For those that dont want 1up to win next round...

[Bashar]

Originally Posted by furssie

Eclipse did pretty good without Sid, Fury didnt do so well in r8 with Sid around.

As much as I hate to weaken your point on this issue, I do have to point out that eclipse did have Sid. He was not there under the nickname Sid, and he had no official position other than member, however he did play a very influential advisory role to Focht in an unofficial capacity.

[Cochese]

Originally Posted by Chika

I sum it up as such:
I feel that Sid/Mazz have a significant impact on how well 1up does.

Now this statement I wholeheartedly agree with.

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

No offense m8, but imo Eclipse is not even a glimpse of what 1up is when it comes to quality of leadership. No alliance can be compared to 1up and while 1up is near the perfection, Eclipse never was at all (it was just the best alliance out there during those 2 rounds, not counting the 9.5).

Perhaps not in overall perfection, but consider Eclipse was formed from 'dead alliances', and won it's first round out. That is no small feat--powerblocking and "competition" (ha!) aside.

I wasn't suggesting Eclipse was 'as good' as 1up, but rather, that Eclipse wasn't a lightweight, the experience from it was of a reasonably high calibre, and former Eclipers had practical experience which could be applied to 1up--and that with that in mind, 1up wouldn't simply 'crumble' without Sid and Maz. We wouldn't win, but we certainly wouldn't pull an Absolute.

In no way am I trying to talk bad about Eclipse, after all they beat my alliance fair and square

I know, just a miscomunication.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by Cochese

Now this statement I wholeheartedly agree with.




Perhaps not in overall perfection, but consider Eclipse was formed from 'dead alliances', and won it's first round out. That is no small feat--powerblocking and "competition" (ha!) aside.

I wasn't suggesting Eclipse was 'as good' as 1up, but rather, that Eclipse wasn't a lightweight, the experience from it was of a reasonably high calibre, and former Eclipers had practical experience which could be applied to 1up--and that with that in mind, 1up wouldn't simply 'crumble' without Sid and Maz. We wouldn't win, but we certainly wouldn't pull an Absolute.



I know, just a miscomunication.

Well it's obvious that under good leadership pple tend to improve aswell on a personal lvl which influences the alliance.

What Eclipse was for 1up could be compared as what FAnG was for Angels. Both are different alliances with a different command but with the same influences from HC's/members who've learned and improved (on all areas) during the rounds and learned the tricks etc ...

Not that I wanna compare 1up with Angels (our version of TheRat is sexier) but I hope you see where I'm going with this.

On a sidenote, purely biassed and personal, Eclipse was from the same calibre as FAnG quality-wise, it just was more continuous at a high level, something FAnG sometimes failed to do.

[Cochese]

Yeah, I see where you're coming from...Very appropriate analogy btw.


BTW whoever gave me a negative rep for a certain post in this thread, and left a retarded message....I think YOU need to get a clue. At least grow some balls and argue your point rather than hiding behind an anonymous reputation remark.

[Tomkat]

Originally Posted by Chika

No, I'm not a teacher. And sadly, without any knowledge of what you do, I know I get paid more than you.

Congratulations, you're still a ****ing tard though.

You really have no clue. Are you saying that if Sid and mazz moved straight into some alliance where the players didn't really have a clue, they'd get it off the ground and into a #1 spot? I doubt it. 1up people are dedicated, they care about the game, they care about the alliance, they understand how the game works.

[Zh|l]

1up wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Sid and Mazzelaar actually getting it going. What you fail to realize Chika (infact, you seem woefully inadequate when it comes to history of alliances and their performance) is that a great deal of 1up command have played this game for far too long.

Calling other command members rubbish when really you never experienced those people when they actually -did- command is nothing short of slander. The prime two examples are myself and Killghost - we may have done relatively little in 1up but our mere presence helped the alliance in terms of reputation and getting other players together - the reason behind that is because we've been around the block a few time and already have our friends and contacts and so forth.

I'm the first to admit I am nolonger suitable for a command role, but not because I'm 'shit' but I'd rather not slave away all my spare time into this game anymore and I believe the same goes for KillGhost. If we really -wanted- too, I bet myself, Killghost and Tis could run 1up perfectly well without Sid and mazzelaar as long as we were prepared to put in the hours. We might not be as streamlined or successful, but we're fully qualified to do it. As if to prove my point further - me and Killghost were instrumental in the setup of Wrath at a time when Fury was considered publically to be a bad choice, and during r7 when Sid wasn't even around.

