Pansies

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Jester

Biggest players are usually the biggest pansies.

Jester

I found this post over on the archive of the Deus forum. It's from two and a half years ago, but I found I was saying the same thing a lot during round 12. I also notice how people talk about their 'one topX rank' before they quit. Sometimes I wonder if people are still playing so they can outlast everyone better.

I witnessed it this round with a galmate* who had an uncharacteristically good planet. He played harder for it, but he also freaked out about leaving his planet vulnerable. And vulnerable it was, he was not in one of the powerhouse alliances (LCH/1up), and his galaxy had only one similarly large planet that could cover him ingal. He kept it reined in enough that he was still an asset to both his galaxy and alliance (I like to think I was a good influence on that). In addition he was wonderfully hostile to our enemies, often (unwittingly) choosing LCH targets in galraids and recall/resending on them enough times to drain a sizable portion of available defense.

But some people stop being assets to their alliance when they get a big planet, and I don't get that. Planetarion is without a sliver of doubt a team game. Sure, you can play betas and speedgames alone, but playing Planetarion alone is pointless and stupid. At the very least one has to play with the galaxy team, but for full value you join an alliance. On the one side it's a social thing, you have more people to talk about the game with, but it also adds depth to the game. You get to be a part of a larger whole, and trust me on this: it's much more of a challenge to help an alliance to nr1 than to get a top ranking planet. So naturally it should be more gratifying to achieve the team victory.

But really, I don't think everyone views it that way. People get a rush off getting roids, so they can build a bigger fleet, get more roids, build a bigger fleet etc. It's a pity, because a lot of team leaders (alliance hc) don't have the foresight to cut these players from their team.

[Almeida]

i don't really get what u mean:
a big player does help his ally as he has a good score which gives the ally a better rank.
a big player has a big fleet which helps the ally when it comes to defense.

so what exactly do u mean when u say big players tend to be big pansies

[Banned]

Originally Posted by Almeida

i don't really get what u mean:

I'm not surprised.

a big player does help his ally as he has a good score which gives the ally a better rank.

Rank has very little to do with winning. All alliances but one can improve it, right?

a big player has a big fleet which helps the ally when it comes to defense.

A lot of big players don't defend, or don't defend regularly, or don't have big defense fleets.

so what exactly do u mean when u say big players tend to be big pansies

I meant exactly what I said. They're often too absorbed in their own size to consider anyone else's anything.

[Almeida]

Originally Posted by Banned

I'm not surprised.

no need to get personal...

Originally Posted by Banned

Rank has very little to do with winning. All alliances but one can improve it, right?

u can only win through getting rank #1 so what u say sounds a bit strange.

Originally Posted by Banned

A lot of big players don't defend, or don't defend regularly, or don't have big defense fleets.

i'd not say that a lot of them act that way; i'd rather say it's a minority

Originally Posted by Banned

I meant exactly what I said. They're often too absorbed in their own size to consider anyone else's anything.

well everybody is trying to get big; and once again i think it's the minority that gets too absorbed in their own size to consider anyone else's anything...

[mazzelaar]

I think Banned is absolutely right. I think the greater issues are the concessions HC make due to people having big planets. I'd like to think this is something 1up aren't guilty of but we all know from the experience of the last two rounds that big planets often hinder an alliance far more than they aid it unless they are forced to play for the team.

Over the past two round we have all seen large planets not defend, not attack, NAP, 3 fleet and generally do nothing other than leech defence simply due to the fact that they have a good planet rank and they want to keep it that way.

[Chika]

I have to differ. Todays big players are not that selfish, though there are a few. SOme of the guys you love, would rather attack your attacker than defend you against that attacker (HI AIF!) and some would only defend you with the same ships that they don't use for attacks or when they run out of targets, or when they are in a big enough lead to where they can defence hoar at the end of the round for defence points (HI AIF, TEK) Or some won't defend you at all (HI CHERRIO-maybe spelling) For the most part, other big planets play there parts from my experience. Sadly, you don't know these people because they ended top 3 instead of top 1 because early while their selfish alliance m8 was roiding, they were defending. You don't know these people because they tend not to be the favorites because they don't build roiding fleets at the start, and look cool hanging in top 10 all round. It is a tough argument, because the selfish people are known, and the unselfish people are not know. But trust me, there are more unselfish than selfish.

