Round 13 predictions

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by Squidly

Despite the fact that zo0f is quite blatantly ignoring the accusations against HR, I have to say that I never once that whole round ever sit in an attack channel or have an attack coordination conversation with anyone significantly not-ND. I do remember one guy who I think was wp and a mate of duck or something, but I think he was the only one =/

But, zo0f is right despite all that. I can name at least 5 channels where you could find a few 1up, some ND, and maybe a few NoS all wanting to bash (verbally) hr/lch/vsn/etc:

#newdawn, #nos, #lch, #vsn, #wp


You should either get your eyesight, or your imagination checked out zo0f ... =/

I think its you who needs your eyes checked out Squid. As i clearly stated, HR are not claiming they had no military co-operation with anyone*, ND are. Good effort at an entirely useless post though.

* As stated above HR worked closely with Insomnia after ND and NoS both attacked us together.

** If your actually stupid enough to continue the HR/LCH thing that is your problem, it is widely known that there was no co-operation between HR and LCH.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by aNgRyDuCk

naaa, I'm saying this, in r12 LCH and 1up did better than ND, and the rest of em didn't.... I've been around since round 1, seen a lot of good command structures, been involved in a few as well, and this one, is pretty good. We have great communication between each other, and our membership, and we've got people who aren't afraid to pull the trigger, not slamming anyone else

This Command took a group of hellraisers to #3, it didn't have the neverending activity of a 1up to do so, that's sayin something, and we're proud of that. A lot of good commanders, or at least people with good command tools, some not so good. Certainly not trying to get into a pissing match over it, just making a point

And my point was that ending #3rd doesn't mean you were the 3rd best alliance (it would be if all alliances had the same amount of members to play with). You are however the 3rd best alliance in YOUR range of alliances with equal membersize.

Not to be gloating, but my alliance Angels only had 35 members and therefor I don't think ND played a better round just because it ended #3 (with 250% more members).

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

I idd agree and tried to tell others so many times, not blocking would have been the best option imo and I'm glad I'm not the only one looking at it that way. Infact most non 1up/ND posters so far think ND didn't take the right decision.

How do you think the round would have developed if ND had stayed neutral? So far I have only seen ppl who claim ND did the right thing actually build up their arguments with different scenarios to show why they think so. You only state that you disagree without stating how you think the round would progress better for ND if they stayed neutral. At least if they blocked with LCH and the gang against 1up they would have a chance for #2 but never any chance of winning.

Imo anything would be better then staying neutral.

[Zo0f]

** Congratulations, Newdawn HC win the 'contradicting yourself on AD award 2005' **

--

Originally Posted by aNgRyDuCk

Ok, gonna clear something up here. ND/1up NAP'd, nothing else.....

Originally Posted by SteInMetz

In some occasions we cooperated millitary with 1up yes.....

--

--

Originally Posted by The_Fish

NewDawn and NoS had a nap......

Originally Posted by aNgRyDuCk

NoS participated in 1 attack with ND........

--

I presume you understand what a NAP is, therefore you will realise any participation outside of not attacking each other, for example any attack cordination, exceeds a NAP.

Im not saying what you did was wrong or evil. It was your attempt at winning the round. My problem comes from you trying to hide your actions by lieing on AD. In the end, you have nothing to be ashamed of, so I have no idea why you feel the need to lie.

[aNgRyDuCk]

cooperation is not an alliance, or a block....we went on 1 joint attack wiuth NoS, and we were NAP'd, no block there..... we fleet caught a few ppl with 1up, again, not a block or an alliance, just NAP'd...no contradiction

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by aNgRyDuCk

cooperation is not an alliance, or a block....we went on 1 joint attack wiuth NoS, and we were NAP'd, no block there..... we fleet caught a few ppl with 1up, again, not a block or an alliance, just NAP'd...no contradiction

Right, I understand now. While most people have NAPs, Allies, temporary NAPs/Allies. ND just have NAPs and 'cooperation'. Its good we got that sorted out.

On a more serious note. So NAPs (non aggression pacts) now include military co-operation do they? No they dont. Wether temporary or not the co-operation Newdawn had with 1up and NoS exceeded a NAP on occasion. That is a fact.

* That one joint attack with NoS lasted several days, part of a large assault on HR.

** A Newdawn HC has told me of several times where ND had chosen targets to benefit 1up, and visa versa.

As i said before, you have nothing to be ashamed of so there is no reason to lie. Other than not wanting to admit you lied in the first place. It takes a big man to admit mistakes.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Treveler

How do you think the round would have developed if ND had stayed neutral? So far I have only seen ppl who claim ND did the right thing actually build up their arguments with different scenarios to show why they think so. You only state that you disagree without stating how you think the round would progress better for ND if they stayed neutral. At least if they blocked with LCH and the gang against 1up they would have a chance for #2 but never any chance of winning.

