Worst ever political PA decisions!!!

[Thatcher]

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

They are the best alliance untill someone beats them.
That can be either by politics or skills.

xvx were beaten by asc in all aspects of the game this round.

dont forget that xvx also managed to piss off virtually every grouping in the game, even asc was busy trying to organise a hit on xvx planets last night, well played i must say, becoming even less desired as a NAP than hellsfury.

[Paisley]

Originally Posted by Wishmaster

why?
ending second is worse than ending 10th.
What did xvx achieve? Whats the difference of playing as a bg or an alliance?
You are saying, that if xvx had 90players, and called themselves a BG, that would have been worse than now?

I DONT GET IT WOMAN!

xVx Playing as 2 x 45 people battlegroups or 3x 30 people battlegroups if I was to hazard a guess. The Thing that I dont get is why xVx didn't go for their first ever round win. I've PM Night sky and she said she didnt want to make an end of round speech.

[Zoro]

Originally Posted by Tomkat

wow an AD thread about something entirely different became centred on ascendancy

thats unusual

This thread was very much started about a decision that has handed ASC another win. So although the 'Worst ever political decision' belongs to xvx it is by default about ascendancy too.

I know some xvx are coming on these forums desperately trying salvage something from this (Light). C'mon you had two choices nap ASC and lose or not nap and win - simple. You made the wrong choice - 100% wrong. Yes it would have been a tougher round. Yes you would have had to try harder and faced difficult days BUT you would have won.
There aren't two winners.
There are only two full tag alliances so you 100% lost. Infact xvx where the only alliance to lose as only 2 could win.

Only one gold is given in the 100 metres sprint.

Everton didn't win the FA cup with chelsea they lost.

Middlesbrough didn't win the premier league because they beat Liverpool helping Manure to win. No they lost and got relegated to boot.

xvx not only lost this round. They ruined this round and helped ASC have another easy round. Plus xvx have rubbed so many people up the wrong way that they have probably missed any chance of winning a round of PA forever.

[JonnyBGood]

That was epically retarded. So if another alliance had added 15 random people to tag they would have lost but by virtue of not adding people they didn't lose? This isn't a competition between xvx and ascendancy. It's a game of political and military domination. And in that game. We. Beat. You.

I wouldn't say this is any great work of genius or whatever. But average score/roids doesn't exactly lie.

[Psi_K]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

That was epically retarded. So if another alliance had added 15 random people to tag they would have lost but by virtue of not adding people they didn't lose? This isn't a competition between xvx and ascendancy. It's a game of political and military domination. And in that game. We. Beat. You.

I wouldn't say this is any great work of genius or whatever. But average score/roids doesn't exactly lie.

Uh, every alliance that isn't in #1 lost.
Period.
It doesn't matter if they're a BG, or a 1 player alliance.
They all lost.

xVx is losing right now.
They haven't lost yet.
They don't lose until the round ends.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Zoro

I know some xvx are coming on these forums desperately trying salvage something from this (Light). C'mon you had two choices nap ASC and lose or not nap and win - simple. You made the wrong choice - 100% wrong. Yes it would have been a tougher round. Yes you would have had to try harder and faced difficult days BUT you would have won.

lol, how have xVx lost? I wasnt aware Asc broke the nap, went to war with xVx and all xVx planets got bashed down to nothing? o wait, your fantasy land isnt real and xVx finished 2nd, having a fun round and currently has #1 planet and #1 galaxy with lots of other high ranking planets.

You cant say an alliance lost, when they finished 2nd and there ally finished 1st. That means.. our block won, your block lost.

[Linkie]

Ministry claims a moral victory. Like always.

[Psi_K]

Originally Posted by Light

You cant say an alliance lost, when they finished 2nd and there ally finished 1st. That means.. our block won, your block lost.

I'm confused why this is considered "fair and good" in today's PA.

