User Name
Password

Go Back   Planetarion Forums > Planetarion Related Forums > Alliance Discussions

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 20 May 2006, 02:24   #1
LukeyLove
ND Ninja!
Trampoline Tricks 2 Champion
 
LukeyLove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London, England
Posts: 295
LukeyLove is a splendid one to beholdLukeyLove is a splendid one to beholdLukeyLove is a splendid one to beholdLukeyLove is a splendid one to beholdLukeyLove is a splendid one to beholdLukeyLove is a splendid one to beholdLukeyLove is a splendid one to behold
1up's not-ingame members

Alot of questions have been raised as to whether 1up are participating in this round for real and why their avr is so low. I think everyone is now aware that the ingame tag is full of scanners and smaller members of 1up, while the largest of them are left out of tag to appear 'weak' to other alliances.
My question is this, why arent these additional out-of-game members classed as 'support planets' and if they are why isnt anything being done about it? So much fuss was made over ND and DLR working together last round, which had much less basis in reality in comparison to this. We all know that nearer the end of round 1up will invite the remaining big members and win the alliance rankings by a considerable margin. Are the out of game members defending ingame members? Are they attacking together? Anyone that can supply answers to these questions, would be very informative as i admit i lack sufficient intel to prove anything and am merely representing the rumour.
__________________
ND Asc 1up TGV LCH eXi HR

RAWR!

~Love Luke, Love Life~
LukeyLove is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 04:54   #2
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by LukeyLove
Are the out of game members defending ingame members? Are they attacking together?
Attacking togehter, not certain. Defending cross, most certainly. At least the spiders of certain cathaar planets are often eta8bound.
__________________
"Oh, wretched race of a day, children of chance and misery, why do ye compel me to say to you what it were most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is for ever beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. The second best for you, however, is soon to die". Silenus, tutor to Dionysos, speaking to King Midas.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 07:07   #3
Legator
Pr0nstar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Look at Galstatus
Posts: 1,006
Legator is a splendid one to beholdLegator is a splendid one to beholdLegator is a splendid one to beholdLegator is a splendid one to beholdLegator is a splendid one to beholdLegator is a splendid one to beholdLegator is a splendid one to behold
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

im surely not up to date but is attacking together forbidden ?
__________________
Ascendancy FTW !!!!!!
Reunion FDS !
Proud to be Founder and Member of VisioN
Honoured to have been [1up] Member

VfL Bochum >*
Legator is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 07:15   #4
Squidly
Avenger of Calamari
 
Squidly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 939
Squidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Well... DLR was dinged for retal'ing for ND allegedly, {proven or not, I have no idea.}

Planets out of tag etc. Tis a grey area tbh, but if it does come to the point where 1up does add in a bunch of planets, I imagine the MH will be all over it, checking histories and the like.

If you can take screen shots or prove those eta 8 spider fleets... eh, might turn into a different story. *shrugs*
Squidly is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 08:55   #5
Gate
;D!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,810
Gate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Legator
im surely not up to date but is attacking together forbidden ?
DLR were accused of being support planets for ND and therefore with closure because 1 planet (myself) consistently attacked 1up, hit elviz with my ND galmate, and received defence from ND, TGV and Angels planets against a 1up fleetcatch. There were accusations of DLR defending ND, but these were never backed up by any form of proof and confused the hell out of DLR HC.

So going by assassin's interpretation last round: consistently attacking with a group of people from one tag whilst being either in another tag yourself, or untagged, is being a support planet and if it persists, will result in closure.
__________________
[ND]
Kicked from Ascendancy
Proud to have been a Dark Lord Rising.
Gate is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 09:14   #6
ComradeRob
wasted
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Under the floorboards
Posts: 1,240
ComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriendComradeRob needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

The support planet rule has (imo) become untenable. It hasn't been fully enforced in the past, so enforcing it fully now would be unfair.

The rule is so vague that many alliances will have violated it in small ways, either by keeping members outside of the tag, having scanners outside the tag sending small def fleets etc. Technically ND and DLR might have broken the rule last round, Ascendancy might have been in violation of the rule (although I think we avoided this by simply not defending each other ).

Because it's so vague, the decision of who to punish is left to the multi-hunters. This makes it a subjective decision, which means that people will be very unhappy if the MHs change their mind about how to enforce it.
__________________
“They were totally confused,” said the birdman, whose flying suit gives him a passing resemblance to Buzz Lightyear in Toy Story. “The authorities said that I was an unregistered aircraft and to fly, you need a licence. I told them, ‘No. To fly, you need wings’.”
ComradeRob is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 09:25   #7
Mek
InSomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 1,473
Mek is a splendid one to beholdMek is a splendid one to beholdMek is a splendid one to beholdMek is a splendid one to beholdMek is a splendid one to beholdMek is a splendid one to beholdMek is a splendid one to behold
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

this is already something i have personally raised with the multi hunters m8
__________________

Runner up in the InSomnia 'Drunkest HC' competition - Currently on the wagon

Elysium | HR | eXilition | OuZo | ND | InSomnia | DLR

db battlegroup founder and spiritual leader

Sexytime HC of Belgians (#s3xytime)

Not so retired anymore....
Mek is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 09:30   #8
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