Imo anything would be better then staying neutral.

I talked at length with Kjeldoran about this the other day.

His only other workable scenario is that ND stayed neutral whlie every other alliance in the game hit 1up. This is obviously never ever going to happen and ND would have got 1up incoming on top of anything they were already getting.

On a side note I also think it worth noting that Kjeldoran, in PM, also admitted that he would've done exactly the same as ND did in the same position.

All his posturing is on the basis of people admitting that, theoretically, there were other outcomes possible if ND hadn't stayed pro 1up. What this fails to take into account is it relies upon a stupid number of what-ifs and possiblies. As we all know, if we have our alliances best interests at heart, a HC will follow the route that is more likely to give a better outcome rather than the one that requires an enourmous number of variables to go 'the right way'.

What Kjeldoran is also incapable of seeing is that there is no other way ND could possibly have finished at the top of the rankings, he disputes this, yet so far hasn't come up with another workable solution that would put ND at #1.

So for all you boring boring bastards out there still banging on about ND napping/allying/whatever acept that it was the only logical decision they could've made if they'd wanted to get to the top spot. In the same position Sid and myself would have made the same choices for 1up.

So can we now let this thread die.

[aNgRyDuCk]

Originally Posted by Zo0f

Right, I understand now. While most people have NAPs, Allies, temporary NAPs/Allies. ND just have NAPs and 'cooperation'. Its good we got that sorted out.

On a more serious note. So NAPs (non aggression pacts) now include military co-operation do they? No they dont. Wether temporary or not the co-operation Newdawn had with 1up and NoS exceeded a NAP on occasion. That is a fact.

* That one joint attack with NoS lasted several days, part of a large assault on HR.

** A Newdawn HC has told me of several times where ND had chosen targets to benefit 1up, and visa versa.

As i said before, you have nothing to be ashamed of so there is no reason to lie. Other than not wanting to admit you lied in the first place. It takes a big man to admit mistakes.

yes, if we chose to take a night out of the round and hit someone, and other alliances want to take part, that's limited cooperation, nothing more, it doesn't mean your now allied, or blocked, don't know how I can make that any clearer.....

We chose targets to benefit ND, if those targets benefit 1up as well, no big deal

the joint attack with Nos, was a 1 wave attack on 15 HR planets, I know because I planned the attack...it was not over a period of days. NoS attacked with us, against HR, 1 time, 1 day, in a 1 wave attack,....hardly a big deal

[Zo0f]

In an attempt to save the thread ill refrain from replying anymore. My point is clear to see for anyone who reads my posts.

Back to the topic, I predict:

1up will win
jerome` will post lots of propoganda
I will steal at least 1 roid from Marinho
I will beat The_Fish at some sort of bet, to win back a PA credit.
Henck will make a post on AD that makes very little sense.
Thats about it

[Dreadnought FTW]

and you will lose at NS :|

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought FTW

and you will lose at NS :|

Not to you though

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

I talked at length with Kjeldoran about this the other day.

His only other workable scenario is that ND stayed neutral whlie every other alliance in the game hit 1up. This is obviously never ever going to happen and ND would have got 1up incoming on top of anything they were already getting.

On a side note I also think it worth noting that Kjeldoran, in PM, also admitted that he would've done exactly the same as ND did in the same position.

All his posturing is on the basis of people admitting that, theoretically, there were other outcomes possible if ND hadn't stayed pro 1up. What this fails to take into account is it relies upon a stupid number of what-ifs and possiblies. As we all know, if we have our alliances best interests at heart, a HC will follow the route that is more likely to give a better outcome rather than the one that requires an enourmous number of variables to go 'the right way'.

What Kjeldoran is also incapable of seeing is that there is no other way ND could possibly have finished at the top of the rankings, he disputes this, yet so far hasn't come up with another workable solution that would put ND at #1.

So for all you boring boring bastards out there still banging on about ND napping/allying/whatever acept that it was the only logical decision they could've made if they'd wanted to get to the top spot. In the same position Sid and myself would have made the same choices for 1up.

So can we now let this thread die.

Could you please mail me (so not post it on AD) the part in PM where exactly I said I'd have done the same? Because clearly you'd have miss-interpreted me. What I did say however is that IF I was HC of ND, I'd have done the same. As HC of my OWN alliance I'd have done it differently.

Could you next time add the FULL part and not ripp 1 piece out of the context.

And yes, my opinion is based on what if's. ALL after round possible scenario's are based on "what if", even the one where ND would ally LCH and end #2 (that is ALSO based on a "what if").

I agree it's pointless to keep discussing about this.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

What I did say however is that IF I was HC of ND, I'd have done the same.