What you also forget is that Mazzelaar is actually a relatively new person into our 'grouping' of command. You have Fury Era, Wrath Era, Eclipse Era command within 1up. Mazz came along in the Eclipse Era (and you're talking a couple of years or more with these.) I'm exceptionally proud of how far mazz has come since the day I recruited him into Wrath after a good few hours of negotiations and consider him a good friend.

To be honest Chika, I've only posted because I felt the need to correct your point of the command being 'shit'.

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by Cochese

BTW whoever gave me a negative rep for a certain post in this thread, and left a retarded message....I think YOU need to get a clue. At least grow some balls and argue your point rather than hiding behind an anonymous reputation remark.

isn't it funny how we claim that we (me included) don't really give a rat's behind about the rep system, but still get bothered by numbnut negreppers who retardedly leave 8==D remarks?

obviously, 1up HCs ability to keep 1uppers active and motivated is quite impressive - i believe in that statement that without mazz/sid, 1up would be nothing, just because of the fact that they are good speakers and motivators (obviously) in the alliance -

now, even with this being true, this statement becomes inaccurate if without the knowledge of the mass, that some of the officers might have picked up the 'style' of leadership these two have - so if they leave the alliance, the same type of leadership style might still be the same tool to be used, thus keeping the group functioning like they never really left

[furssie]

Originally Posted by Chika

its my job to inform people who do have an ego that they are actually idiots.

Who gave you that task? Is it an officer position?

I miscounted already - i stopped at 5. Honestly, how many times you looked like an arrogant monkey is this boards already (including GD)?

[noah02]

This thread has gone very weirdly
I think 1up is good and it will split probs for round 14 and change its name to hardcore or something daft coz good players are like moths to a flame if one goes they all go and Sid has been collecting good players for long enough to make any alliance attract the best or choose the best.

[Tis]

Originally Posted by noah02

This thread has gone very weirdly
I think 1up is good and it will split probs for round 14 and change its name to hardcore or something daft coz good players are like moths to a flame if one goes they all go and Sid has been collecting good players for long enough to make any alliance attract the best or choose the best.

I doubt you will ever see a split with Sid running things, apart from the occasional disgruntled member.

If something drastic happened and I ended up running things on the other hand... *poof* before you can so much as roll your eyes.

[noah02]

Originally Posted by Tis

I doubt you will ever see a split with Sid running things, apart from the occasional disgruntled member.

If something drastic happened and I ended up running things on the other hand... *poof* before you can so much as roll your eyes.

All alliances split just to re-form under a different name
Everyone likes a change of name every so often just look at vts/legion/conc etc...
Everyone will get bored of saying 1up if they keep winnning so you have to change the name its in the contract

[Tis]

Originally Posted by noah02

All alliances split just to re-form under a different name
Everyone likes a change of name every so often just look at vts/legion/conc etc...
Everyone will get bored of saying 1up if they keep winnning so you have to change the name its in the contract

Eh. Fury never split while Sid was in charge. (Zhil's little pet empire doesnt count)

And I'm still not tired of saying "Fury" and its been gone quite a while

[Biggin]

Originally Posted by Alessio

I personally think this playing anti 1up thread is BS..
Every alliance should just play to win and have fun..
And if you try to win u probs have to kick the other alliances like 1up in the arse..
If you play to "not let 1up win again" then you will never win, or get above them even..
If you are still traumatized by 1ups victory then you should really get a life..

There are no rules like do this or that play with that amount of peeps or something.. only on paper maybe but in the end.. The best alliance wins.. simple

if you dont want 1up to win then you should look @ urself instead of at them..

i completely agree with you Alessio. This would have been my similar reply had you not posted it first. 1up knows what it takes to win... bottom line. A term "Old School" comes to mind. 1up is a collective of an old school command structure and they proved it worked time and again. PA is very similar to the world... it's simply politics. The armies just back up the politics. The best politicians and the best strategists usually win wars. My suggestion to you is just like Alessio's, drop the "don't let them win" attitude and play to have fun and win. To quote the great Sean Connery "Losers always talk about their best. Winners go home and f**k the prom queen.) No points for second place, figure out a way to win instead of preventing someone from winning.

[Bashar]

Originally Posted by Biggin

The best politicians and the best strategists usually win wars.

Yep

Originally Posted by Biggin

My suggestion to you is just like Alessio's, drop the "don't let them win" attitude and play to have fun and win. To quote the great Sean Connery "Losers always talk about their best. Winners go home and f**k the prom queen.) No points for second place, figure out a way to win instead of preventing someone from winning.

Is this not politics? And as such, a part of the game, and an attempt to 'win it', or contribute towards winning? It may be a piss-poor attempt, but it is an attempt, and it is politics. This forum isn't a neutral discussion ground set away from the politics of the game, it is part of the politics of the game, just as much as PM's between alliance HC discussing agreements is.

