Ending Powerblocks :(

[Azzer]

Time for some honesty that perhaps 60 (or more!?) players in the game don't want to hear and may choose to convince themselves couldn't possibly be true, but hear me out:

The important fact bit:
Powerblocks kill the game. And the business. Genuinely. There have been a number of rounds in the last 6 years where large powerblocks have dominated (be it 2 or 3 allies), and those rounds the playerbase dwindles more than any other round, people that stay playing don't want to buy game-cash/p-units as much (it's not "worth it" or they have to keep their scores low to stay out of range of the powerblock who are now just "bottomfeeding" off anyone that hops into range), and business itself takes a temporary but always dangerous plunge. Past powerblocks have damaged Bushtarion. The current powerblock is damaging Bushtarion. It's damaging not just the players and community, but it's damaging the actual very business itself. The current powerblock might be "enjoying" their dominance, but you're helping to directly throttle the game. No amount of self-denial will help - it's actual 100% fact, something I see and can physically measure every single time there is a powerblock.

I have in the past tried to implement automated systems to prevent powerblocks (for example CRA) - this doesn't work, and I will not ever attempt that again. I have come to realise that no game mechanic can ever "force" two groups of players to attack eachother/to not work together for a round. Because not attacking eachother, or working together, is something that is external of game mechanics, it's something that happens through social systems, and often in private (so mechanics cannot prevent it, and rules cannot prevent it).

So here's a new approach - being honest and trying to educate users who didn't already guess it. I am asking the players not to powerblock, and if able (and you are able) to stop the current powerblock - for the sake of Bushtarion itself. I can not and will not force you to remove your powerblock or change the way you are playing, that would be unfair to you - but I can try to educate you as to what your playstyle is doing to the whole of Bushtarion itself (the community and the business). And if you genuinely care, you will stop it.

I will continue working on things discussed in the past couple of months on IRC and the forums to help "resistance efforts" be an actually viable system, and to also make "bottomfeeding" unrewarding, which will all help out in situations where top allies form powerblocks and don't care what they do to the business/the game. I'm not simply going to make this announcement, hope for the best, and do nothing. I am working on new features and changes to existing features too (a number of changes will be in for next round).

If you want to discuss powerblocks, or ideas to help resistances that are realistic, fun, and fair to everybody involved, then both IRC (click "Live Chat" when in-game in the game menu) and the forums will always welcome constructive discussions, especially if it can generate solutions and new ideas for the future (I can often be found chatting in #bushtarion between 20:00 GMT and 00:00 GMT, if you want to try and catch me online to have some open discussions in the room about game ideas, features, the future etc.!). I don't want to see spammy/trolly/flamey arguments or personal attacks on individuals though.

And to the 60 players that may be reading this and thinking "sod it, we earned our rank/we broke no rules/we enjoy this/I don't believe anything Azzer says because he's just out to get us" - consider for a moment the cost of your enjoyment and the damage, and consider that I am being serious, and consider that if I was just out to get you I would just come and get you ( ;) ) - you are hurting in a bigger way than any badly coded feature could hurt, and I have witnessed this in a number of past rounds, this isn't the only round there's been a powerblock and I've witnessed exactly the same things happening in the same ways, so have many old veterans here.

Finally - yes there are other things and aspects that damage the game, the community, some that are my own fault. Features that are unwanted. Lack of features that are wanted. The way forums/IRC got moderated/opped or staffed (or not staffed). These things all get worked on over time, through players that give constructive feedback, that's also why we're on Age 5 not Age 1. Sometimes bad changes get made and have to be fixed, other times great changes get made. But don't try to deflect the issue of powerblocks with other issues, this thread and this announcement is not about these other things, it's about something that the players themselves can fix - powerblocks. I'll help with future game and community changes... but you the players... top players especially... can actually directly help if you care about the game, the community, the business, and the future - stop powerblocks. Prevent them. Discourage them. And most of all: Don't be selfish! :D

[Twigley]

Time left: 20.58 days.

I won't be guilt tripped into backstabing my friends.
And i don't see how ending the current one will do anything for business.
I also wont be partaking in any future powerblocks.

[Steve_God]

I never realised there was such a significant effect from it if I'm honest :s

I'd also already planned to not be involved in an similar PowerBlock situation in the future.

If we had originated as three separate allies at the start, then things would have been different, as we would have turned on each other by now - however we were set-up as one alliance from the start, so all members would refuse to attack their friends from the other wings anyway.

Just as a suggestion to 'enforce' it won't happen again - could a well worded paragraph to be added to the EULA for future rounds?

[Blackbeard]

I agree with both the replies...didn't realize it would hurt biz, and also feel strongly about not backstabbing m8's.

No more powerblock for me in the future.

On the other hand, the ally's below rank 3 are still competing strongly and its not like they're not continually attacking smaller ally's, bashing and scoring land. So whats the big deal if they just wont grow beyond rank 4?

To be really honest, this has been one of the most boring rounds i've played, only because there is so little activity in the powerblock. Its worked for me this round tho just because i've gotta lot of stuff going on in RL.

Thanks Azzer for everything you do for bush and your continuous efforts to make it better!

[torp]

Since the round is already decided, why not end it early?

I started playing bushtarion again after a ~2 years break and it's sooo boring at the bottom... no active accounts except the bots.

[Silence]

I agree with both the replies...didn't realize it would hurt biz, and also feel strongly about not backstabbing m8's.

No more powerblock for me in the future.

On the other hand, the ally's below rank 3 are still competing strongly and its not like they're not continually attacking smaller ally's, bashing and scoring land. So whats the big deal if they just wont grow beyond rank 4?

To be really honest, this has been one of the most boring rounds i've played, only because there is so little activity in the powerblock. Its worked for me this round tho just because i've gotta lot of stuff going on in RL.

Thanks Azzer for everything you do for bush and your continuous efforts to make it better!

How can you be *so* naive? I guess this post is aimed at Steve too. How did you not realise that people don***8217;t want to play a game where there is no competition? What***8217;s the point? The amount of frustration I***8217;m feeling right now is unbelievable how did you NOT know that it was killing the game?!

F*** off there is competition at ranks 4 and below. We won***8217;t hit each other almost out of pity because we have to deal with players in the power block "bottom feeding". Secondly if we *do* organise a attack as a group we instantly get jumped on by the "bottom feeders"

Before a reply is given "you are just crying about losing" I would like to state that I have bashed a lot during the time I have played the game and also been on the receiving end a lot too, however the key difference here is that the "top" ( I use that word loosely because they by NO means deserve it) will never properly grow out of range. With a group of 20 the majority will grow out of range and the round can continue, but this time it is CONTINUOUS. How can you not realise that you are killing the game. So f***ing ignorant its retarded

The next issue is boredom. The round has been boring throughout the rankings. Power block is bored because lack of targets and I know my alliance is bored too. To the extent that we have to cause a fuss and start acting like "8 year olds" to get some fun out of the game where we created charchters to piss off moderators, targetting those in the powerblock especially (and inferno because he is a c**t). This round has ruined the excitement I used to have for the game. Ive played for a long time now and loved every round until now.


So finally, your statement of "no power block in future". I doubt there will ever be one. The player base is crumbling, I know that I won***8217;t be around much longer which justifies my "8 year old actions" this round as to be honest I can give a toss anymore. I found myself searching for a new strategy game I can play with a larger player base.

Thank you for killing the game I used to love.

[brett]

well put azzer and also its nice to hear from twigs n steve that they will not take part in another powerblock it has killed this round, at least it was not the round where u spent loads on marketing eh azzer!!!

[LAFiN]

I personally would like to see vast reductions in acre grabs attacking at 30, 35,40 and maybe even 45%. If you drop the land grab to !-2% when attacking at 30-32%, less people will attack that range, and even if they do, they won't be rewarded very much for their efforts. I still believe full land grabs should happen if there is mass def, even attacking at the bottom of your range, because it still takes quite a bit of skill/luck to land when more than 4 people send def.

As for the current powerblock. This is realistically like every other round. The only difference right now is that the rank 4 and 5 allies are both top 3 caliber and are therefore bashing the lower alliances as well. Sure, the top three alliances have to do the same, but all that has ended up happening is that the 4th and 5th rank alliances become the usual 1st and 2nd rank alliances. What I'm saying is that every round is pretty much the same. The top 2-3 alliances dominate every other alliance, whilst trying to stay out of the range of the very top alliance. The big difference this round is that there are three alliances at the top which forces the second best group slightly lower, where they have a bigger impact on the general player base. I understand that people aren't spending in heaps, but to me it seems that more people have bought p-units/game-cash than normal. To be quite honest, had I not been playing in one of the top allies I would not have bought the p-unit, and I know this is true for quite a few other people I've talked to.

All-in-all, powerblocks suck, but it is really just an extension of a normal round where 20-40 people bash the living daylights out of everyone else. This time those same 20-40 people are getting bashed, and therefore they are still bashing people, just at lower ranks. Reduce land grabs/injury/insurance for attacking at the bottom and people will stop abusing the system (to a slight degree).

/end drunk ramble.

[Slug]

yh not many people know me in the game but i got a couple points

yeah poweblocking is killing it and alot of people are givin up cause once a team gets on top and out of range then its almost impossible to kill them because alot of players below start becoming inactive and start givin up.

So Not sure if you guys have had discussions about this or not but i say you should lower the allaince members. 20 is way to much. i say go down to 10 members. or even 8. if you do that more battles would go on, more of a chance to fight through out the game. cause its harder to have people online so more would have to be active.

and add in the fame and honour again. idk if thats just me but i personally liked that idea. gives peoples goals to try and be either good or bad.

just my thoughts.

[Podunk]

I for one will never be involved in a powerblock. If that's anything.

I've been avoiding the game this round because of it. Nothing to play for, nothing to achieve, a bunch of effort for nothing in return.

What would be funny is if Azzer didn't publish a portal this round out of spite :P, just so we can forget about this god awful excuse of a round.

Anyways here's to next round :cheers:

[Max]

Wow, I never knew that it would actually damage the game! And never realised that it had done in the past either.

I must say that I was always going to play slow this round and then try to do better next round, but I guess nobody wants to zealously spend bush creds when they know that they cannot win with them!

Either way, I hope that this is the last powerblock that we ever see with this new information. Maybe we'll see some more solos next round as well? :)

[dafe]

im glad this post has been made as i agree the powerblocks ruin the game...and this round being the worst...and hope this wont happen in the future as if it does i probably wont be playing again (and i could say something to the ppl in the powerblock that say they dont realize it ruins the game...but that would be just too bad and get me a ban or something so i wont ;) )

[avash]

If we had originated as three separate allies at the start, then things would have been different, as we would have turned on each other by now - however we were set-up as one alliance from the start, so all members would refuse to attack their friends from the other wings anyway.

Just as a suggestion to 'enforce' it won't happen again - could a well worded paragraph to be added to the EULA for future rounds?

I am not playing this round mate but as you orginated as 3 alliances together it was kind of obvious you were going to win as in this day and age theres not enough force to stop you. It was kinda power blocked even before the round started.

[IceOfFire]

As for the current powerblock. This is realistically like every other round. The only difference right now is that the rank 4 and 5 allies are both top 3 caliber and are therefore bashing the lower alliances as well.

So so so so so so wrong!

Rank 4-5 alliances attack alot LESS than you think!! We cant send attacks, because TBA find it fun to time their attacks and send at us so we have to recall. I do not think i have organised an attack in weeks! That is not lie!!

And the bullshit out of BlackBeards and Steves mouth!! You had no idea of how stale and horrible you were making the game? You should be HUNG for that comment! What have every gripe about you this round been saying?? And you think constant incs are fun?

I've lost all passion for this round, i dont bother leading my alliance (Chance) they have no real leadership from me, because you know why? It's not worth puttin my energy into a round where know one cares!! I would have quit sooo long ago if i wasnt leading an alliance with my friends in it!

And to all Mods/official helps etc...Silence hit the nail on the head, we piss around because we are so bored. What else is there to do?

If powerblocks are anything in the future, count me out of this game.

Fardie/Farvie/Farkie/Furu FTW.

[Alchemist]

Im in the powerblock, and Its kinda boring, but im not going to stab anyone in the back now, but as someone said, why not end the round 2 weeks erlyer? and perhaps offer incentives to players who continualy purchase game credit, ie buy 5 punits and get 5bc free, or something like that.

I also will not be in any powerblock ever again.

Alchemist

[Dark_Angel]

To reply to a few people here, Silence included.

I don't think it was short-sighted of Steve/Twigley/JJ to have made a powerblock (at least in the sense that they should have been aware their block would severely damaged the quality of gameplay).

Isn't a powerblock just winged alliances that are winning? If we're all going to say "Powerblocks are bad, I won't join one next round" - We've all to agree not to have winged alliances.

If we're saying "powerblocks are bad for the game", which I think we all agree they are, we're inadvertently saying the same thing of "wings" altogether. Because essentially - a powerblock is just the prevailing formation of winged alliances.

I won't form, or be part of, future winged' alliances. But I think to jump on Steve/Twigley/JJ's back for making one this round, is a little "mean" tbh. While I'm sure they now understand the impact of 3 dominant alliances in the game, I'm pretty sure this impact was somewhat unprecedented.

[saint1d]

I'm in the "powerblock". I didnt expect things to turn out this way, it was just supposed to be a bit of fun. I feel bad that it has had such an impact on the game and other players in general, and I am pleased Azzer has spoken out about it.

I'm considering deleting my id, but will speak to the ally later today and come to a decision. I dont really want to leave cos I will get bashed to hell haha

[Nagash]

I find the amount of naivity cosidering the powerblock quite incomprhensable. Considering alliance naps have been removed and the majority of alliances in recent rounds have never been napped or at least for no longer than 1/2 weeks ceasefire. How can the current powerblock really have expected anything but a win/stale and boring round. I think maybe a ban rule for those involved in future powerblocks should be implemented. Basically take part in one and your accounts banned for the next round. Amazing that all those people involved in the powerblock are now eating humble pie and claiming they will never be involved again. May i ask if Azzer hadent made this announcement would you still be saying what your claiming in this thread?

[fred]

To reply to a few people here, Silence included.

I don't think it was short-sighted of Steve/Twigley/JJ to have made a powerblock (at least in the sense that they should have been aware their block would severely damaged the quality of gameplay).

Isn't a powerblock just winged alliances that are winning? If we're all going to say "Powerblocks are bad, I won't join one next round" - We've all to agree not to have winged alliances.

If we're saying "powerblocks are bad for the game", which I think we all agree they are, we're inadvertently saying the same thing of "wings" altogether. Because essentially, a powerblock is just the prevailing formation of winged alliances.

I won't form, or be part of, future powerblocks :)

In the 'old' days we had A-NAPS when alliances had wings so we could defend our alliance NAPs as needed.
Perhaps a modification of this (internal game mechanics permitting of course) where if more than one alliance is attacking you your 'A-NAP' alliance can defend you? Or perhaps when the attackers total score is 2 times higher than the targets score the A-NAP can defend (cumulative across an alliance and not just one target).

[fred]

I find the amount of naivity cosidering the powerblock quite incomprhensable. Considering alliance naps have been removed and the majority of alliances in recent rounds have never been napped or at least for no longer than 1/2 weeks ceasefire. How can the current powerblock really have expected anything but a win/stale and boring round. I think maybe a ban rule for those involved in future powerblocks should be implemented. Basically take part in one and your accounts banned for the next round. Amazing that all those people involved in the powerblock are now eating humble pie and claiming they will never be involved again. May i ask if Azzer hadent made this announcement would you still be saying what your claiming in this thread?

Good post !!!!

Same thoughts .. they all say 'sorry' but will do it all again next round ...

[fred]

To reply to a few people here, Silence included.

I won't form, or be part of, future winged' alliances. But I think to jump on Steve/Twigley/JJ's back for making one this round, is a little "mean" tbh. While I'm sure they now understand the impact of 3 dominant alliances in the game, I'm pretty sure this impact was somewhat unprecedented.

HAHAHAHAHA

They knew what they were doing.
This game, that used to be fun to play, is dying.

[Hobbezak]

If we're all going to say "Powerblocks are bad, I won't join one next round" - We've all to agree not to have winged alliances.

Nah, I don't think that quite cuts it. How about we all agree to not recruit anyone who has been in a powerblock in the last year? (Obviously people deserve a second chance after a few rounds)
Who needs changing rules etc, when the playerbase itself can quite easily put a stop to these tactics?

edit: And the whole "I didn't know"-route is total idiocy obviously. You don't have to be a genius to find out that a powerblock has a bad impact on the game (I'm sure some of the people in TBA were on the receiving end of the r14 Oma's Bende powerblock?), and even then, you can choose to disband when you see it's just not cool. Plenty of people left TBA according to my information, because they saw that powerblocks are ftl. So anyone who comes in here now saying "omg I didn't realise" are making a fool out of themselves, because they've already proven they DO know, and that they just don't care.

[Tombi]

And the bullshit out of BlackBeards and Steves mouth!! You had no idea of how stale and horrible you were making the game? You should be HUNG for that comment! What have every gripe about you this round been saying?? And you think constant incs are fun?



Yeah mate, its a game..don't take it so serious!

[Martin]

Interesting....

I remember, when I was back in my early days (round 6) Azzer told our alliance to seperate as we had so many members (or that's what Sordes told me anyway).

I don't quite understand Azzer's post, as it would be unfair to use admin powers to kill the powerblock this round, at this late stage. If you were going to do something (as you knew powerblocks affect the wallet from previous rounds) you should have done it earlier.

As much as I despise powerblocks they played well to win, there are 3 stronger alliances than them (for the sake of argument) and we didn't work together to stop them. They did their politics well and "deserved" it.

I agree an admin coming in future rounds and stopping them by making it against the rules, and an admin stepping in the same way he does with farming etc.

This round it's not against the rules, you knew powerblocks happened before and you never made it against the rules. I would find it hilarious for them to all die as they all want their scores so much but really you can't do sh*t this round.


Just impliment a rule against mutual non-attacking for an extensive amount of time for next and future rounds and step in using admin powers (your common sense) when you feel necessary.

[Gadfly]

Interesting topic. Should have been put up a long time ago not that it in my opinion would have done any good. This game has really gone down the tubes and I for one am probably going to look for another game that offers a better chance of winning. I am tired of supporting a game by buying gamecash just so the big powerblocks can bash the crud out of me for my effort.

I will most likely stay in sleepmode through out the rest of the round as there is no safe place to park my staff against the constant bashers.

[cb1202]

If we're all going to say "Powerblocks are bad, I won't join one next round" - We've all to agree not to have winged alliances.

Nah, I don't think that quite cuts it. How about we all agree to not recruit anyone who has been in a powerblock in the last year? (Obviously people deserve a second chance after a few rounds)
Who needs changing rules etc, when the playerbase itself can quite easily put a stop to these tactics?

edit: And the whole "I didn't know"-route is total idiocy obviously. You don't have to be a genius to find out that a powerblock has a bad impact on the game (I'm sure some of the people in TBA were on the receiving end of the r14 Oma's Bende powerblock?), and even then, you can choose to disband when you see it's just not cool. Plenty of people left TBA according to my information, because they saw that powerblocks are ftl. So anyone who comes in here now saying "omg I didn't realise" are making a fool out of themselves, because they've already proven they DO know, and that they just don't care.


I know I won't have any TBA people in my allies anytime soon. Unless they were recruited as noobs in the noob army. I think I could make an exception for the ones who just started this round, but anyone who has been playing for rounds will not be accepted by many people in the active playerbase.

[Alchemist]

humm, for thoes that are moaning about us eating humble pie, I for one have never been part of a powerblock so didnt know what it was like and since being part of TBA come to realise that I prefere to be solo. I think a lot of people will no longer wish to be part of winged allainces, there is a future for bushtarion a fun future at that.

[Larz]

I've played for 5-6 Rounds and this one has been very aggravating. To have bought p-units and to have a good staff but to have it 0'd in one single attack as has happened multiple times this round is a pain and makes me not want to buy in game cash knowing it could be all wasted.

I liked someones idea of reducing land grab if score margin is huge.

Maybe limit attack range to less of difference. Instead of not being able to attack someone 30% below my score i couldn't attack someone 60% or more below my score.

Unit balance i feel could be tweaked some to help prevent the utter annihilation of staff. Seen many attacks this round with 1 primary unit being bought in super high numbers. 20 M vamps, 15 M SA, 25M RPG etc wiith little use for other units.

Thanks

[Tombi]

humm, for thoes that are moaning about us eating humble pie, I for one have never been part of a powerblock so didnt know what it was like and since being part of TBA come to realise that I prefere to be solo. I think a lot of people will no longer wish to be part of winged allainces, there is a future for bushtarion a fun future at that.

i agree 100% except the solo bit :P yeah id never been in a winged alliance before, when i was in tdt using the search page brought like over 8 pages of results, now in SG rank 50 i use it and virtually all the results are for chance and WH which is no fun cos they defend to well :P

I agree with Steve's suggestion of adding into the EULA a bit that prohibits powerblocks, yeah maybe it has damaged the game slightly this round with people becoming bored but it was a mistake that wasn't envisioned when the 3 allys were created, we can learn from this by creating that paragraph in the EULA.

We've played this round together people aren't 'gunna backstab now just let the round run its course and make sure a 'powerblock' doesn't happen again.

All of the other winged allys shouldn't be looking so smug either because your doing pretty much the same, albeit not at the top of the game because were here but if we were not im pretty sure you would do the same ;)

[cb1202]

No one is saying to backstab anyone, the proper way to go about it is for you all to realize that rank doesn't matter and say at 18:00 GMT on April 15th we will start attacking each other just to see what happens. All of you are complaining of nothing to do and claiming to never want to do this again. All I am saying it isn't "backstabbing" if you all decide to start attacking one another, the correct term for that is "fun."