With the general statement I have to agree "Big players are the biggest pansies" depending on your meaning of pansies, if it includes, Nitpickers, complainers, questioners, idiots, then alot of people whith big planets fit into this catagory. Typically because most tend to over think certain aspects of the game, take it to serious, etc. But thats all point of view. One who witnesses a big player whining would take him for a pansie (based on my definition) but other pansies won't feel he is.
Big planets make their contribution to the alliance in many sorts of ways, but it could be analized as such,
picture 2 people. Both donate to charities. 1 of the 2 people donates because they really want to help, and the other donates so he can claim it on his taxes and get a bigger return. They both are helping, but one of them has ill-advised motivation.

[Chika]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

I'd like to think this is something 1up aren't guilty of but we all know from the experience of the last two rounds that big planets often hinder an alliance far more than they aid it unless they are forced to play for the team.

You have to elaborate on this one, I can name two names right now (already did) that didn't start actually defending until the end of the round. I also know a guy that opted to attack an attacker rather than defend his alliance m8 which he could have COVERED. Sadly I deleted my logs when I uninstalled irc, because i had a world of quotes that speak for themselves, that I wanted to know if a 1up HC agreed with. I will say that 1up is not the worst, but there are dudes that were allowed to walk on water that just wern't that much help. Guilty of all of the classic "big planet selfish moves". Only defending majorly against 1 class launching attacks and then going afk, only to return to get a scan because "thier fleet was out and they couldn't defend anyway". I have also witnessed AG's TP and a defence call that one of the members could have covered, lets say anti DE, which most xans sent on attacks (just an example) and the call go uncovered. (BTW, this was the case in most of the AG's)
Side note: HI!! I was in all of the AG's, and got kicked from most for complaining about it.
Thanks..

[mazzelaar]

Originally Posted by Chika

You have to elaborate on this one, I can name two names right now (already did) that didn't start actually defending until the end of the round. I also know a guy that opted to attack an attacker rather than defend his alliance m8 which he could have COVERED. Sadly I deleted my logs when I uninstalled irc, because i had a world of quotes that speak for themselves, that I wanted to know if a 1up HC agreed with. I will say that 1up is not the worst, but there are dudes that were allowed to walk on water that just wern't that much help. Guilty of all of the classic "big planet selfish moves". Only defending majorly against 1 class launching attacks and then going afk, only to return to get a scan because "thier fleet was out and they couldn't defend anyway". I have also witnessed AG's TP and a defence call that one of the members could have covered, lets say anti DE, which most xans sent on attacks (just an example) and the call go uncovered. (BTW, this was the case in most of the AG's)
Side note: HI!! I was in all of the AG's, and got kicked from most for complaining about it.
Thanks..

I think you're right to degree but when we experience this selfish attitude we simply stopped defending the planets who were of no use to the rest of the players. You only need to ask cheerios, sk8az, elviz and a couple of selected other about the outcome of not "pulling thier weight". As for players like Aif and TeK, you are slightly misinformed. They were among the top defenders for 1up for most of last round and had thier defence offers turned down very frequently during the latter part of the round to give other members chance to amass defence points. You should know that neither Sid nor myself tolerate the prima donna attitude. We are unlikely to kick any of these people because we know thier fleet is of valid tactical use and we would much rather it was used to attack our enemies rather than us, but we will cut of thier means of keeping that sizeable roid count (thier defence) until they show themselves to be a team player just like every other member.

[Chika]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

I We are unlikely to kick any of these people because we know thier fleet is of valid tactical use and we would much rather it was used to attack our enemies rather than us, but we will cut of thier means of keeping that sizeable roid count (thier defence) until they show themselves to be a team player just like every other member.

I can respect this answer.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by mazzelaar

I think Banned is absolutely right. I think the greater issues are the concessions HC make due to people having big planets. I'd like to think this is something 1up aren't guilty of but we all know from the experience of the last two rounds that big planets often hinder an alliance far more than they aid it unless they are forced to play for the team.

Over the past two round we have all seen large planets not defend, not attack, NAP, 3 fleet and generally do nothing other than leech defence simply due to the fact that they have a good planet rank and they want to keep it that way.

Alot depends on the person playing the big planet. Sure a big planet often has a lesser "quality" defence fleet because he concentrates on attacking (but attacking helps the alliance aswell in a less noble way ), but I think in the end it all comes down to the how the player plays this game.