[lokken]

The conclusion to this thread (that I'm increasingly finding) is that HC's have got their priorities wrong. They've put their political roles way ahead of their role to organise and motivate their alliance and hence have had no teeth to back up their political manoevres.

Well oiled military machines should always be the bedrock of winning alliances - politics is merely what enables it to be a winning machine. At the moment, only 1up makes the former, while others struggle focusing on the latter.

[Banned]

Ah yes, but for a few rounds politics was enough in itself, wasn't it?

[Cochese]

Originally Posted by demiGOD

isn't it funny how we claim that we (me included) don't really give a rat's behind about the rep system, but still get bothered by numbnut negreppers who retardedly leave 8==D remarks?

What bothers me is when they don't even enter the discussion at all, just leave a reputation remark...which is, essentially, defeating the entire point of discussion forums in the first place.

*shrug*

obviously, 1up HCs ability to keep 1uppers active and motivated is quite impressive - i believe in that statement that without mazz/sid, 1up would be nothing, just because of the fact that they are good speakers and motivators (obviously) in the alliance

Maybe, but it's not like they stand around shouting propaganda at us all day. I don't read anything they've said or written, and suddenly get motivated. No one should have to motivate an alliance, they should all be ready to give 110%. Which is they atmosphere in 1up, to me...a very high level of competition. It's not so much about pleasing the HC, as it is having a winning alliance.

In fact, I sometimes think they could just put up a picture of Sid, and people would 'keep up the routine'.

now, even with this being true, this statement becomes inaccurate if without the knowledge of the mass, that some of the officers might have picked up the 'style' of leadership these two have - so if they leave the alliance, the same type of leadership style might still be the same tool to be used, thus keeping the group functioning like they never really left

I'm sure certain qualities rub off, and if the wheel turns smoothly, command change can often have little impact on the alliance overall when everyone is promoted from within.

[Alessio]

Originally Posted by Cochese

blablabla....

In fact, I sometimes think they could just put up a picture of Sid, and people would 'keep up the routine'.

etc etc

Here is teh pic of Sid.. Other allies should also put that picture up in their private channel coz its very motivating indeed..

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Banned

Ah yes, but for a few rounds politics was enough in itself, wasn't it?

That suggests people were close enough to compete then?

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by Alessio

Here is teh pic of Sid.. Other allies should also put that picture up in their private channel coz its very motivating indeed..

thats actually how i imagined him to look like - which probably is extremely demoralizing and not very motivating at all - and if sid was really that young, and the the whole galaxy's ass are being handed to an alliance that's being led by a 9-yr old??

hehehe that would be ****ing hilarious.. IT WILL BE, I SWEAR!!!

[Chika]

Originally Posted by Zh|l

1up wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Sid and Mazzelaar actually getting it going. What you fail to realize Chika (infact, you seem woefully inadequate when it comes to history of alliances and their performance) is that a great deal of 1up command have played this game for far too long.

Calling other command members rubbish when really you never experienced those people when they actually -did- command is nothing short of slander. The prime two examples are myself and Killghost - we may have done relatively little in 1up but our mere presence helped the alliance in terms of reputation and getting other players together - the reason behind that is because we've been around the block a few time and already have our friends and contacts and so forth.

I'm the first to admit I am nolonger suitable for a command role, but not because I'm 'shit' but I'd rather not slave away all my spare time into this game anymore and I believe the same goes for KillGhost. If we really -wanted- too, I bet myself, Killghost and Tis could run 1up perfectly well without Sid and mazzelaar as long as we were prepared to put in the hours. We might not be as streamlined or successful, but we're fully qualified to do it. As if to prove my point further - me and Killghost were instrumental in the setup of Wrath at a time when Fury was considered publically to be a bad choice, and during r7 when Sid wasn't even around.

What you also forget is that Mazzelaar is actually a relatively new person into our 'grouping' of command. You have Fury Era, Wrath Era, Eclipse Era command within 1up. Mazz came along in the Eclipse Era (and you're talking a couple of years or more with these.) I'm exceptionally proud of how far mazz has come since the day I recruited him into Wrath after a good few hours of negotiations and consider him a good friend.

To be honest Chika, I've only posted because I felt the need to correct your point of the command being 'shit'.

