Planetarion Forums

Illuvatar · 16 Dec 2005, 15:20

I just thought about the idea to get the old blockwars back and to increase the fun factor in the game.

As VVOMM created a Block in R9 lots of discussion were made on the pa forums, and enemy-blocks were created! The Politics were clear, no hiding of politics and the war started!
Every Player had a personal enemy and something to hate, and it was lotsa more fun in my opinion!

Today, Alliances only using naps, maybe a few shared channels to decide targets together!

Wouldn't it be better to give Blocks a new Chance for PAN?

The "smaller" alliances wouldnt like it afaik, but it would be interesting how the bigger alliances handle that and who is on top then next round!

Only Problem I see is,that the buddypack size of 5 wouldnt fit that much then, as there should be a size of at least 10 ppl in a BP per gal, and a total size of 15 players...

What would u guys think? Would really like to see the old hatred AD discussions back

Cheers,

-Anti-

hook · 16 Dec 2005, 15:49

Not enough people playing these days to have any sensible form of blockwars I think tbh. By the time the better block 'won', there'd hardly be any targets left to roid. (due to not-involved alliances will be bashed for easy roids in the roid-race part).

On another note however, 'fluent politics' combined with blocks could actually be fun.

mazzelaar · 16 Dec 2005, 16:10

And what exactly was interesting about R9 for VVOMM? They were nailed from tick 72 and roided into oblivion. The first half of that round was one of the dullest imaginable (right up there with the MPF block of round 10.5).

Block wars are utter shite. Rounds like this (although I believe there are 'blocks' in a very loose sense) are far more entertaining. Here we are 7 days before the round ends and it's stil wide open as opposed to the block war round that would've been finished about two weeks ago.

isildurx · 16 Dec 2005, 16:14

R9 = Worst round ever.

Kjeldoran · 16 Dec 2005, 16:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

And what exactly was interesting about R9 for VVOMM? They were nailed from tick 72 and roided into oblivion. The first half of that round was one of the dullest imaginable (right up there with the MPF block of round 10.5).

Oi now, don't bring that up again will you ... 2 blocks were formed during the round. It is NOT our fault that the other block was so damn weak ...

I had a fun round that round

Desse · 16 Dec 2005, 16:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Oi now, don't bring that up again will you ... 2 blocks were formed during the round. It is NOT our fault that the other block was so damn weak ...

I had a fun round that round

However it was your fault that you on top of the block decided to Nap WP untill the other block was completely demolished.

Kjeldoran · 16 Dec 2005, 16:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Desse

However it was your fault that you on top of the block decided to Nap WP untill the other block was completely demolished.

Lol no, did you even play that round? Phraktos napped WP, we just "let" them do it. At no point did we approach or even TALK to WP. Infact, we've kept hitting them occassionaly cause they had no deal with us.

µwe had a deal with Mistu and Phraktos. We were #1 and obviously bigger then our 2 partners. It is NOT upto us, to end the partnership. I mean, if you're in the strong position then you got everything to lose and nothing to gain (gamewise). Phraktos tried, and failed

Then why do WE (FAnG) keep having to hear how shit the round was and that everyone is pissed at us for winning it so easily?

furball · 16 Dec 2005, 17:01

In an attempt to distract attention away from FAnG, I'd like to emphasise

Quote:

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

And what exactly was interesting about R9 for VVOMM? They were nailed from tick 72 and roided into oblivion. The first half of that round was one of the dullest imaginable (right up there with the MPF block of round 10.5).

I was in MadCowS at the time, VVOMM had good intentions but was swiftly nobbled by WEET and NAR teaming up against it for far far too long.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Block wars are utter shite. Rounds like this (although I believe there are 'blocks' in a very loose sense) are far more entertaining. Here we are 7 days before the round ends and it's stil wide open as opposed to the block war round that would've been finished about two weeks ago.

Round 13 got quite entertaining near the end (a block war by then) but I basically agree with you. This round was fun

Stifler · 16 Dec 2005, 17:03

quite simply, no.

The last few rounds have been more interesting the the blockwars of r9 and r10.5

pig · 16 Dec 2005, 18:15

I enjoyed rnd 9 but thats because vom and nar were shit and weak, so i just relaxed.

Oh ye blockwars are bad...very bad, you wont find many people who enjoy them and it just means headaches for a whole round. the way we play these days is better.