[Tombi]

No one is saying to backstab anyone, the proper way to go about it is for you all to realize that rank doesn't matter and say at 18:00 GMT on April 15th we will start attacking each other just to see what happens. All of you are complaining of nothing to do and claiming to never want to do this again. All I am saying it isn't "backstabbing" if you all decide to start attacking one another, the correct term for that is "fun."

Because this round was started with all the allys together and will probably end like that, and i don't think anyone will attack the other allys, they will probably get kickraped if they try it

[DarkSider]

Where to start :p
First i'm pleased Azzer came out and spoke his feelings in a mature and direct way and also to notice that he is thinking of solutions to prevent stale situations in the future.

Second, i don't want to repeat what i said several times before so i'll try to say it short. Fighting for pure score (from acres) can get you in this situation. A top alliance to win needs a few things:
- Access to easy acres
- easy to defend them
- weakened competition
- uneventful round, just random vulturing and bashing.
So forming a temporary powerblock gives you access to all those, a round long one will give you access to easy acres for a while until they become extinct but you still end on top score.
Almost all top alliances that aimed to win played efficient to acomplish their goal. Which ofc means avoid damaging wars as much as they could and have the upper hand in terms of numbers and strength when they had to deal with competition.
So to conclude, when alliances play for pure size there will always be less action. They will temp nap so they don't get hurt or temp nap to overwhelm and kill without loosing much. Key word is avoid taking damage = kill action.
There have been very few balanced wars on top that i have witnessed when allies fight for size and to me that's a not so interesting game.
Compare that with effectiveness. That rank was the answer to all prayers. You could powerblock as much as you wanted, bottom feeding wasn't as rewarding, overwhelming wasn't rewarded, more balanced big fights where the way to go and often rank 2-3 score ally who had to deal with a lot of action coming from rank 1 and also attacking themselfs for land gave them well deserved #1 effectiveness. That rank was asking acres, big army, smart calls, good tactics and you couldn't get it by avoiding action.
In the unified score i hoped the new score can be just size but the size to be earned in action. I have no doubt that the current settings aren't favorable for that and something needs changing.
I personaly liked the idea of population happiness which depending of the action your company and alliance deals with can increase or decrease productivity of your acres. Those peasants are eager to get the ball rolling !! :D

On another note i can't say i agree much with what JJ/Steve/Twigley did this round but i can undestand their initial reasoning. They are all old chaps and grew old with the game. The game for me doesn't offer the same level of satisfaction as my first couple rounds since it's like eating the favorite soup every morning for a couple years. I guess it's same for them too, they are die hard allied members so for them it must be even harder. They can change their routes and go a crazy SA/tl combo, they can choose a funky alliance theme name, play ftw, play resistance but at one point you just do the same thing over and over again. You just need some diversity. So why not try a big group and play brute force for a change :P
I'm speaking from experience since i often change from solo round thugs to allied ftw, solo bunkers, cheerleading round, crazy army setup in an alliance, resisting, large solo group etc, because it's too damn booring to play same thing over and over, the game changes very little.
That's why came so many suggestions to scrap all the units and make new ones or others suggestions of same impact to change the game to almost a new game with taste of bushtarion and the old small comunity that you attached to. With the lack of extreme game changes players need to choose extremely different playstyles so they get the needed diversity and powerblocking to play brute force it's just another one on the list.

[Turnip2k]

I don't understand why you are afraid to use admin powers to disrupt situations like this Azzer - I understand that you have had huge problems with the playerbase complaining in the past when you interviened...but if it comes down to annoying some of the playerbase and losing a chunk of the player base (and your income), there should be no question in doing it. Obviously now it won't do much good since its round end, but in the future, step in using your common sense before this sort of thing becomes a problem.

Also, the fact the rest of the playerbase let this happen is part of a growing trend of apathy I feel. For some reason, as rounds go on, people seem less bothered with large scale attacking, or forming a resistance to bring down a bigger enemy. It's partly this problem that allowed this to happen in the first place, as there was certainly the ability and numbers in the other allies to squash this out. I think finding out why this is, and fixing it, will help prevent this sort of thing in the future and also rekindle the playerbase.

As for the dwindling playerbase, you may just have to put a little bit more work in for next round (changes that inspire interest etc..), but hopefully things will get back to normal soon.

Edit :

There have been very few balanced wars on top that i have witnessed when allies fight for size and to me that's a not so interesting game.
Compare that with effectiveness. That rank was the answer to all prayers. You could powerblock as much as you wanted, bottom feeding wasn't as rewarding, overwhelming wasn't rewarded, more balanced big fights where the way to go and often rank 2-3 score ally who had to deal with a lot of action coming from rank 1 and also attacking themselfs for land gave them well deserved #1 effectiveness. That rank was asking acres, big army, smart calls, good tactics and you couldn't get it by avoiding action.
In the unified score i hoped the new score can be just size but the size to be earned in action. I have no doubt that the current settings aren't favorable for that and something needs changing.
I personaly liked the idea of population happiness which depending of the action your company and alliance deals with can increase or decrease productivity of your acres. Those peasants are eager to get the ball rolling !! :D


On the effectiveness side of things, I do agree it helps rank 2 allies get some enjoyment back out of the game - it most certainly gave us a reason to keep playing actively when we obviously weren't going to take the top value spot back in R21. It encourages good defending and attacking, and was a very satisfying acolade to achieve ultimately - it shows you are good at fighting, not only getting land and playing it safe.


On another note i can't say i agree much with what JJ/Steve/Twigley did this round but i can undestand their initial reasoning. They are all old chaps and grew old with the game. The game for me doesn't offer the same level of satisfaction as my first couple rounds since it's like eating the favorite soup every morning for a couple years. I guess it's same for them too, they are die hard allied members so for them it must be even harder. They can change their routes and go a crazy SA/tl combo, they can choose a funky alliance theme name, play ftw, play resistance but at one point you just do the same thing over and over again. You just need some diversity. So why not try a big group and play brute force for a change :P
I'm speaking from experience since i often change from solo round thugs to allied ftw, solo bunkers, cheerleading round, crazy army setup in an alliance, resisting, large solo group etc, because it's too damn booring to play same thing over and over, the game changes very little.
That's why came so many suggestions to scrap all the units and make new ones or others suggestions of same impact to change the game to almost a new game with taste of bushtarion and the old small comunity that you attached to. With the lack of extreme game changes players need to choose extremely different playstyles so they get the needed diversity and powerblocking to play brute force it's just another one on the list.

I agree with this too - the game has undergone some changes in the past (layout, interface, options etc...), however nothing fundamental has changed (with the exception of a few routes being added). To stop it getting stale, the mechanics of the game need to be mixed up! Add more routes, change the current routes, change what people can play for, whatever - just allow people to do somthing differently from what they have been doing for the last god knows how many years. (Nice post DS btw).

Powerblocks are indeed a bad bad thing - there could be a 'loyalty' measure for each ally member, to remain in that ally (to prevent the swapping out problem that was present early on). Also there is perhaps a need for punishments for not attacking each other and / or rewards for doing so - a war game should severly frown upon mutual non-attacking between allies.

[Commy 64]

When Azzer left Astroempires. Many of us tried bushtarion for the first time, this round. Of the 7 people from my AE alliance that tried it, I'm the only one who stayed.

My Alliance gets mauled badly. I get 0'd every other night because it's hard to have night cover, and being a working person with a family, I can't stay up all night. Heh, the wife wasn't too pleased when I brought the netbook and phone into the bedroom and got texted 3 times that night. Heh. Sleep mode seems like a good idea, but the use of it is discouraged in my alliance. So I continue to get 0'd every other night, and learn that any BCs i spend on game cash (which is also looked down on) is basically wasted...because I get 0'd again soon after. But I buy bush cash because I can afford it, and it allows me to help my alliance in defends and attacks..which is where the fun and entertainment lie. I also bought BCs so I could buy purchase units for other folks in my guild who could not afford it.

The stigma around BCs and sleep mode...make me feel dirty and disingenuous...and I've now been zeored enough that I resolve not to spend BCs on game cash anymore. It's not worth it.

I can say that we recently got into a war. We tried to get help from a loose NAP that we had with another allaince...whichi didn't work out to well. And the Alliance that we were at war with had help from at least 3 other alliances. That's good for the folks who get 0'd by the "helper" alliances (they get insurance). But bad for folks who get 0'd by the actual warring alliance (like me). I'm still sorting out my feelings on this..like any war, there are allies, and this is understandable..but I think that once war is declared, 30-45% attacks shouldn't be allowed by alliances that are not directly declared in the war. I spent 30 bucks last week (because war was declared) and got zeroe'd that night lol. (No insurance either). And 70% of the attackers were not in the alliance that declared..and many were attacking with HUGE armies at 30-35% range. There is something flawed about the way war is handled.

So I've basically had to start over. This being my first round, it's still fun to learn. I don't really know anything different than the powerblocks. I don't get all the names that refer to the lack of "Of" in this round, quite frankly they annoy me.:mrgreen:

One thign that might be cool... is that if you get 0'd by someone from an alliance that you are at war with, you can choose to come back with as a different route, and keep whatever land you had at the time of your zeroing and being able to choose some researches that you would liek to transfer to the new route. We were very vulnerable to RPGs, for example...and it would be nice to come back as a different route, with a little head start (i.e. having the land and all your research done). You could sstill make it so that the purchase unit would have to be bought..then perhaps you would have another avenue of cashflow besides BCs for game cash.

AS this is my first round, take everything I've said with a grain of salt, but I figured I might as well put a brain dump on here, since it seems like Azzer would read it.

Thanks for reading!

Edit; Regardign sleep mode...perhaps the use of it should be restricted during war time (i.e. durign war you can only go into sleep mode for 24 hours or more). This might help reduce the stigma of using it for folks... like for getting a good night's sleep before a big presentation at work or something.

[Mysterious]

Ha...backstab friends?

My personal opinion is that if they are actually your mates, then wouldn't mind a bit of banter, a bit of fighting, a bit of combat. They'd look upon it as a laugh, and a bit of fun. Plenty of times I have hit people in other alliances who I consider friends, and good ones at that, and we've both just laughed and bet who wins.

But eh...each to their own. I commend Azzer for pointing this out, I for one have been avoiding any public contact purely because this round has been the most pointless one ever. Even when I was defending against one alliance in the past against overwhelming odds, it was bearable, and there were more targets. But this round is atrocious.

How can you justify teaching newcomers to powerblock, that strength is in numbers and that that as long as you have these numbers, it doesn't matter what route you hit? Plenty of times I have seen an RPG hit a thug or vamp, a robo hit a striker etc etc. Surely the point of teaching these newcomers is to educate them to play well, not to teach them to play poorly. Another reason that will not have a positive outcome to the game imo.

End of rant.

[f0xx]

Interesting...

I didn't read some of the replies so I might be repeating someone, here is what I have to say on the subject of powerblocking:

First of all, I give thumbs up to Twigley/Steve/JJ for giving home to so many new players and let them "win" in their first round. What you don't realise though, is that you are spoon feeding them. If you give them an easy victory like that, especially in their first round, you don't "teach" them skill. I ain't going to discuss the effect the powerblock has on the alliances outside of it (especially such a big one).

The only other game which I've been playing longer than bush, and I still do, is a mud game. What I've learned from it is that not everything can be fixed by ingame mechanics. Sometimes you must have rules and punishments for certain ingame behaviours which cannot be prevented by mechanics. One of those behaviours in bush is powerblocking. Another is AR triggering.

But since this topic is about powerblocking, I should stick with it. Just make a rule (one for next and future rounds) that powerblocking is not allowed. Then give a definition of powerblocking. Yes, it is that simple.

Powerblocks damage the game, if someone loves the game (not the selfish love, but the true one) he would never be part of a powerblock. Though, there are a lot of powergamers out there who would do *anything* to win, without caring about the game itself. Then they would use the "we didn't know that powerblocks damage the game so much" excuse. Sorry, I ain't buying that.

So, it is time to draw the line and define what is acceptable and what is bad (trashy) ingame behaviour and punish the second one accordingly.

[Azzer]

If enough people think it acceptable to have a EULA against powerblocking, I will seriously consider it. It would have to be clear and concise so that people couldn't abuse the rule by getting people in to trouble who are not powerblocking - eg 5 alliances working together to take down a rank 1 top ally who are only working together as a "resistance", is not the same as 3 allys agreeing to work together permanently. Defining what is a powerblock, and what is not a powerblock, in clear cut manners that cannot be mis-interpreted against innocent people and cannot be "evaded" by naughty/bad people who find a way around the rules, would need to be done, so I'd welcome some feedback on having a stab at writing a clear-cut definition. Also it'd have to be "provable" - eg what if the current powerblock never mentioned eachothers allies anywhere in-game, in-forums, or in IRC - they pretended to be enemies too scared to attack eachother just to evade the rules, while in private (invisible to anyone including admin), they agreed not to attack eachother.

With or without a rule - I will still be working on game mechanics and features to help keep the game interesting when fighting against the odds against large powerblocks etc., and also systems to help limit "bottomfeeding".

[fred]

When Azzer left Astroempires. Many of us tried bushtarion for the first time, this round. Of the 7 people from my AE alliance that tried it, I'm the only one who stayed.

My Alliance gets mauled badly. I get 0'd every other night because it's hard to have night cover, and being a working person with a family, I can't stay up all night. Heh, the wife wasn't too pleased when I brought the netbook and phone into the bedroom and got texted 3 times that night. Heh. Sleep mode seems like a good idea, but the use of it is discouraged in my alliance. So I continue to get 0'd every other night, and learn that any BCs i spend on game cash (which is also looked down on) is basically wasted...because I get 0'd again soon after. But I buy bush cash because I can afford it, and it allows me to help my alliance in defends and attacks..which is where the fun and entertainment lie. I also bought BCs so I could buy purchase units for other folks in my guild who could not afford it.

The stigma around BCs and sleep mode...make me feel dirty and disingenuous...and I've now been zeored enough that I resolve not to spend BCs on game cash anymore. It's not worth it.

I can say that we recently got into a war. We tried to get help from a loose NAP that we had with another allaince...whichi didn't work out to well. And the Alliance that we were at war with had help from at least 3 other alliances. That's good for the folks who get 0'd by the "helper" alliances (they get insurance). But bad for folks who get 0'd by the actual warring alliance (like me). I'm still sorting out my feelings on this..like any war, there are allies, and this is understandable..but I think that once war is declared, 30-45% attacks shouldn't be allowed by alliances that are not directly declared in the war. I spent 30 bucks last week (because war was declared) and got zeroe'd that night lol. (No insurance either). And 70% of the attackers were not in the alliance that declared..and many were attacking with HUGE armies at 30-35% range. There is something flawed about the way war is handled.

So I've basically had to start over. This being my first round, it's still fun to learn. I don't really know anything different than the powerblocks. I don't get all the names that refer to the lack of "Of" in this round, quite frankly they annoy me.:mrgreen:

One thign that might be cool... is that if you get 0'd by someone from an alliance that you are at war with, you can choose to come back with as a different route, and keep whatever land you had at the time of your zeroing and being able to choose some researches that you would liek to transfer to the new route. We were very vulnerable to RPGs, for example...and it would be nice to come back as a different route, with a little head start (i.e. having the land and all your research done). You could sstill make it so that the purchase unit would have to be bought..then perhaps you would have another avenue of cashflow besides BCs for game cash.

AS this is my first round, take everything I've said with a grain of salt, but I figured I might as well put a brain dump on here, since it seems like Azzer would read it.

Thanks for reading!

Edit; Regardign sleep mode...perhaps the use of it should be restricted during war time (i.e. durign war you can only go into sleep mode for 24 hours or more). This might help reduce the stigma of using it for folks... like for getting a good night's sleep before a big presentation at work or something.

A VERY good post from a new player.
True about BCs being a waste of money and no more will I be spending while the game is like it is (private me and I will tell you how much I have spent on this game trying to grow and defend ally members).
The game is dying from:
Powerblock (and I have been in some).
Cheaters (and I have been in some and he who shall not be named turns a blind eye).
Lack of morals.

1. Get rid of eta+2 for top 200 players.
2. Bring back A-NAPs for alliances being bashed.
3. Balance the routes. Robos now rule. Spec Ops is useless. Bikers back to ETA 4.

[f0xx]

Your suggestions make no sense fred and the info which you included in it is very innacurate.

[CFalcon]

I started out in Inimical, and to be honest I can't really blame jj/steve/twigs for the initial concept. I got the impression that it would be 60 players having a laugh together, a few un-organised joint attacks, probably not win, and if we did win then there could be some competition for the top, but all in good fun.

And it was just the last part (or the lack thereof) that made me have to leave. Alliance's working together to take out other threats, then dueling each other for the win is nothing new. However the complete unwillingness to attack each other is ridiculous.

Honestly, the idea that you can't attack each other because you're 'friends' is pathetic. If you can't attack your friends and then have a laugh about it afterwards, I really do pity you. Sure, you use the word 'backstab' and it suddenly seems evil and mean, but really, why can't you backstab in good fun? The argument that you can't attack each other because you're friends isn't water tight, which either you don't understand, or is just cover for not having the balls to do so.

I also know that a large number, although not a majority, of players in the original TBA wanted to get warring with each other, but that the leadership wouldn't allow it. Congrats to all those who left.

As to the idea that ranks 4-6 are somehow contributing by repeatedly bashing lower than usual, or by their not willing to plant; oh please! Chance have had ONE organised alliance attack in the 5 weeks that I've been with them. I can't speak for WH or TDL, but they generally look to be in the same boat. And you honestly believe that we could plant and have a go at TBA, but are just choosing not to?

It's also true that there has been almost no warring between ranks 4-10, because, as IoF says, as soon as we send we get jumped by the lower ranked TBA noobs. I would personally love to have some proper warring between Chance, WH, TDL/TDT, Affliction etc. but we can't, firstly because we get jumped by TBA, and also because we have a certain amount of respect for the alliances around us that are having to deal with the same crap from TBA.

So I would ask TBA to do ONE decent thing this round, plant up and let the rest of us enjoy the last couple of weeks. You've succeded in making this round boring as hell, which you justify by saying its all fair to gain ranks. So have your damned ranks, and seeing as you obviously don't care about boredom, plant and let the rest of us have some fun.

[Tombi]

If enough people think it acceptable to have a EULA against powerblocking, I will seriously consider it. It would have to be clear and concise so that people couldn't abuse the rule by getting people in to trouble who are not powerblocking - eg 5 alliances working together to take down a rank 1 top ally who are only working together as a "resistance", is not the same as 3 allys agreeing to work together permanently. Defining what is a powerblock, and what is not a powerblock, in clear cut manners that cannot be mis-interpreted against innocent people and cannot be "evaded" by naughty/bad people who find a way around the rules, would need to be done, so I'd welcome some feedback on having a stab at writing a clear-cut definition. Also it'd have to be "provable" - eg what if the current powerblock never mentioned eachothers allies anywhere in-game, in-forums, or in IRC - they pretended to be enemies too scared to attack eachother just to evade the rules, while in private (invisible to anyone including admin), they agreed not to attack eachother.

With or without a rule - I will still be working on game mechanics and features to help keep the game interesting when fighting against the odds against large powerblocks etc., and also systems to help limit "bottomfeeding".

it would be difficult to word it so that all angles are covered and even then someone would probably find a loophole and exploit it, another thing to consider maybe would be to implement some kind of peacekeeping force on the supposed 'powerblocking' allys somewhat like the UN peacekeepers/ AR but entirely made up of blockers

just another idea, not very well thought out yet but it could work in future?

[pinpower]

Just a quick post on this rounds situation, i personally didnt realise it would be that big a deal when we got together with twigs and JJ before the round. I just thought it would be a good way to play with a load of mates, have a bit of fun and maybe get one up on some of the "usual winners". Alot of SG were new/fairly unknown so it was just a way for us to tip the odds in our favour a bit.

Firstly i never envisaged there being this much unrest amongst the rest of the playerbase and i certainly didnt foresee an impact on Azzers direct income. And thats the truth, nobody sat down before and said "oo, we're really going to screw up their round!".

Im not sure if an actual rule could be worked out (EULA) against powerblocking. As its very subjective. If an alliance has 3 wings but is rank 4,5,6 is that okay? But if they actually start winning its suddenly wrong? What about a 2 winged ally that is rank 1,3?
I would be for some sort of ingame mechanic which makes this situation alot harder, maybe boosted resistance possibilities/benefits if there is a powerblocking situation. It could be manually enabled by Azzer so he could look at the current situation and decide when its neccesary.

Ill post further later

Edit: Just to add, im not saying im against adding a rule against poweblocks. Im just saying i think it would be very hard to implement such a rule because of all the possible variables. I think if possible a good way would be to add more ingame mechanics, plus then it puts it to the rest of the playerbase to step in (with this added help) to put a stop to any sort of powerblock. Which i think would be even more fair! But something should be done i agree!!! :)
x

[cb1202]

As we have been saying, I see nothing wrong with ranks 4,5,6 all being winged together. It is just when they achieve the goal of rank 1 then the only respectable thing to do is war it out instead of using their mates as a block for the allies below them

[fred]

Firstly i never envisaged there being this much unrest amongst the rest of the playerbase and i certainly didnt foresee an impact on Azzers direct income. And thats the truth, nobody sat down before and said "oo, we're really going to screw up their round!".


and here it is people ... it's all down to Azzer's INCOME ...
Stop spending ... play the FREE game :D:D

[Commy 64]

Also, in war, double bounty, for both defenders and attackers would be sweet. Keep the no insurance rule.