Sorry it took a while for me to reply. I was on an "administrative" vacation.
Mazz being a new person to you guy's scene means nothing. So I can't discuss that.
I do not think you could run 1UP as efficiently as it is being ran, for the simple fact that the reason 1up does well is because people want to play for Sid. I want to play for Sid. I don't find myself wanting to play for you. Also, anyone putting a lot of "time" into the game with Half of a brain can do well in any aspect. If you go back and read my post, I never called ANY command members rubbish. You introduced this phrase into the equation. I never said You, Killghost, or any of the MO's suck. SO where you got that from I do not know. As far as you say (as I know **** all about your past and don't care to) you did a few good/great things in the past. Thats all find and dandy, but that is exactly what it is. Old news. Who cares what you did years ago.
And NOONE charges you with trying to maintain what you did/didn't do. Nor has anyone charged you with NOT doing what you used to do.
All in all, your point in my eyes, is irelevant. For the home base reason that I just wasn't talking about that, nor did I call anyone rubbish. If you FEEL rubbish, thats on you. I don't think your rubbish. I think your old news.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Chika

for the simple fact that the reason 1up does well is because people want to play for Sid. I want to play for Sid. I don't find myself wanting to play for you.

I joined 1up more because Zhil and the pr0ns than Sid. That was just a very convinient bonus.

[ComradeRob]

Originally Posted by Banned

Ah yes, but for a few rounds politics was enough in itself, wasn't it?

I'm not quite sure about that. I think it was convenient for some people to say "you only won because of politics!" to cover up for their own weaknesses.

It has long been assumed that a HC/leader has two areas of responsibility in leading his alliance: military and politics. Skill in these areas is traditionally regarded as being the defining measurement of a leader's usefulness.

Amongst 'purists', those who like to see Planetarion as an heroic conflict between great warrior factions, military skill is more highly prized. Those who focus more on 'politics' are regarded as inferior, with the implication that if they were 'good enough' they wouldn't need the politics. This view of Planetarion partially explains why 1up (having a fair few purists) felt it important to make a point of avoiding excessive politics (or the appearance of such).

To an extent, 1up's success proves the purists right. In a conflict between evenly-sized alliances, the alliance with superior military tactics wins.

However, this seems to me to be a false dichotomy, because it ignores the third skill of alliance leadership - motivation. This can be provided in any number of ways, but an alliance leader who fails to motivate his alliance will fail regardless of military or political skill. 1up have an advantage because the prestige of the alliance (and its leadership) provides a certain amount of motivation in itself. When properly complemented with clear rules and some good old-fashioned people skills, 1up's leadership can motivate their members to make efforts beyond those made by members of other alliances.

Furthermore, the motivation level of an alliance also reflects the alliance's recruitment potential. An alliance which has happy and motivated members will find it easier to recruit good members, and (to some extent) this applies in reverse. An alliance capable of attracting a large number of members will create motivational momentum simply by virtue of its popuiarity (think Eclipse r9, nos r4). However, recruitment-based motivation is unreliable, as it tends to collapse once the recruitment drive ends.

I think this was something that the WP HC of r6 onwards understood quite well. Success relies on a balance of the three attributes - military, politics and motivation. People often said that WP's success was merely political, but this was never true; they weren't especially politically astute. What they succeeded at was motivation and recruitment. The skills of their leaders enabled them to maintain a well-motivated member-base and maintain a fairly constant flow of recruitment. This ability allowed them to bounce back from defeats which would have been near-fatal to most other alliances.

I am tempted to conclude that perhaps the alliance size limit has killed off this approach to alliance-building, and has tipped the balance permanently in favour of the 'purist' approach, where military skill matters more than politics or motivation. After all, if you can only have 100 members there's not much need to worry about recruitment, and you can pre-select people with high personal motivation, reducing the need to spend time rallying the troops quite so much. A charismatic leader can increase motivation somewhat, but can't have the same impact as similar leaders did in past rounds.

For any alliance to succeed against 1up, they will need to do well in all three areas. Relying on any single approach will not be enough; 1up can't be beaten militarily by an alliance with lower motivation, nor can they be beaten poliitcally by an alliance without the military skill to put 1up under serious pressure.


p.s. I stupidly read this thread from the end backwards, so missed the fact that Lokken already made the point about motivation, and made it far more clearly and concisely than I have.

[lokken]

I think the gap in motivation (like you say) is evident currently; Sid can motivate 66 to win, others can't motivate 90+.

When we were working together in r6 motivation wasn't hard - we set ourselves a nigh on impossible task and showed we were hell bent to achieve it and kept the members updated as to how that task was going. The current task alliances have is not to beat 1up, but to outperform them and set a new level in gameplay. We set a motivation based on achievement and a general philosophy on how we believed the game should be. People often think this philosophy was a fallacy, when in fact the HC all believed in it to some capacity, we simply exploited it to its fullest. To back this all up we had most of the vital ingredients reflected in the image of our rather large command.

