|
|
24 May 2006, 10:43
|
#101
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 537
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by robban1
your reply tell me im somwhat on the right thing here as you really should just ignore my post if its bs you know
and on a sidenote the massive planetnaps you got is what keep your little asses alive this far, thats why i said cudos.. the hideing planets thingie was just gay
|
I suspect you missed "the lite shines brite on 1up today" out of your post.
As 1up never had any planet naps until yesterday, I'm slightly puzzled as to how these could been what kept us alive so far. Other than that, your logic and debating skills are as impeccable as ever.
__________________
Synthetic Sid
[1up]
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 10:44
|
#102
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hude
Does it make a difference?
|
Wars are won and lost in the details my friend.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 10:47
|
#103
|
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hude
By the 210+ incoming fleets on Omen in the last 7-8 ticks I would say certain alliances want to play for 2nd. Again.
|
You mean, just like Angels settled for #2 behind you before? How embarassing that other people might use the same tactics...
__________________
Ią! Ią! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 10:50
|
#104
|
self-entitledly superior
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 341
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
You mean, just like Angels settled for #2 behind you before? How embarassing that other people might use the same tactics...
|
Behind who?
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 10:51
|
#105
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
I As 1up never had any planet naps until yesterday
|
and here ppl says the almighty sid never lie on forums
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 10:52
|
#106
|
Internal Error
Join Date: May 2002
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 696
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remy
Good show ppl.
Everyone knew it, and noone did anything (as usual).
|
ahhh the memories
well played so far (1up), planetarion keeps changing but at the same time it never changes
__________________
Nitros
[]LCH[] ..lets change history
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 10:54
|
#107
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by robban1
and here ppl says the almighty sid never lie on forums
|
How about, you shut your pathetic piehole unless you come up with some DECENT FACTS that would somehow backup the crap you seem to post.
If you think sid lied, prove it ... don't cry about it.
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:00
|
#108
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 537
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by robban1
and here ppl says the almighty sid never lie on forums
|
OK, I'll clear this up totally - as I can see two ways in which you could legitimately believe I'm lieing.
Planet naps were offered from the weekend. However 1ups were told that they would only be valid from midnight last night (and to tell their galmates that) - as prior to that we had no MOs, didn't bother putting defence calls into our tools so had no way of detecting napped incs anyway. Plus no way we would check targets for people to see if they were 1up while some members were out of tag - as that would allow people to get an accurate members list of us, including planets who had never sent or received out of galaxy defence all round.
I'm also aware of at least one member who offered their galaxy planet naps at the start of the round. They were told we weren't giving planet naps - and to explain to their galaxy their mistake.
Prior to last night, while we've avoided 1up galaxies as much as possible, we have had no planet naps in place. Any planet attacking 1up could be countered or fleet-caught by any 1ups who wanted to. Members who have decent control of their galaxy would, of course, try to prevent members attacking 1up.
I can only think of one instance where 1up has asked a planet to recall from us for any reason which could remotely be construed as a planet nap: and that was where he had an application being considered to join 1up. His attack was also 100% covered by defence. There have also been 2 occasions where a member in-tag has attacked one out of tag (or vice-versa) due to them not checking their targets (or in one case typoing the coords). They were, of course, ordered to recall.
__________________
Synthetic Sid
[1up]
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:01
|
#109
|
thinking, that's all.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by robban1
your reply tell me im somwhat on the right thing here as you really should just ignore my post if its bs you know
and on a sidenote the massive planetnaps you got is what keep your little asses alive this far, thats why i said cudos.. the hideing planets thingie was just gay
|
Why was it 'just gay'? It's pretty brilliant if it means you only have to organise officers for two weeks. Most other alliances are already knackered! As for planet naps, surely you find that out AFTER having attacked the alliance.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:03
|
#110
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by bwtmc
Why was it 'just gay'? It's pretty brilliant if it means you only have to organise officers for two weeks. Most other alliances are already knackered! As for planet naps, surely you find that out AFTER having attacked the alliance.
|
i didnt have any naps and never will cos its just selfish morons who accept them
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:07
|
#111
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 260
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by robban1
i didnt have any naps and never will cos its just selfish morons who accept them
|
><(((*>
YHBT. YHL. HAND.