It was a dreadful rule and one of the few things which have been introduced in PA that I have been totally against. Trying to implement it in this scenario just gives the proof as to how ****ing moronic and limiting it really is.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 09:36   #9
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

If such a rule exists though, someone should consider enforcing it. If you browse through news scans, you can find that there are 1up planets in tag that defend each other and out of tag planets that consistently receive defences from these planets and defend these planets, and each other. I'm not personally up to date with the whole support planet discussion, nor do I find it so important, but it also comes eventually down to dodging tag limits (which a some people find abuse of game mechanics).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mek
this is already something i have personally raised with the multi hunters m8
Allthough I seriously doubt anything will happen.
__________________
"Oh, wretched race of a day, children of chance and misery, why do ye compel me to say to you what it were most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is for ever beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. The second best for you, however, is soon to die". Silenus, tutor to Dionysos, speaking to King Midas.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 09:38   #10
Nadar
I see you!
 
Nadar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In any girl
Posts: 2,825
Nadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tietäjä
If such a rule exists though, someone should consider enforcing it.
Why start enforcing it now?


oh.. I see... because you're Omen
__________________
www.foxystoat.com
Nadar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 09:43   #11
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nadar
Why start enforcing it now?


oh.. I see... because you're Omen
Or then remove the rule. One and same to me. Why should there be a rule that isn't enforced in any aspect? Just get rid of it and it's as simple or even simplier than enforcing it.
__________________
"Oh, wretched race of a day, children of chance and misery, why do ye compel me to say to you what it were most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is for ever beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. The second best for you, however, is soon to die". Silenus, tutor to Dionysos, speaking to King Midas.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 09:44   #12
Nadar
I see you!
 
Nadar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In any girl
Posts: 2,825
Nadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Agree. It'd be pointless to suddenly start enforcing it now (if anyone actually are playing with/as support planets).
__________________
www.foxystoat.com
Nadar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 09:44   #13
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

The rule was needed but was poorly defined, meaning that exceptions are needed for just about everything now.

Planets with the sole aim of supporting an alliance (such as eXil's r15 support planets with mass Vipers) need to be kept out of the game. From what I gather they ruined the early war with 1up and in the end, ensured eXil's success.

It was stupid to try to apply it to your everyday 'entire universe involved in a fleetcatch' situation as in Round 16.

Just keeping a few planets out of tag may be no bad thing as long as they aren't going crazy defending other alliance members. With the current 1up situation it depends how those out-of-tag planets are interacting with each other and with tagged members. Lots of interaction = bad. Little interaction = better.

Frankly those out-of-tag members may as well form a tag and defend each other with their mass value. However, that'd make it harder for them to join the 1up tag. It'd also mean admitting that they exist.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 10:03   #14
Gate
;D!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,810
Gate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by ComradeRob
Technically ND and DLR might have broken the rule last round, Ascendancy might have been in violation of the rule (although I think we avoided this by simply not defending each other ).
The accusations of ND/DLR support was initially that DLR had defended ND. As far as I know that was a complete fallacy. After that, it was that joint attacks were breaking the rule. ND and DLR, again, afaik, didn't coordinate any attacks (DLR was hitting gals with fat targets in, and targets were just added by DLR members throughout the day as they saw fat targets available...), but nontheless, I felt intimidated that if I were to attack a 1up planet whilst in the DLR tag, I would be closed.

So if ascendancy actually ran raids last round (Did you actually do that? I never saw any ), where none-tagged and tagged planets attacked together, you were breaking the rule, and repeatedly doing so should have led to your closure. Same for 1up this round.

Unless the rule was only applicable to planets attacking 1up, that is.
__________________
[ND]
Kicked from Ascendancy
Proud to have been a Dark Lord Rising.
Gate is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 10:08   #15
Nadar
I see you!
 
Nadar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In any girl
Posts: 2,825
Nadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriendNadar needs a job and a girlfriend
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gate
So if ascendancy actually ran raids last round (Did you actually do that? I never saw any )
That would have required someone's effort
__________________
www.foxystoat.com
Nadar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 10:09   #16
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gate
So if ascendancy actually ran raids last round (Did you actually do that? I never saw any ), where none-tagged and tagged planets attacked together, you were breaking the rule, and repeatedly doing so should have led to your closure. Same for 1up this round.

Unless the rule was only applicable to planets attacking 1up, that is.
As Rob's said, the rule in its current form is untenable. It cannot continue to be enforced. If we all ignore it hopefully it'll go away.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 10:30   #17
Gate
;D!
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,810
Gate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himGate is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
As Rob's said, the rule in its current form is untenable. It cannot continue to be enforced. If we all ignore it hopefully it'll go away.
I agree the current rule is flawed, but there has to be something to prevent the reoccurance of r15's viper planets from occuring again :/
__________________
[ND]
Kicked from Ascendancy
Proud to have been a Dark Lord Rising.
Gate is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 11:04   #18
I am Idler
This is bat country
 
I am Idler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,693
I am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squidly
Well... DLR was dinged for retal'ing for ND allegedly, {proven or not, I have no idea.}

Planets out of tag etc. Tis a grey area tbh, but if it does come to the point where 1up does add in a bunch of planets, I imagine the MH will be all over it, checking histories and the like.