Fact of the matter truly is that blocks don't normally claim they're separate at the start of the round.
Declare war on each other midway through the round.
Then claim they won with the ally they were at war with at the end of the round after getting badly out-performed.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Psi_K

I'm confused why this is considered "fair and good" in today's PA.

Fact of the matter truly is that blocks don't normally claim they're separate at the start of the round.
Declare war on each other midway through the round.
Then claim they won with the ally they were at war with at the end of the round after getting badly out-performed.

Blocks dont claim anything when they arnt a block and dont claim anything after. While the block is in place, they are allys... and the block is in place.

and what the hell are you mentioning "fair and good" when discussing the actions of Asc or xVx? but blatently ignore the BG's 400v100 block

[Psi_K]

Originally Posted by Light

Blocks dont claim anything when they arnt a block and dont claim anything after. While the block is in place, they are allys... and the block is in place.

and what the hell are you mentioning "fair and good" when discussing the actions of Asc or xVx? but blatently ignore the BG's 400v100 block

At best it was 150(BGs) vs 130(Asc)

xVx afaik was only napped with the BG's 'block' and targeting with them.

If you consider xVx in the BG's block.
Then you have to acknowledge that xVx left the BG's block to finish in 2nd with the Asc block(based on current scoring! :P).
Bad move imo.

[Knight Theamion]

I think that if you read through the forums a bit more properly Psi that you find the correct numbers, not those fictional ones you are using at the moment.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

I think that if you read through the forums a bit more properly Psi that you find the correct numbers, not those fictional ones you are using at the moment.

But the correct numbers dont support his case, so he has to use fictional ones

[[ND]Byrney]

I don't think anyone has used any realistic numbers on the forum this round so that's probably not a very useful post!

[[B5]Londo]

Originally Posted by Psi_K

At best it was 150(BGs) vs 130(Asc)

xVx afaik was only napped with the BG's 'block' and targeting with them.

sounds like semantics to me, Asc and xVx are only NAPped aswell - like xVx was to the BGs and ND was to the BGs, I have no idea what the status of the smaller allianes like InS and VGN who hit us at the same time was but it all adds up to more that the BGs vs Asc.

really all this arguing has only proved my original point, all the asc and xvx have posted here saying the agreement has been great for them; How can an agreement that is so popular amongst the ppl who abide by it be the "worst PA political decision" if it pleases everyone it affects its good regardless of whether that alliance had the possibility of a slightly better showing. Yes ppl play games to win, they also play to enjoy it, simply from a utilitarian point of view this agreement has been good.

[[ND]Byrney]

Lets be honest, even if xVx were actually thinking they'd played a shocker by throwing away the round win, they wouldn't be all over the forums yelling about how shit they are would they?

[Zoro]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

That was epically retarded. So if another alliance had added 15 random people to tag they would have lost but by virtue of not adding people they didn't lose? This isn't a competition between xvx and ascendancy. It's a game of political and military domination. And in that game. We. Beat. You.

I wouldn't say this is any great work of genius or whatever. But average score/roids doesn't exactly lie.

I like the fact that you just picked on one aspect of my post - kinda reafirms that everything else was true.

But let's address ur gripe. There were two fully tagged alliances able to win this round. the weakened ND and CT were not fully tagged nor filled with great players SO they were not in it to win it.

The BG were in it for fun and to play with people they like. Again not in it to win it.

Only ASC and xvx could win and xvx blew it.

I know u keep playing the we all won card but u have to. you're not gonna burn bridges you may need in later rounds.

JBG you keep up ur silly fantasy team with xvx - no one here believes for one second you did xvx over

[[B5]Londo]

Byrney: My problem with that assessment is that xVx has quite visibly given up over the last week or so, they havnt even tried to hold on to first by roid racing, ergo they dont really want it.

[[ND]Byrney]

Well it's a fair point they seem to have given up, but I'd suggest that's actually more because they feel they're incapable of winning from this position.

xVx managing to lose the round (yes lose, **** off with 'winning with asc') from the completely dominant position they held suggests this political decision was bad.