__________________
(XelNaga) Everybody please vote for Planetarion at http://www.mpogd.com !!!! We are second, we have to get first place back!
(SethMace) omg 2nd!!!
(SethMace) we must block with 3rd to take them down!!!11
(Marneus) also the damn thing aint always right 4 + 79 = i type 81 and it kicked me back to the login again grrr
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:16
|
#112
|
thinking, that's all.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
I have to admit that means less to me than what robban said.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:19
|
#113
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by XelNaga
><(((*>
YHBT. YHL. HAND.
|
I hereby invoke clause 11 and request a translation.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:27
|
#114
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 260
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by JonnyBGood
I hereby invoke clause 11 and request a translation.
|
I gave him a fish because he was trolling.
Thus trolling him myself in return.
You have been trolled. You have lost. Have a nice day.
__________________
(XelNaga) Everybody please vote for Planetarion at http://www.mpogd.com !!!! We are second, we have to get first place back!
(SethMace) omg 2nd!!!
(SethMace) we must block with 3rd to take them down!!!11
(Marneus) also the damn thing aint always right 4 + 79 = i type 81 and it kicked me back to the login again grrr
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:28
|
#115
|
.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,382
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by robban1
i didnt have any naps and never will cos its just selfish morons who accept them
|
this is the single best post you've made ever
edit: though it does depend on the context too
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:30
|
#116
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by XelNaga
I gave him a fish because he was trolling.
Thus trolling him myself in return.
You have been trolled. You have lost. Have a nice day.
|
that one only you and your imagimary friend called frank knowed it seemed
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:32
|
#117
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 260
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by robban1
that one only you and your imagimary friend called frank knowed it seemed
|
And the biggest encyclopedia of the world.
__________________
(XelNaga) Everybody please vote for Planetarion at http://www.mpogd.com !!!! We are second, we have to get first place back!
(SethMace) omg 2nd!!!
(SethMace) we must block with 3rd to take them down!!!11
(Marneus) also the damn thing aint always right 4 + 79 = i type 81 and it kicked me back to the login again grrr
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:34
|
#118
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
We're at a stage where 1up can be beaten. The round ends in just over two weeks, which is plenty of time to take them down. However, this would require the formation of a real block, one that works together and doesn't backstab..
|
Considering the way have Omen have played, I think quite a few alliances will be pretty content to let them hang and play for second, as I'm sure it's a tough choice between "help Omen get first" and "get the best rank which is second".
On a personal level, I'd let Omen go down purely for serving up this crock of shite.
__________________
"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."
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:34
|
#119
|
.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,382
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
are we talking about the same post here? the one where he said planet napping is for selfish people? what? where's the troll in that? more often than not, that's completely true
edit: by the way wikipedia is pretty shit, especially of late
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:42
|
#120
|
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hude
Behind who?
|
Omen, originally. Why else would they have encouraged buddypacks and a nap with Omen?
__________________
Ią! Ią! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:47
|
#121
|
hirr
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 187
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by lokken
Considering the way have Omen have played, I think quite a few alliances will be pretty content to let them hang and play for second, as I'm sure it's a tough choice between "help Omen get first" and "get the best rank which is second".
On a personal level, I'd let Omen go down purely for serving up this crock of shite.
|
You lost me there, Lokken. What do you have in mind when you refer to the way Omen has played?
Xeno
__________________
Cogito ergo dumb
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:49
|
#122
|
self-entitledly superior
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 341
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
Omen, originally. Why else would they have encouraged buddypacks and a nap with Omen?
|
And how exactly is that settling for 2nd behind Omen when the round is still open before the tickstart?
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:54
|
#123
|
Up The Hatters!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic_Sid
I suspect you missed "the lite shines brite on 1up today" out of your post.