*
What does adding out of tag members got to do with multiing ? Can you elaborate on this one? Or do you just label large planets out of tag as cheats
__________________
Burárum!
I am Idler is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 11:15   #19
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gate
I agree the current rule is flawed, but there has to be something to prevent the reoccurance of r15's viper planets from occuring again :/

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
The rule was needed but was poorly defined, meaning that exceptions are needed for just about everything now.

Planets with the sole aim of supporting an alliance (such as eXil's r15 support planets with mass Vipers) need to be kept out of the game. From what I gather they ruined the early war with 1up and in the end, ensured eXil's success.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 11:29   #20
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Planets with the sole aim of supporting an alliance (such as eXil's r15 support planets with mass Vipers) need to be kept out of the game. From what I gather they ruined the early war with 1up and in the end, ensured eXil's success.
I entirely disagree. If an alliance can get players to sit out-of-tag and defend players intag without multi-ing I don't see anything wrong with it. Personally I thought at the time some of the problem was that people were convinced these planets were multis and this was the quickest and easiest way to get at them.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 11:37   #21
Squidly
Avenger of Calamari
 
Squidly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 939
Squidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet societySquidly is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by I am Idler
What does adding out of tag members got to do with multiing ? Can you elaborate on this one? Or do you just label large planets out of tag as cheats
err... the multihunters cover the support planet rule as well as mutliing planets. That was what I was referring to. If the alleged 1up guys join the tag, then the MH may need to go over the history of the planets joining, and make sure there isn't consistentcy in their and 1up's targetting at the time.

If there is, then the planet gets dinged for being a support. If not, then it's clean.
Squidly is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 11:54   #22
I am Idler
This is bat country
 
I am Idler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norway
Posts: 1,693
I am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himI am Idler is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Squidly
err... the multihunters cover the support planet rule as well as mutliing planets. That was what I was referring to. If the alleged 1up guys join the tag, then the MH may need to go over the history of the planets joining, and make sure there isn't consistentcy in their and 1up's targetting at the time.

If there is, then the planet gets dinged for being a support. If not, then it's clean.

What was the definition of a support planet again?
__________________
Burárum!
I am Idler is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 12:12   #23
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
I entirely disagree. If an alliance can get players to sit out-of-tag and defend players intag without multi-ing I don't see anything wrong with it. Personally I thought at the time some of the problem was that people were convinced these planets were multis and this was the quickest and easiest way to get at them.
Frankly I don't care why people thought there was a problem at the time.


It makes a farce out of the alliance limits if alliances are allowed to keep members out of tag. The idea behind the alliance limits is that alliances are of no greater size than that limit. If they are of greater size then it makes the limits pointless.

For an alliance to have 3-4 members out of tag is fine. As Vengeance HC it was not uncommon to have a couple of planets waiting to join us when we were in the top 5 (and unable to accept new members).

However, to have more than that (say, more than 5 members out of tag and interacting) is unfair on the other alliances who don't have that member base. If we don't nip this in the bud in some way, we'll see 100+ member alliances with 60 members in tag, organised on a cluster basis as opposed to using the alliance bonuses.


I consider this a bad thing, and this is why I believe we must retain the support planet rule in some form.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 12:33   #24
lokken
BlueTuba
 
lokken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

The fact is you can't stop planets attacking other planets then joining what tags they want and it not being legitimate. Trying to enforce it is impossible because unless you do it together regularly with those other planets, the rule isn't going to catch you (and even if it does, try enforcing it), so they are playing within the rules. Saying that support extends to playing out of a tag and then joining it to boost its score is ridiculous, simply because you can't enforce it.

So it's up to players to get better intel or do something about it. The worst part of all this is after Ascendancy dumping the collective universe on its arse this round, it's probably going to happen with 1up again. A lot of this to me (while I admire the object of demolishing the support planets rule) seems to be an attempt to cover up some massive oversight by some people.

The support planets rule isnt great in my opinion, and really a straight all out coding for defence would have been far easier as then we wouldn't have to think about how a rule is applied.
__________________
"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."
lokken is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 12:51   #25
TheGoaT
Old Timer
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Your sisters panties
Posts: 201
TheGoaT is a splendid one to beholdTheGoaT is a splendid one to beholdTheGoaT is a splendid one to beholdTheGoaT is a splendid one to beholdTheGoaT is a splendid one to beholdTheGoaT is a splendid one to behold
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gate
DLR were accused of being support planets for ND and therefore with closure because 1 planet (myself) consistently attacked 1up, hit elviz with my ND galmate, and received defence from ND, TGV and Angels planets against a 1up fleetcatch. There were accusations of DLR defending ND, but these were never backed up by any form of proof and confused the hell out of DLR HC.
and was anyone closed?
__________________
Round 1-6: ND, Xanadu(RedBull)
Round 13: LCH
Round 14-18: [1up]
Round 19-20: Ascendancy
Round 21: Quit
Round 30: Ascendancy
Round 75-81: DLR
TheGoaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 13:10   #26
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Frankly I don't care why people thought there was a problem at the time.


It makes a farce out of the alliance limits if alliances are allowed to keep members out of tag. The idea behind the alliance limits is that alliances are of no greater size than that limit. If they are of greater size then it makes the limits pointless.