I think you'll find thats pretty much what I said. This has nothing to do with Angels so if you could kindly leave them out of the conversation for once.

Also, if you admit that if you were ND HC in exactly the same position you would do the same thing, how can you tell them they didn't do the right thing?

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

And yes, my opinion is based on what if's. ALL after round possible scenario's are based on "what if", even the one where ND would ally LCH and end #2 (that is ALSO based on a "what if").

I wasn't talking about what-ifs in the past tense, I was talking about the massive number of possible outcomes if ND had stayed neutral Vs the much fewer outcomes if they had gone pro 1up. Any HC worth their salt would take the option with the greater chance of success. This is what ND did and what they should do if they had the same decision again.

And you still haven't given me a single other outcome whereby ND could have finished #1.

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Could you please mail me (so not post it on AD) the part in PM where exactly I said I'd have done the same? Because clearly you'd have miss-interpreted me. What I did say however is that IF I was HC of ND, I'd have done the same. As HC of my OWN alliance I'd have done it differently.

Could you next time add the FULL part and not ripp 1 piece out of the context.

And yes, my opinion is based on what if's. ALL after round possible scenario's are based on "what if", even the one where ND would ally LCH and end #2 (that is ALSO based on a "what if")

You still fail to share with us a workable solution to how ND could end #1 without allying 1up. And yes its all based on "what if`s" but some scenarios are more likely then others. If you think its likely that ND could walk in the backdoor to #1 by staying neutral while the rest of the universe blindly hit eachother then thats a fair assumption. Its up to the rest of us to deside if we find that scenario likely or not.

[Gerbie]

In can think of scenario's of how ND might have gotten #1. The problem is that they did not deserve it and should not even have tried.

In general it's sad to block with the strongest alliance. If we want to have a fluid game without big blocks then people should learn not to build big blocks with the strongest alliance to get lifted to a good position. Alliances should win on their own strength. 1up deserved the win because they were the best.

I think it is acceptable to team up on whoever is the #1 alliance at that moment to keep the fight going. But ofcourse there is no reason to continue that till the very end of a round.

Some people will draw the conclusion that 1up is willing to block to gain a victory and the only way to beat them is to build a bigger block. And aparantly it has to be bigger than the block they had this round. And since you can expect Sid to make sure he will not be outblocked he might start out making some deals beforehand...

If alliances do not restrain themselves we will all lose.

[The_Fish]

Originally Posted by Gerbie

In can think of scenario's of how ND might have gotten #1. The problem is that they did not deserve it and should not even have tried.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

That is possibly the most stupid comment I've seen on AD. Just because ND wasn't as good as LCH or 1up, we shouldn't try to win? What kind of mentality is that? You think Greece at Euro2004 shouldnt have tried to win because they arent as good as other nations? It's not a perfect analogy I know, but the point stands. You HAVE to try to win, if there is a chance of you achieving it. Otherwise we all play like LCH and we have a boring round.

[lokken]

Xanadu should have accepted that Fury were the best and never started r4 - FACT

[Seth Mace]

Originally Posted by Treveler

Imo anything would be better then staying neutral.

Why is that? R11 was the closest round we've ever seen that avoided blocks and it created a situation were an alliance finished at a rank THEY deserved to finish at, rather then a rank whose achievement was connected to that of another faction.

If ND stayed out of the 1up-LCH war, i honestly believe that war would have allowed the rest of the universe to catch up to LCH but without tipping the scales in favour of 1 body (as both 1up & LCH seemed to be stagnating each other). Maybe im wrong on this, who knows!?

We chose targets to benefit ND, if those targets benefit 1up as well, no big deal

the joint attack with Nos, was a 1 wave attack on 15 HR planets, I know because I planned the attack...it was not over a period of days. NoS attacked with us, against HR, 1 time, 1 day, in a 1 wave attack,....hardly a big deal

You missing out ToF which meant 3 alliances against 1 because you obviously felt ND couldnt take HR alone?:P

But seriously, if you honestly think the above then you are lieing through your teeth m8! 1up had good connections with SiN, who were fighting on your side and ToF were clearly helping you guys when it mattered (ie HR would get consistant incomings from ToF & Sin from the start of our war until end round)

(hehe, Ill never forget that ToF dude spamming me in PM about how HR was gonna die)

So it was not JUST a case of "NoS attack with us, against HR, 1 time", while that may have been the only time YOU organised something, it was not the last for your alliance.

But afterall this, the most amazing thing, was how NDers took part in the moral high ground of flames towards the LCH et al block for their ev1l cooperation. When from my pov, it was their alliances who were the guilty party.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Gerbie

In can think of scenario's of how ND might have gotten #1. The problem is that they did not deserve it and should not even have tried.

Enlighten us please.