EDIT: this is assuming they do lose, fair play if they've got a load of hidden and still win

[lokken]

Regarding numbers: I'd say 400 is very much a peak figure referring to the time we were hit very heavily and probably on about four or five occasions. The BG's combined probably outnumbered Ascendancy at a rate of close to two to one on their own (remember they are smaller now at a level around the 160 mark than they were at their peak).

[[B5]Londo]

A decision can only be evaluated by its aims, the aims on xVx's side of the NAP are still somewhat opaque. The idea that the aim of every decision must be to secure victory is crazy. If that were true then the BGs would never have existed. Nor yet F-crew or a whole host of others. Indeed if everyone plays the game thinking they must win we would remove 80% of the player base so plz plz dont refute this

[Psi_K]

Originally Posted by Knight Theamion

I think that if you read through the forums a bit more properly Psi that you find the correct numbers, not those fictional ones you are using at the moment.

Considering I highly doubt there's barely even 400 players not in Asc/xVx working together the fictional numbers they like throwing out also are pretty far off the point.

This thread is classic though.

xVx members claimed their ally Asc is going to win and they win with them.
Asc members cliaming that xVx is only nap'd with them.

Originally Posted by lokken

Regarding numbers: I'd say 400 is very much a peak figure referring to the time we were hit very heavily and probably on about four or five occasions. The BG's combined probably outnumbered Ascendancy at a rate of close to two to one on their own (remember they are smaller now at a level around the 160 mark than they were at their peak).

Last I checked P-targeting with information from other alliances doesn't instantly throw you in the block.

There was a BG's block of about 150 or so.
There was a HA/ToF/HR block of probably 200.
Then the other alliances solo.
I'm not sure if there are more people involved in the blocks.
But I'm pretty sure that the BG block wasn't directly allied with the other block (or any other alliances(Correct me if I'm wrong)).
You can't just openly say "Every other ally was blocked vs Asc", because it clearly wasn't the case(Because if it was, Asc/xVx/Rock would have been completely obliterated).

[[ND]Byrney]

Originally Posted by [B5]Londo

A decision can only be evaluated by its aims, the aims on xVx's side of the NAP are still somewhat opaque. The idea that the aim of every decision must be to secure victory is crazy. If that were true then the BGs would never have existed. Nor yet F-crew or a whole host of others. Indeed if everyone plays the game thinking they must win we would remove 80% of the player base so plz plz dont refute this

I wasn't suggesting that their only aim was to win with that decision. However, realistically the only thing taking that NAP with Asc (at the time they did) achieved was losing them the round. Had they played us off for a while longer Asc would still have been there to take the NAP and we'd be in the same situation except Asc would have been too far behind to come back and win.

Just to elaborate, I don't think the deal was necessarily a bad one for xVx but they took it too early. I imagine they assumed that in such a position Asc wouldn't be able to catch them again and to be fair, without some crashes etc from some of xVx's shit members they probably would have.

In the end, you have to judge a decision by what it achieves in the end and if xVx do lose this round then you've got to mark it down as a bad decision. Surely not one of the stupidest in PA ever (there's stiff competition for that!) but a bad one nevertheless.

[Veedeejem!]

Originally Posted by Light

lol, how have xVx lost?

By having this round safely secured around tick 500 and then throwing it all away.

Btw, your "block" didn't win, Asc will win

I'm usually pretty anti-Asc, but this time i'm really glad they're gonna win

[[ND]Byrney]

Originally Posted by lokken

Regarding numbers: I'd say 400 is very much a peak figure referring to the time we were hit very heavily and probably on about four or five occasions. The BG's combined probably outnumbered Ascendancy at a rate of close to two to one on their own (remember they are smaller now at a level around the 160 mark than they were at their peak).