But like you said, a good planet rank often is more important to some players then working for the team as they should. I guess it's up to the alliances to figure out which pple would play like that and to filter them before the round starts.

[Chika]

If the community came together and kicked all shitty, none alliance helping big planets, and the communtiy roided them to the ground, we wouldn't have this problem.

[cypher]

in all fairness to aif as far as i know he defended all round... tek however didn't even come to 1up till he had a very nice rank and with his switch to 1up and the defence he almost got instantly he basically had no chance but to def ALOT

ow and you didn't get kicked of our attack group cuz you whined about using fleets for defence that's for sure totally other reasons which are not important atm

[Tis]

completely and utterly unrelated....

Chika, your sig. "In the Mid 1800's, being a Virgin was actually cool. Does this mean that one day it will actually be cool to be fat? "

That time has been and gone. In ancient times, being fat was a sign of prosperity and desirablity, you could afford to eat a lot and provide for others and whatnot. You will notice all the ancient fertility goddesses are fat, and not in a pregnant way.

Go History degree Go!

In the interest of not getting deleted, big players cover a range. The 'winner' tends to be a selfish player but unselfish people who work their asses off can also do well (when ive been playing hardcore, ive gotten as many as 5 defenses out of one fleet in a day, due to noticing recalls early on), if they are smart enough. Certainly how an alliance enforces its def requirements makes a big difference. In a lot of ways, the cap of 8000 roids evens the odds a bit. The 'selfish' players reach a point they cant grow much beyond while there is still time left in the round, giving other people who defended more a chance to catch up.... especially if they are in the winning alliance and consiquently having to deal with fewer calls for def than earlier on.

[noah02]

Yuck I remember evil_noob in SiN didnt have 1 wave amp no defence ships and in top 20.
He soon got his lil ass kicked.

[Treveler]

Originally Posted by noah02

Yuck I remember evil_noob in SiN didnt have 1 wave amp no defence ships and in top 20.
He soon got his lil ass kicked.

You shouldnt kick him you should stop providing defence. And if he leave because of it, you roid him for 72 hours none stop!

[CrazySpoon]

The thing is, bit planets could help cover a galaxy with an alliance raid. Even if its only a fake attack it would help. Defence fleets get sent out, alliance m8s will be more able to land and gain rocks. So it would help several planets of your alliance. Wich would probably mean that the avarage score would go up, the quality of your alliance m8's planets would go up and it will mean that they will grow bigger a bit faster, wich is in ur advantage when you want to take out bigger galaxies or when there is a heavy attack on u or ur galaxy.

I fully agree with Banned

[TheRat]

Chika, you had your access removed from my AG, when it was found you were picking targets in ALL AG's, heh. I never saw you whine about people attacking instead of def'ing.

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by Treveler

You shouldnt kick him you should stop providing defence. And if he leave because of it, you roid him for 72 hours none stop!

Roiding indefinitely at your officers' disposal.

One "someone" (hi Chronox ) last round was constantly jump-shipping alliances last round, had the pri-Madonna aura in him, left us on the last week of r12 for some very petty reasons and dropped us remarkably on the universal ranks.

He was roided to the ground, got our place back on ranks, and passed DeadlyRock while at it on the last 2-3 ticks of the round.

Big players not defending, being selfish and acting up is like harvesting. When the season comes, you eat healthy and you eat good.

[The Real Arfy]

Originally Posted by demiGOD

Roiding indefinitely at your officers' disposal.

One "someone" (hi Chronox ) last round was constantly jump-shipping alliances last round, had the pri-Madonna aura in him, left us on the last week of r12 for some very petty reasons and dropped us remarkably on the universal ranks.

He was roided to the ground, got our place back on ranks, and passed DeadlyRock while at it on the last 2-3 ticks of the round.

Big players not defending, being selfish and acting up is like harvesting. When the season comes, you eat healthy and you eat good.

Tee hee hee!

As we showed, it pays to do the right thing, usually

I must say I agree with everything written so far on this topic, but I can sympathise (or empathise?) with those who are being blamed here, the big planets. Yes, cheerios in r11 wasn't really an asset to 1up, because he hardly attacked and stacked alot of resources - but this was probably not his fault due to there being very few targets for him, so he would have needed to keep his value as low as possible.

[BloodyButcher]

Big planet, big e-penis, big e-penis and small boxers?