I like the point about WP - while i'd have expected them to wither away, they've kept going despite the various ins and outs they have over time - their relative stability can only be as a result of good leadership, even if results have at times hardly been spectacular.

The game has got to a stage where recruitment continues to be vital to success as you have to make the most of those 100 spots available. I start thinking of players in terms of 'I would recruit player X but not player Y' in terms of building an alliance that I personally believe would be successful based on reliability, activity, ability and most importantly being decent people. Sid has always had the enviable advantage of having a large amount of old skool players who have a massive amount of respect for him, and this as noted in previous threads (and not to be further discussed as its offtopic) of having a considerable competitive edge over the rest meaning competition was effectively nullified in r11 - it was only with their handicap in r12 that produced a true classic of a round.

Obviously i'm not quite at your level, so who am I to talk eh

[Kjeldoran]

Lokken and Rob, Apart from military, politics and motivation, I think you've not mentionned one of the most important values when it comes to a succesful alliance. And that value would be Activity/Dedication or however you describe it.

PA is a game. The most important characterization of a game is that practice aka activity is the biggest factor. A factor which enables you to create skills and enables you to learn strategies and tactics.
You can basicly apply this on any game or sport you can think of. The more time you put into it, the better you'll become.

PA isn't different there and pple who are willing to spend hours assigning targets, calcing the perfect fleets etc, will naturally have more tactical skills then pple who simply don't put the time into it. Same goes for every aspect in PA.

And yes, an HC and command can activily influence activity, which often depends on motivation (to get back to your 3rd point).

If you however mean "motivation" as the bigger description which also includes activity and dedication then you're correct and you can ignore this post

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

If you however mean "motivation" as the bigger description which also includes activity and dedication then you're correct and you can ignore this post

Activity and dedication derive from motivation. Alternatively I presume we take activity and dedication as a given for success.

Plus if you read my part about recruitment, activity and reliability are neatly covered there.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by lokken

Activity and dedication derive from motivation. Alternatively I presume we take activity and dedication as a given for success.

Yeah I know it's derived from motivation, hence why I assumed that you meant activity and dedication aswell when talking about motivation.

But I think activity and dedication decides more then just "success". Infact, an alliance with lesser military or political skills but far higher activity and dedication will imo peform better then the other way around.

Skills are good, but if you're not there to use them or not care enough to use them to the fullest of their potential, then skills won't make such a huge impact.

[Desse]

Originally Posted by Avarin

^^
that would be me then

Nah, has to be me.

[Zh|l]

Originally Posted by Chika

Sorry it took a while for me to reply. I was on an "administrative" vacation.
Mazz being a new person to you guy's scene means nothing. So I can't discuss that.
I do not think you could run 1UP as efficiently as it is being ran, for the simple fact that the reason 1up does well is because people want to play for Sid. I want to play for Sid. I don't find myself wanting to play for you. Also, anyone putting a lot of "time" into the game with Half of a brain can do well in any aspect. If you go back and read my post, I never called ANY command members rubbish. You introduced this phrase into the equation. I never said You, Killghost, or any of the MO's suck. SO where you got that from I do not know. As far as you say (as I know **** all about your past and don't care to) you did a few good/great things in the past. Thats all find and dandy, but that is exactly what it is. Old news. Who cares what you did years ago.
And NOONE charges you with trying to maintain what you did/didn't do. Nor has anyone charged you with NOT doing what you used to do.
All in all, your point in my eyes, is irelevant. For the home base reason that I just wasn't talking about that, nor did I call anyone rubbish. If you FEEL rubbish, thats on you. I don't think your rubbish. I think your old news.

Thats all very fair and dandy for you to sit there and state that 'anyone' with the time can do just as well, but to be frank, you're wrong. Time spent into an activity does not equal the same output. 1up has done well for factors given by Lokken and Rob. Sid -is- motivating and inspirational, but if you wish to argue on 1up's command structure then you -should- at least aquaint yourself with Sid and his past command structures also.

You can state that you 'don't care to what I did years ago' but it is relevant in that it is past actions that help to build up a member of High Command. It is past actions that provide that initial boost of reputation in order to make allies and friends. Case in point would be the Fury/Bluetuba alliance for r4/r5 which I personally believe was influenced by mine and KG's close association with Lokken during the S7n War. Due to this I gained a reputation of being very pro-Fury but quite approachable if it benefitted Fury. Sid's reputation also provided the basis for r6, and upon his return he used that reputation to challenge every other alliance in the game to 'being the best'.

1up won with the combined efforts of command and membership alike.

But do tell me what your point(s) exactly is. That way I'll have an easier time of actually addressing your points rather than wallowing through pages of posts.