For an alliance to have 3-4 members out of tag is fine. As Vengeance HC it was not uncommon to have a couple of planets waiting to join us when we were in the top 5 (and unable to accept new members).

However, to have more than that (say, more than 5 members out of tag and interacting) is unfair on the other alliances who don't have that member base. If we don't nip this in the bud in some way, we'll see 100+ member alliances with 60 members in tag, organised on a cluster basis as opposed to using the alliance bonuses.


I consider this a bad thing, and this is why I believe we must retain the support planet rule in some form.
The alliance limits are a farce. They're a stupid attempt to limit the amount of political moves in the game through imposing extra-ordinary rules. I agree with lokken if you want to do it properly just code it so that only alliance members can defend each other. Stopping attack co-operation is impossible. It's stopping politics. Planetarion without politics is only mildly better than planetarion without irc.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 13:58   #27
Almeida
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austria, Vienna
Posts: 326
Almeida is a splendid one to beholdAlmeida is a splendid one to beholdAlmeida is a splendid one to beholdAlmeida is a splendid one to beholdAlmeida is a splendid one to beholdAlmeida is a splendid one to beholdAlmeida is a splendid one to behold
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

i have been against this rule back when it was brought up and i am still against it.

if the out of tag members receive defense from ingame 1uppers it ain't against the rule.
if the out of tag members crossdef each other it ain't against the rule.
if the out of tag members def the intag members on a regular basis, then it would break the rule.
Attacking together never was against any rule.

imo 1up is playing it well and there really is no need to add a planet with ~80mill res /each stockpiled to the tag atm. if they can win the round with this strategy, then well done.

if any of the out of tag 1uppers get closed coz they defended ingame 1uppers then it might be backed up by this rule but imo it would be as stupid as the closings of eXi scanners deffing intag eXi back in r15.

btw, it's not 1ups fault that the Universe lets those out of tag members grow. they could be roided to the ground or at least forced to join 1up with sending enough FI/CO waves (no possibility do def against eta 7 unless u are in the ally, except cluster/ingal def)
__________________
eXilition
Almeida is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 14:06   #28
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
The alliance limits are a farce. They're a stupid attempt to limit the amount of political moves in the game through imposing extra-ordinary rules. I agree with lokken if you want to do it properly just code it so that only alliance members can defend each other. Stopping attack co-operation is impossible. It's stopping politics. Planetarion without politics is only mildly better than planetarion without irc.
How does a limit on the size of alliances limit the number of political moves?


We need to limit alliance sizes otherwise all of the most hardcore players will just congregate in the top 4 alliances. As I'm sure you realise, this would be a bad thing and in fact would limit politics. At present I see 8 or 9 alliances with the ability to sway the political situation, which means more room for political manouvering - my favourite part of the game. Moreover, a blocks situation without alliance limits would never be much more than 2 vs 2. At present it could be 4 v 4, 5 v 3, 5 v 4 and so on.

As for coding defence to ban it OOAOOG, I think this is a terrible idea as it would wreck alliance co-operation and make huge fleetcatches a thing of the past. The game itself would become a whole lot more boring.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 14:17   #29
Willzzz
Legion Idle Master
 
Willzzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 425
Willzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud of
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

To be honest i wouldnt class this as being a 'Support planet' it seems to me that 1up are just playing a great stratergy to not show there full force and memberbase. This was done last round with the winning alliance.

Now, to compare this to when the rule was implemented (when exi won the round) it is completly different in my eyes. First of all 1up arnt first. Second, i beleive 1ups main planets are out of tag, not within the tag. This means alliances (if you guys bothered to find them) could hunt them down and it should be easier to attack them, then if they were in the tag. Exi however had there best planets in tag, but had 'scan planets' with a lot of vipers to make a certain eta jump at the ready to defend the top planets in the alliance. As far as i am aware by this thread, 1up are doing the complete opposit? Infact there taking more of a risk, becuase surely if an alliance attacked there out of tag top planets they would be easier to roid this way?

If anything i say well done to 1up to have the balls to play so many top planets out of tag in this way. Was a great stratergy and must be well played to keep them so highly ranked with being out of tag.


So in Conclusion: When the support planet rule was implemented it was there soly to stop planets, outside of an alliance that was at the time ranked first, from being there to defend them and prevent apposing alliances to make a dent. These 1up out of taggers are playing the game. There not here as defence whores? Or to soly be here to benefit the alliance? They are alliance members simply taking a risk out of tag. If people cant understand that then perhaps people need to step back and think. Just my appinon on the subject. But well done 1up for another tactical display.
__________________

Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

p3nguin Founder
Willzzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 14:37   #30
Banned
Banned
 
Banned's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
Banned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so littleBanned contributes so much and asks for so little
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gate
So if ascendancy actually ran raids last round (Did you actually do that? I never saw any ), where none-tagged and tagged planets attacked together, you were breaking the rule, and repeatedly doing so should have led to your closure.
Not quite. Running raids together is only against the rules if the planets outside the tag are working solely for the benefit of the tag (at least that's how I interpret the word dedicated below). Generally, the planets outside the tag in our case were benefiting more from the attacks where others joined them*, this is 'proven' since the out of tag members almost invariably ended higher ranked than the other participants in the raid.