[barney]

i too agree with banned that some of the bigger alliance players play selfishly and not for the benefit of their alliance, however not all big planets play this way!

i also beleive it tallys rather well with some of the points i made about fencesitting towards the end of the round and has always been an annoyance to me :/

[olle]

i agree with banned

Its easy beeing selfish when having top spot, you dont want anyone to attack you etc. but beeing top player means your also will be attacket if not for XP then roids... or even just be mean. If you dont have any ally to help you then your dead. Me myself cant brag, ive never ended in the top 5, 10, 20 or even 30.
A nice solution determing if the player is a team player and helps out with ally defence or not is defence points, you will see clear whos helping or not.

[cypher]

Originally Posted by The Real Arfy

I must say I agree with everything written so far on this topic, but I can sympathise (or empathise?) with those who are being blamed here, the big planets. Yes, cheerios in r11 wasn't really an asset to 1up, because he hardly attacked and stacked alot of resources - but this was probably not his fault due to there being very few targets for him, so he would have needed to keep his value as low as possible.

ermmm if what you state is true cheerios should have defended even more and with some proper fleets instead of the stuff he used

and for the record... earlier on there were more then enough targets available for him

[Bashar]

I think that, in general (not always, aif last round was a definite exception), you need to have a certain amount of selfishness to get to the top spot and stay there.

[thaeter]

i think that having a top spot goes to people's heads. They have feeling of superiority over everyone else, they feel because they have a top rank means they are an asset to their alliance, which usually is not true because like people said previously they become attack whores and give their alliance "spare" ships. However there are are people who hold top spots and still contribute well to alliance defence etc.. I really think Chika was a prime example of how someone can have a top planet but also send alot of defence to their alliance and be an active player. Also Maz and Sid are good examples of top players with top planets who defend alot.

[noah02]

I defend a lot for salvage does that make me selfish?

[Rinoa]

maybe we will see a lot more top zik players defending their alliancemates this round due to the potential stealing factor?

[Neferti]

...and as I suspect a lot of top players will go Zik, this could have a major impact on how top players behave towards alliances?

[Gate]

Rinoa and Nef have made good points. Pirates in particular look rather tasty. I could see some less scrupulous zik DCs using their influence to slowly build up a powerful BS and/or CR attack fleet by sending enough corsairs or pirates to steal a decent number, but not enough to dissuade an attacker with anything more than a wafer of resolve...

Note: Hmmm, maybe I should change my race choice to zik?

[G.K Zhukov]

Its not a new problem, however how the pansies act have changed according to the changes in the game.

The 72-hour period makes it a bit uncomfy beeing a pansy cought with yer pans down, but it wont stop them from trying.

P.S: Look at my sig.....

[Almeida]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

P.S: Look at my sig.....

guess u mean me with that;
1st) it is a bit out of the context
2nd) i was one of the top deffers in ND last round; something u can't say from u...

[lokken]

I wouldn't describe Almeida as a coward myself. He's put his planet on the line for the sake of his galaxy on a matter of principle (one that i strongly disagree with as I believe he was being grossly unfair to his alliance, but he believes in it all the same) and got pretty much trashed for the privelege of standing up for what he believed in - if he cared for his rank above his principles, he'd have recognised ND's greater interest on the issue. Almeida holds galaxy above alliance, got his planet trashed along with the rest of his galaxy.

I wouldn't say Almeida is a 'coward' looking at the facts.

Zhukov wasn't active last round, btw and the top defenders were those who lasted til the end of the round. If you don't finish a job, it doesn't count.

[Almeida]

Originally Posted by lokken

I wouldn't describe Almeida as a coward myself. He's put his planet on the line for the sake of his galaxy on a matter of principle (one that i strongly disagree with as I believe he was being grossly unfair to his alliance, but he believes in it all the same) and got pretty much trashed for the privelege of standing up for what he believed in - if he cared for his rank above his principles, he'd have recognised ND's greater interest on the issue. Almeida holds galaxy above alliance, got his planet trashed along with the rest of his galaxy.

i don't hold the gal above the ally, both are nearly equally important to me and in most cases it shouldn't be a problem to be loyal to both. i would **** my fleet for an ally m8 as well as for a gal m8.

