. Got some good tacticians on board, decent defence culture and offense but...
I've heard that kargool is the same old kargool <---- bookies favourite for political HC wildcard for R42.
edit - I would consider TGV an option for R42 after talking shop with kargool for potental.
xVx ... Got some Good tacticians on board (I was quite surprised with santacruz), good bunch, Decent defence culture, reasonable attacks.
Good choice for alliance, But lack the ambition/drive to go from Mid tier to Contender win alliance.
Due to that I would not consider xVx an option For R42.
__________________
Missing Subh (r15-r18)
Last edited by Paisley; 28 May 2011 at 23:19.
|
|
|
28 May 2011, 22:39
|
#45
|
Valle is my hero
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,581
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
I doubt many alliances would consider Paisley an option either
|
|
|
29 May 2011, 14:38
|
#46
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 46
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Good read Paisley and some good input.
|
|
|
29 May 2011, 15:18
|
#47
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,038
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
My list consists of current and previous alliances that may or may not return in the future. This is entirely my opinion
Apprime: Would recommend for Hardcore players who want to win.
CT: Would recommend for Good players who like to be competitive
DLR: Would recommend for Good-Hardcore players who like following orders and have everything done for them
ODDR: Would recommend for New players who are willing to be active
HR: Would recommend for New-Bored players who want to chat more then play
xVx: Would recommend for Hardcore players who have good internet connections and like idling
TGV: Would recommend for Good players who like to compete
Evolution: Would recommend for Hardcore players who want to win
F-Crew: Would recommend for New players who dont really care about getting defence and just like being able to attack with a bunch of people
P3nguins: Would recommend for New-Good players who want to win
Ng0: Would recommend for No One.
New Dawn: Would recommend for New-Good players who are active but don't really care about value
ROCK: Would recommend for New players who have time to spend on this game
TOF: Would recommend for New players the small tag is off putting
GROSS: Would recommend for New players the small tag is off putting and i would find it hard to succeed in a democracy
|
|
|
29 May 2011, 18:23
|
#48
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Posts: 673
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiba
I doubt many alliances would consider Paisley an option either
|
I'd have him over you any day
__________________
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
|
|
|
29 May 2011, 20:29
|
#49
|
Valle is my hero
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,581
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
Yeh but thats like saying youd rather have TB instead of cancer
|
|
|
29 May 2011, 21:03
|
#50
|
Anarchy Shadow
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nafferton, England
Posts: 324
|
Re: Alliances I would consider playing for
If I'm honest I'd have Kai, nothing against Paisley as I don't really know him but Kai even though we don't see eye to eye you know what ya get with him, a dedicated sometimes annoying player who has the ability to motivate even the dumbest of players into playing well. Never a dull moment when kai's around that's guaranteed hehe.
__________________
EX
Legion, Fury, Xanadu, Wolfpack, NoS, TSU, LKSAB, Vgn, F-Crew, CT, Insomnia, Angels, VsN, Gross, Osiris, ROCK, XvX, Faceless, Unsullied, Haven, Carisan, RaGe, Carnage, Kittenz and EC
Currently
In ODDR Command
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:11.
| |