Even in the case of equal benefit, the support planet clause can't be invoked. (Again, as I interpret the text, really the MHs will do whatever the **** they want.)

I'd also like to point out that there's nothing wrong with having people out of tag, even when those planets defend the tag. Allow me to elaborate:

Quote:
(f) Support Accounts are accounts which are dedicated to undertaking specific
and repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit for a
planet/organisation, where an organisation is defined as an alliance or galaxy.
I think people are mixing up 'cooperating' with 'dedicated to undertaking specific and repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit'. This round's stats have a lot of eta-1 defense ships. Mandrakes, Barghests, Spiders, Scarabs, Black Widows, Illusions (heh), Banshees, Ghosts, Clippers, Buccaneers. You've got all 4 >FI/CO classes covered there. Ingal defense against FI/CO is powerful enough that it's possible to deal with those without tagged defense possible.

Now, I've pointed out that it's possible to defend tagged planets from untagged planets, which is what causes all the fuss. But if they are receiving defense in return, their actions are not causing unfair benefit to the tag.

The second point worth noting is the avoidance of the alliance tag limit. This is closer to the gray area in my opinion. As an alliance HC, I can easily pad the numbers of my alliance by allowing newbie applicants into the alliance. 1up probably gets more of these than Ascendancy does. A possible scenario (I'm not saying this is true, it's completely hypothetical) is that 1up allows the security risk of newbies to lower their average and increase their member count to dispell the 'waiting out of tag' myth.

Otherwise, the extra tag members must be scanners or people who will be kicked out of the tag when the alledged out of tag members are brought in. It's worth noting that Sid has made a very specific point about these members:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
I DO see a difference between mid-round recruitment to replace losses and a last minute mass addition to improve rank. The biggest difference, to me, is if you kick members out of your tag that you otherwise wouldn't to allow in higher score planets. The ones who kick from tag - even if they remain in your channels - are NOT in the winning alliance more. So people who have fought all round for you are now rewarded by NOT having won the round.
Emphasis mine.

So we can assume that there will be a number (where number can be 0) of members currently in the tag that will be, essentially, kicked from 1up.

I think discussing cheating on AD is rather fruitless, so I'm just trying to clarify a few things with this post. My personal opinion remains that the support planet rule is ridiculous. It's worse than the farming rules when it comes to stirring shit among losers. Before the farming rule, we could call the winners lame, and they'd get indignant because "we didn't farm!" (often true, not always). Now we have to call them cheaters to do the same, and with rules that are practically unenforcable, it's easy to ditch sane discussion in favor of it.

* While never running raids per se, target picks were public, and a lot of lazy members escewed target searching in favor of just checking where the biggest members of their race were attacking and following them. JBG, bwtmc and Dav's targets usually got queues of 1-3 attackers behind them.
Banned is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 16:08   #31
JonnyBGood
Banned
 
JonnyBGood's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.JonnyBGood has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
How does a limit on the size of alliances limit the number of political moves?
Moving swiftly on.

Quote:
We need to limit alliance sizes otherwise all of the most hardcore players will just congregate in the top 4 alliances.
Well, most of them do anyways, maybe top five alliances I guess. Most hardcore players who aren't in these alliances now aren't in them because they don't really want to be there.

Quote:
As I'm sure you realise, this would be a bad thing and in fact would limit politics. At present I see 8 or 9 alliances with the ability to sway the political situation, which means more room for political manouvering - my favourite part of the game. Moreover, a blocks situation without alliance limits would never be much more than 2 vs 2. At present it could be 4 v 4, 5 v 3, 5 v 4 and so on.
That doesn't necessarily make it more interesting. Interesting wars are caused by a closeness in strength and the potential of one at least, but less than three, parties to change the balance of power.

Quote:
As for coding defence to ban it OOAOOG, I think this is a terrible idea as it would wreck alliance co-operation and make huge fleetcatches a thing of the past. The game itself would become a whole lot more boring.
How would it make fleetcatches a thing of the past? You can still attack with other people.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.

Last edited by wakey; 20 May 2006 at 17:12.
JonnyBGood is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 16:26   #32
Synthetic_Sid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 537
Synthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet societySynthetic_Sid is a pillar of this Internet society
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by LukeyLove
Alot of questions have been raised as to whether Angels are participating in this round for real and why their avr is so low. I think everyone is now aware that the ingame Angels tag is full of scanners and smaller members of Omen, while the largest of them are in the main Omen tag so Angels appear 'weak' to other alliances.
My question is this, why arent these Angels members classed as 'support planets' and if they are why isnt anything being done about it? So much fuss was made over ND and DLR working together last round, which had much less basis in reality in comparison to this. We all know that nearer the end of round Omen will invite the remaining big Angels members and win the alliance rankings by a considerable margin. Are the out of game (Angels) members buddy-packing with ingame (Omen) members? Are they attacking the same alliances? Anyone that can supply answers to these questions, would be very informative as i admit i lack sufficient intelligence to post anything of substance.
I agree totally. Close Angels as a support alliance - as their political actions are clearly designed to assist Omen in winning the round rather than in furthering their own aims.