As 1up never had any planet naps until yesterday, I'm slightly puzzled as to how these could been what kept us alive so far. Other than that, your logic and debating skills are as impeccable as ever.
|
I will like to encourage all alliances to say to their members to refuse planetnaps with 1up or any other alliance for that matter. Planetnaps is an insult to the alliance hc the member who agrees to a planetnap is in. By having a planetnap to an alliance, you technically tell your HC that you dont agree that the HC is the only one who should be handling politics for your alliance. If an alliance wants a nap with another alliance the HC of that alliance should approach an alliance hc, not a random member.
__________________
Planetarion veteran
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:56
|
#124
|
BlueTuba
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,339
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by XelNaga
|
He isn't trolling. He has made one stupid post, which wasn't against the rules. When he accused Sid of lying, Sid pointed out it was understandable that he could have that point of view. Infact in the mother of all ironies, you're the one breaking the rules for accusing him of trolling. So quit it. If you want to argue you can send me an in forum whine to my pm box.
Quote:
You lost me there, Lokken. What do you have in mind when you refer to the way Omen has played?
|
They've pretty much let the game stop altogether politically, upset most of the smaller alliances, then when they see a threat try and get other people to do their work for them by playing the 'OMG 1up card', get told it's not going to work until they make the first move and take some damage themselves because they have a lead, then make the choice of doing nothing and have pretty much sealed their own fate.
Really, if you aren't being given a chance to win yourself, no one cares whether Omen or 1up wins.
__________________
"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."
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 11:57
|
#125
|
CRASHING BEATS 'N FANTASY
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cold Country.
Posts: 1,912
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hude
And how exactly is that settling for 2nd behind Omen when the round is still open before the tickstart?
|
Just do the maths. No need to look for a possibly strong partner if they'd have enough self-esteem to achieve number one by themselves; also consider that Kjeldoran is their HC - how in the world could they try to get number one alliance spot with such a bad starting ground?
__________________
Ią! Ią! Munin F'tagn! - [*scendancy]
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:02
|
#126
|
self-entitledly superior
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 341
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
Just do the maths. No need to look for a possibly strong partner if they'd have enough self-esteem to achieve number one by themselves; also consider that Kjeldoran is their HC - how in the world could they try to get number one alliance spot with such a bad starting ground?
|
Hard to argue against that one
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:05
|
#127
|
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
Planetnaps is an insult to the alliance hc the member who agrees to a planetnap is in. By having a planetnap to an alliance, you technically tell your HC that you dont agree that the HC is the only one who should be handling politics for your alliance. If an alliance wants a nap with another alliance the HC of that alliance should approach an alliance hc, not a random member.
|
Unless you're in Ascendancy, in which case we can't be bothered to make NAPs for you. Do it yourself you lazy bum.
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:09
|
#128
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned
Unless you're in Ascendancy, in which case we can't be bothered to make NAPs for you. Do it yourself you lazy bum.
|
I'm sure we put zhil in charge of politics this round dear.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:13
|
#129
|
thinking, that's all.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
By having a planetnap to an alliance, you technically tell your HC that you dont agree that the HC is the only one who should be handling politics for your alliance. If an alliance wants a nap with another alliance the HC of that alliance should approach an alliance hc, not a random member.
|
'Random members' are the alliance not the people that try to organise them.
You know what, (especially this round) dIsagreeing with your HC can be a good thing.
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:15
|
#130
|
InSomniac
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 1,473
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by furball
Omen. Insomnia. NewDawn. By working together and BCing attacks at a high level, you could quite possibly grind 1up into the dust and still have a few days left to scrap amongst yourselves. But I don't believe any of you have it in you. You've not shown the willingness to go for 1up, despite knowing that this would happen a long time ago. You've got no balls.
|
you werent in the meeting, you dont know what was said, you dont know who was willing to go for 1up, and at what stage, and who wasnt. So unless you were a fly on the wall during that meeting then clearly you dont have an insight into what went on. Please dont say we have no balls without knowing the full story.
come see me on irc and i will show you the logs of both meetings held (1st was omen/ND/InS/Angels....2nd was Angels/Insomnia/Omen)
__________________
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....