And Wrath was never a split from Fury - it was part of Fury, under the glorius dictatorship of Emperor Sid. I live to serve!

[Chika]

Originally Posted by Banned

I joined 1up more because Zhil and the pr0ns than Sid. That was just a very convinient bonus.

You say ths. And others say that they joned 1up to see what the bg deal was about Sid. There are many different opinions, but I think we can agree that the majority joined to play for Sid. It is "His" alliance. This point can be stressed as such. If Therat headed up 1up, with Mazz as his Co, they would not have drwan the same quality statement.
That last point can actually be argued, but we all know the real answer.

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Chika

You say ths. And others say that they joned 1up to see what the bg deal was about Sid. There are many different opinions, but I think we can agree that the majority joined to play for Sid. It is "His" alliance. This point can be stressed as such. If Therat headed up 1up, with Mazz as his Co, they would not have drwan the same quality statement.
That last point can actually be argued, but we all know the real answer.

It's true - I suck :/

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

It's true - I suck :/

Well well, we'd be glad to have you Mazz m8 (and take TheRat with you PLZ)

And Zhil, I know this is beyond your will but most of the time you post it ends up with Fury history (and I don't have ANYTHING against that).

Sometimes it sounds like entire PA evolves around Fury and Fury offsprings and Fury related things and in a way Fury is probably the alliance that had the most impact on this game (Fury, Eclipse, 1up, ...).
But I think everyone should stop considering Fury HC's or ex Fury command pple like "the best command pple around". I'm sure sid, mazz, you, kg, germania, .... are ace command pple (as you've proven) but there are other pple out there who'd do an equally good job.
Not every HC has the luxury to work with such other quality HC or has the luxury to have an alliance that attracts top players just because of their past etc ...

Sometimes it sounds like if you're not from the "Fury school" then you're not a top command person ...

I'd not claim that I'm on an equal lvl of those mentionned pple, that's for other pple to decide, but I've run an alliance for over 8 rounds (4 different ones) and I can fairly say I've learned from my mistakes aswell and that I probably know all the tricks and stuff needed to run an alliance these rounds.

Nway, just felt like mentioning this, but it's not intended to ask you to stop posting about Fury or anything.

[Chika]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Well well, we'd be glad to have you Mazz m8 (and take TheRat with you PLZ)

And Zhil, I know this is beyond your will but most of the time you post it ends up with Fury history (and I don't have ANYTHING against that).

Sometimes it sounds like entire PA evolves around Fury and Fury offsprings and Fury related things and in a way Fury is probably the alliance that had the most impact on this game (Fury, Eclipse, 1up, ...).
But I think everyone should stop considering Fury HC's or ex Fury command pple like "the best command pple around". I'm sure sid, mazz, you, kg, germania, .... are ace command pple (as you've proven) but there are other pple out there who'd do an equally good job.
Not every HC has the luxury to work with such other quality HC or has the luxury to have an alliance that attracts top players just because of their past etc ...

Sometimes it sounds like if you're not from the "Fury school" then you're not a top command person ...

I'd not claim that I'm on an equal lvl of those mentionned pple, that's for other pple to decide, but I've run an alliance for over 8 rounds (4 different ones) and I can fairly say I've learned from my mistakes aswell and that I probably know all the tricks and stuff needed to run an alliance these rounds.

Nway, just felt like mentioning this, but it's not intended to ask you to stop posting about Fury or anything.

Yeah I noticed Zhil and that Fury thing also. KJ put it nicely, but I say cease that Fury crap. All of your posts sound the same. Its to the point where it seems like you trying to convince yourself and not others anymore (indefinition means insecurity). Its like you are stuck in 2001.
Its 2005 dude. Being that you had some part in Fury, (personnally I heard you were crap there, but I HEARD is the key part) it will not help you in anyway in this day in PA. maybe you will get an invite to Vengeance or something, but other than that.........



















Nothing. Nothing at all.

[Chika]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

It's true - I suck :/

you don't suck. your just not as flashy. Your Michael Jordan's Scottie Pippen. (Scottie couldn't win any championships without Jordan btw)

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Chika

you don't suck. your just not as flashy. Your Michael Jordan's Scottie Pippen. (Scottie couldn't win any championships without Jordan btw)

Come on - I gotta at least be a Dennis Rodman, surely?

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

Come on - I gotta at least be a Dennis Rodman, surely?

Lol, so you wanna be the player who once acted in the WORST MOVIE EVER MADE IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF MANKIND?

(movie was "Simon says" and it's really S.H.I.T.)