I've seen a bunch of people say this but no-one come up with an actual working scenario.

[The_Fish]

Seth - the only 'moral highground' ND took was against the way LCH decided they weren't going to fight 1up for the #1 spot, they were going to make sure ND wouldn't win, even though it meant LCH wouldn't win either. ND's co-operation with other alliances was, at best, limited.

NewDawn didn't take any easy roads, we fought against the LCH block as hard as we possibly could have, and we have nothing to be ashamed of.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

Why is that? R11 was the closest round we've ever seen that avoided blocks and it created a situation were an alliance finished at a rank THEY deserved to finish at, rather then a rank whose achievement was connected to that of another faction.

If ND stayed out of the 1up-LCH war, i honestly believe that war would have allowed the rest of the universe to catch up to LCH but without tipping the scales in favour of 1 body (as both 1up & LCH seemed to be stagnating each other). Maybe im wrong on this, who knows!?

Lets look over it again. ND sees a situation where LCH are winning by a fair margin, 1up on the rise but catching, slowly - LCH have a lead which on the face they can things they could hold for a long time if they chose. At this time ND sees an opportunity, a universe that has a fair bit of beef for 1up, while having to think about LCH. LCH at this time are targeting them, 1up less so. Hence an agreement with an 1up is a prudent solution, as not only do they reduce incoming, they have more scope to focus on the real problem of r12, while at the same time that if they are successful, they have an ally that logically would get a lot of incs if it ever to rose to #1 because it was so unpopular, giving ND an opportunity to reach the #1 spot.

1up's welfare was of no concern to us - if people are annoyed that we stuck with the 1up too long, well they shouldn't have targeted us in the first place and given us nothing to lose as either by keeping or dropping the agreement, we'd be attacked by your bunch in any case. Why add to our incomings when we don't have to?

On the logic that 1up and ND were more than NAP'd because we targeted the same alliances, we can call LCH and HR allied - it's a non-sensical argument - mutual interest shouldn't prevent targeting of the same alliance just because some alliance might see it as 'more than a NAP'. Even so if alliances have mutual interest, what's wrong with anyone cooperating, it's in everyone's interest to be more efficient. Flaming alliances for trying to be more efficient is a ridiculous notion, so on either premise I can't see any rational line of thinking.

[Seth Mace]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Seth - the only 'moral highground' ND took was against the way LCH decided they weren't going to fight 1up for the #1 spot, they were going to make sure ND wouldn't win, even though it meant LCH wouldn't win either. ND's co-operation with other alliances was, at best, limited.

Thats not the point tho, the point is that ND were involved in a movement that tipped the scales to favour 1up BEFORE LCh started hitting ND "full scale", as has been documented on these boards so often.

Before ND helped 1up, the war was even and every ally (inc HR who had more incomings from LCH then ANY other alliance - including when we were at war with ND), had just as much chance of getting incomings from 1up/ LCH.

[Seth Mace]

Lokken, I dont see why you needed to reply like you did, with the post i made? I was just saying i felt there was no need for ND to get involved in the 1up-LCH war because it was productive for the rest of the uni (inc ND), to let the two allies fight it out while the rest of us caught up.

Originally Posted by lokken

if people are annoyed that we stuck with the 1up too long, well they shouldn't have targeted us in the first place

This is like the chicken and egg thing aint it Can you not accept ND played the first major political move and that is why so many alliances took to your roids? The reason you stuck with 1up AT ALL, is the reason alliances hit you!

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

Lokken, I dont see why you needed to reply like you did, with the post i made? I was just saying i felt there was no need for ND to get involved in the 1up-LCH war because it was productive for the rest of the uni (inc ND), to let the two allies fight it out while the rest of us caught up.



This is like the chicken and egg thing aint it Can you not accept ND played the first major political move and that is why so many alliances took to your roids? The reason you stuck with 1up AT ALL, is the reason alliances hit you!

They had taken to them before we made such an agreement and it was a choice being LCH's punchbag or having a chance of winning. Tough choice innit - LCH's top planets don't hit 1up, so they have to hit elsewhere, so we have to do something about this and they were our main problem to deal with. ND made the first 'political' move if you want to work in a formal sense, because we needed to be more effective in taking on the LCH planets hitting us, as they were more of a problem than anything else. How this is not 'fair enough' I don't know. The other upshot of the idea was that we could win the round from there, which i've already explained.

I'd hardly say we were the biggest help to 1up winning, as we were hardly LCH's biggest problem, because we don't have 1up's attack power. This can only suggest that instead of tapping up alliances to target 1up and really taking them on - they bottled it because they let their big planets do as they please. Other alliances followed as ND were simply roids to gain, while 1up had plenty of defence to go round because LCH stopped targetting them. You can't attribute our political agreements to the major opposing force to 1up in the game bottling it. If people hate 1up that much that they'll target anyone who allies with them, 1up will keep winning, because you just free up their fleets to increase the gap, by which point they become too big to tackle because they are inherently superior to every other alliance.