Buddah · 16 Dec 2005, 18:17

r9 was good for like 150 ticks. then TEENWAR proved to be to big, and we were kinda raped daily

isildurx · 16 Dec 2005, 18:19

Round 8 was good

Squidly · 16 Dec 2005, 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Lol no, did you even play that round? Phraktos napped WP, we just "let" them do it. At no point did we approach or even TALK to WP. Infact, we've kept hitting them occassionaly cause they had no deal with us.

Heh, were you playing a different game than the rest of us? Oddly enough, I seem to recall a freaking lot of conversations involving irvine trying to get wp planets to pull and vice versa.

Edit: ftr, I could have my timeline wrong though :s have done it before... so plz correct me if need be

Stoom · 16 Dec 2005, 19:03

The way it is now is just fine.

Europatriot · 16 Dec 2005, 19:18

it's amazing how many people reply to a thread like this, which is obviously a big joke...

Seth Mace · 16 Dec 2005, 22:27

I didnt realise blockwars went away tbh:P

Nadar · 16 Dec 2005, 22:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seth Mace

I didnt realise blockwars went away tbh:P

They didn't

Seth Mace · 16 Dec 2005, 22:32

Omg Nadar stalker:P

Alessio · 16 Dec 2005, 22:48

Alright, im convinced..

PM me for blockwars!!

gzambo · 16 Dec 2005, 22:50

i thought it was a great rd
as there is plenty of movement of roids and no clear winner yet

JonnyBGood · 16 Dec 2005, 22:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by gzambo

i thought it was a great rd
as there is plenty of movement of roids and no clear winner yet

Conversely it's rather unfortunate that the round is going to end and there really won't be a clear winner.

Scorpio · 17 Dec 2005, 00:00

blockwars were fun

-eod-

Legator · 17 Dec 2005, 00:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

And what exactly was interesting about R9 for VVOMM? They were nailed from tick 72 and roided into oblivion. The first half of that round was one of the dullest imaginable (right up there with the MPF block of round 10.5).

Block wars are utter shite. Rounds like this (although I believe there are 'blocks' in a very loose sense) are far more entertaining. Here we are 7 days before the round ends and it's stil wide open as opposed to the block war round that would've been finished about two weeks ago.

i can only underline that as an active part of the vvomm block

block wars are fun with like 10k+ planets (like r6) and they are hardly balanced. past showed that in like 80% of the cases one of the blocks gets beaten to quick and then boredom stagnates the universe.

no i dont want it back. i think the current round is one of the best - if no the best (political wise) ever.

lokken · 17 Dec 2005, 01:18

Blockwars do not prevent a good round. Morons in charge of blocks do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by isildurx

R9 = Worst round ever.

Round 5 was like grating your eyes out.

Round 7 was cobblers.

Round 4 was entertaining with blocks. Round 6 was entertaining with blocks. Round 12 was entertaining with blocks.

Would anyone else like to add with the over generalisation and misconceptions about blocks, or are we done already?

ComradeRob · 17 Dec 2005, 01:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by isildurx

R9 = Worst round ever.

AD, the only place where history is written by the losers

More seriously, I think the situation we have now is better. Blocks are dynamic, so the losing side can (in general) expand to fight back against a dominant force (round 13 being the only recent exception).

mazzelaar · 17 Dec 2005, 10:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

AD, the only place where history is written by the losers

More seriously, I think the situation we have now is better. Blocks are dynamic, so the losing side can (in general) expand to fight back against a dominant force (round 13 being the only recent exception).

I think this comes down to a personal definition of block wars. To me block wars were atypical of rounds like 5/7/9 where predetermined blocks that grossly overpowered the other block started the round with shared intel, galaxies and goals. The current form of block is determined by a greater threat and the want to make a more even round by pegging back the alliance running away with things and therefore not a block war in the same context. This is, of course, my own opinion and I'm pretty sure everyone has thier own perspective on the meaning and the past. No doubt many people will have varying theories on this so it's a fairly evocative point that no-one can really prove.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lokken

Round 4 was entertaining with blocks. Round 6 was entertaining with blocks. Round 12 was entertaining with blocks.

You're totally right apart from the basics of the comparison. Rounds 4 and 6 had a massive player base in relation to the one currently playing in PA and alliances were not limited by the number of members they could have. The 3 blocks in round 6 is what made it interesting with the intelligent poliical play of the FLVTT block making it an interesting round rather than the stagnation fest we all know it would've been if they had given up like the losing side tend to do in a block war.