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:40
|
#131
|
thinking, that's all.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 867
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Meeting logs might demonstrate you had some willingness, it doesn't change the fact that collectively you didn't do anything though (which is his point by the way, he doesn't give a shit about willingness).
__________________
[1up], Ascendancy Events Organiser & eXilition HC
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:41
|
#132
|
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: ******
Posts: 2,326
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mek
you werent in the meeting, you dont know what was said, you dont know who was willing to go for 1up, and at what stage, and who wasnt. So unless you were a fly on the wall during that meeting then clearly you dont have an insight into what went on. Please dont say we have no balls without knowing the full story.
come see me on irc and i will show you the logs of both meetings held (1st was omen/ND/InS/Angels....2nd was Angels/Insomnia/Omen)
|
I'm very amused that you need some sort of meeting to decide on things. I thought this is a war game, not a bureaucracy game
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:42
|
#133
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned
I'm very amused that you need some sort of meeting to decide on things. I thought this is a war game, not a bureaucracy game
|
The sub-committee in charge of deciding when to have meetings thought it'd be a good idea you see.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:42
|
#134
|
Up The Hatters!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Kenilworth Road
Posts: 3,012
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned
I'm very amused that you need some sort of meeting to decide on things. I thought this is a war game, not a bureaucracy game
|
I think its called a summit. Like the jalta meeting etc..
__________________
Planetarion veteran
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 12:45
|
#135
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kargool
I think its called a summit.
|
More like a new low am I right I think I am I really do.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 13:21
|
#136
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 537
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned
I'm very amused that you need some sort of meeting to decide on things. I thought this is a war game, not a bureaucracy game
|
Yeah, that thought occured to me. Given that we were never hugely bigger than Omen and had planets out of tag I'm not sure which amuses me the most:
That they needed 4 alliances to even have a meeting about it
or
That even then they couldn't agree to attack us.
My experience of wars is generally that I have a PM with one HC from the other alliance. One of us says "fancy hitting alliance X?" other says "Let me check with my HC" then 5 minutes later 2nd one says "OK, when do we start."
Meetings are for less important things like naps - or for when you don't want a war but want someone else to think that you do. If one person can't speak for an alliance, then I'm not too happy with the prospect of working with them anyway.
__________________
Synthetic Sid
[1up]
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 13:24
|
#137
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
Omen, originally. Why else would they have encouraged buddypacks and a nap with Omen?
|
Once upon a day, I looked into my glass ball and forsaw Omen to win r17 (because I have the gift to know before the round who will win it). Then the sudden urge aroze to share bp's with them and to nap them, to make sure we'd settle for #2.
Heartless, as usual you make the most sence of everyone here.
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 13:27
|
#138
|
Angels for life !
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,269
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heartless
Just do the maths. No need to look for a possibly strong partner if they'd have enough self-esteem to achieve number one by themselves; also consider that Kjeldoran is their HC - how in the world could they try to get number one alliance spot with such a bad starting ground?
|
yes correct, every Angel member is an idiot to not know this and each night I laugh at them for not realizing how shit I am.
But you're correct though, I've been more then useless this round (no sarcasm here)
__________________
Former Angels CEO/HC - retired! as of round 16.
FAnG Founder | CEO/HC | Ex Gaming Community Senate
Furious Angels Gaming community
FA Gaming community
No need for a disclaimer ...
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 13:54
|
#139
|
hirr
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 187
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by lokken
Really, if you aren't being given a chance to win yourself, no one cares whether Omen or 1up wins.
|
Thank you for elaborating. But I think you're wrong when it comes to people not caring if they themselves can't claim the throne. Remember hirr?
Xeno
__________________
Cogito ergo dumb
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 13:55
|
#140
|
Old Timer
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Your sisters panties
Posts: 201
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Im sure this will go on for a while with various bitching about 1up, but the bottomline is you saw this coming for weeks, You did nothing but cry, so if you dont like the current situation, you have only yourself to blame.