Letting an alliance which houses fencesitters and bottles it when it comes to the top alliance get off scott free, while castigating an alliance for being self-interested and trying to win makes no sense.

Run alliances properly, make bold political moves and forget trying to settle old scores, then maybe you'll become more successful than 1up - fact.

[Seth Mace]

No i agree with you, ANY alliance (inc LCH) that allows fencesitters are fooked up. However you forget the build up to R13 had the whole "king makers" thing going on and as ive said before, when ND helped 1up they also stuck a pre-emptive crown on their heads and said to everybody "we are gonna get #1 so you better get us before 1up can fullfil our destiny".

Letting an alliance which houses fencesitters and bottles it when it comes to the top alliance get off scott free, while castigating an alliance for being self-interested and trying to win makes no sense.

You've answered your own question there m8, LCH clearly wasnt able to hurt 1up because of their fencesitters, so they hit the next best thing - 1ups buddys. Its as if LCh were self interested about getting their own planets easier roids and trying their out-roid tactic in trying to overtake & win the round.

Run alliances properly, make bold political moves and forget trying to settle old scores, then maybe you'll become more successful than 1up - fact.

No offense m8, but ND are just as guilty as any other alliance in holding grudges against other allies (ie againt LCH), so i aint sure how you can make such an eye-opening statement?

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

You've answered your own question there m8, LCH clearly wasnt able to hurt 1up because of their fencesitters, so they hit the next best thing - 1ups buddys. Its as if LCh were self interested about getting their own planets easier roids and trying their out-roid tactic in trying to overtake & win the round.

And if ND hadn't done that - where would LCH have gone then?

[Sonnenbomber]

hrhr. sounds like flaming here. could become an interesting round.
anyone interested to block?
Focht, Sid, Kjeldoran guess we can manage something like that?

[Gate]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

PLZ READ WHAT I SAID DAMNIT !!! "FOR NEXT ROUND" yes mmmk?

I ONLY spoke about putting yerself in the victime role for next round as that is EXACTLY what the_fish did by assuming we'd all block to take out ND ...

I was trying to cover the same argument too, using this round as an example
The part;;
'This round was a huge ego boost as ND policy at critical points actually decided who would win the round, but it also proved that the HCs of other alliances are easily driven by base emotions (the whole 'NewDawn are evuhl and must be PUNISHED' type thing) rather than trying to find a logical way to do better in the round.'
Was my implication that I felt that several alliances (Those who follow the LCH side of propaganda) may well continue hostilities to ND into next round, as 'revenge' for 'ruining' this round (though these arguments are pointless. I believe wholeheartedly that ND did the right thing with regards to the 1up/LCH thing in the later part of the round, and it'll take an intelligent, well informed, and well supported argument on here before I lose some of my complete confidence in this).
In the same as we saw Elysium battered into the ground in PaX.5 by the immense opposing block, and how FAnG were completely unable to take a strong challenge into round 11, from what I gathered, this was due to most of the uni hating them for blocking their way to victory and stagnating PaX.5. They may have entered the round with fewer players/weaker, but they did play PaX.5 through blocking and recruiting those who place winning above their alliance, who will typically jump when faced with a serious challenge. A pity, as Angels have shown that FAnG had a brilliantly skilled and rock solid community core...

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Enlighten us please.

I've seen a bunch of people say this but no-one come up with an actual working scenario.

I dunno about the others so I'll speak about myself here. I am not willing to post such suggestions on AD because AD is troll paradise and some pple (yes even some 1up and ND posters) will troll EVERYTHING without even bothering to read what's being said.
I've tried to explain you in pm some of my arguements etc, of which some you clearly missunderstood but that's no problem.

All I INITIALY tried to say here was that I do not think ND HC made the BEST decision. Sure not the worst either, but NOT the best. And I've made some small suggestions why I think that, if you bother to read my posts. I did not say ND sucks, did not say they don't deserve to win.

Again, I speak only for myself, so stop threating everyone the same. Because if you do then due to 2-3 pple I can easily say entire ND and 1up are troll posters (but mazz ofc heh).

Only the first paragraph was meant towards mazz, the rest is in general.

[Seth Mace]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

And if ND hadn't done that - where would LCH have gone then?

Unfortunately, no1 will ever really know but i would hazard a guess they would do their usual tactic, of targetting the most roid fat and juicy targets (regardless of alliance). That is the way of the LCh from my experience.

A more interesting question imo, is where would ND have gone?