[Commy 64]

and here it is people ... it's all down to Azzer's INCOME ...
Stop spending ... play the FREE game :D:D

But if less people play the game, it is less fun for all of us...

[pinpower]

Firstly i never envisaged there being this much unrest amongst the rest of the playerbase and i certainly didnt foresee an impact on Azzers direct income. And thats the truth, nobody sat down before and said "oo, we're really going to screw up their round!".


and here it is people ... it's all down to Azzer's INCOME ...
Stop spending ... play the FREE game :D:D

What do you mean?

[fred]

Firstly i never envisaged there being this much unrest amongst the rest of the playerbase and i certainly didnt foresee an impact on Azzers direct income. And thats the truth, nobody sat down before and said "oo, we're really going to screw up their round!".


and here it is people ... it's all down to Azzer's INCOME ...
Stop spending ... play the FREE game :D:D

What do you mean?

no punits
no game cash ...
game is advertised as "free"
so don't spend money ...
(see how long it lasts lol)

Also, in war, double bounty, for both defenders and attackers would be sweet. Keep the no insurance rule.

Insurance when defending only :D
Bribed players need to be replaced (as there is no insurance, injury etc) at say 50% after 30 ticks :)

[Tombi]

Yes the game is advertised as 'free' because it is free, it requires no money whatsoever to play the game but there are things to spend money on to somewhat improve your gameplay, and that would be one of the stupidest suggestions ever removing p-units and gamecash

[Azzer]

no punits
no game cash ...
game is advertised as "free"
so don't spend money ...
(see how long it lasts lol)

Wait, weren't you one of the players that hated powerblocks and said it ruins the game? (and also said robos were overpowered and ruined the game, special ops were underpowered and ruined the game, bikers were ridiculous and ruined the game, cheaters rule the game and ruin the game, and a few other messages I recall throughout the round that "ruin the game"). But at the same time you want to ruin the game anyway? Or are you being sarcastic to try and point out how ridiculous powerblocks are? Maybe I miss understood the point of your post.

[Martin]

If enough people think it acceptable to have a EULA against powerblocking, I will seriously consider it. It would have to be clear and concise so that people couldn't abuse the rule by getting people in to trouble who are not powerblocking - eg 5 alliances working together to take down a rank 1 top ally who are only working together as a "resistance", is not the same as 3 allys agreeing to work together permanently. Defining what is a powerblock, and what is not a powerblock, in clear cut manners that cannot be mis-interpreted against innocent people and cannot be "evaded" by naughty/bad people who find a way around the rules, would need to be done, so I'd welcome some feedback on having a stab at writing a clear-cut definition. Also it'd have to be "provable" - eg what if the current powerblock never mentioned eachothers allies anywhere in-game, in-forums, or in IRC - they pretended to be enemies too scared to attack eachother just to evade the rules, while in private (invisible to anyone including admin), they agreed not to attack eachother.

With or without a rule - I will still be working on game mechanics and features to help keep the game interesting when fighting against the odds against large powerblocks etc., and also systems to help limit "bottomfeeding".


I think it would have to be left open, as you will not have a clear cut definition. The admin reserves all right to intervene non-beneficial powerblocks for the game. Warnings will be given and actions not instant to give those resposible the chance to rectify, BUT if the situation continues the admin of Bushtarion is able to use other means, other than ingame mechanics to resolve the situation as the admin sees best.

Something like that. We had an 8 man resistance against us 24 hours into the round - that's fine, as we were stupid enough to give people clues to our IDs and we had a lead. The attacks then stopped for a day or so when we dropped.

The majority of people can look at things from a neutral/outsider's perspective and take it on the chin.

[Enrico]

Bah...

This should have happened a bit earlier, but meh, better ate than never.

Why not just add a paragraph to the EULA:

Any alliance which is in #1 spot more that 10 days running, or which is X times larger than the median of the top 10 alliances runs a cumulative risk of getting attacked by the Government in an anti-trust crack down.

This would:
a) make it very risky to try an pull ahead and/or set up a powerblock.
b) make the round more interesting for the top allies, as they would get action even if no resistance shows up.

To successfully pull through a win then would mean a lot more jockeying for position, making sure other allies would pull ahead for a it, and then killing them off etc.

Note: I'm not talking undefendable rapeage here, just the risk of getting a well set up bashing from government troops, which naturally can't be countered by any "wing-allies".

MAYBE it would be a bit unfair to do so now, but hey, Azzer is god after all... ;)

Still not sure about the whole "oh but we are friends, this was set ut before round" etc, as arguments for not pulling a nasty backstab when least expected. It's even sweeter backstabbing and killing an ally which see you as no threat what so ever. :D But I'm just evil I guess.

[fred]

Yes the game is advertised as 'free' because it is free, it requires no money whatsoever to play the game but there are things to spend money on to somewhat improve your gameplay, and that would be one of the stupidest suggestions ever removing p-units and gamecash

/me sighs
i didn't say remove them
just don't buy them ....

[Martin]

Yes the game is advertised as 'free' because it is free, it requires no money whatsoever to play the game but there are things to spend money on to somewhat improve your gameplay, and that would be one of the stupidest suggestions ever removing p-units and gamecash

/me sighs
i didn't say remove them
just don't buy them ....


So your view is that if you don't want to buy BCs, then don't? Fair comment.
Unfortunatly that's the problem, people's lacking motivation to spend money on this business. How do we solve the issues that lower motivation, in this instance powerblocking.

Then re-read everyone's posts attempting to try and discuss a feasable option to do so.

[Tombi]

Yes the game is advertised as 'free' because it is free, it requires no money whatsoever to play the game but there are things to spend money on to somewhat improve your gameplay, and that would be one of the stupidest suggestions ever removing p-units and gamecash

/me sighs
i didn't say remove them
just don't buy them ....

but the p-units are what make some routes playable

[fred]

no punits
no game cash ...
game is advertised as "free"
so don't spend money ...
(see how long it lasts lol)

Wait, weren't you one of the players that hated powerblocks and said it ruins the game? (and also said robos were overpowered and ruined the game, special ops were underpowered and ruined the game, bikers were ridiculous and ruined the game, cheaters rule the game and ruin the game, and a few other messages I recall throughout the round that "ruin the game"). But at the same time you want to ruin the game anyway? Or are you being sarcastic to try and point out how ridiculous powerblocks are? Maybe I miss understood the point of your post.

how is posting "not spending money on a free game" ruining the game?
unless of course the whole idea of the game is to make you money???

[Martin]

no punits
no game cash ...
game is advertised as "free"
so don't spend money ...
(see how long it lasts lol)

Wait, weren't you one of the players that hated powerblocks and said it ruins the game? (and also said robos were overpowered and ruined the game, special ops were underpowered and ruined the game, bikers were ridiculous and ruined the game, cheaters rule the game and ruin the game, and a few other messages I recall throughout the round that "ruin the game"). But at the same time you want to ruin the game anyway? Or are you being sarcastic to try and point out how ridiculous powerblocks are? Maybe I miss understood the point of your post.

how is posting "not spending money on a free game" ruining the game?
unless of course the whole idea of the game is to make you money???

ofc it is.... it's his job, his business...

[Tombi]

Bah...

This should have happened a bit earlier, but meh, better ate than never.

Why not just add a paragraph to the EULA:

Any alliance which is in #1 spot more that 10 days running, or which is X times larger than the median of the top 10 alliances runs a cumulative risk of getting attacked by the Government in an anti-trust crack down.

This would:
a) make it very risky to try an pull ahead and/or set up a powerblock.
b) make the round more interesting for the top allies, as they would get action even if no resistance shows up.

To successfully pull through a win then would mean a lot more jockeying for position, making sure other allies would pull ahead for a it, and then killing them off etc.

Note: I'm not talking undefendable rapeage here, just the risk of getting a well set up bashing from government troops, which naturally can't be countered by any "wing-allies".

MAYBE it would be a bit unfair to do so now, but hey, Azzer is god after all... ;)

Still not sure about the whole "oh but we are friends, this was set ut before round" etc, as arguments for not pulling a nasty backstab when least expected. It's even sweeter backstabbing and killing an ally which see you as no threat what so ever. :D But I'm just evil I guess.

Good suggestion ;) but why not make it even simpler like the Government will crack down without warning on racketeering alliances or something similar to that?

[fred]

Yes the game is advertised as 'free' because it is free, it requires no money whatsoever to play the game but there are things to spend money on to somewhat improve your gameplay, and that would be one of the stupidest suggestions ever removing p-units and gamecash

/me sighs
i didn't say remove them
just don't buy them ....


So your view is that if you don't want to buy BCs, then don't? Fair comment.
Unfortunatly that's the problem, people's lacking motivation to spend money on this business. How do we solve the issues that lower motivation, in this instance powerblocking.

Then re-read everyone's posts attempting to try and discuss a feasable option to do so.

well after something like 6 years playing this game here is my "2 cents" worth.

a) Bring back A-NAPs - but only when your alliance has multiple incomings from 2 or more alliances. One A-NAP only though.
b) Balance the routes - I had most kills with SAs one round .. now they 'suck'.
c) Alliances to be 12 members.
d) Reduce +2ETA attacks to 5% of land and +1ETA to 10%. Repeated attacks within 1 day to be reduced by 50%.
e) Alliances being 'massed' get bonus of 20% damage against attackers. Like where there is rank 10 v rank 200. Small alliance members then have a chance to defend.

[cb1202]

Bah...

This should have happened a bit earlier, but meh, better ate than never.

Why not just add a paragraph to the EULA:

Any alliance which is in #1 spot more that 10 days running, or which is X times larger than the median of the top 10 alliances runs a cumulative risk of getting attacked by the Government in an anti-trust crack down.

This would:
a) make it very risky to try an pull ahead and/or set up a powerblock.
b) make the round more interesting for the top allies, as they would get action even if no resistance shows up.

To successfully pull through a win then would mean a lot more jockeying for position, making sure other allies would pull ahead for a it, and then killing them off etc.

Note: I'm not talking undefendable rapeage here, just the risk of getting a well set up bashing from government troops, which naturally can't be countered by any "wing-allies".

MAYBE it would be a bit unfair to do so now, but hey, Azzer is god after all... ;)

Still not sure about the whole "oh but we are friends, this was set ut before round" etc, as arguments for not pulling a nasty backstab when least expected. It's even sweeter backstabbing and killing an ally which see you as no threat what so ever. :D But I'm just evil I guess.



That was tried before and did not work. The problem isn't one alliance winning, it is the 3 alliances teaming up to win. Under the guidelines u suggested then a powerblock would actually benefit from being in the powerblock

[tobapopalos]

What would be funny is if Azzer didn't publish a portal this round out of spite :P, just so we can forget about this god awful excuse of a round.

Two big thumbs up from me.

[cb1202]

Yes the game is advertised as 'free' because it is free, it requires no money whatsoever to play the game but there are things to spend money on to somewhat improve your gameplay, and that would be one of the stupidest suggestions ever removing p-units and gamecash

/me sighs
i didn't say remove them
just don't buy them ....


So your view is that if you don't want to buy BCs, then don't? Fair comment.
Unfortunatly that's the problem, people's lacking motivation to spend money on this business. How do we solve the issues that lower motivation, in this instance powerblocking.

Then re-read everyone's posts attempting to try and discuss a feasable option to do so.

well after something like 6 years playing this game here is my "2 cents" worth.

a) Bring back A-NAPs - but only when your alliance has multiple incomings from 2 or more alliances. One A-NAP only though.
b) Balance the routes - I had most kills with SAs one round .. now they 'suck'.
c) Alliances to be 12 members.
d) Reduce +2ETA attacks to 5% of land and +1ETA to 10%. Repeated attacks within 1 day to be reduced by 50%.
e) Alliances being 'massed' get bonus of 20% damage against attackers. Like where there is rank 10 v rank 200. Small alliance members then have a chance to defend.



although completely off topic like all your posts so far. If you look at the guy with most damage he is using SA's so obviously you are doing something wrong.

[Azzer]

b) Balance the routes - I had most kills with SAs one round .. now they 'suck'.

although completely off topic like all your posts so far. If you look at the guy with most damage he is using SA's so obviously you are doing something wrong.
Indeed, the current rank 1 most damaging is in-fact SAs, it didn't take more than 20 seconds of effort to check this :P

[DarkSider]

There's no way an Eula post could cover a powerblock.
As mentioned above rank 6 and 8 can form a powerblock .. what then ?
Or rank 2 and 3 don't attack eachother but don't call themselfs a powerblock .. is it true ?
2 leaders of different alliances share information and once in a while they attack the same wounded alliance for easy land .. powerblock ?
Ranks 2-5 alliances decide to not attack eachother for a few weeks and just botomfeed on other smaller alliances to get strong enough to kill #1 .. powerblock ? What if they do it for 2 days ? 3 days ? 6 days ? 7 and a half ? 1 month ?
I can go on all day :p

For a powerblock to be so easy to be against eula would need the alliances to say "I'm part of a powerblock" and only then you'd have the grounds to do something about it.
What about diplomacy .. short naps ? longer naps ? It's a waste of time to think of a wording to stop powerblocks.

All you can do is add mechanics against it. Back to my population happiness - Your HQ peasants could have some desires and needs and see there are alliances around you that you pussy having a go at. They want a war once in a while, they want attacking above once in a while if possible, a good defence here and there etc. They start to spread rumours about alliance leadership beeing too soft and not representative for their desire to be known as fearless warriors and spread the rumours to peasants from companies and lower income from the acres :p

[Enrico]

That was tried before and did not work. The problem isn't one alliance winning, it is the 3 alliances teaming up to win. Under the guidelines u suggested then a powerblock would actually benefit from being in the powerblock


How come, the reason they are so successful is that as soon as one of the allies was mobbed the other two would step in and counter. You can't counter the Government.

And right now all 3 wings are worth at least 3 times the median of the top 10, so X=3 would mean that all 3 would risk visits from the government. ;)

Though I still think that if the leaders of rank 2 and 3 allies had any balls what so ever they would kill the rank 1 ally the last week just for ***** and giggles :D

[Gadfly]

b) Balance the routes - I had most kills with SAs one round .. now they 'suck'.

although completely off topic like all your posts so far. If you look at the guy with most damage he is using SA's so obviously you are doing something wrong.
Indeed, the current rank 1 most damaging is in-fact SAs, it didn't take more than 20 seconds of effort to check this :P

I love my SA's...but, they do tend to get raped by Robo's.

[willymchilybily]

faith. I have faith. that next round. next round during the summer holidays. the next 70 days where i have just finished my 4year masters degree i will be kaining the bushtarion.

i have faith that with the right advertising the realisation of the powerblocks negative impact, and with the support of my recreational drug abuse, should all fuel an all out 24/7 bush monster that is me. and no power block will stop my desire to win. to rape and to kill everything i see.

next round every one should try with thiere summer holidays thier free time, there ability to commit high levels of hours when they want to. as most people start this sort of game when at school/college/uni that means there is a large player base that remains in the game that will have enough free time to make the next round fricken awsome. So if your thinking about leaving after coming back and playing a gash round. i emplore you give it one more chance one more round. next round. because next round will be a beast

It could be the best round ive ever played since round 8 or 9 (still my fave) so much poitential all the new feature all the desire to beat these people that have been keeping a power block bashing us down, keeping us pinned down and unable to play.

they will start as our equals 20days from now! and i for one will say F*CK YOU MOTHER F*CKERS this time its willy's time to kill rape and win. this time you will feel my wrath.
whether there is 20 of you 40 of you or 60 of you. I will play hard enough and long enough to be like 20 people i will be a god damn spider monkey.

RAWR

so stop *****ing and start making your allie make your plans. start your scheming. decide your allies, decide your route set up. decide your time zones and cover. decide your enemies, who you would like most to rape. decide your play style. decide how you will play your individual route, start testing things that you would never normally test because you cared about troops and score. suicide cause chaos go mad. go out with a bang. Discover loop holes, discover unit "hidden bonuses" and how to best manipulate them. test different combinations of the early units and learn thier depth. then be ready to hit it hard next round. and ensure you shall never be walked over, never face anihalation by overwhelming forces. ensure you are on top. and defend like its only a game and your friends and allies are welcome to the millions of fictional troops at your disposal. Dominate your enemies. have some fight some spirit some passion. some compassion. and have some fricken fun.

ps fred. if no one bought gamecash or punits where would azzer get the money to pay for the server? lol that comment better not have been serious else maybe you should take a few economics and business lessons

[Matthew]

IMO the removal of Psolo's had a lot to do with the introduction of the powerblock. You removed such a dynamic and vast game mechanic which meant that a large group of players had to find an alliance. I can't remember specific figures but by the end of round 4 the playerbase consisted of between 50-70% Psolo's. Once this mechanic was removed A LOT players (many accomplished and skilled) then needed to find an alliance, however, the current situation with regards to frequent active leaders couldn't meet the demands for these players. So this resulted in leaders taking on more players as they had a lot more options.

I am in no way insinuating that this powerblock was deserved. But there is a clear link with the removal of Psolo and then there being 3 wings at varying points in the round.

[Enrico]

Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it so back in age 3/4 that the top allies didnt get the ally-bonus when sending defense?

Maybe just add to that, let top ally have +2 and the allies ranked 2-5 have 0 in ally defense modifier.

As soon as an ally starts having zeroed members they tend to be a bit less daunting.

[cb1202]

That was tried before and did not work. The problem isn't one alliance winning, it is the 3 alliances teaming up to win. Under the guidelines u suggested then a powerblock would actually benefit from being in the powerblock


How come, the reason they are so successful is that as soon as one of the allies was mobbed the other two would step in and counter. You can't counter the Government.

And right now all 3 wings are worth at least 3 times the median of the top 10, so X=3 would mean that all 3 would risk visits from the government. ;)

Though I still think that if the leaders of rank 2 and 3 allies had any balls what so ever they would kill the rank 1 ally the last week just for ***** and giggles :D


I dont know if you were playing, but like I said it was tried before. Who wants to play a game where the government punishes you for being successful? It might solve one problem but creates 100 new ones. Something else must be done that punishes only those who powerblock, but not people who earn their win fair and square.

[tyedyegoddess]

I've been quite frustrated with powerblocks and winged alliances and bottomfeeding...

I'm an officer in an alliance that strives, tries the best we can, and does things legitimately. We don't wave an alliance that hasn't already waved us, and we quit after we've gotten our land back. We don't tolerate spies and actually kicked and waved someone for joining another alliance then trying to come back by offering their ally list, and we let that ally know. We play legitimately, purchase p-units...

And whenever we get close to top ten, at least 2 alliances wave us continually until we're down again.

Right now I'm under attack from someone in the top 50 rank in the world, because I'm just big enough to hit 30% range for him. Same person hit someone in my alliance earlier today.

TBH, if my p-unit credits hadn't been gifted, I wouldn't have purchased them. I'd rather stay low, and I've seen an unbelievable amount of stock in the philosophy of suiciding your troops so you stay low rank. It's not worth it to try, and wherein previous rounds I've purchased my p-unit and at least once a round purchased game cash, I'm not doing it this round.

The saddest part is this: Our entire alliance got kicked because we *looked* like a multi and hadn't quite understood the rule of using the same computer. However, less than half of us that used to play do now, and the ones that don't were the ones that spent the most money. Those of us who do still play make quite the honest effort, but we realize there's nothing admin can do about it.

Jerks are jerks. They don't care who they're ruining the game for, or they wouldn't be powerblocking and bottomfeeding. They're doing what's fun for them. At least once a day I come across some jerk who is like "I'll keep coming back until they're zeroed and I land"... so there's no point in sending def, not when our entire alliance can muster half of what one person sends at us.

You can do land grab caps for smaller ranges and make allies smaller - I honestly believe both of these would be wonderful moves. I also believe bringing back the fame system would as well, and I do miss being able to see what kind of bounty I'd get on someone. Back about a year and a half ago, my alliance would hunt people with lots of bounty or that weren't on the green end of the law/fame ranking. Maybe instead of trying to deter people from bottomfeeding and such by forcing them not to, you should try making it more advantageous to attack people of higher rank somehow?? Just a thought. Maybe making land grabs specifically relative to someone's range to you, or the same concept with insurance and bounty. Anti-rape works great and prevents solo accounts from really being hit with any effective mob, but if someone's in an alliance (which is supposed to be the preferred way to play) they're fair game. If you can find an allied target 30% your range that was recently zeroed and has 6k land, you're going to get 700 land if they don't get def. And if you're sending huge, allies are afraid to defend it. Hell, get your buddies in too, before they drop too low! But if attacking them meant you'd only get 100 land no matter what and would get a lower insurance rate than if you attacked someone at 45% your range, people would start attacking at 45% their range instead. I know I would.

You can't mandate asshatery. People are inconsiderate jerks, and you can't make people be good people. I learned that when I was 18 trying to be friends with a guy who was only interested in dating me. He never stopped being a jerk and was always inconsiderate to anything that actually mattered to me. There are two types of people in this world - People who care and people who care about themselves. The latter vastly outnumber the former.

[atsanjose]

What would be funny is if Azzer didn't publish a portal this round out of spite :P, just so we can forget about this god awful excuse of a round.

Two big thumbs up from me.

yup, that would be funny :D

[cb1202]

What would be funny is if Azzer didn't publish a portal this round out of spite :P, just so we can forget about this god awful excuse of a round.