Round 12 you are right on the money and this was the best example of a blockwar in a long time. Two sides were formed and for once they were pertty even. Althought the round finished with 1up winning by a sizeable margin I feel that was mainly due to the targetting policy, as I'm sure you're aware, of the opposing block. This is actually a fine example of two even sides slugging it out for the top but you have to ask the question: how likely is this to be the 'norm' given the history of PA and the usual policy of blockwars which is to build a side far bigger than the other then smash them into oblivion.

And as a T100 Eclipse player in round 9, I can confirm without bias, that it was boring as ****

Game^ · 17 Dec 2005, 13:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

And as a T100 Eclipse player in round 9, I can confirm without bias, that it was boring as ****

Oh come on mazz hows anyone supposed to take your post seriousily when your talking about YOU finishing top100

. I swear some people will make up anything for attention

mazzelaar · 17 Dec 2005, 15:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Game^

Oh come on mazz hows anyone supposed to take your post seriousily when your talking about YOU finishing top100

. I swear some people will make up anything for attention

It's not that impressive - even Zhli finished in front of me

Scorpio · 17 Dec 2005, 16:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

The 3 blocks in round 6 is what made it interesting with the intelligent poliical play of the FLVTT block making it an interesting round rather than the stagnation fest we all know it would've been if they had given up like the losing side tend to do in a block war.

Not to be picky or anything, but umm intelligent political play by FLVTT?? If I'm not mistaken, poilitics had nothing to do with how the round went. The military impact on alliances did. The scenario of the round had more or less been set in stone at the start of the round already. (2 wars; 1 vs FLVTT and 1 vs FoS or XeTa, depending on who came out on top of the first war).)

Unless inelligent political play means you're letting yourself get hammered on purpose to be able to play the underdog later on

isildurx · 17 Dec 2005, 17:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by ComradeRob

AD, the only place where history is written by the losers

More seriously, I think the situation we have now is better. Blocks are dynamic, so the losing side can (in general) expand to fight back against a dominant force (round 13 being the only recent exception).

Hehe i am a little biased perhaps yes. fact is though that round 9 was a horrific round if you were in the vvomm block.

I much prefer the 'block' system we see nowadays and ive had a pretty fun round, atleast political wise.

mazzelaar · 17 Dec 2005, 17:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scorpio

Not to be picky or anything, but umm intelligent political play by FLVTT?? If I'm not mistaken, poilitics had nothing to do with how the round went. The military impact on alliances did. The scenario of the round had more or less been set in stone at the start of the round already. (2 wars; 1 vs FLVTT and 1 vs FoS or XeTa, depending on who came out on top of the first war).)

Unless inelligent political play means you're letting yourself get hammered on purpose to be able to play the underdog later on

I was talking about intelligent political play with respect to keeping the round going. After taking the beating of the century they could've just ****ed off the rest of the round and it would have been a two block war which would've been won reasonably quickly and turned the round into a borefest. As it was FLTVV (or NOTDEAD) decided to side with FoS and hit XETA which kept the round pretty interesting. The FLVTT block joining one of the sides definately made it a more interesting round, in my opinion.

bwtmc · 19 Dec 2005, 09:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antigone

I just thought about the idea to get the old blockwars back and to increase the fun factor in the game.

As VVOMM created a Block in R9 lots of discussion were made on the pa forums, and enemy-blocks were created! The Politics were clear, no hiding of politics and the war started!
Every Player had a personal enemy and something to hate, and it was lotsa more fun in my opinion!

Today, Alliances only using naps, maybe a few shared channels to decide targets together!

Wouldn't it be better to give Blocks a new Chance for PAN?

The "smaller" alliances wouldnt like it afaik, but it would be interesting how the bigger alliances handle that and who is on top then next round!

Only Problem I see is,that the buddypack size of 5 wouldnt fit that much then, as there should be a size of at least 10 ppl in a BP per gal, and a total size of 15 players...