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by Gate

I was trying to cover the same argument too, using this round as an example
The part;;
'This round was a huge ego boost as ND policy at critical points actually decided who would win the round, but it also proved that the HCs of other alliances are easily driven by base emotions (the whole 'NewDawn are evuhl and must be PUNISHED' type thing) rather than trying to find a logical way to do better in the round.'
Was my implication that I felt that several alliances (Those who follow the LCH side of propaganda) may well continue hostilities to ND into next round, as 'revenge' for 'ruining' this round (though these arguments are pointless. I believe wholeheartedly that ND did the right thing with regards to the 1up/LCH thing in the later part of the round, and it'll take an intelligent, well informed, and well supported argument on here before I lose some of my complete confidence in this).
In the same as we saw Elysium battered into the ground in PaX.5 by the immense opposing block, and how FAnG were completely unable to take a strong challenge into round 11, from what I gathered, this was due to most of the uni hating them for blocking their way to victory and stagnating PaX.5. They may have entered the round with fewer players/weaker, but they did play PaX.5 through blocking and recruiting those who place winning above their alliance. A pity, as Angels have shown that FAnG had a brilliantly skilled and rock solid community core...

heh, I'm well aware of our recruiting mercenaries history but thx to remind me about it

And yeah, I think Angels idd proved FAnG has SOME brilliant skilled core who act like 1 community.

[aNgRyDuCk]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

Why is that? R11 was the closest round we've ever seen that avoided blocks and it created a situation were an alliance finished at a rank THEY deserved to finish at, rather then a rank whose achievement was connected to that of another faction.

If ND stayed out of the 1up-LCH war, i honestly believe that war would have allowed the rest of the universe to catch up to LCH but without tipping the scales in favour of 1 body (as both 1up & LCH seemed to be stagnating each other). Maybe im wrong on this, who knows!?

are you freakin kidding me, round 11 was close? 1up won by like 4 billion points and 600 billion roids, and it wasn't the LCH-1up war, LCH chose to fight on 2 fronts, more correctly 1, vs ND, they didn't have the stones to go after 1up

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

You missing out ToF which meant 3 alliances against 1 because you obviously felt ND couldnt take HR alone?:P But seriously, if you honestly think the above then you are lieing through your teeth m8! 1up had good connections with SiN, who were fighting on your side and ToF were clearly helping you guys when it mattered (ie HR would get consistant incomings from ToF & Sin from the start of our war until end round)So it was not JUST a case of "NoS attack with us, against HR, 1 time", while that may have been the only time YOU organised something, it was not the last for your alliance.

we did take HR, and as for ToF's involvement, ya, on the 1 joint attack, they were there to... again, you and Zo0f must eat from the same cereal bowl..... 1 day attack, 15 HR planets... not like it was a global thermonuclear strike.... and maybe you were getting consistent incoming from more than ND because more than 1 alliance didn't like you, I won't presume to speak for other alliances, but that's kind of how it works

[The_Fish]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

I dunno about the others so I'll speak about myself here. I am not willing to post such suggestions on AD because AD is troll paradise and some pple (yes even some 1up and ND posters) will troll EVERYTHING without even bothering to read what's being said.
I've tried to explain you in pm some of my arguements etc, of which some you clearly missunderstood but that's no problem.

All I INITIALY tried to say here was that I do not think ND HC made the BEST decision. Sure not the worst either, but NOT the best. And I've made some small suggestions why I think that, if you bother to read my posts. I did not say ND sucks, did not say they don't deserve to win.

Again, I speak only for myself, so stop threating everyone the same. Because if you do then due to 2-3 pple I can easily say entire ND and 1up are troll posters (but mazz ofc heh).

Only the first paragraph was meant towards mazz, the rest is in general.

I absolutely hate replies like this.

You say one thing, but won't back it up.

ND didn't make the best choice, you say. Please enlighten us and tell us what ND should have done and what you think the most probable outcome of that was. If you don't want to do it here on AD, please pm me it. I'm genuinely interested to know in how ND could have bettered our 3rd place finish.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

No offense m8, but ND are just as guilty as any other alliance in holding grudges against other allies (ie againt LCH), so i aint sure how you can make such an eye-opening statement?

If LCH's fencesitters had never targetted us in the first place, we'd never have any reason to have any agreement with 1up, because they'd have been focusing on the task of taking down 1up - we wouldn't have been too bothered.

Cause and effect son.

[Seth Mace]

Originally Posted by aNgRyDuCk

are you freakin kidding me, round 11 was close? 1up won by like 4 billion points and 600 billion roids, and it wasn't the LCH-1up war, LCH chose to fight on 2 fronts, more correctly 1, vs ND, they didn't have the stones to go after 1up

Eh? I meant closest to alliances remaining solo AND in turn, the rank they finished at, equalled the rank THEY worked for alone.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

I dunno about the others so I'll speak about myself here. I am not willing to post such suggestions on AD because AD is troll paradise and some pple (yes even some 1up and ND posters) will troll EVERYTHING without even bothering to read what's being said.
I've tried to explain you in pm some of my arguements etc, of which some you clearly missunderstood but that's no problem.