Two big thumbs up from me.

yup, that would be funny :D

This is an incomplete version of Age 5, I dont think it should count

[saint1d]

I'm in the "powerblock". I didnt expect things to turn out this way, it was just supposed to be a bit of fun. I feel bad that it has had such an impact on the game and other players in general, and I am pleased Azzer has spoken out about it.

I'm considering deleting my id, but will speak to the ally later today and come to a decision. I dont really want to leave cos I will get bashed to hell haha



I find the amount of naivity cosidering the powerblock quite incomprhensable. Considering alliance naps have been removed and the majority of alliances in recent rounds have never been napped or at least for no longer than 1/2 weeks ceasefire. How can the current powerblock really have expected anything but a win/stale and boring round. I think maybe a ban rule for those involved in future powerblocks should be implemented. Basically take part in one and your accounts banned for the next round. Amazing that all those people involved in the powerblock are now eating humble pie and claiming they will never be involved again. May i ask if Azzer hadent made this announcement would you still be saying what your claiming in this thread?

Good post !!!!

Same thoughts .. they all say 'sorry' but will do it all again next round ...

Ok then f~@# you, I wont delete my id. I was being genuine, but if thats the sort of response my statement gets then no I wont delete my id, I wont leave the ally. Think what you like, I dont care.

[Garrett]

Wow. I feel my intelligence dropping per page in this thread.

The powerblock: "oh i had no idea people were upset"

I point you to the politics subsection of the overall forum. You can't go on and brag and then act all innocent. You are not politicians/members of congress/parliment. The posts from every powerblock person (with the exception of twigley's first and short and to the point post) is utterly retarded, this is fact.

The others wanting 'justice':

No, it should not be rules lawyered into the EULA. Impossible to crack down on. No, portal should not be taken away. And most definitely since azzer posted his ... dissertation? spat-fest with twigley? ... in politics a month ago... nothing should be done in game now this round. 20 days left. All these posts (a couple humourous) are also very retarded. Fact again.

People making sense:

Martin - a blurb extending the definition of mutual attacking. This guy is a genius.

DarkSider - making good points. Some of his ideas are in the weeds, imo. But it's ...and I can't stress this enough for this playerbase... it's substantial items that can be built upon or discussed.

every other post is a gripe/a flame/a troll/an excuse/whiny

[dafe]

If enough people think it acceptable to have a EULA against powerblocking, I will seriously consider it. It would have to be clear and concise so that people couldn't abuse the rule by getting people in to trouble who are not powerblocking - eg 5 alliances working together to take down a rank 1 top ally who are only working together as a "resistance", is not the same as 3 allys agreeing to work together permanently. Defining what is a powerblock, and what is not a powerblock, in clear cut manners that cannot be mis-interpreted against innocent people and cannot be "evaded" by naughty/bad people who find a way around the rules, would need to be done, so I'd welcome some feedback on having a stab at writing a clear-cut definition. Also it'd have to be "provable" - eg what if the current powerblock never mentioned eachothers allies anywhere in-game, in-forums, or in IRC - they pretended to be enemies too scared to attack eachother just to evade the rules, while in private (invisible to anyone including admin), they agreed not to attack eachother.

With or without a rule - I will still be working on game mechanics and features to help keep the game interesting when fighting against the odds against large powerblocks etc., and also systems to help limit "bottomfeeding".

i vote for such a rule, resistances are good and needed

[Enrico]

No, it should not be rules lawyered into the EULA. Impossible to crack down on.

Again, just the possibility of getting reaction will make most thik twice. (By the same degree, not all speeders on the motorways can be caught and punished, should we then remove all speed limits?)


No, portal should not be taken away.
Agreed, silly idea!

nothing should be done in game now this round. 20 days left.

Why should the amount of time left have any thing to say? I really don't understand? Even if Azzer where to go in and zero all members of TBA (and I'm not saying he should) they would still have plenty of time to rebuild in 20 days.

[Garrett]

Let me clarify - Nothing should be done by Azzer

because changing rules mid-round? bad. it's just bad. it's false advertising of sorts.

those who band together and fight together accomplished something. sure it may be bad, but the current environment allowed it.

So now you want to punish 60 players for *NOT* breaking the rules? Simply because no one else did anything about it and Azzer isn't making money?

No, you have to chalk this experience up to lesson learned. Think I'm happy with a powerblock? Hell NO. But I would absolutely leave (if i was staying) if Azzer moved into to punish them now. He just said he's not going to force behavior through direct game mechanics like the CRA. (Or in this case robotic monstrosities or whatever Gov't units are used)

So he just said he wasn't going to do it. The 60 planned to work as one and they don't want to turn on each other after ~60 (pre round too) days of fellowship? I don't blame em.

Vengence isn't justice. If I was staying, I'd have many ideas on how to help some of our loopholes to be closed (not powerblock, but bashing, triggering, etc) through the fairness calculator. But Meh. It took until the playerbase is virtually dried up for responsibility to be talked about in this game.

[Polo]

Yes the game is advertised as 'free' because it is free, it requires no money whatsoever to play the game but there are things to spend money on to somewhat improve your gameplay, and that would be one of the stupidest suggestions ever removing p-units and gamecash

/me sighs
i didn't say remove them
just don't buy them ....


So your view is that if you don't want to buy BCs, then don't? Fair comment.
Unfortunatly that's the problem, people's lacking motivation to spend money on this business. How do we solve the issues that lower motivation, in this instance powerblocking.

Then re-read everyone's posts attempting to try and discuss a feasable option to do so.

well after something like 6 years playing this game here is my "2 cents" worth.

a) Bring back A-NAPs - but only when your alliance has multiple incomings from 2 or more alliances. One A-NAP only though.
b) Balance the routes - I had most kills with SAs one round .. now they 'suck'.
c) Alliances to be 12 members.
d) Reduce +2ETA attacks to 5% of land and +1ETA to 10%. Repeated attacks within 1 day to be reduced by 50%.
e) Alliances being 'massed' get bonus of 20% damage against attackers. Like where there is rank 10 v rank 200. Small alliance members then have a chance to defend.

I find it hard to believe that you've played 6 years if these are your ideas to 'balance' the game.

IMO the removal of Psolo's had a lot to do with the introduction of the powerblock. You removed such a dynamic and vast game mechanic which meant that a large group of players had to find an alliance. I can't remember specific figures but by the end of round 4 the playerbase consisted of between 50-70% Psolo's. Once this mechanic was removed A LOT players (many accomplished and skilled) then needed to find an alliance, however, the current situation with regards to frequent active leaders couldn't meet the demands for these players. So this resulted in leaders taking on more players as they had a lot more options.

I am in no way insinuating that this powerblock was deserved. But there is a clear link with the removal of Psolo and then there being 3 wings at varying points in the round.

Pure solo was overpowered. It is still quite easy to play solo - you don't all of a sudden need to find an alliance now. People are just upset because they can't be overpowered pure solos now.

There is no link with the removal of pure solo and there being a powerblock this round - that's absurd.


On topic, the main problem is that people would rather sit around doing bugger all aside from planting just to get a good rank (and moaning about how bored they are :roll:). If people weren't such scorequeens, we wouldn't have anywhere near the level of problems we do.

Maybe reward fighting more by making it more profitable:
- Non exponential land score would mean people would have a lot more land so taking losses to get a grab from them would be more profitable overall
- Bounty gained against all defenders, not just the target
- Bounty gained against all attackers

[Garrett]

Also keep in mind that the playerbase is just as responsible as anyone else for the block. Those that made it as well as those who didn't.

A certain couple of alliances could have jumped on SG, they didn't. Instead they fell for the obvious trick that SG would attack with them.

Then they finally attacked SG and SG would have fallen, but suddenly a cease-fire was called.

YOU PLAYERS ALLOWED THIS TO HAPPEN. Sit down, be quiet. Play the round. Post suggestions on improving gameplay.

Thank you.

[Enrico]

Let me clarify - Nothing should be done by Azzer

because changing rules mid-round? bad. it's just bad. it's false advertising of sorts.

those who band together and fight together accomplished something. sure it may be bad, but the current environment allowed it.

So now you want to punish 60 players for *NOT* breaking the rules? Simply because no one else did anything about it and Azzer isn't making money?

No, you have to chalk this experience up to lesson learned. Think I'm happy with a powerblock? Hell NO. But I would absolutely leave (if i was staying) if Azzer moved into to punish them now. He just said he's not going to force behavior through direct game mechanics like the CRA. (Or in this case robotic monstrosities or whatever Gov't units are used)

So he just said he wasn't going to do it. The 60 planned to work as one and they don't want to turn on each other after ~60 (pre round too) days of fellowship? I don't blame em.

Vengence isn't justice. If I was staying, I'd have many ideas on how to help some of our loopholes to be closed (not powerblock, but bashing, triggering, etc) through the fairness calculator. But Meh. It took until the playerbase is virtually dried up for responsibility to be talked about in this game.

If you want to be a game lawyer, you could say that having one ally purposefully countering attacks on another ally is a form of mutually agreed attacking. :P

Point is: All agree the current situation is useless, boring and hurts the whole player base and game as such. We could just sit around and curse the 60 dumdums in TBA, or we could find a fix. Whether that fix is implemented right away or not is not that interesting in my view. The "victory" of the 1/3 of the power-block will be a hollow victory as the situation is right now anyway. No one I've talked to seems to think it's a real victory brought about by skill, but rather just bending the rules, and blatantly disregarding the intentions of the rules. That's why I would think the prospect of ****ing over the designated #1 by #2 and #3 would have been hilarious. :) It's all a game, so any one bearing a grudge after such a move should take a quick course in learning the difference between real life and games. And even if it didn't work, the players in the #2 and #3 would get a better reputation in the player base generally for pulling a stunt like that.
:D

[Garrett]

I did say that a blurb expanding the mutual attacking rules is a good idea. However, it's late to implement it now in the CURRENT round.

Yeah everyone admits it's a waste. However, those who are 'thinking' they are going to portal at a certain spot... did get their spot and they should be allowed to queen it up if that's what they choose. more than 2/3rd's of the round is gone.

You aren't going to get a great pull from the playerbase to ramp up these last 20 days with extravagant purchase nor spark interest for 'long term' plans for the round. It's going to make about about 20% of the player base happy. 10% of the player base mad (those that would get 'punished' for not breaking any CURRENT rules) and the other 70% is still apathetic as all hell.

Accomplishes nothing. Ending the round would be nothing and as I had just restared a couple weeks ago and bothered to get my p-unit... I would be pissed if my money is gone because you all want to whine about how the last 20 days is *****.

If it's ***** THEN F'N PLAY!

[ryanlok15]

i want to ask why not a few alliances like chance and WH and whoever else gang up and try to take out one alliance at a time...why not actually co-operate...i do remember that WH was a HUGE threat and that chance and WH attacked SG and hurt them alot...they could have done this to the other 2 alliance or try to kill off SG...i believe that rewarding sort of like the bounty system would be good...like a systematic fund management system where if you (as an alliance in war mode) attacked an alliance say between ranks 1-5 you would get extra funds ontop of your bounty or something like that...why not make an union of alliances consisting of say alliances 4-6 or 7 and then attack one alliance at a time...people should know that WH and Chance defend VERY WELL and why not adapt it to thier attacking...if they could stop attacks why not organise properly and attack...i know they can do damage but i feel that they dont trust eachother enough to attack in tandem

[Polo]

i want to ask why not a few alliances like chance and WH and whoever else gang up and try to take out one alliance at a time...why not actually co-operate...i do remember that WH was a HUGE threat and that chance and WH attacked SG and hurt them alot...they could have done this to the other 2 alliance or try to kill off SG...i believe that rewarding sort of like the bounty system would be good...like a systematic fund management system where if you (as an alliance in war mode) attacked an alliance say between ranks 1-5 you would get extra funds ontop of your bounty or something like that...why not make an union of alliances consisting of say alliances 4-6 or 7 and then attack one alliance at a time...people should know that WH and Chance defend VERY WELL and why not adapt it to thier attacking...if they could stop attacks why not organise properly and attack...i know they can do damage but i feel that they dont trust eachother enough to attack in tandem

Because everytime we send out attacks we get massive retals from the other 2 alliances? Plus nobody can be arsed to organise.

[Ahead]

I have to say I agree entirely with Silence and IoF's posts.

i want to ask why not a few alliances like chance and WH and whoever else gang up and try to take out one alliance at a time...why not actually co-operate...i do remember that WH was a HUGE threat and that chance and WH attacked SG and hurt them alot...they could have done this to the other 2 alliance or try to kill off SG...i believe that rewarding sort of like the bounty system would be good...like a systematic fund management system where if you (as an alliance in war mode) attacked an alliance say between ranks 1-5 you would get extra funds ontop of your bounty or something like that...why not make an union of alliances consisting of say alliances 4-6 or 7 and then attack one alliance at a time...people should know that WH and Chance defend VERY WELL and why not adapt it to thier attacking...if they could stop attacks why not organise properly and attack...i know they can do damage but i feel that they dont trust eachother enough to attack in tandem

Funny funny funny. I'd say that the majority of Chance and WH have more of less given up now. I wouldn't say that the alliances don't trust each other at all, I have seen organised rushes including Chance, WH and TDL members go successfully etc without trust being an issue.
I think you'll find that the main issue is attacking 60 players at once with 40 who are all smaller. Attacks must be focused on one wing at a time, and whilst that wing defends, the other two are open to retal facing minimal defence. Another issue is the fact that the lowest alliance can swap a couple of players around for a few top 10 ranked players and get them ready to defend by the time the second wave comes.

I also find it funny how supposedly "clever" people (especially those official helpers etc) don't seem to think that forming a powerblock will ruin the game and cause less money to be spent - it quite obviously will. Who really wants to waste their money? If I hadn't been vamp with an alternative goal rather than achieving a value win, I definitely wouldn't have bought the p-unit.

One of the main reasons why I'm annoyed is because of the constant incomings. If it was from one alliance, managing to have 15 people online the whole time to send at my alliance I would take my hat off to their activity and commitment. But when it's 3 alliances, 60 members available to attack all the time, the fact that those 15 people attacking you need sleep and a social life isn't important, because there will be another 30 online throughout the day to take their place. That is the most infuriating thing; that and the blatent lack of skill that the vast majority possess (i.e. SOs attacking a vamp etc).

And to all those who are promising never to play in a powerblock again, do you not think it's a bit late now. The only person that I believe in this thread who is truely apologetic for their participation in the powerblock is saint1d. I'm sure the rest (Steve_God, pinpower etc included) care too much about their rank to be truely sorry.

To the nooblock: imo the least you could all do is buy 5 BCs each and spend it on game cash tbh. Either that or attack each other and bring some fun back into the game.

[ryanlok15]

see thats how you cant undo the powerblock because if you cant be arsed organising how are you going to take them down...you guys are capable of it...you have enough activity to do it why not just go all out on one of the alliances...its not like many of the top alliances can still attack you guys so you do have a choice to do it or not....but if you guys cant be 'arsed' to do it then why complain about the powerblock if you can destroy it with enough planning...WH and Chance have enough to take out 2 of the alliances if not all 3...it just takes planning...why not create a thread and organise properly, just dont sit it out...do something while you can...its not like WH and Chance are completely out ranked and overpowered it just they dont try hard enough...they've done it before why not do it again...polo how many attacks have you guys blocked lately coming from TBA? alot of them, so why not use that defending skill for offence?

i want to ask why not a few alliances like chance and WH and whoever else gang up and try to take out one alliance at a time...why not actually co-operate...i do remember that WH was a HUGE threat and that chance and WH attacked SG and hurt them alot...they could have done this to the other 2 alliance or try to kill off SG...i believe that rewarding sort of like the bounty system would be good...like a systematic fund management system where if you (as an alliance in war mode) attacked an alliance say between ranks 1-5 you would get extra funds ontop of your bounty or something like that...why not make an union of alliances consisting of say alliances 4-6 or 7 and then attack one alliance at a time...people should know that WH and Chance defend VERY WELL and why not adapt it to thier attacking...if they could stop attacks why not organise properly and attack...i know they can do damage but i feel that they dont trust eachother enough to attack in tandem

Because everytime we send out attacks we get massive retals from the other 2 alliances? Plus nobody can be arsed to organise.

[Matthew]

Pure solo was overpowered. It is still quite easy to play solo - you don't all of a sudden need to find an alliance now. People are just upset because they can't be overpowered pure solos now.

There is no link with the removal of pure solo and there being a powerblock this round - that's absurd.

Psolo was overpowered and I wholeheartedly agree with its removal and think it moves the game forward, however it displaced a lot of players. I do disagree that it is easy to play solo, despite not having tried it myself since the introduction of age 5 there are much less solo's within the higher rankings, solo's are now much easier land.

I personally think there is a large link between the removal of psolo's and wings/powerblocks, there simply hasn't been enough leaders or accomplished leaders to accomodate for all these players, meaning that there has been expansion and an increase in supply of more skilled players.

[Martin]

see thats how you cant undo the powerblock because if you cant be arsed organising how are you going to take them down...you guys are capable of it...you have enough activity to do it why not just go all out on one of the alliances...its not like many of the top alliances can still attack you guys so you do have a choice to do it or not....but if you guys cant be 'arsed' to do it then why complain about the powerblock if you can destroy it with enough planning...WH and Chance have enough to take out 2 of the alliances if not all 3...it just takes planning...why not create a thread and organise properly, just dont sit it out...do something while you can...its not like WH and Chance are completely out ranked and overpowered it just they dont try hard enough...they've done it before why not do it again...polo how many attacks have you guys blocked lately coming from TBA? alot of them, so why not use that defending skill for offence?

i want to ask why not a few alliances like chance and WH and whoever else gang up and try to take out one alliance at a time...why not actually co-operate...i do remember that WH was a HUGE threat and that chance and WH attacked SG and hurt them alot...they could have done this to the other 2 alliance or try to kill off SG...i believe that rewarding sort of like the bounty system would be good...like a systematic fund management system where if you (as an alliance in war mode) attacked an alliance say between ranks 1-5 you would get extra funds ontop of your bounty or something like that...why not make an union of alliances consisting of say alliances 4-6 or 7 and then attack one alliance at a time...people should know that WH and Chance defend VERY WELL and why not adapt it to thier attacking...if they could stop attacks why not organise properly and attack...i know they can do damage but i feel that they dont trust eachother enough to attack in tandem

Because everytime we send out attacks we get massive retals from the other 2 alliances? Plus nobody can be arsed to organise.


Ahead AND Polo have answered your questions, please read their posts.

[Enrico]

I did say that a blurb expanding the mutual attacking rules is a good idea. However, it's late to implement it now in the CURRENT round.

Yeah everyone admits it's a waste. However, those who are 'thinking' they are going to portal at a certain spot... did get their spot and they should be allowed to queen it up if that's what they choose. more than 2/3rd's of the round is gone.

I respectfully disagree. The round is over in 20.15 days. Until then, anyone thinking they have a "safe" portal spot really should wake up and smell what the Rock is cooking. :P
If Azzer decides to smash them up a bit so the game is more fun for all the last three weeks... well that's up to him. If they are half as skilled as they think they are they should have no problem portaling.



If it's ***** THEN F'N PLAY!

I am! :P Still working for a top 5 in units disabled and to get past 25K acres stolen this round. :D But When Azzer asks for input, I will give my input.

[ryanlok15]

i dont believe that chance and WH have given up...why would the defend if they have...do you see many incoming from the top alliance(imical)?...you practically have 2 alliances that oyu have to worry about...yes you are smaller but how many attacks from TBA have been successful lately...IMHO it doesnt seem as many...i believe that IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO, you could actually do some damage to TBA....but it seems that you guys just dont want to risk it...you guys have TL, POMS, RPG, SA, ROBO, etc. why not use it effectively and mass up to take on TBA...you guys should realise that if you take down one of the alliances it greatly reduces the powerblock, but its sad that even you great players have given up already when you guys could join up and attack...i know you guys could do alot of damage, but it seems that you are too worried about losing score/rank...you guys can rush, so why not rush, you guys can send stealth so why not send stealth attacks...its up to you how this round ends but its if you guys get motivated....

so to conclude i do have to say that you guys defend really well against the attacks from TBA so think about it, if you can defend, why not attack aswell...all you have to do is organise like TBA does

I have to say I agree entirely with Silence and IoF's posts.

i want to ask why not a few alliances like chance and WH and whoever else gang up and try to take out one alliance at a time...why not actually co-operate...i do remember that WH was a HUGE threat and that chance and WH attacked SG and hurt them alot...they could have done this to the other 2 alliance or try to kill off SG...i believe that rewarding sort of like the bounty system would be good...like a systematic fund management system where if you (as an alliance in war mode) attacked an alliance say between ranks 1-5 you would get extra funds ontop of your bounty or something like that...why not make an union of alliances consisting of say alliances 4-6 or 7 and then attack one alliance at a time...people should know that WH and Chance defend VERY WELL and why not adapt it to thier attacking...if they could stop attacks why not organise properly and attack...i know they can do damage but i feel that they dont trust eachother enough to attack in tandem

Funny funny funny. I'd say that the majority of Chance and WH have more of less given up now. I wouldn't say that the alliances don't trust each other at all, I have seen organised rushes including Chance, WH and TDL members go successfully etc without trust being an issue.
I think you'll find that the main issue is attacking 60 players at once with 40 who are all smaller. Attacks must be focused on one wing at a time, and whilst that wing defends, the other two are open to retal facing minimal defence. Another issue is the fact that the lowest alliance can swap a couple of players around for a few top 10 ranked players and get them ready to defend by the time the second wave comes.