Yeah though I'm not sure why anyone argues about numbers anyway. We probably outnumbered you about 4:1 at some point in the round but then we got bashed by you guys in an even more uneven fight (lets say 200:40). Anyone complaining about numbers in this round is an idiot really.

[Light]

I really love the arguments the BG's are throwing at xVx now, they are so stupid.

A political decision where both sides are happy with the outcome, is not a bad decision. You can spin it anyway you like but all you're arguing is that xVx decided to pwn the BG's instead of pwn Asc, then crying.

You keep arguing the same crap, which is just wrong. xVx blew the #1 alliance race, so its the worst decision ever? find someone who's complaining that we blew it other than a BG/ND/CT member? absolutly no-one cares.

The worst decision this round was made by afew HC's, who decided to instead of create an alliance to play PA.. instead create a BG to be farms.

[[ND]Byrney]

Yeah, we're just all bitter about how you owned us all up so bad, you've hit the nail on the head.

By all means though, ignore the actual content of my post.

[Light]

Originally Posted by [ND]Byrney

Yeah, we're just all bitter about how you owned us all up so bad, you've hit the nail on the head.

By all means though, ignore the actual content of my post.

You are, as you're saying its a extremly bad decision.. regardless of weither Asc or xVx are happy with it. How the hell can it be a bad decision if everyone involved is happy with the outcome and if the decision came up again, they'd do the same.

[[ND]Byrney]

Cause, as I said earlier, even if you weren't happy with it you wouldn't be on the forums telling us about how shit your HC are.

What I really want to know is, how can a decision that only manages to move you down in the ally ranks be a good one? You'd still have top gal and top planet if you'd taken this deal a bit later on but you'd also be the winning alliance.

Furthermore, if you'd actually read my post you'd have seen I didn't say it was an extremely bad decision. I even suggested that it might have been a good one had your members not been awful and crashed off heaps of value.

[Light]

Originally Posted by [ND]Byrney

Cause, as I said earlier, even if you weren't happy with it you wouldn't be on the forums telling us about how shit your HC are.

Actually, its the end of the round.. So if people in xVx were unhappy, they'd be shouting about it now and preparing to move alliance for next round

I'm also pretty confident, that if xVx had arguments erupting in its private channels over this.. Other alliances would of heard, nothings secret in PA.

What I really want to know is, how can a decision that only manages to move you down in the ally ranks be a good one? You'd still have top gal and top planet if you'd taken this deal a bit later on but you'd also be the winning alliance.

As it really was a case, that no-one in xVx really cared about the alliance rank. This round wasnt a round where it meant anything, it would of been a worthless victory whichever way and whoever won it. xVx just wanted a fun and entertaining round, giving its members the ability to grow and finish high in the rankings.. which puts them in the best shape they could be going into next round where hopefully we see more competition instead of BG's.

[[ND]Byrney]

OK, I'll accept that xVx didn't want to win the round (wat?) even if I find it hard to believe.

In that case; how can you criticise the way we in the BGs have played in the slightest? What we've done is take 30 people (per BG) away from playing competitively. What your alliance has done has taken 90 from the pool of competitive players If anything you're the bigger problem so stop ****ing complaining about us and take a good look at yourself.

[Fuzzy]

Originally Posted by Light

lol, how have xVx lost? I wasnt aware Asc broke the nap, went to war with xVx and all xVx planets got bashed down to nothing? o wait, your fantasy land isnt real and xVx finished 2nd, having a fun round and currently has #1 planet and #1 galaxy with lots of other high ranking planets.

You cant say an alliance lost, when they finished 2nd and there ally finished 1st. That means.. our block won, your block lost.

/o\ /o\ /o\ /o\ /o\

the queen of silly posts has just bested herself \o/

EDIT. im not sure if 'bested' is even a word, but it sounds right so i'll roll with it.

[Light]

Originally Posted by [ND]Byrney

OK, I'll accept that xVx didn't want to win the round (wat?) even if I find it hard to believe.