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

But I think everyone should stop considering Fury HC's or ex Fury command pple like "the best command pple around". I'm sure sid, mazz, you, kg, germania, .... are ace command pple (as you've proven) but there are other pple out there who'd do an equally good job.

I don't think Fury command is particularly gifted at all. I think they were good at what they did, no doubt, but their primary qualification was that they were party-liners. They weren't necessarily yes-men, but they were very much Fury*. What seperates Fury** from other alliances*** is quite often the decisiveness of their actions and their loyalty to the cause. And it's from this platform people pile disdain upon other alliances. When you've seen situations like Fury in round 4 and 6, and not given up, seeing alliances fold mid-round because of resistance and 'the round not being worth playing' is an insult to the times they were on top and you kept fighting.

I'm not saying they're right to be arrogant about it, but many of them have earned the right to be able to do this.

The other key reason Fury is remembered is that Xanadu and Legion players kept very little of their identity when they moved on, not only that, but very few of their commanders continued playing. If Olympians had been a Titans spin-off for a few rounds longer, then maybe people would still be talking about the Legion legacy, but they didn't and we don't.

* That is, they wouldn't consider joining another alliance as long as Fury was around. The reason behind this wasn't just that Sid was there, it went beyond that.

** Or rather, the Fury spirit.

*** Ironically (HI PATRICIAN) BlueTuba people had a lot of the same spirit, but Fury are the ones remembered for it.

PS. I posrepped Kjel's post. I feel dirty :(

[TheRat]

Originally Posted by Chika

If Therat headed up 1up, with Mazz as his Co, they would not have drwan the same quality statement.

Im asuming you mean if I started 1up with mazz, that we wouldnt have gotten the same quality people, and you are quite correct. At the point when I joined 1up, all I was known for was Pilkara, and you dont really draw quality players with the ability to code.. Sid's reputation (and of course that of the other initial HC's) is what has drawn the playerbase to this alliance, no doubt. But Sid isnt 100% crucial, they have proven that before with eclipse. Sid is just the icing of the cake which makes a great alliance superb.

[Banned]

Originally Posted by TheRat

Im asuming you mean if I started 1up with mazz, that we wouldnt have gotten the same quality people, and you are quite correct. At the point when I joined 1up, all I was known for was Pilkara, and you dont really draw quality players with the ability to code.. Sid's reputation (and of course that of the other initial HC's) is what has drawn the playerbase to this alliance, no doubt. But Sid isnt 100% crucial, they have proven that before with eclipse. Sid is just the icing of the cake which makes a great alliance superb.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to TheRat again.

I regret negrepping you in that other thread now

I think the whole 'would 1up be 1up without Sid' discussion is pointless. It's a massive theoretical debate that we all know the answer is 'no' to. But FAnG/Angels wouldn't be the same without Kjel, PA wouldn't be thase without Spinner, etc ad nauseam.

[Cochese]

Originally Posted by Chika

Yeah I noticed Zhil and that Fury thing also. KJ put it nicely, but I say cease that Fury crap. All of your posts sound the same. Its to the point where it seems like you trying to convince yourself and not others anymore (indefinition means insecurity). Its like you are stuck in 2001.

Where you see ignorance, I see a level of loyalty most people (you especially) can't even understand, yet alone recognize.

That's just Zhil.

Its 2005 dude. Being that you had some part in Fury, (personnally I heard you were crap there, but I HEARD is the key part)

He can stick up for himself here, but you HEARD quite wrong. I'd check again, with reliable sources (not whomever keeps telling you these wierd and wild 'factoids' you use in your posts).

it will not help you in anyway in this day in PA.

Actually, it has, still does, and probably always will. After all, he's Sid jr.

maybe you will get an invite to Vengeance or something, but other than that.........

Trying to use that as an insult not only makes you look like even more of a utter dicksmack than you already are, but also negates any credibility your argument had. Vengeance is a good alliance, yet you would refer to them as if they were a present-day SL.

As if you're just that leet.

'As if'.

Incidentally, your argument had no sense from the get-go...you're just bitter, as we (and GD) all know.

Nothing. Nothing at all.

...is what you've been posting so far, and probably the only thing you should post from now on.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by Banned

PS. I posrepped Kjel's post. I feel dirty

It does feel dirty the first time, but it'll be easier the next time, just don't give up

Nway about your post, what you said probably is true. But I didn't mean so much the legacy of Fury but more like the fact that pple think less of current command (doesn't matter what alliance) then the Fury command (which happens to be partly the Eclipse command and 1up command now).

And Chika, don't twist my words. don't quote me to then use my words to have a go at Zhil etc. I don't agree with what you post, I was merely making a point that there are other equally skilled and who knows, better, Hc's out there then those from the old "Fury school".