I also find it funny how supposedly "clever" people (especially those official helpers etc) don't seem to think that forming a powerblock will ruin the game and cause less money to be spent - it quite obviously will. Who really wants to waste their money? If I hadn't been vamp with an alternative goal rather than achieving a value win, I definitely wouldn't have bought the p-unit.

One of the main reasons why I'm annoyed is because of the constant incomings. If it was from one alliance, managing to have 15 people online the whole time to send at my alliance I would take my hat off to their activity and commitment. But when it's 3 alliances, 60 members available to attack all the time, the fact that those 15 people attacking you need sleep and a social life isn't important, because there will be another 30 online throughout the day to take their place. That is the most infuriating thing; that and the blatent lack of skill that the vast majority possess (i.e. SOs attacking a vamp etc).

And to all those who are promising never to play in a powerblock again, do you not think it's a bit late now. The only person that I believe in this thread who is truely apologetic for their participation in the powerblock is saint1d. I'm sure the rest (Steve_God, pinpower etc included) care too much about their rank to be truely sorry.

To the nooblock: imo the least you could all do is buy 5 BCs each and spend it on game cash tbh. Either that or attack each other and bring some fun back into the game.

[Ahead]

i dont believe that chance and WH have given up...why would the defend if they have...do you see many incoming from the top alliance(imical)?...you practically have 2 alliances that oyu have to worry about...yes you are smaller but how many attacks from TBA have been successful lately...IMHO it doesnt seem as many...i believe that IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO, you could actually do some damage to TBA....but it seems that you guys just dont want to risk it...you guys have TL, POMS, RPG, SA, ROBO, etc. why not use it effectively and mass up to take on TBA...you guys should realise that if you take down one of the alliances it greatly reduces the powerblock, but its sad that even you great players have given up already when you guys could join up and attack...i know you guys could do alot of damage, but it seems that you are too worried about losing score/rank...you guys can rush, so why not rush, you guys can send stealth so why not send stealth attacks...its up to you how this round ends but its if you guys get motivated....

so to conclude i do have to say that you guys defend really well against the attacks from TBA so think about it, if you can defend, why not attack aswell...all you have to do is organise like TBA does

Sorry but you make me rofl :P Not being a member of either Chance or WH I don't think you know all the facts. I lost 16k acres in the space of 16 hours to TBA around 3/4 days ago. I had 13 incs on me at once at one time, whilst other members in our alliance also had incs. Bear in mind that all of these attackers were at least 250% of our scores. Chance and WH's defences may be very good the majority of the time, but it does not stop 100% of TBA attacks. That is the first instance of your incorrect information.

The second is the we are afraid to lose score statement. Absurd. If we were afraid to lose score, we wouldn't defend against them, let alone rush them. Spy TBA's robo players, you will see a significant number of RPG/striker rushes. Even 3 people rushing one TBA robo gets Chance/WH several incs, so imagine what would happen if a full scale attack was launched.

Another key problem is the fact that the majority of the larger players are contactable. This means that if a full scale attack is launched that they can't defend against, all 3 wings will retal, and Chance/WH will end up gaining 3k acres but losing at least 20k from retals, and no damage will be done to the powerblock. It is a lot harder than you think, and if you think you can lead and organise Chance/WH's attacks on TBA, then by all means have MY PLACE in Chance to do it :P

[Garrett]

I did say that a blurb expanding the mutual attacking rules is a good idea. However, it's late to implement it now in the CURRENT round.

Yeah everyone admits it's a waste. However, those who are 'thinking' they are going to portal at a certain spot... did get their spot and they should be allowed to queen it up if that's what they choose. more than 2/3rd's of the round is gone.

I respectfully disagree. The round is over in 20.15 days. Until then, anyone thinking they have a "safe" portal spot really should wake up and smell what the Rock is cooking. :P
If Azzer decides to smash them up a bit so the game is more fun for all the last three weeks... well that's up to him. If they are half as skilled as they think they are they should have no problem portaling.


You know I have mad love for you Enrico, but you don't see your request of Azzer smashing them as vigilantism?

What if you had perfectly and legally set up a core group to play together and then the creator decides that he's had enough and wipes you from the board?

Ask yourself how you would feel. Let them have the round. They won it. Alliances that had chances, just admitted that they cba to organize. Rather than taking out other allies, they recalled to defend their acres which means that their acres meant more than taking out the powerblock.

The entire playerbase is pussified this round.

[DarkSider]

A bit off topic but everytime i asked in the past for somebody that kept saying psolo overpowered what exactly is the part that makes it so overpowered i never got a reply, at least never a decent one.
Maybe if i ask now what exactly psolo's had in the past over normal solo's that made them so overpowered i could get an answer ?
I don't want to appear like i slap those ppl over their faces but i made several calcs with what mobs might be sent to several solo's and how bad they'd get pwned and i got to conclusion that psolo's where pretty weak, especially higher on ranks. Except bunkers any other route was just dust in wind so i welcome anybody to explain why where the psolo's overpowered.
Hell we farmed solo's for a living in Pestiferous with one going for the kill and 6 others waiting to wave for free acres so i'm yet to see evidence psolo's where overpowered.
My personal opinion is that psolo was a popular choice and the allied players didn't like to be against something that doesn't share the same treatement like them. Probably most of the moaning about psolo's beeing overpowered came from the bitterness that you couldn't just press a on all units and send with 3 members more and also you didn't get to see the solo's ar level to calculate your mob either. Also it was distressing to see your alliance had to deal with all the **** and constant waving while psolo's had a more relaxed policy of getting zeroed once a week or so and just chill without putting anything near the effort allied players put in. But what you expect .. solo has to defend 1, allies have to defend 20 .. it's obvious it's more action in an alliance .. was just a matter of preference.

[Turnip2k]

i dont believe that chance and WH have given up...why would the defend if they have...do you see many incoming from the top alliance(imical)?...you practically have 2 alliances that oyu have to worry about...yes you are smaller but how many attacks from TBA have been successful lately...IMHO it doesnt seem as many...i believe that IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO, you could actually do some damage to TBA....but it seems that you guys just dont want to risk it...you guys have TL, POMS, RPG, SA, ROBO, etc. why not use it effectively and mass up to take on TBA...you guys should realise that if you take down one of the alliances it greatly reduces the powerblock, but its sad that even you great players have given up already when you guys could join up and attack...i know you guys could do alot of damage, but it seems that you are too worried about losing score/rank...you guys can rush, so why not rush, you guys can send stealth so why not send stealth attacks...its up to you how this round ends but its if you guys get motivated....

so to conclude i do have to say that you guys defend really well against the attacks from TBA so think about it, if you can defend, why not attack aswell...all you have to do is organise like TBA does

I have to say I agree entirely with Silence and IoF's posts.

Funny funny funny. I'd say that the majority of Chance and WH have more of less given up now. I wouldn't say that the alliances don't trust each other at all, I have seen organised rushes including Chance, WH and TDL members go successfully etc without trust being an issue.
I think you'll find that the main issue is attacking 60 players at once with 40 who are all smaller. Attacks must be focused on one wing at a time, and whilst that wing defends, the other two are open to retal facing minimal defence. Another issue is the fact that the lowest alliance can swap a couple of players around for a few top 10 ranked players and get them ready to defend by the time the second wave comes.

I also find it funny how supposedly "clever" people (especially those official helpers etc) don't seem to think that forming a powerblock will ruin the game and cause less money to be spent - it quite obviously will. Who really wants to waste their money? If I hadn't been vamp with an alternative goal rather than achieving a value win, I definitely wouldn't have bought the p-unit.

One of the main reasons why I'm annoyed is because of the constant incomings. If it was from one alliance, managing to have 15 people online the whole time to send at my alliance I would take my hat off to their activity and commitment. But when it's 3 alliances, 60 members available to attack all the time, the fact that those 15 people attacking you need sleep and a social life isn't important, because there will be another 30 online throughout the day to take their place. That is the most infuriating thing; that and the blatent lack of skill that the vast majority possess (i.e. SOs attacking a vamp etc).

And to all those who are promising never to play in a powerblock again, do you not think it's a bit late now. The only person that I believe in this thread who is truely apologetic for their participation in the powerblock is saint1d. I'm sure the rest (Steve_God, pinpower etc included) care too much about their rank to be truely sorry.

To the nooblock: imo the least you could all do is buy 5 BCs each and spend it on game cash tbh. Either that or attack each other and bring some fun back into the game.

I suggest you read that reply, and Polo's reply, again. If they attack, they will get counterattacked. They are able to defend because they aren't attacking! The guys who you are talking about that are 'out of range' can still defend against the incomings, and let the rest of the people in range take up the counterattacks. Even If one ally started to get weakend, they could swap in some bigger players to bolster defense.

As for 'organising like TBA does', I can assure you that TBA's attacks are pretty atrocious - they are flailing wildly in the dark from what I've seen. They won by numbers and the rest of the playerbase doing nothing about it early on, not by skill.

[ryanlok15]

i know that there is alot of factors that come into it, like player being contacted etc...but you have to realise that imical cant attack the majority of players in this game and then you have to only deal with 2 alliance...im not talking about stealing land predominantly, im just stating that if the powerblock was weakened wouldnt the majority of players in this game take advantage and start attacking the weakened TBA while they were weak...only people that you would have to worry about is 2/3 of TBA attacking/retal against you guys...and WH and Chance are 2 alliances...so imo 2v2 isnt that hard to do...also if your worried about your land you can easily obtain it as you have alot of skilled player in your midst and can easily obtain the land if needed...you guys have plenty of ammo to take out thier robo players, have enough to block, terrors and tls to hit aswell, vamps...why not use it properly and attack...i mean i can see your frustration as it hard to destroy a powerblock but it has been done...why not work together and take one alliance out...then you only have 2 alliances to contest with, while the 3rd is getting hit by other alliances...i know alot more thought is needed for this kind of stuff and i have no intention to doubt you guys' skills but i think that it is still possible to hit TBA hard...of course there will be retals but then you could atleast block them too...i doubt that TBA will give up land easily and that you guys could still have enough fire power to block further incoming...but thats what i think and you guys are alot more skilled than i am but i thought why not organise and see how it goes, it would hurt you guys too much...and you guys have alot of troops that are alot more power/quicker than theirs....hopefully you guys do step up and show what you can do...i know it might take more than 2 alliances but you guys have enough contacts to organise something if it was needed

i dont believe that chance and WH have given up...why would the defend if they have...do you see many incoming from the top alliance(imical)?...you practically have 2 alliances that oyu have to worry about...yes you are smaller but how many attacks from TBA have been successful lately...IMHO it doesnt seem as many...i believe that IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO, you could actually do some damage to TBA....but it seems that you guys just dont want to risk it...you guys have TL, POMS, RPG, SA, ROBO, etc. why not use it effectively and mass up to take on TBA...you guys should realise that if you take down one of the alliances it greatly reduces the powerblock, but its sad that even you great players have given up already when you guys could join up and attack...i know you guys could do alot of damage, but it seems that you are too worried about losing score/rank...you guys can rush, so why not rush, you guys can send stealth so why not send stealth attacks...its up to you how this round ends but its if you guys get motivated....

so to conclude i do have to say that you guys defend really well against the attacks from TBA so think about it, if you can defend, why not attack aswell...all you have to do is organise like TBA does

Sorry but you make me rofl :P Not being a member of either Chance or WH I don't think you know all the facts. I lost 16k acres in the space of 16 hours to TBA around 3/4 days ago. I had 13 incs on me at once at one time, whilst other members in our alliance also had incs. Bear in mind that all of these attackers were at least 250% of our scores. Chance and WH's defences may be very good the majority of the time, but it does not stop 100% of TBA attacks. That is the first instance of your incorrect information.

The second is the we are afraid to lose score statement. Absurd. If we were afraid to lose score, we wouldn't defend against them, let alone rush them. Spy TBA's robo players, you will see a significant number of RPG/striker rushes. Even 3 people rushing one TBA robo gets Chance/WH several incs, so imagine what would happen if a full scale attack was launched.

Another key problem is the fact that the majority of the larger players are contactable. This means that if a full scale attack is launched that they can't defend against, all 3 wings will retal, and Chance/WH will end up gaining 3k acres but losing at least 20k from retals, and no damage will be done to the powerblock. It is a lot harder than you think, and if you think you can lead and organise Chance/WH's attacks on TBA, then by all means have MY PLACE in Chance to do it :P

[Tombi]

i dont believe that chance and WH have given up...why would the defend if they have...do you see many incoming from the top alliance(imical)?...you practically have 2 alliances that oyu have to worry about...yes you are smaller but how many attacks from TBA have been successful lately...IMHO it doesnt seem as many...i believe that IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO, you could actually do some damage to TBA....but it seems that you guys just dont want to risk it...you guys have TL, POMS, RPG, SA, ROBO, etc. why not use it effectively and mass up to take on TBA...you guys should realise that if you take down one of the alliances it greatly reduces the powerblock, but its sad that even you great players have given up already when you guys could join up and attack...i know you guys could do alot of damage, but it seems that you are too worried about losing score/rank...you guys can rush, so why not rush, you guys can send stealth so why not send stealth attacks...its up to you how this round ends but its if you guys get motivated....

so to conclude i do have to say that you guys defend really well against the attacks from TBA so think about it, if you can defend, why not attack aswell...all you have to do is organise like TBA does

I have to say I agree entirely with Silence and IoF's posts.

Funny funny funny. I'd say that the majority of Chance and WH have more of less given up now. I wouldn't say that the alliances don't trust each other at all, I have seen organised rushes including Chance, WH and TDL members go successfully etc without trust being an issue.
I think you'll find that the main issue is attacking 60 players at once with 40 who are all smaller. Attacks must be focused on one wing at a time, and whilst that wing defends, the other two are open to retal facing minimal defence. Another issue is the fact that the lowest alliance can swap a couple of players around for a few top 10 ranked players and get them ready to defend by the time the second wave comes.

I also find it funny how supposedly "clever" people (especially those official helpers etc) don't seem to think that forming a powerblock will ruin the game and cause less money to be spent - it quite obviously will. Who really wants to waste their money? If I hadn't been vamp with an alternative goal rather than achieving a value win, I definitely wouldn't have bought the p-unit.

One of the main reasons why I'm annoyed is because of the constant incomings. If it was from one alliance, managing to have 15 people online the whole time to send at my alliance I would take my hat off to their activity and commitment. But when it's 3 alliances, 60 members available to attack all the time, the fact that those 15 people attacking you need sleep and a social life isn't important, because there will be another 30 online throughout the day to take their place. That is the most infuriating thing; that and the blatent lack of skill that the vast majority possess (i.e. SOs attacking a vamp etc).

And to all those who are promising never to play in a powerblock again, do you not think it's a bit late now. The only person that I believe in this thread who is truely apologetic for their participation in the powerblock is saint1d. I'm sure the rest (Steve_God, pinpower etc included) care too much about their rank to be truely sorry.

To the nooblock: imo the least you could all do is buy 5 BCs each and spend it on game cash tbh. Either that or attack each other and bring some fun back into the game.

I suggest you read that reply, and Polo's reply, again. If they attack, they will get counterattacked. They are able to defend because they aren't attacking! The guys who you are talking about that are 'out of range' can still defend against the incomings, and let the rest of the people in range take up the counterattacks. Even If one ally started to get weakend, they could swap in some bigger players to bolster defense.

As for 'organising like TBA does', I can assure you that TBA's attacks are pretty atrocious - they are flailing wildly in the dark from what I've seen. They won by numbers and the rest of the playerbase doing nothing about it early on, not by skill.

yeah some of the attacks have been pretty poor i admit but your forgetting that there have been some brilliantly thought out attacks mainly set up by DA :P that caused huge landlosses to WH

[Enrico]

You know I have mad love for you Enrico, but you don't see your request of Azzer smashing them as vigilantism?

What if you had perfectly and legally set up a core group to play together and then the creator decides that he's had enough and wipes you from the board?

Ask yourself how you would feel. Let them have the round. They won it. Alliances that had chances, just admitted that they cba to organize. Rather than taking out other allies, they recalled to defend their acres which means that their acres meant more than taking out the powerblock.

The entire playerbase is pussified this round.

Well as I have mentioned a couple of times, I dont think Azzer should do anything that drastic. But I can't see the harm in him amending the EULA now, and warning the 3 allies that countering attacks made on any of the other alliances will be met by retribution.

That way he makes a resistance possible, since each of the 3 wings will be on their own. And I do think such "skilled" alliances should be perfectly capable of defending themselves agains any resistance. (Granted if one of the three take the old switcharoo and make for the win, so much better.)

Most likely one of the three will win anyway, but it might invite some epic battles the last part of the round. :D

[ryanlok15]

i have read polos arguments but i think my message isnt really getting translated in what im typing...ill say it basically for me aswell...yes those big guys can defend and the guys attacking you can send out as retals but think about it this way, if organied properly both can be done(defending attacking)...you just have to get numbers and co-operation in order....and what i mean copy TBA in attacks was that, copy thier communication methods or whatever they use and organise your guys on an attack...i know this may have been covered but i believe that people are giving up too early in the round and that while TBA are still small (compared to what they could be later in the game) there should be some sort of revolt against them...how many people could the possibly send retals at, at one singular time???...if enough people are interested and are willing why not organise a massive attack?

i dont believe that chance and WH have given up...why would the defend if they have...do you see many incoming from the top alliance(imical)?...you practically have 2 alliances that oyu have to worry about...yes you are smaller but how many attacks from TBA have been successful lately...IMHO it doesnt seem as many...i believe that IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO, you could actually do some damage to TBA....but it seems that you guys just dont want to risk it...you guys have TL, POMS, RPG, SA, ROBO, etc. why not use it effectively and mass up to take on TBA...you guys should realise that if you take down one of the alliances it greatly reduces the powerblock, but its sad that even you great players have given up already when you guys could join up and attack...i know you guys could do alot of damage, but it seems that you are too worried about losing score/rank...you guys can rush, so why not rush, you guys can send stealth so why not send stealth attacks...its up to you how this round ends but its if you guys get motivated....

so to conclude i do have to say that you guys defend really well against the attacks from TBA so think about it, if you can defend, why not attack aswell...all you have to do is organise like TBA does

I have to say I agree entirely with Silence and IoF's posts.

Funny funny funny. I'd say that the majority of Chance and WH have more of less given up now. I wouldn't say that the alliances don't trust each other at all, I have seen organised rushes including Chance, WH and TDL members go successfully etc without trust being an issue.
I think you'll find that the main issue is attacking 60 players at once with 40 who are all smaller. Attacks must be focused on one wing at a time, and whilst that wing defends, the other two are open to retal facing minimal defence. Another issue is the fact that the lowest alliance can swap a couple of players around for a few top 10 ranked players and get them ready to defend by the time the second wave comes.

I also find it funny how supposedly "clever" people (especially those official helpers etc) don't seem to think that forming a powerblock will ruin the game and cause less money to be spent - it quite obviously will. Who really wants to waste their money? If I hadn't been vamp with an alternative goal rather than achieving a value win, I definitely wouldn't have bought the p-unit.

One of the main reasons why I'm annoyed is because of the constant incomings. If it was from one alliance, managing to have 15 people online the whole time to send at my alliance I would take my hat off to their activity and commitment. But when it's 3 alliances, 60 members available to attack all the time, the fact that those 15 people attacking you need sleep and a social life isn't important, because there will be another 30 online throughout the day to take their place. That is the most infuriating thing; that and the blatent lack of skill that the vast majority possess (i.e. SOs attacking a vamp etc).

And to all those who are promising never to play in a powerblock again, do you not think it's a bit late now. The only person that I believe in this thread who is truely apologetic for their participation in the powerblock is saint1d. I'm sure the rest (Steve_God, pinpower etc included) care too much about their rank to be truely sorry.

To the nooblock: imo the least you could all do is buy 5 BCs each and spend it on game cash tbh. Either that or attack each other and bring some fun back into the game.

I suggest you read that reply, and Polo's reply, again. If they attack, they will get counterattacked. They are able to defend because they aren't attacking! The guys who you are talking about that are 'out of range' can still defend against the incomings, and let the rest of the people in range take up the counterattacks. Even If one ally started to get weakend, they could swap in some bigger players to bolster defense.

As for 'organising like TBA does', I can assure you that TBA's attacks are pretty atrocious - they are flailing wildly in the dark from what I've seen. They won by numbers and the rest of the playerbase doing nothing about it early on, not by skill.

[Twigley]

copy thier communication methods or whatever they use


:')

[Garrett]

ahhh account sharing, that's what the resistance lacked.

[Jubjub]

Tbh, the powerblock has actually taught me alot of things about the game. Being allied with 59 other players is good for a noob like me because i can learn alot of stuff from the more experienced players(Without having to pay 1BC for it ;) )
I agree, it has killed all competition but it has also given me a chance to play at the top for once. Yeah, it is really boring now that there is no competition and that i've stopped dying and have minimal targets but it also was fun and a decent experience for the first time. I however, would never do it again because it's so boring.
It does make a change though for the players who normally play at the bottom to now be bashed by people who hardly know how to play the game. Also, if we are going to end this powerblock it's just going to create another slightly smaller powerblock next round of the same players who win every round. This is the first round i've actually slightly enjoyed playing because i know when i log on i'm not going to be smashed into the ground because i've grown in-range of someone who wants my land.
Anyway, powerblocking once is enough and i doubt anyone will do it more than once unless they really enjoy being bored.
i dont believe that chance and WH have given up...why would the defend if they have...do you see many incoming from the top alliance(imical)?...you practically have 2 alliances that oyu have to worry about...yes you are smaller but how many attacks from TBA have been successful lately...IMHO it doesnt seem as many...*i believe that IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO, you could actually do some damage to TBA....but it seems that you guys just dont want to risk it...* Thats crap, they have a 2:3 ratio on us, and we simply win by numbers you guys have TL, POMS, RPG, SA, ROBO, etc. why not use it effectively and mass up to take on TBA...you guys should realise that if you take down one of the alliances it greatly reduces the powerblock, but its sad that even you great players have given up already when you guys could join up and attack...i know you guys could do alot of damage, but it seems that you are too worried about losing score/rank...you guys can rush, so why not rush, you guys can send stealth so why not send stealth attacks...its up to you how this round ends but its if you guys get motivated....

so to conclude i do have to say that you guys defend really well against the attacks from TBA so think about it, if you can defend, why not attack aswell...all you have to do is organise like TBA does

I have to say I agree entirely with Silence and IoF's posts.