Using the argument of claiming everyone else is trolling when the moderators have not deemed so is not a valid posting strategy - I've warned about your conduct in this thread, and i'm prepared to tolerate it no longer - a 24 hour ban will be winging its way to you. As much as i'm aware you get upset at certain posts, inflammatory posts are not acceptable on this forum, especially when you don't extend your argument from what you've already said.

Originally Posted by The_Fish

I absolutely hate replies like this.

You say one thing, but won't back it up.

ND didn't make the best choice, you say. Please enlighten us and tell us what ND should have done and what you think the most probable outcome of that was. If you don't want to do it here on AD, please pm me it. I'm genuinely interested to know in how ND could have bettered our 3rd place finish.

I appreciate the restraint, but you really should have reported the post to a mod, as much as such posts deserve to be condemned. I'm sure people will claim I should ban you, but i'm not sure your post warrants a ban, considering you are willing to take the argument to PM rather than continue your pointless flamewar with Kj on this forum.

Refer to: http://pirate.planetarion.com/showth...73#post2754073 and point 12, especially.

[Gate]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

A more interesting question imo, is where would ND have gone?

I'd guess the round would have stagnated, LCH would probably have won the round by miles, weeks before ticks finally stopped. Those alliances not friendly to LCH, including ND, would most likely have lost activity and wandered aimlessly, occasionally getting roided by big LCHers and barely able to mount a response due to lack of morale or feeling of involvement thus leading to lower activity..

Most likely we would have dropped slowly below HR, then probably been overtaken by VisioN, aided by having perhaps their closest ally placed on top of the pile. Then perhaps WolfPack who grew impressively throughout the round and would most likely have been able to skirt around most major conflict (though the WP led fleetcatch on cocteu was impressive and well done [pld NitinA!], it was the first time I'd noticed WP doing something major outside of a few multi-wave retals on ND). So I predict ND would probably have finished 5th or 6th, depending on whether 1up were just held back, or fell heavily under the LCH/VisioN/Mistu/HR/etc incs.

[StDomingo]

Originally Posted by Gate

I'd guess the round would have stagnated, LCH would probably have won the round by miles, weeks before ticks finally stopped. Those alliances not friendly to LCH, including ND, would most likely have lost activity and wandered aimlessly, occasionally getting roided by big LCHers and barely able to mount a response due to lack of morale or feeling of involvement thus leading to lower activity..

Most likely we would have dropped slowly below HR, then probably been overtaken by VisioN, aided by having perhaps their closest ally placed on top of the pile. Then perhaps WolfPack who grew impressively throughout the round and would most likely have been able to skirt around most major conflict (though the WP led fleetcatch on cocteu was impressive and well done [pld NitinA!], it was the first time I'd noticed WP doing something major outside of a few multi-wave retals on ND). So I predict ND would probably have finished 5th or 6th, depending on whether 1up were just held back, or fell heavily under the LCH/VisioN/Mistu/HR/etc incs.

Answer me this would you please. Would you attack an alliance which you had a NAP with? Would you feast upon their roids and take pleasure in seeing them lose them? I guess your answer would be the same as mine then: NO. So, why did Vision attack LCH then? Simple innit? We had no NAP with them in the beginning of the round.

As the round progressed and 1up gained on LCH, it was clear to see that LCH would not be able to keep the #1 spot for the remainder of the round. At this stage VisioN decieded to target 1up/ND instead of LCH, as LCH had incs from a number of alliances (including a few of their so called "friends").

[Goodfellah]

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

You missing out ToF which meant 3 alliances against 1 because you obviously felt ND couldnt take HR alone?:P

But seriously, if you honestly think the above then you are lieing through your teeth m8! 1up had good connections with SiN, who were fighting on your side and ToF were clearly helping you guys when it mattered (ie HR would get consistant incomings from ToF & Sin from the start of our war until end round)
]
(hehe, Ill never forget that ToF dude spamming me in PM about how HR was gonna die)

So it was not JUST a case of "NoS attack with us, against HR, 1 time", while that may have been the only time YOU organised something, it was not the last for your alliance.

But afterall this, the most amazing thing, was how NDers took part in the moral high ground of flames towards the LCH et al block for their ev1l cooperation. When from my pov, it was their alliances who were the guilty party.

we have joined in on 1 attack on HR, other wise we just choose are attacks on our own. and as for the guy spamming u, plz give me his irc nick so i can beat the living shit out of him.