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

It does feel dirty the first time, but it'll be easier the next time, just don't give up

What's really creepy is that it wasn't the first time...

[Chika]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

And Chika, don't twist my words. don't quote me to then use my words to have a go at Zhil etc. I don't agree with what you post, I was merely making a point that there are other equally skilled and who knows, better, Hc's out there then those from the old "Fury school".

My next comment is directed at that portion of your reply:

Your Predictable.

[Chika]

Originally Posted by Cochese

Where you see ignorance, I see a level of loyalty most people (you especially) can't even understand, yet alone recognize.

That's just Zhil.



He can stick up for himself here, but you HEARD quite wrong. I'd check again, with reliable sources (not whomever keeps telling you these wierd and wild 'factoids' you use in your posts).



Actually, it has, still does, and probably always will. After all, he's Sid jr.



Trying to use that as an insult not only makes you look like even more of a utter dicksmack than you already are, but also negates any credibility your argument had. Vengeance is a good alliance, yet you would refer to them as if they were a present-day SL.

As if you're just that leet.

'As if'.

Incidentally, your argument had no sense from the get-go...you're just bitter, as we (and GD) all know.




...is what you've been posting so far, and probably the only thing you should post from now on.

This is summed up in one single question.

Am I entitled to my own opinion?
Sadly, Loyalty, on an inet game is not a trait I seek to portray. Am I a bad person because I am not Loyal to a PA alliance or the people? Am I a bad person because I think Vengenance is crap? Why can't I feel they are crap? And yes, I am bitter, now what? Where do we go from here? All of your replies to my posts sound the same. Really. Llook at them.

Sidenote: I actually laughed at the dicksmack bit. Quite a funny line. Its your opinion that I am a dicksmack, and I am not mad at you for it. So don't be mad at me because I think Zhil is repetitve and insecure, and that vengeance is crap.

Also, if you need help in proving your point in the furture, RP also thinks I am bitter.

[furball]

Chika, as a current PA player I've just wandered over from GD where I spend most of my time in the forums. I stuck up for you. I suggested that you be a given a break by the 'masses', and that people should stop inciting you to say stuff.


But this is of your own accord, with no dispute. I will leave my post on GD because I still think it's valuable there. However, my opinion of you has now plummeted considerably.

Why do you feel the need to insult Vengeance? Sure, they're not at the level of 1up or even ND (your current preferred alliance afaik), but they hold a respectable position among the next tier of alliances.

Are you like Storebo, in feeling victimised by actually getting attacked by Vengeance? Are you too good for it? If you do feel that way, then your attitude smacks of nothing short of pure arrogance. To treat Vengeance as something below that suggests a personal grudge, since the facts bear no resemblence.



furball, Vengeance DC.

PS. Hi cochese. m00.

[Chika]

See. I neer said or even implied that Vengeance was crap. I used them as an example. Our pal Coc brought out the comparisions to other crap alliances etc. My point in my last post was to say" So what I think vengeance is crap. AND" Maybe it came out wrong. I do have to admit that i labeled vengeance because of thier recent Speed round related tone. I don't think vengenace is crap, but i do think they are "sub-par". but that doesn't make me a bad person.

[Cochese]

Points taken all around I think.

PS: Chika, I owe you a + rep point.

PPS: hi furball. mooOOOoo.

[Chika]

Originally Posted by Cochese

PS: Chika, I owe you a + rep point.

Forreal? Woot! Wooooot!!
I actually lost 2 red blurbs in 2 days. i had 5 or 6 posreps in a row, but then I posted a post in joy of losing 1 red blob, and someone negrepped me for being happy.

[Bashar]

Originally Posted by Bashar

As much as I hate to weaken your point on this issue, I do have to point out that eclipse did have Sid. He was not there under the nickname Sid, and he had no official position other than member, however he did play a very influential advisory role to Focht in an unofficial capacity.

Could the person who gave me neg-rep for this post please contact me and explain why. I am at a loss as to how to improve my posts based on the anonymous and reason-free neg rep I recieved from it.

[TheRat]

Originally Posted by Nonentity

Are you like Stifler, in feeling victimised by actually getting attacked by Vengeance?

In my opinion, holding a serious grudge against an alliance for attacking you is a bit wierd. I personaly joke around about hating vgn/bee/etc for killing my babies, but anyone who knows me will realize that Im just joking (And Ive earned the right to joke about it, I still have the screenshot with 37 vgn planets fleetcatching my babies ).

Everyone knows that if you are anything, you will be attacked for it, and getting angry about it is just a waste of energy. I took it as a serious compliment that they actually spent that much effort just to get me down.