And for all those of you who take this seriously - go get a sense of humour transplant.
__________________
Synthetic Sid
[1up]
Synthetic_Sid is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 20 May 2006, 16:27   #33
robban1
Registered User
 
robban1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
robban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these partsrobban1 is infamous around these parts
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
I agree totally. Close Angels as a support alliance - as their political actions are clearly designed to assist Omen in winning the round rather than in furthering their own aims.

And for all those of you who take this seriously - go get a sense of humour transplant.
robban1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 00:10   #34
Remy
Ex-Head Multihunter
 
Remy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: At home
Posts: 900
Remy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud of
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

From the EULA, this is considered cheating and will result in closure:

Quote:
Originally Posted by EULA
(f) Support Accounts are accounts which are dedicated to undertaking specific
and repeated actions which result in an unfair benefit for a
planet/organisation, where an organisation is defined as an alliance or galaxy.
I cud not find any other wordings in the EULA about support planets and planets defending an alliance while not ingame or planets cooperation with an alliance in attack while not ingame.

To answer the question if 1up (or any other alliance, because there is more then 1up around here to go accuse) is actually breaking the EULA, I think you should analyze this paragraph better.

- Dedicated accounts

This means the sole purpose of the accounts is to either 1) give ingame members an unfair advantage or 2) give individual non-ingame planets an unfair advantage.

btw: PA crew probably will see dedicated as: mainly used for, not purely dedicated.

- specific and repeated actions

Assuming the actions are attacks and defense only, then any of the following qualifies:
- repeatedly defending a non-ingame planet who is from the alliance
- repeatedly attacking with a non-ingame planet who is from the same alliance
- repeatedly defedning an ingame alliance member while not being ingame
- repeatedly attacking together with an ingame ally member while not being ingame


(btw: scanners/pure coopers not ingame perform specific and repeated actions to the extreme. When they are not ingame, they do qualify as breaking the EULA under this description)

- unfair benefit for a planet/organisation (being ally or galaxy)

What is unfair advantage? thats very subjective, but pa crew probably means: to be able to maintain a bigger planet with the help of planets who are NOT in the same galaxy or alliance.

Now back to the original question: is 1up cheating/breaking the EULA?

First you have to prove that planets ingame and not ingame are actually defending each other and attacking together, on a regular basis. This is easy to prove from logs, so that should be an easy task, although maybe time consuming :-)

Now let's assume (im not accusing, but i wanna assume this to be able to go on with this post) that this is actually happening. If you read and interpret the EULA literally, without taking into account the spirit of the EULA, then you can safely say that none or at least very few of the planets are dedicated to giving other planets unfair advantage.

If you DO take into account the spirit of the rule, then pa crew simply wants to make sure no alliance gets an unfair advantage because they found a way to undermine/evade the alliance limit that was hard coded.

I will not draw a conclusion, but this was just my thoughts on the subject. I wish the pa crew much success in deciding what is allowed and what is not.
__________________
R02.0-R4.0: [noob]
R05.0: [Wrath]/[Fury]
R06.0: Quit after 1 week
R7-9: Had an account, but didnt play seriously
R09.5: []LCH[] Officer
R10.0: []LCH[] HC (Rank #9, #1 Gal)
R10.5-R18.0: []LCH[] HC Scanner!
R18.0-R33 : Multihunter, Head MH
R34-.. : [CT] HC
Remy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 01:08   #35
Furyous
Registered User
 
Furyous's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: England
Posts: 258
Furyous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to beholdFuryous is a splendid one to behold
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

What a complete farce!

The whole issue would be nullified if the 1up tag disappeared and all the (supposedly real) 1up members created a '2up' tag. Then it is technically a different alliance, so '1up' didn't benefit from any 'support planets' (as it no longer exists), and '2up' is a brand new alliance, so all past issues during the round are irrelavant!

That rule is indeed untenable.
__________________
You ain't seen me, right!
Furyous is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 06:16   #36
Remy
Ex-Head Multihunter
 
Remy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: At home
Posts: 900
Remy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud of
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

True.

The rule is so misty that there is many ways to circumvent it. It is also quite impossible to enforce it.

But the question here wasnt: is the rule good or bad, but the question was if 1up (and i bet they arent the only ones ding this) was breaking the rule.
__________________
R02.0-R4.0: [noob]
R05.0: [Wrath]/[Fury]
R06.0: Quit after 1 week
R7-9: Had an account, but didnt play seriously
R09.5: []LCH[] Officer
R10.0: []LCH[] HC (Rank #9, #1 Gal)
R10.5-R18.0: []LCH[] HC Scanner!
R18.0-R33 : Multihunter, Head MH
R34-.. : [CT] HC
Remy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 07:08   #37
Tietäjä
Good Son
 
Tietäjä's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Finland
Posts: 3,991
Tietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better placeTietäjä single handedly makes these forums a better place
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Remy
If you DO take into account the spirit of the rule, then pa crew simply wants to make sure no alliance gets an unfair advantage because they found a way to undermine/evade the alliance limit that was hard coded.