/thread
__________________
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
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 14:09
|
#141
|
NewDawn
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Stavanger, Norway
Posts: 468
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hude
By the 210+ incoming fleets on Omen in the last 7-8 ticks I would say certain alliances want to play for 2nd. Again.
|
I think im right Omen is also playing for second..
If i remember correctly you guys wasnt gonna launch at 1up, unless we did it 6 ticks before you.
Why would such nice guys as us flak for you? What is in it for us? Surely we would be retalled even before you started to hit em.
Instead of actually doing something you guys buggered off and did nothing, even tho you knew about it.
__________________
Proud to be Newdawn
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 14:13
|
#142
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteInMetz
If i remember correctly you guys wasnt gonna launch at 1up, unless we did it 6 ticks before you.
|
Say it isn't so :(((
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 14:32
|
#143
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
its not true
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 14:41
|
#144
|
Come Closer, I Have Candy
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Vast Regions of Space Without a Lifejacket
Posts: 213
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Honestly, I think this thread is focusing on the wrong thing, I mean, I dont think you should be pointing fingers at who did or didnt do what, I think you should be thinking about what should be done if you dont want 1up to win this round.
Like furball said, theres still time in the round.
But hey, what do I know.
__________________
MetallicAnomaly
[ROCK] || Conspiracy Theory || Ascendancy
Rounds Played: 3-9 16-19 23-33
I became insane, with long intervals of horrible sanity.
- Edgar Allan Poe
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 14:41
|
#145
|
Retired
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 702
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
I dont know why, but it look like no one really had the gutts to hit 1up, when it was known fact for a while that they would take #1.
Most surprising is omen could have hit them for a while and secure themselves a #1 spot, but they didnt do this, instead other alliances wanted to take on 1up and fight their war.
After a while that all the top10 alliances hit each others withtout really hitting the Real #1 alliance, 1up took the #1 spot and now everyone cry again.
Guys, you been concentrating on the wrong ennemy. Now its would be normal if 1up and ND would hit omen, because 1up want to be #1, and ND would settle happily for #2 and i think they would do it more happily behind 1up than behind omen (plus lets face it, if no one really wanted to hit 1up all round, why should it start now?).
So its game over, and you guys predicted it really nice from the begining, no one can really say "oh my god we didnt know, theses cheating bastards!"
You knew, you were blind or rather stupid, now eat your own dish.
ps: This is including Angels, why the **** would you want to fight 1up when its not actually your war, and omen should doing this given the situation. Why would you participate in such meeting? because you wanted omen to end #1? Did you give up on #1 from tick72?
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 14:45
|
#146
|
Black Power MotherF*ckas!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: JAPAN
Posts: 1,812
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Funny how PA evolves. Ascendancy hides a few members 1 round, then the next round another alliance copies it.
Whats ironic is that people are surprised.
__________________
Ascendancy
When Doves Cry
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 14:48
|
#147
|
self-entitledly superior
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 341
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteInMetz
I think im right Omen is also playing for second..
If i remember correctly you guys wasnt gonna launch at 1up, unless we did it 6 ticks before you.
Why would such nice guys as us flak for you? What is in it for us? Surely we would be retalled even before you started to hit em.
Instead of actually doing something you guys buggered off and did nothing, even tho you knew about it.
|
I'm just a peon in Omen so I wouldn't know
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 14:49
|
#148
|
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Further to the right
Posts: 19,441
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chika
Funny how PA evolves. Ascendancy hides a few members 1 round, then the next round another alliance copies it.
Whats ironic is that people are surprised.
|
People are more surprised that nobody, especially omen it seems, didn't do anything about it rather than that 1up actually had members out of tag.
__________________
Some might ask what good is life without purpose but I'm anticipating a good lunch.
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 14:50
|
#149
|
self-entitledly superior
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 341
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chika
Whats ironic is that people are surprised.
|
They are?
|
|
|
24 May 2006, 15:04
|
#150
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 846
|
Re: 1up's not-ingame members
im not suprised at all of the stupidity of the pa player
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:53.
| |