Originally Posted by lokken

Zhukov wasn't active last round, btw and the top defenders were those who lasted til the end of the round. If you don't finish a job, it doesn't count.

ok lets express me that thing with other words: i covered many incomings with my def fleets but i was not on the official defenders list coz i did quit 2 weeks before the round ended

when zhukov was inactive last round imho he doesn't have the right to judge if i was an asset to ND or not as he doesn't have a clue about it.

enough whining from me: back to topic

[Chika]

Originally Posted by Bashar

I think that, in general (not always, aif last round was a definite exception), you need to have a certain amount of selfishness to get to the top spot and stay there.

Bashar, I don't expect you, of all people, to let your brain dangle from a fence in the wind.

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by Almeida

i don't hold the gal above the ally, both are nearly equally important to me and in most cases it shouldn't be a problem to be loyal to both. i would **** my fleet for an ally m8 as well as for a gal m8.



ok lets express me that thing with other words: i covered many incomings with my def fleets but i was not on the official defenders list coz i did quit 2 weeks before the round ended

when zhukov was inactive last round imho he doesn't have the right to judge if i was an asset to ND or not as he doesn't have a clue about it.

enough whining from me: back to topic

No offense nor is this meant towards you in particular but I honnestly cannot even begin to understand how a person could value his galaxy higher then his alliance. Galaxy is something temporarily, in the best case you got like 2 buddy friends in it and with some luck 1-2 other pple you know.

an alliance, incase you're a loyal player, is a long time commitment. Normally you don't join an alliance for 1 round and hop on to the next one (yes I'm aware there are such players).

Whenever I get the choice between my alliance and my galaxy then I'm sorry for those being in my galaxy, but I will for 200% chose what's in the best interest of my alliance. Even if that means seeing my galaxy getting ruined and thrown outside the top10 (as it happened last round).

Ranks are cool, but pple need to realize that if their alliance performs shit, chances are your galaxy won't last long while if you make sure you contribute to your alliance, then you're a larger chance that your galaxy and thus your own planet will be bigger.

Nway, that's just how I feel about this. I'd also kick out any player that values his galaxy above the alliance as to me that's being disloyal.

[Squishy]

not much more can be said to that.

Your galaxy is all well and good but even from a selfish point of view u want to do well u need a good alliance at you back. And to bee a good alliance you need 100% member commitment. for instance having your alliance hitting hostiles in your gal may weaken your gal but will strenghen your alliances standing. Its not a pretty way to play but who said war was pretty.....

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by lokken

I wouldn't describe Almeida as a coward myself. He's put his planet on the line for the sake of his galaxy on a matter of principle (one that i strongly disagree with as I believe he was being grossly unfair to his alliance, but he believes in it all the same) and got pretty much trashed for the privelege of standing up for what he believed in - if he cared for his rank above his principles, he'd have recognised ND's greater interest on the issue. Almeida holds galaxy above alliance, got his planet trashed along with the rest of his galaxy.

I wouldn't say Almeida is a 'coward' looking at the facts.

Zhukov wasn't active last round, btw and the top defenders were those who lasted til the end of the round. If you don't finish a job, it doesn't count.

I guess I disagree with you Lokken.

1) I dont care sh*t for what Almeida or anyone else does for his galaxy in a random round.

2) He refused to attack big LCH planets, becouse it wasnt a good enough chance to get trough. Saying he would just attack medium or smaller planets than himself, while he had one of the larger planets in ND (I know becouse I checked with the ND-webbie).

I will happily dig up the log when I get back from easter vac, if you want it.

P.S Its not taken out of context, so dont come with that crap exuse anyone.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

[alot more]
Nway, that's just how I feel about this. I'd also kick out any player that values his galaxy above the alliance as to me that's being disloyal.

I agree 110% with Kj. I know its strange, but hey

The only round I have ever cared much for my galaxy was round 4, but that was becouse my galaxy was 100% Legion and I was lego myself.

(The_Fish: our r8 gal was fluffly though)

[Chika]

I think Almedia is an idiot. And accordingly his character last round was incoherent. His gal was getting owned anyway. He was disloyal to an alliance that allowed him to directly disobey his HC. No he isn't a coward, but i would rather have a coward than someone who doesn't use thier brain.

[Almeida]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

No offense nor is this meant towards you in particular but I honnestly cannot even begin to understand how a person could value his galaxy higher then his alliance.

i can't believe tha tit's so hard to read my words: In no sentence i said that i value my gal over my ally!!!