So xVx isnt allowed to just play for fun? but ND/CT/Evo/WAFHH/Spoon/Toot Support/etc are allowed to play just for fun and not care about ally rank?

In that case; how can you criticise the way we in the BGs have played in the slightest? What we've done is take 30 people (per BG) away from playing competitively. What your alliance has done has taken 90 from the pool of competitive players If anything you're the bigger problem so stop ****ing complaining about us and take a good look at yourself.

No-one was playing for #1 alliance rank this round.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

/o\ /o\ /o\ /o\ /o\

the queen of silly posts has just bested herself \o/

EDIT. im not sure if 'bested' is even a word, but it sounds right so i'll roll with it.

23 WAFHH 9 307 2,105,139 2,765 18,946,247

Fuzzy succeed's in ruining another alliance! Thats 3 rounds and 3 alliances you've been in that have been forced to disband.

[[ND]Byrney]

Well considering you're (I'm pretty sure, apologies if not) one of those that has been publically saying that the BGs are stupid and are detracting from the game by not making/playing in a competing alliance I just assumed that you'd be playing in a competitive alliance. My apologies, I didn't realise you were such a hypocrite.

[Psi_K]

Originally Posted by Light

So xVx isnt allowed to just play for fun? but ND/CT/Evo/WAFHH/Spoon/Toot Support/etc are allowed to play just for fun and not care about ally rank?



No-one was playing for #1 alliance rank this round.

Lets see how xVx didn't try to play to win.

They didn't fill their tag ...
They didn't ally/block/co-ordinate with other allies ...
They didn't claim they win by saying they're allied with the winners ... ...

Yup ... you guys sure showed us you weren't in it to win

[Fuzzy]

this is 3 rounds and 3 alliances you've argued relentlessly for regardless of how indefensible their actions/decisions are :P

Originally Posted by [ND

Byrney]You'd still have top gal and top planet if you'd taken this deal a bit later on but you'd also be the winning alliance.

i think 10.5 would have won top gal if it hadnt been for the asc/xvx nap (or at least had a very good shot at it)

cardinal securing his gal the win with the nap seems the only possible motive for it.

one could argue this whole thing has been a pre-meditated asc masterstroke to ensure they won their 4th round when the odds were likely to be heavily stacked against them :P

[Light]

Originally Posted by Psi_K

Lets see how xVx didn't try to play to win.

They didn't fill their tag ...
They didn't ally/block/co-ordinate with other allies ...
They didn't claim they win by saying they're allied with the winners ... ...

Yup ... you guys sure showed us you weren't in it to win

gz, you have more intel on xVx, than xVx HC's or members do.. as its now tick 1054 and still nobody cares that Asc has overtaken us?

[[ND]Byrney]

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

this is 3 rounds and 3 alliances you've argued relentlessly for regardless of how indefensible their actions/decisions are :P



i think 10.5 would have won top gal if it hadnt been for the asc/xvx nap (or at least had a very good shot at it)

cardinal securing his gal the win with the nap seems the only possible motive for it.

one could argue this whole thing has been a pre-meditated asc masterstroke to ensure they won their 4th round when the odds were likely to be heavily stacked against them :P

Maybe but I was suggesting they should have taken the NAP but a few days later, so 10.5 would still have been raped.

Plus, Mactanzu would have annoyed me so much if he'd played active whole round I'd have kicked him from tag ;(

[Psi_K]

Originally Posted by Light

gz, you have more intel on xVx, than xVx HC's or members do.. as its now tick 1054 and still nobody cares that Asc has overtaken us?

I'd be claiming the same crap you are if I was in xVx's spot lol

[Light]

Originally Posted by Psi_K

I'd be claiming the same crap you are if I was in xVx's spot lol

cuz you would of had a fun and enjoyable round, and so.. would be happy with the way xVx played.

Instead, you got bashed.. so turned bitter.