I will not draw a conclusion, but this was just my thoughts on the subject. I wish the pa crew much success in deciding what is allowed and what is not.
Within this conclusion, having more than 1 planet participating in f.ex defences for 1up would be evading the hard coded limit. Against the EULA, that is. In my opinion the whole ruleset needs to be rephrased or changed.
__________________
"Oh, wretched race of a day, children of chance and misery, why do ye compel me to say to you what it were most expedient for you not to hear? What is best of all is for ever beyond your reach: not to be born, not to be, to be nothing. The second best for you, however, is soon to die". Silenus, tutor to Dionysos, speaking to King Midas.
Tietäjä is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 07:17   #38
Remy
Ex-Head Multihunter
 
Remy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: At home
Posts: 900
Remy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud ofRemy has much to be proud of
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Furyous
What a complete farce!

The whole issue would be nullified if the 1up tag disappeared and all the (supposedly real) 1up members created a '2up' tag. Then it is technically a different alliance, so '1up' didn't benefit from any 'support planets' (as it no longer exists), and '2up' is a brand new alliance, so all past issues during the round are irrelavant!

That rule is indeed untenable.
This in not true tbh. Nowhere is it stated that the support planet in question has be be allianceless. But i agree that it will even be harder to mark a planet as support planet.

Remember that when the rule was 'invented', also the repeated defending of another alliance was seen as support planet. This seriously crippled the concept of two alliances being fully allied.
__________________
R02.0-R4.0: [noob]
R05.0: [Wrath]/[Fury]
R06.0: Quit after 1 week
R7-9: Had an account, but didnt play seriously
R09.5: []LCH[] Officer
R10.0: []LCH[] HC (Rank #9, #1 Gal)
R10.5-R18.0: []LCH[] HC Scanner!
R18.0-R33 : Multihunter, Head MH
R34-.. : [CT] HC
Remy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 09:02   #39
Fridge
Angel
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Munich
Posts: 21
Fridge is on a distinguished road
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
I agree totally. Close Angels as a support alliance - as their political actions are clearly designed to assist Omen in winning the round rather than in furthering their own aims.

And for all those of you who take this seriously - go get a sense of humour transplant.
Thanks for cracking me up this early in the morning, Sid
__________________
Angels HC

Former:
Furious Angels | FAnG | ChâoZ Daddy | Angels till i die


Furious Angels Gaming community
Fridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 10:39   #40
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Planets with the sole aim of supporting an alliance (such as eXil's r15 support planets with mass Vipers) need to be kept out of the game. From what I gather they ruined the early war with 1up and in the end, ensured eXil's success.
That's half the reason the rule doesn't work, nobody's sole aim is to serve a tag. Every player has other agendas, at least to a degree. I'd like to put straight that there was no grand plan for 'viper planets.' Many scanners went Cathaar and it became 'obvious' at the time that building a vipers, that which their friends needed most would make a big difference. I'm absolutely certain, having planned it, it made no difference to that war and actually weakened our round. We ended up with one scanner from six at the end because PA team decided to invoke the rule.

I imagine there's individual cases where players have taken the piss and probably could be closed on the same count as some of those five. The players certainly didn't attack, I think I'm right in saying one got closed for as little as three defences. It's hardly worth talking about, the rule's appalling. Edit: iirc, a lot of the issue was that these players weren't really doing anything but helping friends inside and scanning. While I think 1up have benefited a lot more from whatever this is, you'll probably find it can be easily shown that out of tag 'proper' planets are attacking and defending in their own interests. They're probably doing a lot more for their galaxies and other friends too.

It's probably more of an 'evading the tag limit' issue if the players-to-be-kicked in the tag are defending/attacking with the tag as well as those outside, to be later taken on. Our scanners got closed because they didn't fit in the tag and were helping some of those inside. I doubt this situation is any different. For the love of god make a new rule or get rid of it altogether.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 10:42   #41
hook
I'm who you want me to be
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: In a flat place, enjoying RL
Posts: 418
hook is a glorious beacon of lighthook is a glorious beacon of lighthook is a glorious beacon of lighthook is a glorious beacon of lighthook is a glorious beacon of lighthook is a glorious beacon of light
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Remy
unfair benefit for a planet/organisation (being ally or galaxy)

What is unfair advantage? thats very subjective, but pa crew probably means: to be able to maintain a bigger planet with the help of planets who are NOT in the same galaxy or alliance.
And this is exactly what makes me frown.

I don't play this game anymore, but some good friends of mine still do. If I wanted to play a round solely for helping them to do good by defending them whenever they call me, (by the current way alliances are coded it is possible, and therefore should be possible), I see no reason why not to do so.

Aslong as PA-team allow out-of-tag members and out-of-galaxy members to defend planets, people truely shouldn't be suprised it's happening.
__________________
And in the end, it's not the years in your life that count... it's the life in those years
hook is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 10:57   #42
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by Furyous
What a complete farce!

The whole issue would be nullified if the 1up tag disappeared and all the (supposedly real) 1up members created a '2up' tag. Then it is technically a different alliance, so '1up' didn't benefit from any 'support planets' (as it no longer exists), and '2up' is a brand new alliance, so all past issues during the round are irrelavant!