Funny funny funny. I'd say that the majority of Chance and WH have more of less given up now. I wouldn't say that the alliances don't trust each other at all, I have seen organised rushes including Chance, WH and TDL members go successfully etc without trust being an issue.
I think you'll find that the main issue is attacking 60 players at once with 40 who are all smaller. Attacks must be focused on one wing at a time, and whilst that wing defends, the other two are open to retal facing minimal defence. Another issue is the fact that the lowest alliance can swap a couple of players around for a few top 10 ranked players and get them ready to defend by the time the second wave comes.

I also find it funny how supposedly "clever" people (especially those official helpers etc) don't seem to think that forming a powerblock will ruin the game and cause less money to be spent - it quite obviously will. Who really wants to waste their money? If I hadn't been vamp with an alternative goal rather than achieving a value win, I definitely wouldn't have bought the p-unit.

One of the main reasons why I'm annoyed is because of the constant incomings. If it was from one alliance, managing to have 15 people online the whole time to send at my alliance I would take my hat off to their activity and commitment. But when it's 3 alliances, *60 members available to attack all the time* -- Thats bollocks, we have like 10 per attack atm , the fact that those 15 people attacking you need sleep and a social life isn't important, because there will be another 30 online throughout the day to take their place. That is the most infuriating thing; that and the blatent lack of skill that the vast majority possess (i.e. SOs attacking a vamp etc).

And to all those who are promising never to play in a powerblock again, do you not think it's a bit late now. The only person that I believe in this thread who is truely apologetic for their participation in the powerblock is saint1d. I'm sure the rest (Steve_God, pinpower etc included) care too much about their rank to be truely sorry.

To the nooblock: imo the least you could all do is buy 5 BCs each and spend it on game cash tbh. Either that or attack each other and bring some fun back into the game.

I suggest you read that reply, and Polo's reply, again. If they attack, they will get counterattacked. They are able to defend because they aren't attacking! The guys who you are talking about that are 'out of range' can still defend against the incomings, and let the rest of the people in range take up the counterattacks. Even If one ally started to get weakend, they could swap in some bigger players to bolster defense.

As for 'organising like TBA does', I can assure you that TBA's attacks are pretty atrocious - they are flailing wildly in the dark from what I've seen. They won by numbers and the rest of the playerbase doing nothing about it early on, not by skill.

yeah some of the attacks have been pretty poor i admit but your forgetting that there have been some brilliantly thought out attacks mainly set up by DA :P that caused huge landlosses to WH

Yeah, something about full real defence on a fake attack leaving all other members exposed springs to mind......

[Antinoobkiller]

Good game I think :)) I think it is fair to make a powerblock since everyone is doing it except me cause im the only one playing without any pnaps and alliance.

I think that the lower ranked alliances failed to see what was going on in the start so they let them win by fault. Dont blame them for it their game when you could have stopped it so easily by taking out them one by one. BUT you couldnt cause they were smarter,stronger and better than you, they won, you didnt, thats the fact. Get over it, its a new round in 20days.

Anyways I still like bushtarion and think it is a great game but bunker/sa is really really really stupidly easy to play -_-

[f0xx]

yeah some of the attacks have been pretty poor i admit but your forgetting that there have been some brilliantly thought out attacks mainly set up by DA :P that caused huge landlosses to WH

Actually, ALL of the attacks have been poor and the only reason for which some of them are succesful is because they are multiple times bigger than the target alliance.

Also, the recent score/land loss at WH was not because of DA's "brilliance" but because of someone's stubborn'ness, which is also the reason for Martin's leaving.

So, if you want to be blind and ignorant, then keep praising DA.

Just remember that the actually good organisers don't need 3 times more members and multiple times more score to do moderate damage to an ally.

[Matthew]

Good game I think :)) I think it is fair to make a powerblock since everyone is doing it except me cause im the only one playing without any pnaps and alliance.

I think that the lower ranked alliances failed to see what was going on in the start so they let them win by fault. Dont blame them for it their game when you could have stopped it so easily by taking out them one by one. BUT you couldnt cause they were smarter,stronger and better than you, they won, you didnt, thats the fact. Get over it, its a new round in 20days.

Anyways I still like bushtarion and think it is a great game but bunker/sa is really really really stupidly easy to play -_-

erm... If the alliances who were involved with the minor resistance on SG were able to swallow their pride and work together for a bit initially then they would have been able to stop the powerblock. Full stop. realistically is WH/Chance acted on the powerblock sooner they could have done a lot more...

In summary im equally if not more so annoyed with the pessimism of the resistance rather than TBA. WE ALLOWED THEM TO WIN. Remember that.

[Tombi]

yeah some of the attacks have been pretty poor i admit but your forgetting that there have been some brilliantly thought out attacks mainly set up by DA :P that caused huge landlosses to WH

Actually, ALL of the attacks have been poor and the only reason for which some of them are succesful is because they are multiple times bigger than the target alliance.

Also, the recent score/land loss at WH was not because of DA's "brilliance" but because of someone's stubborn'ness, which is also the reason for Martin's leaving.

So, if you want to be blind and ignorant, then keep praising DA.

Just remember that the actually good organisers don't need 3 times more members and multiple times more score to do moderate damage to an ally.

Well DA sent in a fake and you all fell for it..you didn't lose much score 'cos you sent away..not much more to be said?

[harriergirl]

Wow, this thread is a whole lot of crapola, on a stick even.

So 60 players, some of them lameasses to begin with, don't break rules but decide to work together. They could have been taken down early but through politics and whatnot weren't. Now they are really untouchable.. and they are...

But poor Azzer just bought a house people. He needs those credits.

Please, either make a rule or don't. But this round is a wash, it is what it is and it's over. move on thanks.

[Garrett]

yeah some of the attacks have been pretty poor i admit but your forgetting that there have been some brilliantly thought out attacks mainly set up by DA :P that caused huge landlosses to WH

Actually, ALL of the attacks have been poor and the only reason for which some of them are succesful is because they are multiple times bigger than the target alliance.

Also, the recent score/land loss at WH was not because of DA's "brilliance" but because of someone's stubborn'ness, which is also the reason for Martin's leaving.

So, if you want to be blind and ignorant, then keep praising DA.

Just remember that the actually good organisers don't need 3 times more members and multiple times more score to do moderate damage to an ally.


Now now f0xx. remember, it finally took DA to realize that the powerblock needed such overwhelming forces to land. May not be great organization, but at least they came and stayed. They just simply subscribed to 'well if we throw enough corpses on them, they can't move'.

So while the brilliance may be in question, he must be the first to figure out the whole 'numbers' aspect.

[Turnip2k]

yeah some of the attacks have been pretty poor i admit but your forgetting that there have been some brilliantly thought out attacks mainly set up by DA :P that caused huge landlosses to WH

Bottom line mate - if you, or any of your ally mates want respect for getting to the top and attacks afterwards, do it properly. No matter what any of do now, no one will ever think you are a good players for it, and thats the sad truth. Sheer numbers will eclipse any tactical ability - only your mistakes are apparent right now, not your successes. The only thing you could do to gain any sort of respect from the rest of the playerbase is to war each other. You got to the top by using sheer numbers, and fair enough. The rest of the playerbase should have stepped in early, but they didn't - which highlights how apathetic alot of people are becoming to attacking - resistances etc are becoming less and less frequent (reasons for which are mostly highlighted in DS's earlier post on page 2 or 3 I think).

[Dark_Angel]

Any chance people can respond to this thread a little more objectively?

As Azzer has already pointed out, this issue doesn't relate to "TBA" exclusively. Its about past rounds and future rounds too.

90% of the responses now are about TBA. Nothing can be done about this round. Try addressing/discussing the problem of powerblocks for future rounds...

[Bobbin]

Not the first. Not the last. And probably not the worst.

People always powerblock because they want a skilless easy ride.

It's not going to change, unless something gets brought in to change it, or the playerbase gets a serious attitude adjustment. All the people in this thread saying they won't be part of a power block again? Bollocks. You're the kind of player who plays that way, simple as.

Part of the reason I stopped playing properly a long time ago is because of the new breed of players this game has these days. Bushtarions problem has never been the game really, yeah some things in it have sucked. I've said this for 3/4 years now... The main problem is the player base. People want an easy ride, so they go in huge groups and powerblock. People don't want to risk themselves, So they don't resist. People are content about sitting there doing nothing and whining. so nothing gets done.

[Koeniej]

Nah, I don't think that quite cuts it. How about we all agree to not recruit anyone who has been in a powerblock in the last year?

Sure you could do that.. but rejecting a group of 60-ish players to all good ally's will only encourage them to play together and attack the ones who are hating them.. what probably ends in a powerblock like thing.. so dont think that will work

[Rama]

All I have to say is if we werent on the top noone would have complained about our wings. Then also if the resistance organised well(a thing they never did because who knows why) we could have been killed and everyone would be making laugh of us, etc. Then to be honest never thought we would win but things turned like that. Then everyone knew about the "powerblock" like 30 days before round start, if you didnt take any measures about it, like make a temporary agreement with an ally to kill us or something that means you werent really prepared. Prolly you thought you wanted to win as a normal round but you knew it wasnt going to be a normal round so you should have take measures about it like I have done in the past.


Then I need to remember anyone when I started playing this game I rememebr 2 allys getting like the 40 best players of the game in allys anap back on round 15 and making the round pointless? ofc noone of those 40 players complained? R 15. Or always an ally getting no competition FTW and they wining like after 10 days round started. And I can mention several rounds, 21,22,23 etc. So the only thing you could do is what Allys like Chance or warhu are doing now? I have been in that positions several times, I remember on round 23 I was in gheno and as we knew there wasnt a resistance coming and we dindt have a chance to win we decided to give away lands to the top when they attacked us so they went out of range quickcly and we could play without they bothering us anytime we wanted to make an attack, I remember I got up to 14 k lands that round and stopped there and seed for the last 22 days as If I grew the top ally would attack us, so those 22 days was boring as hell but I dindt moan about it I just played the game. Ofc the game still needs changes and Powerblock shouldnt be repeat never again but its just cirscunstances that took place this round and you have to play with. Just live with it and start thinking about next round.


Cheers!

[Ahead]

Then everyone knew about the "powerblock" like 30 days before round start, if you didnt take any measures about it, like make a temporary agreement with an ally to kill us or something that means you werent really prepared.

Anyone remember "a noob training alliance"? OH WAIT

[Garrett]

Anyone remember "a noob training alliance"? OH WAIT

You can't call them noobs remember?! You are insulting their veterans. :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Matthew]

Any chance people can respond to this thread a little more objectively?

As Azzer has already pointed out, this issue doesn't relate to "TBA" exclusively. Its about past rounds and future rounds too.

90% of the responses now are about TBA. Nothing can be done about this round. Try addressing/discussing the problem of powerblocks for future rounds...

LOL well thats because this issue is more or less 90% TBA's fault. I mean why in the name of god do you need to still try and justify your ***** decision?

the other powerblocks were different, it was a different time frame and context, infact the idea of alliances working together at that stage was almost encouraged, this was illustrated by the introduction of ANAP's. However, with their removal it also highlight the fact that they were being discouraged. Yet you guys wanted an "army" because you're cool and shiz.

Please consider context DA, Then there were between 2000-3000 players meaning that 60 players wasn't that big of a deal. Whereas now you have atleast 3/5 of the active playersbase.

you say nothing can be done. there are 20 days left. Although Twigley has already stated there will be no war even though he promised me there would be when i left overlude and said before leaving i should have spoke to him to avoid miscomceptions within my judgement.

so if 2/3 weeks into the round the initial idea was to disband and fight each other. Why can this not be changed within the remaining 3 weeks?

Critically you all highlighted that in heindsight the powerblock was a bad idea, not now when azzer gave you facts but beforehand. You also all claimed you would never be part of one again. So why was it not ended then? The thing is if this game were real war i would support your decision to maintain alliances, but this isn't real war, your alliance are not democratic establishments.

They are nothing more than piss stains on bushtarion.

Congratz.

[TehPantz]

I applaud Azzer's decision! I also find it very odd that people were surprised that powerblock's are harmful to bushtarion.

[Jubjub]

Same old **** guys. Cry cry I'm not winning but TBA are. If you had the brain capacity to realise that to take us down you need skill and a bit of luck. No, you would rather cry to azzer to fix your problems rather than trying to take the challenge of taking us down? I'm sure if you tried you could get like 80-150 players who want to kill TBA.
On a more overall powerblock view, it's mainly about playstyle. If I hadn't joined the powerblock I'd be at rank 500ish being farmed for seeds if I was offline for more than 2 days. The powerblock gave me a chance to play at the top and a chance to relax and still end up in a half decent position in the game. If you think about it this way, say 60 players powerblock. Those 60 players get an easy ride for a round and end up winning. The veteran bushtarion players get upset and start crying because they know they're good enough to win but they aren't winning. No powerblock, those 60 players get bored, same old veterans winning every round. They get upset because they have nothing to play for. It's a 50:50 issue. As I said in my last post, powerblocking was fun for abit but now I miss that equal BR where you just win by a small margin and end up taking big losses while dealing big damage. But I'm sure next round when I'm not powerblocking I'll be sick of the equal BRs and taking big damage. The game just needs more balance so that the not-so hardcore players can play while having fun and the veterans can also play and have fun.
You wonder why the playerbase isn't growing, it's because the same people win every round, but I'm sure they will be just as pissed because they shouldn't be at a disadvantage for being good at the game.
Yeah, just a sum up and some general points.

[Garrett]

LOL. Wow such a contrast in attitude from your post a few pages ago.

Can't wait to see how you post and how much you are participating in active resistances when you aren't on top next round.

with only 20 days left and the large cash rolls that the powerblock has especially the ones that haven't restarted... 1 person can easily take on 20-30 lower ranked easily. if not more.

this isn't the time to cry about taking a resistance to topple you. only rushes to do damage at this point, hit and fade tactics are going to work here. but it wouldn't dethrone... only annoy those who think they are going to be in the top 10 at rounds end.

please.

[pinpower]

Please consider context DA, Then there were between 2000-3000 players meaning that 60 players wasn't that big of a deal. Whereas now you have atleast 3/5 of the active playersbase.

The playerbase hasnt actually declined as much as people think. There wasnt 2000-3000 active players. iirc correctly Azzer said the actual playerbase hasnt really shrunk THAT MUCH there are just less "log in once a week never really doing much" players which made up alot of the often talked about 2000 players!

(sorry to misquote if im wrong, but im sure i remember it being said somewhere ;))

[Antinoobkiller]

Same old **** guys. Cry cry I'm not winning but TBA are. If you had the brain capacity to realise that to take us down you need skill and a bit of luck. No, you would rather cry to azzer to fix your problems rather than trying to take the challenge of taking us down? I'm sure if you tried you could get like 80-150 players who want to kill TBA.
On a more overall powerblock view, it's mainly about playstyle. If I hadn't joined the powerblock I'd be at rank 500ish being farmed for seeds if I was offline for more than 2 days. The powerblock gave me a chance to play at the top and a chance to relax and still end up in a half decent position in the game. If you think about it this way, say 60 players powerblock. Those 60 players get an easy ride for a round and end up winning. The veteran bushtarion players get upset and start crying because they know they're good enough to win but they aren't winning. No powerblock, those 60 players get bored, same old veterans winning every round. They get upset because they have nothing to play for. It's a 50:50 issue. As I said in my last post, powerblocking was fun for abit but now I miss that equal BR where you just win by a small margin and end up taking big losses while dealing big damage. But I'm sure next round when I'm not powerblocking I'll be sick of the equal BRs and taking big damage. The game just needs more balance so that the not-so hardcore players can play while having fun and the veterans can also play and have fun.
You wonder why the playerbase isn't growing, it's because the same people win every round, but I'm sure they will be just as pissed because they shouldn't be at a disadvantage for being good at the game.
Yeah, just a sum up and some general points.

I agree

[Turnip2k]

Same old **** guys. Cry cry I'm not winning but TBA are. If you had the brain capacity to realise that to take us down you need skill and a bit of luck. No, you would rather cry to azzer to fix your problems rather than trying to take the challenge of taking us down? I'm sure if you tried you could get like 80-150 players who want to kill TBA.
On a more overall powerblock view, it's mainly about playstyle. If I hadn't joined the powerblock I'd be at rank 500ish being farmed for seeds if I was offline for more than 2 days. The powerblock gave me a chance to play at the top and a chance to relax and still end up in a half decent position in the game. If you think about it this way, say 60 players powerblock. Those 60 players get an easy ride for a round and end up winning. The veteran bushtarion players get upset and start crying because they know they're good enough to win but they aren't winning. No powerblock, those 60 players get bored, same old veterans winning every round. They get upset because they have nothing to play for. It's a 50:50 issue. As I said in my last post, powerblocking was fun for abit but now I miss that equal BR where you just win by a small margin and end up taking big losses while dealing big damage. But I'm sure next round when I'm not powerblocking I'll be sick of the equal BRs and taking big damage. The game just needs more balance so that the not-so hardcore players can play while having fun and the veterans can also play and have fun.
You wonder why the playerbase isn't growing, it's because the same people win every round, but I'm sure they will be just as pissed because they shouldn't be at a disadvantage for being good at the game.
Yeah, just a sum up and some general points.

The latter part of your message I can see where you are coming from - but the first part is slightly obtuse. 'We are going to make the game boring for everyone, but absolve ourselves of responsibility because someone should be stopping us' doesnt ring too well in my ears - take some responsibility for your actions. The way this round has gone is the largely the fault of TBA, the playerbase not stopping it only makes the problem worse.

I can see some reason in your arguement in the latter half against the vets, but the powerblock isn't just affecting them. There are hundreds of other people in the game, who, like you were, are now being farmed for seeds and bashed a far higher rate due to scores being less spread out. You are making the very issues you are complaining about worse. Nice.

[Matthew]

Please consider context DA, Then there were between 2000-3000 players meaning that 60 players wasn't that big of a deal. Whereas now you have atleast 3/5 of the active playersbase.

The playerbase hasnt actually declined as much as people think. There wasnt 2000-3000 active players. iirc correctly Azzer said the actual playerbase hasnt really shrunk THAT MUCH there are just less "log in once a week never really doing much" players which made up alot of the often talked about 2000 players!

(sorry to misquote if im wrong, but im sure i remember it being said somewhere ;))

you think all the players now are active? Noone is active outside of the powerblock now pin. Noone. There is actually no point, if we steal land, TBA remind us we have a land cap.

The playerbase now is actually miniscule. but you wouldn't realise this as you've been at the top all round so it isn't as apparant to you.

Remember pin everything Azzer says isn't going to be 100% true, do you really think he wants to openly admit that his game is dying? To some extent he is going to bend the truth to ensure that he doesn't lose all his golden oldies and that faith remains in the game.

[IceOfFire]

Same old **** guys. Cry cry I'm not winning but TBA are. If you had the brain capacity to realise that to take us down you need skill and a bit of luck. No, you would rather cry to azzer to fix your problems rather than trying to take the challenge of taking us down? I'm sure if you tried you could get like 80-150 players who want to kill TBA.
On a more overall powerblock view, it's mainly about playstyle. If I hadn't joined the powerblock I'd be at rank 500ish being farmed for seeds if I was offline for more than 2 days. The powerblock gave me a chance to play at the top and a chance to relax and still end up in a half decent position in the game. If you think about it this way, say 60 players powerblock. Those 60 players get an easy ride for a round and end up winning. The veteran bushtarion players get upset and start crying because they know they're good enough to win but they aren't winning. No powerblock, those 60 players get bored, same old veterans winning every round. They get upset because they have nothing to play for. It's a 50:50 issue. As I said in my last post, powerblocking was fun for abit but now I miss that equal BR where you just win by a small margin and end up taking big losses while dealing big damage. But I'm sure next round when I'm not powerblocking I'll be sick of the equal BRs and taking big damage. The game just needs more balance so that the not-so hardcore players can play while having fun and the veterans can also play and have fun.
You wonder why the playerbase isn't growing, it's because the same people win every round, but I'm sure they will be just as pissed because they shouldn't be at a disadvantage for being good at the game.
Yeah, just a sum up and some general points.

I agree

I am sorry but you did make a big mistake the 2 of you...You said 60 people won?? Well if i check alliance standings, Inimical won.

The other 40 are second and third. Only one winner, everyone else is the next loser...shame u wasted your round thinking you have won! hahahaha

[Enrico]

I am sorry but you did make a big mistake the 2 of you...You said 60 people won?? Well if i check alliance standings, Inimical won.

The other 40 are second and third. Only one winner, everyone else is the next loser.

Well I guess 20 people can congratulate themselves with being the best of the losers, but what about the 20 that end up being runners up even for that! :P

[Garrett]

hey let's remake the game into thunderdome! 2 players enter, 1 player leaves!