What would u guys think? Would really like to see the old hatred AD discussions back

Cheers,

-Anti-

Hi, I signed up to join ND a week before the end of the round because recruitments fun

Gate · 19 Dec 2005, 10:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwtmc

Hi, I signed up to join ND a week before the end of the round because recruitments fun

I assume eXilition turn down all applicants in the last weeks of the round, then?

bwtmc · 19 Dec 2005, 10:44

Was he an applicant, or did NewDawn approach him?

mazzelaar · 19 Dec 2005, 10:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squidly

Heh, were you playing a different game than the rest of us? Oddly enough, I seem to recall a freaking lot of conversations involving irvine trying to get wp planets to pull and vice versa.

Edit: ftr, I could have my timeline wrong though :s have done it before... so plz correct me if need be

More often than not that was me and sid attacking. I was 'offline' on many an occasion :P

Kjeldoran · 19 Dec 2005, 11:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

More often than not that was me and sid attacking. I was 'offline' on many an occasion :P

Hehe, I know that tactic all too well

Fact is (was), in r10.5 Phraktos had a deal with WP and since phraktos was part of the FMP block, it would be common sence (and their expectation) for FAnG to respect that nap.
Nonetheless we've kept hitting WP occassionaly, we've not avoided them in our galaxy attacks and yes, when they hit us we tried to get them to pull, using the "but you napped Phraktos" excuse.

You could say we did abuse the situation. Then again, it got offered to us rather then us looking for it.

I guess that was one of the reasons why Phraktos decided to break the block and die ... I mean attack us

Banned · 19 Dec 2005, 11:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwtmc

Was he an applicant, or did NewDawn approach him?

Does it matter?

Hude · 19 Dec 2005, 11:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Banned

Does it matter?

I think there is a difference between accepting applicants and trying to make top players jump ship.

Kjeldoran · 19 Dec 2005, 11:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hude

I think there is a difference between accepting applicants and trying to make top players jump ship.

I don't think alliances need to convince top players to jump ship. They often decide to jump ship and will contact another top alliance.

Hude · 19 Dec 2005, 11:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

I don't think alliances need to convince top players to jump ship. They often decide to jump ship and will contact another top alliance.

I am talking about a case where the planet did not jump ship nor did contact the alliance first.

Banned · 19 Dec 2005, 12:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hude

I think there is a difference between accepting applicants and trying to make top players jump ship.

I don't.

Tomkat · 19 Dec 2005, 12:41

Block wars can be fun.

At least you then know who's on your side and who isn't.

Unlike now, where NAPs and alliances seem to change weekly.

Kjeldoran · 19 Dec 2005, 13:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tomkat

Block wars can be fun.

At least you then know who's on your side and who isn't.

Unlike now, where NAPs and alliances seem to change weekly.

blockwars would only suit the top alliances. Alliances like ND would have no chance in hell to win a round in a blockwar? Why? Because alliance like Exi, 1up and yes Angels can and will manifest themselves as the strongest alliance in their block. And if your block wins, then the strongest one in that block wins the round.

CrazyConrad · 19 Dec 2005, 15:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by isildurx

R9 = Worst round ever.

Methedrine · 19 Dec 2005, 15:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by isildurx

R9 = Worst round ever.

I think 10.5 manages to get very close to that round.

Gate · 19 Dec 2005, 15:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by bwtmc

Was he an applicant, or did NewDawn approach him?

He was an applicant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hude

I think there is a difference between accepting applicants and trying to make top players jump ship.

Antigone is/was about 20-25% below our average.

So I fail to see what bwtmc's whining about recruitment is about :/

Tomkat · 19 Dec 2005, 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

blockwars would only suit the top alliances. Alliances like ND would have no chance in hell to win a round in a blockwar?

Don't make me come down there and point out that ND are higher ranked than Angels at the moment!

mazzelaar · 19 Dec 2005, 18:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tomkat

Don't make me come down there and point out that ND are higher ranked than Angels at the moment!

That is true but it's because they have played a politically astute round. In the scenario Kjeldoran is talking about I would tend to agree with his synopsis.

Tomkat · 19 Dec 2005, 18:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

That is true but it's because they have played a politically astute round. In the scenario Kjeldoran is talking about I would tend to agree with his synopsis.

I thought you knew not to take me seriously

bwtmc · 20 Dec 2005, 02:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gate

He was an applicant.

Antigone is/was about 20-25% below our average.

So I fail to see what bwtmc's whining about recruitment is about :/

Liar

Averages are irrelevant when your bottom player was half his score.

Well, do you think extended influence placed on top players in small alliances at the very end of the round is a bad thing?