That rule is indeed untenable.
The problem then is that you can't easily transfer the untagged planets in and out of the tag in order to send them defence. At present I expect that they all have applications to join 1up, and as necessary a scanner can be kicked and the large planet accepted in order to send it -1 eta defence.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 11:00   #43
furball
Registered Awesome Person
 
furball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,676
furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.furball has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
How would it make fleetcatches a thing of the past? You can still attack with other people.
But a fleetcatch organised by 2-3 alliances is undefendable. This is a bad thing. You're also not going to see any of the mass wars at planets (usually prompted by said fleetcatches). This is bad for casual players as well, since things like this give them a lot of entertainment when news of them gets spread around IRC.
__________________
Finally free!
furball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 11:18   #44
lokken
BlueTuba
 
lokken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.lokken has ascended to a higher existance and no longer needs rep points to prove the size of his e-penis.
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Please stop trying to bring in planets who don't interact within the support planets rule. That's unbelievably shit.

You can't possibly hope to enforce it so please stop trying. it's so utterly tenuous I'm posting to save everyone time.

The only way you'll get them via interaction.
__________________
"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."
lokken is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 11:21   #45
Willzzz
Legion Idle Master
 
Willzzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 425
Willzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud of
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Ok, lets get to grips with things here. I was searching the forum as last round there was a huge guidlines/rules post made by Assassin the MH manager which im sure most of you would of witnessed. It had this below within it:

Support Planets

There has been a lot of discussion on what constitutes a support planet. Planets that are signed up with the sole purpose of helping a certain alliance/planet/galaxy/BP will not be allowed. This rule was implemented last round and we will continue using this rule for further rounds.

We will allow planets to defend friends from time to time but it has to be obvious you're also playing for yourself (as opposed to playing purely to support others). If we do suspect that planets are set up purely to defend others, we will investigate and take appropriate action based on the evidence collected.

Planets that are signed up for the sole purpose of flaking out attack fleets are not allowed. If your friends want to join your attack then their is no issue with this but again it has to be them playing their own game and not only attacking for the benefit of others. Any external BGs existing between alliances in the round are advised to come and speak to myself, Squishy or any other member of the MH team if they feel that this will help reduce problems down the line. Again, we're not trying to set out and destroy people playing together, but in the recent past people have tried to do this sort of thing to gain an unfair advantage.

I would also like to say that all appeals from closed planets will be listened to.



Now, to me that makes perfect sense. Why doesnt it for others? Now regarding this 1up issue, 1up cant be said to be abusing the support planet rule at all. Instead they could perhaps be moaned at for decieving people with using smaller planets in the tag and playing there bigger planets outside of the tag. It was a great tactic and it is indeed paying off. The rule above has no relevence to them unless of course they are majorly interacting.

Now, the simple way of stopping 1up as i have heard people mention before i came on here to post would be the simple way for some of the top 5 alliances to target the top 1up out of tag players. This will then force them to kick these more inactive players there using as a diversion in the tag out to allow there top members to join instantly for eta defence. This means they come out of hiding. Now, the planets they kicked out of there tag which should be the smaller planets, can now not interfear under the support planet rule. They wouldnt be allowed to majorly defend them or be involved with attacking the enemy. So, it seems to me they can be stopped just depends on wheather alliances can be bothered to actually do anything other then complain about how good there tactics were to create a loophole around the alliance limit.
__________________

Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

p3nguin Founder
Willzzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 11:27   #46
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
The problem then is that you can't easily transfer the untagged planets in and out of the tag in order to send them defence. At present I expect that they all have applications to join 1up, and as necessary a scanner can be kicked and the large planet accepted in order to send it -1 eta defence.
Since everyone avoids attacking them I doubt they have to bother. A lot of players find they're able to finish as high or higher while not receiving any alliance defence (and as such, alliance incomings) at all.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 11:30   #47
Willzzz
Legion Idle Master
 
Willzzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 425
Willzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud ofWillzzz has much to be proud of
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Quote:
Originally Posted by bwtmc
Since everyone avoids attacking them I doubt they have to bother. A lot of players find they're able to finish as high or higher while not receiving any alliance defence (and as such, alliance incomings) at all.
That is exactly my point which i posted ealier ^^

Why are 1up not being targetted? I can see from this thread people see them as a threat. But instead of doing anything about this it seems you would rather try and claim they were abusing the support planet rule. When in fact if anything they played great tactics to diseave you all.
__________________

Played: Round 1-13. PA Team: Round 13-17. The Return: Round 18-19. PA Team: Round 20. Return.. Again: Round 21-37 Retired: Round 38 Returned: Round 39-45 Retired: Round 45 Returned: Round: 56

p3nguin Founder
Willzzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 11:52   #48
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Because the next strongest alliance wouldn't fare too well in a one on one war, and they know it. The others either don't care about the top spot or think that if it were challenged, they wouldn't be the ones that ended up winning. Not that it makes sense or anything.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 11:54   #49
bwtmc
thinking, that's all.
 
bwtmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
bwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond reputebwtmc has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

Or.. maybe they have collectively decided that the best way to play, is the Angels way
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
bwtmc is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 21 May 2006, 12:01   #50
Heartless
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
 
Heartless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
Heartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like himHeartless is an inspiration to us all and we should try to be more like him
Re: 1up's not-ingame members

When the round ends and 1up have not finished first I am going to laugh about all of you chickens which thought they'd hold a super secret weapon.

(Just because I get tired of laughing about Angels believing Omen would secure them a number 2 alliance ranking)
__________________
Ià! Ià! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
Heartless is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:36.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2002 - 2018