[TehPantz]

Same old **** guys. Cry cry I'm not winning but TBA are. If you had the brain capacity to realise that to take us down you need skill and a bit of luck. No, you would rather cry to azzer to fix your problems rather than trying to take the challenge of taking us down? I'm sure if you tried you could get like 80-150 players who want to kill TBA.
On a more overall powerblock view, it's mainly about playstyle. If I hadn't joined the powerblock I'd be at rank 500ish being farmed for seeds if I was offline for more than 2 days. The powerblock gave me a chance to play at the top and a chance to relax and still end up in a half decent position in the game. If you think about it this way, say 60 players powerblock. Those 60 players get an easy ride for a round and end up winning. The veteran bushtarion players get upset and start crying because they know they're good enough to win but they aren't winning. No powerblock, those 60 players get bored, same old veterans winning every round. They get upset because they have nothing to play for. It's a 50:50 issue. As I said in my last post, powerblocking was fun for abit but now I miss that equal BR where you just win by a small margin and end up taking big losses while dealing big damage. But I'm sure next round when I'm not powerblocking I'll be sick of the equal BRs and taking big damage. The game just needs more balance so that the not-so hardcore players can play while having fun and the veterans can also play and have fun.
You wonder why the playerbase isn't growing, it's because the same people win every round, but I'm sure they will be just as pissed because they shouldn't be at a disadvantage for being good at the game.
Yeah, just a sum up and some general points.

Im not crying (boo hoo) about people winning, im crying about Azzer losing out on money that runs this game.

[Ahead]

Tbh, the powerblock has actually taught me alot of things about the game.

No, that's the problem, it hasn't taught you a lot at all.

it has also given me a chance to play at the top for once.

But not properly. The top ranks this round can hardly be called "the top". That's why most people are calling it a void win.

It does make a change though for the players who normally play at the bottom to now be bashed by people who hardly know how to play the game.

And how is that a good change? :? The people who normally play at the top are there for a reason. In general, they have played their way up over many many rounds, that is WH they are there.

Also, if we are going to end this powerblock it's just going to create another slightly smaller powerblock next round of the same players who win every round.

If you are threatening people with another powerblock next round good luck finding members as half of TBA have said they'd never participate in a powerblock again and the other half have no chance of winning with 30 vs 20. I can assure you that a TBA powerblocked group will NOT win next round.


This is the first round i've actually slightly enjoyed playing because i know when i log on i'm not going to be smashed into the ground because i've grown in-range of someone who wants my land.

Sorry but if you are that bothered about being zeroed, put a bit more effort in and get into a more decent alliance![/QUOTE]




Anyone remember "a noob training alliance"? OH WAIT

You can't call them noobs remember?! You are insulting their veterans.

I called it that as that is what TBA was originally intended for I believe? Noob training? Therefore Rama's argument of "people knew it was coming" isn't valid at all I'm afraid.


Same old **** guys. Cry cry I'm not winning but TBA are.

It's not about not winning, it's the methods that the "winners" used to "win". If you had managed to send as many attacks, and retal as well and defend with just 20 players, I would have been impressed and congratulated you on the win, but you haven't. That is where the problem lies.

If I hadn't joined the powerblock I'd be at rank 500ish being farmed for seeds if I was offline for more than 2 days. The powerblock gave me a chance to play at the top and a chance to relax and still end up in a half decent position in the game.

1) There is a reason why you would be rank 500ish. Re-read your posts.
2) So you are admitting that you are SQing in the powerblock?

No powerblock, those 60 players get bored, same old veterans winning every round.

The same people do NOT win every round, and you are SO wrong to think that. You clearly have no knowledge of the game at all and no offence but tbf both your posts are ****. The veterans win for a reason - they are better. If people want to play casually and don't want to go ftw, then they don't deserve to win. I don't understand how you can justify them deserving to win by putting no effort in.

Many of these so-called "veterans" you are talking about haven't won every round they have played, and haven't "cried" to this extent when they have lost in the past. Therefore your logic is flawed and you are proven to be wrong.

[Garrett]

oh ahead, i was jokingly paraphrasing some of their rebuttals. don't take that post serially. ;)

but as I said before... i believe that if the HQ and alliance system gets a major overhaul then people can start taking personal pride (more than just score) over having their HQ... because the HQ and alliance will be more meaningful.

then i think you will see more individual alliance pride and working to their own goals. politics and siding with others will always happen... but give people a reason to band together within their own borders (alliance) and see what happens.

[Tombi]

Tbh, the powerblock has actually taught me alot of things about the game.

No, that's the problem, it hasn't taught you a lot at all.

it has also given me a chance to play at the top for once.

But not properly. The top ranks this round can hardly be called "the top". That's why most people are calling it a void win.

It does make a change though for the players who normally play at the bottom to now be bashed by people who hardly know how to play the game.

And how is that a good change? :? The people who normally play at the top are there for a reason. In general, they have played their way up over many many rounds, that is WH they are there.

Also, if we are going to end this powerblock it's just going to create another slightly smaller powerblock next round of the same players who win every round.

If you are threatening people with another powerblock next round good luck finding members as half of TBA have said they'd never participate in a powerblock again and the other half have no chance of winning with 30 vs 20. I can assure you that a TBA powerblocked group will NOT win next round.


This is the first round i've actually slightly enjoyed playing because i know when i log on i'm not going to be smashed into the ground because i've grown in-range of someone who wants my land.

Sorry but if you are that bothered about being zeroed, put a bit more effort in and get into a more decent alliance!




Anyone remember "a noob training alliance"? OH WAIT

You can't call them noobs remember?! You are insulting their veterans.

I called it that as that is what TBA was originally intended for I believe? Noob training? Therefore Rama's argument of "people knew it was coming" isn't valid at all I'm afraid.


Same old **** guys. Cry cry I'm not winning but TBA are.

It's not about not winning, it's the methods that the "winners" used to "win". If you had managed to send as many attacks, and retal as well and defend with just 20 players, I would have been impressed and congratulated you on the win, but you haven't. That is where the problem lies.

If I hadn't joined the powerblock I'd be at rank 500ish being farmed for seeds if I was offline for more than 2 days. The powerblock gave me a chance to play at the top and a chance to relax and still end up in a half decent position in the game.

1) There is a reason why you would be rank 500ish. Re-read your posts.
2) So you are admitting that you are SQing in the powerblock?

No powerblock, those 60 players get bored, same old veterans winning every round.

The same people do NOT win every round, and you are SO wrong to think that. You clearly have no knowledge of the game at all and no offence but tbf both your posts are ****. The veterans win for a reason - they are better. If people want to play casually and don't want to go ftw, then they don't deserve to win. I don't understand how you can justify them deserving to win by putting no effort in.

Many of these so-called "veterans" you are talking about haven't won every round they have played, and haven't "cried" to this extent when they have lost in the past. Therefore your logic is flawed and you are proven to be wrong.

Yes and your not in TBA, you don't know what goes on inside so i'm wondering why you think nothing has been taught and JubJub hasn't learnt anything?

[Matthew]

Yes and your not in TBA, you don't know what goes on inside so i'm wondering why you think nothing has been taught and JubJub hasn't learnt anything?

I WAS in TBA, you learnt f*** all. Not only was it shown back then by your evident incompetence whilst being in there but it is also illustrated now by your current inability to do anything.

[IceOfFire]

Because a huge majority of you cant attack or read/understand spy reports

[Martin]

Tbh, the powerblock has actually taught me alot of things about the game.

No, that's the problem, it hasn't taught you a lot at all.

it has also given me a chance to play at the top for once.

But not properly. The top ranks this round can hardly be called "the top". That's why most people are calling it a void win.

It does make a change though for the players who normally play at the bottom to now be bashed by people who hardly know how to play the game.

And how is that a good change? :? The people who normally play at the top are there for a reason. In general, they have played their way up over many many rounds, that is WH they are there.

Also, if we are going to end this powerblock it's just going to create another slightly smaller powerblock next round of the same players who win every round.

If you are threatening people with another powerblock next round good luck finding members as half of TBA have said they'd never participate in a powerblock again and the other half have no chance of winning with 30 vs 20. I can assure you that a TBA powerblocked group will NOT win next round.


This is the first round i've actually slightly enjoyed playing because i know when i log on i'm not going to be smashed into the ground because i've grown in-range of someone who wants my land.

Sorry but if you are that bothered about being zeroed, put a bit more effort in and get into a more decent alliance!




Anyone remember "a noob training alliance"? OH WAIT

You can't call them noobs remember?! You are insulting their veterans.

I called it that as that is what TBA was originally intended for I believe? Noob training? Therefore Rama's argument of "people knew it was coming" isn't valid at all I'm afraid.


Same old **** guys. Cry cry I'm not winning but TBA are.

It's not about not winning, it's the methods that the "winners" used to "win". If you had managed to send as many attacks, and retal as well and defend with just 20 players, I would have been impressed and congratulated you on the win, but you haven't. That is where the problem lies.

If I hadn't joined the powerblock I'd be at rank 500ish being farmed for seeds if I was offline for more than 2 days. The powerblock gave me a chance to play at the top and a chance to relax and still end up in a half decent position in the game.

1) There is a reason why you would be rank 500ish. Re-read your posts.
2) So you are admitting that you are SQing in the powerblock?

No powerblock, those 60 players get bored, same old veterans winning every round.

The same people do NOT win every round, and you are SO wrong to think that. You clearly have no knowledge of the game at all and no offence but tbf both your posts are ****. The veterans win for a reason - they are better. If people want to play casually and don't want to go ftw, then they don't deserve to win. I don't understand how you can justify them deserving to win by putting no effort in.

Many of these so-called "veterans" you are talking about haven't won every round they have played, and haven't "cried" to this extent when they have lost in the past. Therefore your logic is flawed and you are proven to be wrong.

Yes and your not in TBA, you don't know what goes on inside so i'm wondering why you think nothing has been taught and JubJub hasn't learnt anything?

Because we can read his posts? :P

[Davis]

In all honestly would it be that hard to make a new amendment to the EULA (kinda like Martin said) saying, that "Agreeing to not attack each other as a group over x ticks, is not allowed and will be punished by Admin troops" or "any known Winged allies (not power blocks because a winged ally is the same as a power block only the power block succeeded) will be punished by admin troops" and then when the next round starts make everyone that makes an ID re-accept the EULA. its pretty easy to spot a "wing/power block" so make it against the rules. problem solved, no need to spend hours trying to think of ways to "prevent it" when you can just stop it...

Seriously you're making this harder than it needs to be.


p.s.
i swear on all that i have, i will never be in a power block again.

[Nagash]

I think what the game needs is a clear divide in groups of players. For example a number of rounds ago you had a clear divide in player groups.

Angelas group (long standing old chool players)

Welshies group

Martins group (from time to time)

Virus

There was almost a hatred between these groups but also one of respect, it made the game interesting. From what ive seen now its generally every man for hire each round, theres no consistent groups or commitment/loayalty to a playerbase in quite the same way there was.

This is all something that Azzer has no controll over; and hence something that made the game enjoyable.

[Davis]

I completely disagree with that! that makes every round boring and the same witht he same group, that leaves no room for improvement, those were the rounds when no one knew who i was, when i was in some rank 15 ally being the most active most land stole but always losing land, because i couldn't get into a decent ally. now that those groups are gone, you see a lot more new players becoming known and making a name for themselves and if new players have no chance of getting into a pre established group then they will more than likely quit the game for goo.

[Polo]

I think what the game needs is a clear divide in groups of players. For example a number of rounds ago you had a clear divide in player groups.

Angelas group (long standing old chool players)

Welshies group

Martins group (from time to time)

Virus

There was almost a hatred between these groups but also one of respect, it made the game interesting. From what ive seen now its generally every man for hire each round, theres no consistent groups or commitment/loayalty to a playerbase in quite the same way there was.

This is all something that Azzer has no controll over; and hence something that made the game enjoyable.
I agree, it was so much fun having the same core alliances fighting every round, it made everyone a lot more blood thirsty and people didn't tend to quit/become inactive just because they didn't win a round as much as they do now. However, it is something Azzer has some control over - he can implement an alliance profile system similar to user profiles, as I have suggested in the past.
I completely disagree with that! that makes every round boring and the same witht he same group, that leaves no room for improvement, those were the rounds when no one knew who i was, when i was in some rank 15 ally being the most active most land stole but always losing land, because i couldn't get into a decent ally. now that those groups are gone, you see a lot more new players becoming known and making a name for themselves and if new players have no chance of getting into a pre established group then they will more than likely quit the game for goo.
That's a load of rubbish. All you needed to do was impress one of the core alliance leaders and not be a moron and you'd often get picked up for the next round or maybe watched some more and picked up for a couple of rounds time. It's kind of like trying to impress scouts, I guess. :P

For example, I started talking to Martin in my first round and ended up playing with him over the next few rounds and through him met more experienced players etc. And back in r20 or so, we both saw icy playing in his first round could tell he was going to be a good player so recruited him for the next round.

[Twigley]

I think what the game needs is a clear divide in groups of players. For example a number of rounds ago you had a clear divide in player groups.


R25 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew / Podunk and co.
R26 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew (rama leading).
R27 - Twigleys crew and Iofs merged into a 2 wing all SA piss about.
R28 - Podunks crew / Bit of random / Lukeys crew
R29 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew / Ogluks crew (Which had a fair few of iofs old crew fighting v Twigleys crew)
R30 - "Twigleys group" (Even though its not just mine its always said to be / Iofs group / Ogluks group.

(24 - Ramas crew which had lots of "Iofs crew")
(23 - Iofs crew / Lukeys crew)
(22 - Ramas crew)


So ...
Clear divide?
Just took at the last 6 or more rounds there is a clear divide in players and there is alot of "hate" or to word it better rivalry that has been created by past rounds.

[Mateeen]

mk.. since ive read all posts on the last 10 pages >< i thought id add in my comment as well

I'm part of TBA, but only because i go where ever JJ goes, and that is because we go to the same school, and also because he introduced me to Bush. (on a sidenote, since round 26 or 27, JJ has brought ATLEAST 10 active 6-10 hour activity a day guys into bushtarion, yay night cover)

Anyways, yes, i wont join a power block again, simply because ive been bored as hell this round :P

When JJ got me to join 20-ish days into round 26, or 27.. i do not remember, he had made an ally on his own called "woodlands"(the name of our school), he was in the top 50 with massive troops while all of us were rank 500ish, our ally was around rank 15ish. All JJ did was defend us while we learned about the game. I stole to 17k in 4 days (something i boasted about for a loong time) and all i remember is going to sleep one night, only to wake up with 8k land the next day and no troops...

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.
Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

What needs to happen is these experienced and active players to start splitting and making thier own allys just like JJ did in round 26 and start recruiting players so we can get more active allys in the game who actively war each other..

EDIT: a suggestion that just popped into my mind, as soon as an ally hits rank 1 or 2, they get no insurance what so ever, so they are left open to rushes/resistances, so there will be a good turnover of allys in rank 1 and 2 and more killing ;)

[Polo]

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.
Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

What needs to happen is these experienced and active players to start splitting and making thier own allys just like JJ did in round 26 and start recruiting players so we can get more active allys in the game who actively war each other..

I made my own alliance this round...War? Huh? The players I recruited came from many different "groups" and some players I'd never even played with before.

[Mateeen]

The players you recruited are all players who are really really good and should not even be allowed to be in the same ally :P
I attacked you guys at 2 30 GMT at night and you had 15 defending >< that imo is just "retarded" :\

Martin, f0xx, cb1202, no-daichi, kuda, alci...

Tbh, *atleast* Martin and f0xx, bieng the old good players that they are, should make thier own allies so we get more circulation of newbies + experienced players in top allies.. a person shudnt HAVE to be contacble to be in a FTW ally imo

And, im not saying that you took the people from the same group, you just took all the good ones and made a super ally :P

A super stacked ally just isnt fun to play against...

[Inferno]

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.
Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

What needs to happen is these experienced and active players to start splitting and making thier own allys just like JJ did in round 26 and start recruiting players so we can get more active allys in the game who actively war each other..

I made my own alliance this round...War? Huh? The players I recruited came from many different "groups" and some players I'd never even played with before.


Indeed, i have never played with Polo, but martin had been watching me (weirdo) /heard of me, spot opened up and he put me forward. although i have played (quite) a few rounds (since R11/R12?) i have always kept myself to myself, took over leadership of United_Nations for a few rounds, blah blah blah (infact i cant remember my point now)....ah yes, polo tells truth in his post. And i *hope* i have performed OK for polo.

much love.

[tobapopalos]

The players you recruited are all players who are really really good and should not even be allowed to be in the same ally :P
I attacked you guys at 2 30 GMT at night and you had 15 defending >< that imo is just "retarded" :\

Martin, f0xx, cb1202, no-daichi, kuda, alci...

Tbh, *atleast* Martin and f0xx, bieng the old good players that they are, should make thier own allies so we get more circulation of newbies + experienced players in top allies.. a person shudnt HAVE to be contacble to be in a FTW ally imo

And, im not saying that you took the people from the same group, you just took all the good ones and made a super ally :P

A super stacked ally just isnt fun to play against...

That's stupid. Why would someone deliberately avoid recruiting people he knows are good players? :P

[Mateeen]

He wouldn't, except if the good players were recruiting themselves ;)

hurray for competition over recruiting people! :D

[Rosa]

This is actually a pretty stupid thread.... You won't destroy the power block with your admin powers because it's "not fair to them". However, you're considering putting a rule against powerblocking on the EULA.... How is this fair to players who got bashed to hell by the power block? What if they want to make a power block of their own next round just to give the power block this round a bit of revenge?

You'll be using your admin powers to stop other people from making power blocks but you won't end the one now?

[IceOfFire]

I think what the game needs is a clear divide in groups of players. For example a number of rounds ago you had a clear divide in player groups.


R25 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew / Podunk and co.
R26 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew (rama leading).
R27 - Twigleys crew and Iofs merged into a 2 wing all SA piss about.
R28 - Podunks crew / Bit of random / Lukeys crew
R29 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew / Ogluks crew (Which had a fair few of iofs old crew fighting v Twigleys crew)
R30 - "Twigleys group" (Even though its not just mine its always said to be / Iofs group / Ogluks group.

(24 - Ramas crew which had lots of "Iofs crew")
(23 - Iofs crew / Lukeys crew)
(22 - Ramas crew)


So ...
Clear divide?
Just took at the last 6 or more rounds there is a clear divide in players and there is alot of "hate" or to word it better rivalry that has been created by past rounds.

Beat me to it dam u! :P

[Stass]

A bit off topic but everytime i asked in the past for somebody that kept saying psolo overpowered what exactly is the part that makes it so overpowered i never got a reply, at least never a decent one.
Maybe if i ask now what exactly psolo's had in the past over normal solo's that made them so overpowered i could get an answer ?
I don't want to appear like i slap those ppl over their faces but i made several calcs with what mobs might be sent to several solo's and how bad they'd get pwned and i got to conclusion that psolo's where pretty weak, especially higher on ranks. Except bunkers any other route was just dust in wind so i welcome anybody to explain why where the psolo's overpowered.
Hell we farmed solo's for a living in Pestiferous with one going for the kill and 6 others waiting to wave for free acres so i'm yet to see evidence psolo's where overpowered.
My personal opinion is that psolo was a popular choice and the allied players didn't like to be against something that doesn't share the same treatement like them. Probably most of the moaning about psolo's beeing overpowered came from the bitterness that you couldn't just press a on all units and send with 3 members more and also you didn't get to see the solo's ar level to calculate your mob either. Also it was distressing to see your alliance had to deal with all the **** and constant waving while psolo's had a more relaxed policy of getting zeroed once a week or so and just chill without putting anything near the effort allied players put in. But what you expect .. solo has to defend 1, allies have to defend 20 .. it's obvious it's more action in an alliance .. was just a matter of preference.

I would also like this answered... i dont see how they are over powered and i agree with others that the lack of pure solo has added to the powerblock.
I have been a high ranked p-solo in the past and often wondered why i wasnt getting smashed alot more often then i was. i guess as DS said it is too hard if u cant just type 'a' for all units. Personally i find attacking solos easier than attacking allies if u find them with low enough a/r (a/r doesnt stay at 90% forever).
P-solo seems a great way for the less active to play rather than joining a powerblock to feel their troops/land is safer.

and if someone could give a decent reason as to why p-solo is overpowered how about bringing it back as pure i.e. no p-naps? would that cancel it's overpowerdness out?

sorry for being a little off topic
back on topic yeah power blocks are bad... i agree that this is something that should be shunned by the player base and not really dealt with by admin/gov.
Although i have been trying to come up with a way it could be, unfortunately everything i think of has some other bad implications so is not worth posting

[Hobo]

just to try to offer some ideas.... its been a while since i was active and the reasons for that are varied some life some game. I haven't spent money for a while and i want to offer two reasons for that. I hope they are on topic and i then have a couple of ideas that may or may not help. There will be problems, or issues, with them but then i am not Azzer, or for that matter an alliance player but having played for a lot of years it would be a shame to see this game disappear or be seriously danmaged because of the current situation.

