|
|
7 Jan 2006, 17:24
|
#51
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: not sure
Posts: 98
|
Re: Has to be said
he he, I just got another red dot because I made a joke about red dots... (attn. I wasnt "moaning about red dots" : moaning to me is more like: ahhh, ahhhhhh, ahhhhhh. uhmmm, ahhhh, yes, ahhhhh...)
I think I would actually take robban's path and become infamous around this parts :P So then people can punish me with green dots.
In any case... I DONT CARE!!!! :P
Last edited by Dictator2; 7 Jan 2006 at 19:32.
|
|
|
7 Jan 2006, 17:36
|
#52
|
Registered Awesome Person
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
|
Re: Has to be said
From the compact Oxford English Dictionary ( www.askoxford.com)
moan
• noun 1 a low mournful sound, usually expressive of suffering. 2 informal a trivial complaint.
• verb 1 utter or make a moan. 2 informal complain; grumble.
— DERIVATIVES moaner noun.
— ORIGIN of unknown origin.
Your definition of moaning is entirely porn-influenced generally on the forums griping about being neg-repped will only earn you more neg reps, unless the neg rep is totally absurd AND you're already an upstanding member of the community. So now you know.
__________________
Finally free!
|
|
|
7 Jan 2006, 17:42
|
#53
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: not sure
Posts: 98
|
Re: Has to be said
he he, good one, more or less what I said with my example, im besides and more important, u got my innuendo.
Yeh I know people are like that, is hard to please the masses
Last edited by Dictator2; 7 Jan 2006 at 19:32.
|
|
|
7 Jan 2006, 18:15
|
#54
|
Idle Git
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wandering
Posts: 1,550
|
Re: Has to be said
Quote:
Originally Posted by Appocomaster
Setting the alliance limit to this was probably my idea more than most.
When discussing the alliance limit on any forum, there were generally a few opinions:
1) ditch limits (minority)
2) get low alliance limits (active players wanting small alliances/BGs to play in)
3) prefer higher alliances to not kick less active people (training alliances/alliances with big communities not willing to split, generally middle / lower top 10 or below).
So, the logic was that the 50 member alliances kept the top active alliances small. There'd probably be 7-8 alliances competiting for the top, so I wouldn't be surprised to see the 50 man alliances slip up to 60 by mid/end round. It might be because of ship jumping, or scanners coming in tag, or later signups...
The higher limit was set so that the other alliances could keep their players, although yes I admit that not all of them can join at once.
Edit:
The only way I'd change it is to perhaps change the 50 to 60
|
I understand WHY the concept was implemented, and I don't complain about that. However, the approach you've used to balancing is comparable to putting an anvil on one side of a see-saw when you want a baby to leave the ground.
__________________
Here we go again....
|
|
|
7 Jan 2006, 18:53
|
#55
|
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: not sure
Posts: 98
|
Re: Has to be said
OK, now, some of the messages I have been receiving along with the red dots are quite offensive, is ther any way of regulating that? Because people don't even leave their nicks. I really don't care, such attitude and behavior only speak about their true character; but it really bothers me that the system is in place precisely to avoid such language. Im not complaining about the red dots per se, I couldnt care any less about those, but I do think is quite lame to try to offend someone anonymously knowing that there won't be any repercussions.
Last edited by Dictator2; 7 Jan 2006 at 19:33.
|
|
|
7 Jan 2006, 23:26
|
#56
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 111
|
Re: Has to be said
what really scares me is the following scenario:
1 decent ally has i.e. 100 players who want to be members
now what happens: in tick 1 10 small ppl join the ally. now the ally is ranked 25 with 10 members
in tick 2 the 90ppl other from the ally apply
now they are all let in in this tick => 1 ally with 100 players. they will be unstoppable because they are 100 decent players and have the -1 eta. when the other allys realize this it will be too late as they cant recruit 100 up to good player
(or did i misuderstand it and this is impossible?) (had to be said by me)
__________________
Dark HC - find us in #darkwarriors
|
|
|
7 Jan 2006, 23:38
|
#57
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,174
|
Re: Has to be said
you can only recruit 1 person for every X ticks, where x is based on the alliance ranking
__________________
If one person is in delusion, they're called insane.
If many people are in delusion, it's called a religion.
|
|
|
9 Jan 2006, 11:51
|
#58
|
Drink is Good
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,122
|
Re: Has to be said
I cant say i agree with the 50 alliance limit, especially for a free round, considering new players now have the chance to join top tier alliances, without the fear of being rejected because they cannot upgrade there account, also it would give them a taste of top alliances and get them hooked just as we all are. It just seems a bit wierd to me:\
__________________
Can we please have a moment of silence...........
|
|
|
11 Jan 2006, 12:48
|
#59
|
ND for life
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 94
|
Re: Has to be said
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding the rule here or if most of the people posting on this thread are misunderstanding it. To me the rule means that after the first 4 days with the 50 member limit then an alliance ranked 6th would be able to accept a member after 20-6= 14 ticks. So after 14 ticks the alliance would be able to accept a member. If they don't accept a member this tick and accept one say in tick 20 then as I see it they won't be able to accept a member for another 14 ticks, ie tick 34. Looking at f-crew this round this seems to be how it worked, although I think there was a problem with it for the first part of the round so I'm not entirely sure that is right. However to me it is the only way it makes sense.
__________________
'Soaring where angels fear to fly'
|
|
|
11 Jan 2006, 13:02
|
#60
|
Inactive peon
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 6,050
|
Re: Has to be said
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy
I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding the rule here or if most of the people posting on this thread are misunderstanding it. To me the rule means that after the first 4 days with the 50 member limit then an alliance ranked 6th would be able to accept a member after 20-6= 14 ticks. So after 14 ticks the alliance would be able to accept a member. If they don't accept a member this tick and accept one say in tick 20 then as I see it they won't be able to accept a member for another 14 ticks, ie tick 34. Looking at f-crew this round this seems to be how it worked, although I think there was a problem with it for the first part of the round so I'm not entirely sure that is right. However to me it is the only way it makes sense.
|
bingo, at last someone who understands
with regards to the start of last round there were some bugs preventing people form going above the lower limit, f-crew worked with us to track them down and fix them though.
|
|
|
25 Jan 2006, 19:26
|
#61
|
Planetarion Forum Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,289
|
Re: Has to be said
Moved to it's own thread on the Suggestion Forum which can be found here.
__________________
Romans 10:9-10
#strategy
Last edited by Monroe; 25 Jan 2006 at 19:34.
Reason: Changed my mind
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:32.
| |