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

2) He refused to attack big LCH planets, becouse it wasnt a good enough chance to get trough. Saying he would just attack medium or smaller planets than himself, while he had one of the larger planets in ND (I know becouse I checked with the ND-webbie).

It's funny how much of a twat u are, u are so stupid that it starts to hurt me. u have no ****ing clue why i didn't want to hit LCH planets and start telling some random crap on here. i never refused to hit a planet when i got direct orders from HC, go and ask them u asshole.

Originally Posted by Chika

I think Almedia is an idiot. And accordingly his character last round was incoherent. His gal was getting owned anyway. He was disloyal to an alliance that allowed him to directly disobey his HC. No he isn't a coward, but i would rather have a coward than someone who doesn't use thier brain.

u idiot, where do u want to know from if i obeyed my HC or not? u been in ND last round while i had some discussions in there? and the thing that caused the troubles was THAT i used my brain...

@Lokken: don't dare to censor my post again

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by Almeida

i can't believe tha tit's so hard to read my words: In no sentence i said that i value my gal over my ally!!!

Nor can I believe it's so hard to read MY words ...

I said this wasn't meant towards you, it was meant to everyone who value his galaxy above his alliance. I just quoted you cause you raized the subject

[jerome]

I can sortof understand when people value galaxy over alliance as I hold high regard for my own galaxies. Except when I say that, I do not mean rankwise I mean, I usually stick with my closest friends in galaxies for the pure enjoyment factor of being around those you enjoy being with more (shown in being in a gal with Xain for past 2 rounds and in other games, pushed certain people into my gals/alliances pretty much every round just because they're my friends.)

Onto the topic at hand, pansies exist, always have existed and probably always will as long as attacking is more profitable personal-rankwise than defending. I don't understand what all the commotion is about with top planet, it holds too many negative vibes for me to ever really care tbh, it's much more fun playing in a crap gal, getting incoming regularly and fighting for survival (in the higher echelons that is) rather than sitting cosy (hello round 5.)

[Almeida]

Originally Posted by Kjeldoran

Nor can I believe it's so hard to read MY words ...

I said this wasn't meant towards you, it was meant to everyone who value his galaxy above his alliance. I just quoted you cause you raized the subject

/me hides i should take an english course again :P

[Kjeldoran]

Originally Posted by _ryzekiel_

I can sortof understand when people value galaxy over alliance as I hold high regard for my own galaxies. Except when I say that, I do not mean rankwise I mean, I usually stick with my closest friends in galaxies for the pure enjoyment factor of being around those you enjoy being with more (shown in being in a gal with Xain for past 2 rounds and in other games, pushed certain people into my gals/alliances pretty much every round just because they're my friends.)

then my question is, in a galaxy you have 2 budies and with abit of luck you know 1-3 other pple in your galaxy. so atmost you start with a 60% of known pple in your galaxy.
In an alliance however, and I'm talking about my opinion, you play with far more pple you know and most of them ARE my m8's.
Sure you stick with 1-2 closest friends in your galaxy, but they most likely are in your buddy and are either your own alliance or some allied alliance (in most cases one of these 2) ...

So if you look at it from the "where are my friends" question, then I'd still go for alliance over galaxy.

[G.K Zhukov]

Originally Posted by Almeida

It's funny how much of a twat u are, u are so stupid that it starts to hurt me. u have no ****ing clue why i didn't want to hit LCH planets and start telling some random crap on here. i never refused to hit a planet when i got direct orders from HC, go and ask them u asshole.

Heh.
Im not interested in your reasons for not hitting LCH planets. There is no good reasons for hitting your enemies in a war.
Besides that, writing that you needed specific orders from a HC to attack a planet you were to pansy to attack, tell loads. Just imagine how much extra work that puts on HC when they have to sweettalk to certain childish members.

[lokken]

Almeida's galaxy was fencesitting, for sure. I don't doubt it, members of his galaxy have openly admitted they weren't up for any war at all to me in PM. I initially got the impression that Almeida was eager to protect his galaxy above all else (as ND had every right to attack it on classic retal principles).

However the refusal to hit LCH (our main enemy) which I didn't know about and Almeida's protests that he doesn't hold galaxy or alliance above the others suggests he's certainly not up for drawing attention to himself, which can be cowardly, and in some situations sensible (not really in his case when he's got a very large galaxy with plenty of outside support behind him to protect him). If I was in his fortunate position i'd have been out annoying LCH as much as possible.