[Psi_K]

Originally Posted by Light

cuz you would of had a fun and enjoyable round, and so.. would be happy with the way xVx played.

Instead, you got bashed.. so turned bitter.

No, I would have been kicked if I was in xVx for calling out how retarded the HC was to cause us to lose the round.
Period.

[Light]

No you wouldnt, watch.. i'll go bitch in xVx priv channels about it then paste the log.. lets see what happends!

[lokken]

Originally Posted by [ND]Byrney

Yeah though I'm not sure why anyone argues about numbers anyway. We probably outnumbered you about 4:1 at some point in the round but then we got bashed by you guys in an even more uneven fight (lets say 200:40). Anyone complaining about numbers in this round is an idiot really.

Won't argue with much of that. Our point about BG's being too small is based exactly around the numbers game, simply because when we turned your own strategies against you, they were even more devastating. Having a small defence pool of say 40 is pretty much writing your own death warrant, because its an obvious weakness and one that people are going to readily exploit.

The reason I posted that was because people were quoting silly numbers, when some actual stats would have helped. I'm all for stats in posts by the way, I think it improves posts by 84%

[Light]

Edit, i just tried to bitch in xVx priv channels about us slipping to rank2, but no-one cares

[JonnyBGood]

Originally Posted by Zoro

I like the fact that you just picked on one aspect of my post - kinda reafirms that everything else was true.

Actually it was pretty much the only aspect that was coherent enough to merit a straightforward response. The rest of your ravings I covered with the blanket statement following that part of my reply.

But let's address ur gripe. There were two fully tagged alliances able to win this round. the weakened ND and CT were not fully tagged nor filled with great players SO they were not in it to win it.

The BG were in it for fun and to play with people they like. Again not in it to win it.

Only ASC and xvx could win and xvx blew it.

This is just gibberish. I mean if you're going to base it on pre-round aims I've talked to a number of people in xVx at various points during the round. They never sounded like the #1 alliance ranking was of massive concern to them. Neither did anyone in ascendancy either for that matter. Now maybe you're actually xvx's priorities and desires guy and know precisely what they were in this round for but it doesn't seem to me like #1 tag was the one and only thing they were in it for (like, say, ascendancy and omen were in it for last round). The situation is actually this, ascendancy and xvx dominate the planet and gal rankings, are the top two tags by a distance and killed off anyone who annoyed them this round. If that's losing then I think I can live with that.

I know u keep playing the we all won card but u have to. you're not gonna burn bridges you may need in later rounds.

JBG you keep up ur silly fantasy team with xvx - no one here believes for one second you did xvx over

I don't give a **** about bridges man. For example here's me burning any bridges I could possibly have with you. You're a deranged loon. Stop posting please.

Originally Posted by Fuzzy

i think 10.5 would have won top gal if it hadnt been for the asc/xvx nap (or at least had a very good shot at it)

I'm pretty sure if no alliance ever attacked any particular gal they'd have a pretty good shot at #1 gal man.

[lokken]

Best galaxy not winning because of politics in best galaxy not winning because of politics in Planetarion shocker!

[Psi_K]

Originally Posted by Light

Edit, i just tried to bitch in xVx priv channels about us slipping to rank2, but no-one cares

You're doing it wrong

[Mzyxptlk]

God, this thread is ****ing dreadful.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Munkee

wow NEWSFLASH asc is the same as every other alliance and your model just leaves it open to even more blaming eachother instead of blaming HC in regular set ups.

Is this your first emo quit? I think a lot of people will see it as that anyway

And yet we're the ones winning 4 rounds running.

[Veedeejem!]

Originally Posted by Banned

And yet we're the ones winning 4 rounds running.

This round: xVx letting you win
Last round: Hard round on you guys but you managed to win it
round 29: you were liked more than denial
round 28: no opposition

Asc is a really good alliance no question about that, but you have been given an easy ride except last round imo...