[Shev]

Originally Posted by The_Fish

Seth - the only 'moral highground' ND took was against the way LCH decided they weren't going to fight 1up for the #1 spot, they were going to make sure ND wouldn't win, even though it meant LCH wouldn't win either. ND's co-operation with other alliances was, at best, limited.

NewDawn didn't take any easy roads, we fought against the LCH block as hard as we possibly could have, and we have nothing to be ashamed of.

Not quite true there. ND also decided to take a very vocal stance agains't alliances not attacking the #1 - LCH at the time. The point of several posts throughout this thread - each time ignored - is that this makes their posters fairly hypocritical, despite the fact that they made the best choice of the political moves available to them once LCH decided to concentrate on them.

[Gerbie]

When LCH was still in the lead I was a member of VGN. We focussed on LCH with several other alliances. One after the other these other alliances were forced to stop hitting LCH because they got heavy incomming from other alliances (including ND). VGN remained hostile to LCH even after 1up had passed LCH in the rankings. Dunno if that remained till the end of the round because I left after that.

When returning to possible scenario's: there were plenty of alliances that hated both 1up and LCH. This would open up several possibilities for ND to form a temporary co-operation that could beat both. The simple fact that ND was avoiding 1up (later NAPed them) meant they got hostile to the alliances they would need most if they wanted to win the round.

[LocknLoad]

I thought we had forum moderators here? Cant you see that the last 3 (maybe even more) pages have nothing to do with round 13 predictions.

[Shev]

Originally Posted by LocknLoad

I thought we had forum moderators here? Cant you see that the last 3 (maybe even more) pages have nothing to do with round 13 predictions.

Yes, but the original topic proved to be a catalyst for a fairly sensible discussion in places. Which is what this forum is supposed to be all about really.

[jerome]

All this thread has done is escalate the anti-ND/1up sentiments within the HR, LCH & rest camp and carve the 'sidings' further in stone hence delay or cast off some of the rather successful fluid politics seen of recent in PA to appear oncemore in the next round(s?). Then again, the imposation of Ministry & ToT in the scenario does spice things up a tad.

[Envious]

actually i seem to see more justification from ND in this thread than anything else, must get the impression they think they have something to justify. may be my own short sight ofc.

[jerome]

Probably due to the amount of posters trying to hound them.

[Zo0f]

Originally Posted by _ryzekiel_

All this thread has done is escalate the anti-ND/1up sentiments within the HR, LCH & rest camp and carve the 'sidings' further in stone hence delay or cast off some of the rather successful fluid politics seen of recent in PA to appear oncemore in the next round(s?). Then again, the imposation of Ministry & ToT in the scenario does spice things up a tad.

You should (but sadly dont) know better than to talk such rubbish jerome`. Unless you want to say between the 1up camp and LCH camp. As that is closer to reality. With HR in the middle getting hastle from everyone, inc me.

P.S. Do you seriously not get bored of posting your one-sided bias drivvel?

P.S.S Invite me to homax channel on NG

[jerome]

HR-ND whine
LCH-1up whine
etc

same difference, everyone sucks :|

PS I do get bored, I don't think I've posted on AD for a few days before now.

(invite on the way btw)

[Gate]

Originally Posted by Envious

actually i seem to see more justification from ND in this thread than anything else, must get the impression they think they have something to justify. may be my own short sight ofc.

As opposed to people giving no justification whatsoever?

ND are perfectly confident that we have justification for what we've done 'wrong'.

[Gate]

Originally Posted by StDomingo

Answer me this would you please. Would you attack an alliance which you had a NAP with? Would you feast upon their roids and take pleasure in seeing them lose them? I guess your answer would be the same as mine then: NO. So, why did Vision attack LCH then? Simple innit? We had no NAP with them in the beginning of the round.

As the round progressed and 1up gained on LCH, it was clear to see that LCH would not be able to keep the #1 spot for the remainder of the round. At this stage VisioN decieded to target 1up/ND instead of LCH, as LCH had incs from a number of alliances (including a few of their so called "friends").

I didn't say you had a NAP at the beginning of the round

From my PoV, it looked like 1up were not going to peg back LCH on their own. LCH had been able to grow hugely during the bringing down of Mistu, and anti 1up sentiment was far stronger than any anti LCH sentiment in the universe... not only was there a bigger and competent alliance targetting them, but many other alliances/players would be happy to take revenge on 1up, thanks to the '1up are evil' propaganda spread and followed so readily. ND assisted 1up against LCH, and before LCH were toppled, or even coming into our range at a respectable speed, then LCH, VisioN and Mistu in particular turned on ND. Basically, this is how ND got trapped as I've said before, before we chose to support 1up, we weren't aware of LCH's glaring weaknesses against 1up, and that they were not going to make any consistant, determined attempt to bring them down.