As for editing posts, I shall censor as I deem appropriate in this forum as listed in rule 1 of these forums: "Life's unfair, deal with it" to ensure that reasonable discussion is maintained. Just telling people to **** off and generally trolling them was not acceptable, hence it was removed.

[Almeida]

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

Heh.
Im not interested in your reasons for not hitting LCH planets. There is no good reasons for hitting your enemies in a war.
Besides that, writing that you needed specific orders from a HC to attack a planet you were to pansy to attack, tell loads. Just imagine how much extra work that puts on HC when they have to sweettalk to certain childish members.

Your incoherent use of the english language revels what you want to hide. I suggest you try to put a bit more effort into your PR here.

Every thought about, that there are also non english native speakers out in the world u ignorant dumbass?

tbfh, i would have had more reasons to hit 1up than LCH; LCH never touched my galaxy but 1up did several times...

and what bullshit are u talking about the extra work for HC's?? is it much work to do a quick PM to me: "Almeida hit that guy". Angryduck told me back then and u can ask him i didn't argue about hitting him, i simply did, though i thought it was a stupid decision; i wasn't to pansy to hit him, it was just illogical to do so, when there were targets out there left with more than twices as many roids. if u really think i was a coward that feared for his planet, then don't you think i would have stayed in ND which would have protected me from the 1up bashing i received.

[lokken]

Originally Posted by Almeida

but u are a typical troll, whenever u see my name u do everything to miscredit me. shows of your character tbh.

Originally Posted by G.K Zhukov

Your incoherent use of the english language revels what you want to hide. I suggest you try to put a bit more effort into your PR here.

Here endeth the PA guide on 'how to get banned real fast'

Thank you for your attention.

[aNgRyDuCk]

to clear something up, as far as Almeida goes, as far as I can remember, (please accept my apologies if I'm mistaken) but 72 hours after Almeida left ND, he joined HR as I remember it, (ofcoarse his planet was toast by the time he actually put the tag on) and his reason for leaving had to do something with not getting adequate defense or something along those lines, maybe that was chronox (another real piece of work), or both, can't really remember, may have had to do with target selection. I do remember his leaving hurt ND at a time when alliance score was close and his joining HR could have changed the alliance rankings, it was a slap in the face to ND, and I remember being pretty pissed about it at the time. When a 7-8 Mil planet ups and leaves after you've provided their attacks and defenses all round it tends to piss you off.....I will say that to my knowledge Almeida hit every target I directly ordered him to hit (I seem to remember one occasion where we had a conversation about this, he didn't want to hit LCH, and I told him that wasn't an option) and as far as I know he launched as directed (I didn't verify the launch, so have to take his word for it) Why was it illogical to hit LCH, they were 1 spot above us in the rankings and we were working towards catching them. Seems quite logical to me, not to mention the hostilities all round from LCH.

again, I don't clearly remember play by play of the occurance, as we had a lot going on at the time obviously, however, his leaving ND in my opinion was unwarranted (on ND's part) and he basically screwed ND, because of this he would not be welcomed back into our membership as long as I hold a seat on the HC.

[Gate]

And, from my point of view...

The reasons I have heard/have guessed about Almeida leaving, was mainly due to his hostility to 1up. He hates 1up, and would rather have been part of an alliance hitting them than part of ND, which was friendly to 1up. This in turn led to friction, his distaste for hitting LCH (hostile to 1up ofc), and wishing to join HR (Which, pld to them, actually seemed to throw far more of their weight in 1up's direction than LCH did. So almi atleast picked the right choice in who to join ). Ofc, I'm not HC, so can't comment on his attacks on LCH or lack of. However, I do remember he was threatened with a bashing by 2 very large LCH players if he did not back down in his support of ND against LCH (or one of their allies), and that his response was something along the lines of 'ok, bash me.'
Therefore, during his time at ND, he seemed to try to be a good part of the alliance, but was hampered by his own internal problems due to hating 1up.

(The above is pretty clueless on my part, it's just what I gathered... I was very disappointing when my darling almeida went and joined the puppies )

ChronoX on the other hand, buggered off thanks to lack of def, at a time when ND were getting 100+ incoming fleets a day.