1) Although much maligned the Solo and bounty system of fame and law enabled those larger alliances to be hit by smaller players, be it one alliance or three working together. This in my opinion, at least weakened them and maybe would help lower allys jump on after an attack, a lot of resistances used to use solos to help. I am aware there are problems with that system.
My thoughts with this are, if in game mechanics cant really been used to prevent powerblocking, then maybe in game players can be. They could be allied or solo, rewards, or units, or land or something for attacking up could be won. This could be linked to bounty but if that word is outdated or from previous ages then a new system of something along the same lines might be worth thinking about. The system had flaws

2) If there is an ally powerblock so soon ( and from what i can tell so large) after the removal of the pure solo option, i cant help but think there may be a relationship. With regard to the financing of the game, and I have to guess here, if there were a lot of solo players did the majority of them go Punit? on a lot of routes if your playing on your own you really, for the most part, need it. Unless there are a lot of apac/strikers out there or similar. I would be interested to know how many solos are in the game at the moment or the difference from the last few rounds.

3) Smaller alliances numbers - for two reasons. It could ( though not sure if it would) spread out the experienced players a little more and maybe bring back some of the fighting spirit to the game. I understand that friends want to play together, though 60 seems a little excessive, if numbers are reduced maybe they start playing for the win against each other instead of with each other. When i play squash with a friend i want to win and whoever does we are still friends at the end of it. I know this is a team game, but if the player base is less numerous or active then spreading their numbers around seems to be an idea?
The second reason is competition, to win is always good ( not that i would know!) but to win a competitive match is much more enjoyable, you can gain a sense of achievement from that. Smaller numbers would, of course, still mean active players, or the good players would win, but that's normal. I also know that this in itself would not stop power blocks, but it might make their actions more punishable by the player base itself by facing 20/30 players instead of 60.
Someone with more experience than me might be able to say this would be stupid but i offer the idea anyway.

Just some quick thoughts...

1) A bush UN, when there is a powerblock there are sanctions, reduce grabs, troops defect, land becomes useless apart from score. Disaster at the alliance because they are too busy looking after their friends ally instead of their own

2) Ally AR? Although i dont know the mechanics it is probably too easily to abuse.

thats it... no idea of how useful it is, but felt i had to try to do something to help and hope that bush can get back to being the fun competitive crazy game it was.


Hobo

[septimus]

I would like to see the old L/F system back, I realize it had its flaws, but it did give people at lower ranks more of an incentive to rush the top ranks, as they typically had the highest bounties. I'm not a fan of the base bounty system, at all, I just don't see much of a point in it, i suppose to some small extent it gives people a reason to stay on an attack they might ordinarily recall, but, it's still just a question of what they'll lose v the bounty they'll gain.

In terms of helping out a resistance perhaps some kind of dynamic insurance?(iirc that did exist at one point?) The current system, with the top ally(s) generally stocking seeds when they hit a certain level makes it that much more difficult for a resistance to succeed, because they damage you deal out is decreased significantly by the insurance they get back. Something where your allies rank directly affects your insurance level? Maybe like 5% if your ally is rank 1, 10% for rank 2, etc. but with a cap of 35 or 40%, so that you don't get people starting 1 man allies for 100% insurance.

As for the question of whether it is better to have clearly divided "sides" time after time. I'd say so long as they don't powerblock at all, it is a good thing. I've played this game for a few rounds now, and fairly recently started getting "noticed" by top players, which got me invites into better allies. It's not impossible to get there, you just gotta work on constantly improving yourself. Spots always open up in those top allies. The rivalries created by the same groups ruling round after round have a huge impact on lower allies, the playful hatred between them means that in general they will war more amongst the top allies, which limits the amount of waves and bashes on the mid level allies, which allows them to fight more allies their size, trickle down effect and all that.

As for the actual topic at hand of how to prevent powerblocks, a genuine rule in the EULA would be too difficult to enforce, frankly a blanket statement by Azzer that is intentionally open ended would be a better system. Azzer is more involved, and has a bettr grasp of what is going on in this game then the admins/owners of alot of other games I've played. I believe he'd be fair in handing out punishments for powerblocks and coalitions. But, generally, it should be on the players to prevent it. Hopefully the lessons learned this round will keep the top players from doing it again, in which case the group of people best suited to fighting it(IE the top veterans) will be able to stop it in the future.

Anyway, congratulations to JJ, Twigley, and Steve. You won, well played.

[Edliuen]

I want to make one point, and will probably get bashed to death for it, but nontheless here it goes.

The powerblocks happened, because frankly, the playerbase let it happen. War/Chance let us get to the top, even though they all knew we were working together. They didn't work fast enough or hard enough to end it early. They gave us the round 8 days in.

Later on, when the resistance happened, S_G were pretty much on the verge of dying. But the resistance slacked off, and the powerblock affirmed their positions.

Later, when about a week ago, War actually posed a threat, when they valiantly almost caught up, they threw it away trying to mass defend one target. What was the point in that? Martin left you because he was trying to tell you that it was stupid trying to kill yourself mass defending him. But then you go ahead and do it and get killed. To be honest, War has played an amazing round, but I must say, didn't make the best decisions or didn't make it fast enough. You guys weren't committed enough to try to break the powerblock.

The powerblock does contain a lot of noobs, with a handful of skilled and active players that support and teach them. It contains a lot of first-rounders and a lot of people who does not have the experience in a top alliance. We are therefore susceptible, you just need the will and incentive to break it. The only way you'll prevent a powerblock is by providing some incentive and motivation. I understand, it's scary. you massing one alliance, and then getting retalled by two others. There needs to be a way to stop that, but I don't see how. I guess you've done a fair job Azzer by expressing your feelings. It will prevent a powerblocking in the near future, but how long will people remember this speech for?

That is all. (By the way, this is written at a very late hour and I cba to edit and read over. yes it's all over the place and I apologize. but i speak the truth.)

[ryanlok15]

as an idea especially for the bigger players, why not have a system where the gov sends out attacks at one of the top alliances or a single person(s) so it can slow down growth and development...no doubt if WH and Chance ganged up and had a bit of help i think that they could do a bit of damage...if azzer sets up a system that determines a persons strength and send at him/her accordingly with a certain amount of troops or powerful units then it will keep those at the top on thier toes...and this could allow smaller people to join in and be able to damage those who they couldnt even touch at all...just an idea

[Nagash]

IceOfFire
Head Gardener

IceOfFire's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 267
IceOfFire is an unknown quantity at this point

Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twigley View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nagash View Post
I think what the game needs is a clear divide in groups of players. For example a number of rounds ago you had a clear divide in player groups.
R25 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew / Podunk and co.
R26 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew (rama leading).
R27 - Twigleys crew and Iofs merged into a 2 wing all SA piss about.
R28 - Podunks crew / Bit of random / Lukeys crew
R29 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew / Ogluks crew (Which had a fair few of iofs old crew fighting v Twigleys crew)
R30 - "Twigleys group" (Even though its not just mine its always said to be / Iofs group / Ogluks group.

(24 - Ramas crew which had lots of "Iofs crew")
(23 - Iofs crew / Lukeys crew)
(22 - Ramas crew)


So ...
Clear divide?
Just took at the last 6 or more rounds there is a clear divide in players and there is alot of "hate" or to word it better rivalry that has been created by past rounds.
Beat me to it dam u!

I apologise if there has been two groups fighting it out but i havent particually played recently, i havent played in a long long time and have only recently returned, not really posted on forums previously either. However i dont think your rivalry and Ramas/IoF stands that true and bloodthirsty as the old rivalries, From what i gather Rama (i have no idea who Rama is btw) is with JJ? in that case your "snapped" to him. Hardly a rivalry if thats the case no?

[Antinoobkiller]

Mostly of the ppl moaning against the powerblock are players that have never felt how it is to not be able to win. You are the players that mostly probably had an easy ride but not this time cause some ppl wanted to make a diffrence this round.

Get over it, You got ownd really hard by these new guys :). I sure can see all your frustration and hate towards TBA. And I can ensure they were tired of seeing you in the top rank posistions when they got bashed by you! Now it was your turn!

I think this round was a turning point in Bush history. :)

[fred]

I find it hard to believe that you've played 6 years if these are your ideas to 'balance' the game.

At least I have some ....

[pinpower]

This is actually a pretty stupid thread.... You won't destroy the power block with your admin powers because it's "not fair to them". However, you're considering putting a rule against powerblocking on the EULA.... How is this fair to players who got bashed to hell by the power block? What if they want to make a power block of their own next round just to give the power block this round a bit of revenge?

You'll be using your admin powers to stop other people from making power blocks but you won't end the one now?

Difference is its in no way fair to change rules halfway through a round (or 3/4 of the way through even). Im not just saying that cos im in SG, any major rule changes cannot be done mid round as it can completely mess up the way someone is playing, which really isnt fair. Even Garrett has said this.

I do however understand your point that if others were planning on making a powerblock they cant (if a rule is added), but i think the point is that basically all the "top" players are saying something should be done to stop them, and lower ranked players are feeling the effects as well. Also, if a rule is added it will be done between rounds, therefore allowing people to alter their plans if they had planned on creating permanent winged allies.

[fred]

Wow, this thread is a whole lot of crapola, on a stick even.

So 60 players, some of them lameasses to begin with, don't break rules but decide to work together. They could have been taken down early but through politics and whatnot weren't. Now they are really untouchable.. and they are...

But poor Azzer just bought a house people. He needs those credits.

Please, either make a rule or don't. But this round is a wash, it is what it is and it's over. move on thanks.

most rounds are over in 2-3 weeks ....
waste of time and money ....

[f0xx]

I find it hard to believe that you've played 6 years if these are your ideas to 'balance' the game.

At least I have some ....

Hahahahahah, that guy is killing me.

"At least I have some..."

And Polo doesn't have, right? RIGHT? Perhaps you should remove that blindfold ;)

[fred]

Any chance people can respond to this thread a little more objectively?

As Azzer has already pointed out, this issue doesn't relate to "TBA" exclusively. Its about past rounds and future rounds too.

90% of the responses now are about TBA. Nothing can be done about this round. Try addressing/discussing the problem of powerblocks for future rounds...

LOL well thats because this issue is more or less 90% TBA's fault. I mean why in the name of god do you need to still try and justify your ***** decision?

the other powerblocks were different, it was a different time frame and context, infact the idea of alliances working together at that stage was almost encouraged, this was illustrated by the introduction of ANAP's. However, with their removal it also highlight the fact that they were being discouraged. Yet you guys wanted an "army" because you're cool and shiz.

Please consider context DA, Then there were between 2000-3000 players meaning that 60 players wasn't that big of a deal. Whereas now you have atleast 3/5 of the active playersbase.

you say nothing can be done. there are 20 days left. Although Twigley has already stated there will be no war even though he promised me there would be when i left overlude and said before leaving i should have spoke to him to avoid miscomceptions within my judgement.

so if 2/3 weeks into the round the initial idea was to disband and fight each other. Why can this not be changed within the remaining 3 weeks?

Critically you all highlighted that in heindsight the powerblock was a bad idea, not now when azzer gave you facts but beforehand. You also all claimed you would never be part of one again. So why was it not ended then? The thing is if this game were real war i would support your decision to maintain alliances, but this isn't real war, your alliance are not democratic establishments.

They are nothing more than piss stains on bushtarion.

Congratz.
How many real players are there nowdays?
500?
DA and the like are killing the game - again.
The main reason why I CBF any more ...

[Dark_Angel]

Matthew, Fred.

It is a narrowminded argument that ALL of bushtarions problems are down to TBA.

Azzer has already pointed out that any round in which a powerblock of two or more alliances win, there is a severe impact on the quality of gameplay and therefore the business itself.

There have been a number of rounds in the last 6 years where large powerblocks have dominated (be it 2 or 3 allies), and those rounds the playerbase dwindles more than any other round, people that stay playing don't want to buy game-cash/p-units as much (it's not "worth it" or they have to keep their scores low to stay out of range of the powerblock who are now just "bottomfeeding" off anyone that hops into range), and business itself takes a temporary but always dangerous plunge. Past powerblocks have damaged Bushtarion. The current powerblock is damaging Bushtarion.

I'm not saying TBA hasn't damaged the quality of gameplay. We all know it has. But to say:

LOL well thats because this issue is more or less 90% TBA's fault.

Is inaccurate to say the least.

If everyone wants to kid themselves that TBA are the only powerblock that has ever existed (and damaged the quality of gameplay) go ahead and use this thread to flame away.

Its that kind of nonsense that more than likely meant last time this happened (perhaps not on this scale, but not all that far off) nobody learnt their lesson.

So I'll repeat myself. If you want to target just one small part of the powerblock "issue" - keep flaming TBA. Whilst they are in a large way responsible this round they have not been the culprits in the past, nor will they be in the future. You are not addressing the issue of powerblocking by merely targetting one formation of alliances that have existed in one round of 30. IMO.

I've nothing else to add here. I have already agreed not to take part in future winged' alliances :)

[IceOfFire]

[QUOTE] IceOfFire
Head Gardener

IceOfFire's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 267
IceOfFire is an unknown quantity at this point

Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twigley View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nagash View Post
I think what the game needs is a clear divide in groups of players. For example a number of rounds ago you had a clear divide in p

I apologise if there has been two groups fighting it out but i havent particually played recently, i havent played in a long long time and have only recently returned, not really posted on forums previously either. However i dont think your rivalry and Ramas/IoF stands that true and bloodthirsty as the old rivalries, From what i gather Rama (i have no idea who Rama is btw) is with JJ? in that case your "snapped" to him. Hardly a rivalry if thats the case no?

1. Rama is with JJ because they are friends but he is seriously inactive, i wouldnt let him join me like that :P

2. I think you miss understand once again buddy. I HATE Twigley :D So yes we have the hatred of past groups :D

[IceOfFire]

Why dont the quotes work? :s

[Nagash]

my apologies then

[f0xx]

I HATE Twigley :D So yes we have the hatred of past groups :D

I personally don't discriminate, I hate everyone equally.

[IceOfFire]

I HATE Twigley :D So yes we have the hatred of past groups :D

I personally don't discriminate, I hate everyone equally.

Fair point

I hate everyone in TBA, but Twigley that little bit more

Better f0xx?

[Garrett]

I HATE Twigley :D So yes we have the hatred of past groups :D

I personally don't discriminate, I hate everyone equally.

man if you are going to steal my best lines, at least give me credit.

[Changer]

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.
Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

Hit the nail on the head in my opinion.

[Inferno]

Mostly of the ppl moaning against the powerblock are players that have never felt how it is to not be able to win. You are the players that mostly probably had an easy ride but not this time cause some ppl wanted to make a diffrence this round.

Get over it, You got ownd really hard by these new guys :). I sure can see all your frustration and hate towards TBA. And I can ensure they were tired of seeing you in the top rank posistions when they got bashed by you! Now it was your turn!

I think this round was a turning point in Bush history. :)

Please read the past 10 and a half pages, and then post. Also before you hit Submit reply, i suggest you re-read your comment.

[Jubjub]

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.
Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

Hit the nail on the head in my opinion.

Exactly what i was trying to get across in my last post. Although Ahead tried to read into what i was saying and made some bullshit conclusions...
Tbh, the powerblock has actually taught me alot of things about the game.

No, that's the problem, it hasn't taught you a lot at all. How can you say that unless you are me?

it has also given me a chance to play at the top for once.

But not properly. The top ranks this round can hardly be called "the top". That's why most people are calling it a void win.

It does make a change though for the players who normally play at the bottom to now be bashed by people who hardly know how to play the game.

And how is that a good change? :? The people who normally play at the top are there for a reason. In general, they have played their way up over many many rounds, that is WH they are there.

Also, if we are going to end this powerblock it's just going to create another slightly smaller powerblock next round of the same players who win every round.

*If you are threatening people with another powerblock next round* What the ****? Where did you draw that from? good luck finding members as half of TBA have said they'd never participate in a powerblock again and the other half have no chance of winning with 30 vs 20. I can assure you that a TBA powerblocked group will NOT win next round.


This is the first round i've actually slightly enjoyed playing because i know when i log on i'm not going to be smashed into the ground because i've grown in-range of someone who wants my land.

Sorry but if you are that bothered about being zeroed, put a bit more effort in and get into a more decent alliance!




Anyone remember "a noob training alliance"? OH WAIT

You can't call them noobs remember?! You are insulting their veterans.

I called it that as that is what TBA was originally intended for I believe? Noob training? Therefore Rama's argument of "people knew it was coming" isn't valid at all I'm afraid.


Same old **** guys. Cry cry I'm not winning but TBA are.

It's not about not winning, it's the methods that the "winners" used to "win". If you had managed to send as many attacks, and retal as well and defend with just 20 players, I would have been impressed and congratulated you on the win, but you haven't. That is where the problem lies.

If I hadn't joined the powerblock I'd be at rank 500ish being farmed for seeds if I was offline for more than 2 days. The powerblock gave me a chance to play at the top and a chance to relax and still end up in a half decent position in the game.

1) There is a reason why you would be rank 500ish. Re-read your posts. - Yes, i'm sometimes inactive, don't spend 38days of a round at my computer and i'm not always contactable
2) So you are admitting that you are SQing in the powerblock? - No, otherwise i wouldn't be one of the lowest score-ranked players in TBA...

No powerblock, those 60 players get bored, same old veterans winning every round.

The same people do NOT win every round, and you are SO wrong to think that. You clearly have no knowledge of the game at all and no offence but tbf both your posts are ****. The veterans win for a reason - they are better. If people want to play casually and don't want to go ftw, then they don't deserve to win. I don't understand how you can justify them deserving to win by putting no effort in.

Many of these so-called "veterans" you are talking about haven't won every round they have played, and haven't "cried" to this extent when they have lost in the past. Therefore your logic is flawed and you are proven to be wrong.

[f0xx]

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.
Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

Hit the nail on the head in my opinion.

Atually he didn't. It is one thing to fight 20 players and completely another to fight 60, spread over 3 alliance who can swap members between eachother with no time penalty.

The currect recruiting system STRONGLY supports exactly this abuse and that is why I think it should be changed.

As for that ally next round, I am not in so it can't be that bad ass ;)

[Commy 64]

There's always going to be dominant alliances. You'll never prevent the powerblock because a subset of people are always going to be FTW. There has to be revisons to the game such that people can still have fun, while not being completely FTW.

For my part, even though my alliance gets constantly pwned, it's been really fun to play with folks who are from other countries and develop a "kinship" with them. Coming from other games liek Ogame and Astroempires, I was struck with the code of honor and honesty amongst many players. Whether it's decrying the use of sleep mode (which I don't necessarily agree with unless it's a strictly FTW alliance) or reporting one of our own members for "multi"...it's been a refreshing foray into a new game for me. Even though we get our asses kicked all the time.

I was also struck by the insidiousness of other players who joined our alliance..then left for a new alliance and gave out all of our IDs (early in the round wh en not everyone knew the basic breakdown of alliances). People that joined for a few days, then left for another alliance and waved us. It really makes one mad..but that also makes for good times.

There's a good base of community here. I think we all have to accept powerblocks and help Azzer make decisions about how to keep the game fun for everyone, FTW or "for the Fun". And let's not be naive...Azzer needs to make his living too. Compared to ogame and Astroempires, I'm very impressed by the interface of bush. He deserves to be able to make a living for this product.

My only regret is that after everything has been decided..there's no way to change routes. As someone new, there's so many routes, and so many things I'd like to try. But I gotta wait till next round...

[Changer]

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.
Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

Hit the nail on the head in my opinion.

Atually he didn't. It is one thing to fight 20 players and completely another to fight 60, spread over 3 alliance who can swap members between eachother with no time penalty.

The currect recruiting system STRONGLY supports exactly this abuse and that is why I think it should be changed.

As for that ally next round, I am not in so it can't be that bad ass ;)

Im not saying powerblocks are good for the game. Far from it. But because some reasonable players, maybe not great but reasonable players spend their entire time getting bashed around without the opportunity to prove themselves is the reason why such a block has been formed. If the players that fight out the majority of rounds cant see this then I don't know how else to put it. Some of the more recent suggestions to lower activity needed by Polo would go far to seeing that this game is more competitive in my opinion. They would create more targets and larger players all around, giving better wars and battles.

[f0xx]

Im not saying powerblocks are good for the game. Far from it. But because some reasonable players, maybe not great but reasonable players spend their entire time getting bashed around without the opportunity to prove themselves is the reason why such a block has been formed. If the players that fight out the majority of rounds cant see this then I don't know how else to put it. Some of the more recent suggestions to lower activity needed by Polo would go far to seeing that this game is more competitive in my opinion. They would create more targets and larger players all around, giving better wars and battles.

What a load of bull... this powerblock leaders are far from newbs. They are extremely skilled and experienced (not so extreme in JJ's case). If it wasn't for SG, JJ and mostly Twigley, this powerblock would have never existed. And since none of the really skilled players would ever agree to play in a winged alliance, they had to recruit some not so skilles and new players.

I've had enough of the "newbs got tired of being bashed and formed a powerblock" excuse. *IF* this powerblock had for leaders players which weren't playing since before round 10, then yes, the powerblock would have been a little big justified I guess. The fact is though, that few experienced players wanted to have an easy victory and since they knew they couldn't beat us alone and since they were to lazy to try it the fun way - with politics - they decided to side with each other and create a winged alliance of not two, but THREE alliances.

Now DA will come and point that this discussion is not about TBA but for future rounds and how much he wants to prevent powerblocking in the rounds to come while thinking it is OK if he is part of one at the moment.

Then Twigley will come and bring thousand of suggestions on how to bring new players to the game because he "likes" bush so much.

Then Steve will come and say how much he doesn't care about winning...

I am getting sick of all the hypocricy...

[IceOfFire]

Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

Hit the nail on the head in my opinion.

Nothing like giving up 20 days before even sign up starts for next round lol

[Twigley]

/Following the offtopicness:

Line ups with "big names" are often over rated.
There are plenty of players that dont get a chance out there and i try recruit 4/5 every round.

And a wise leading mentor once taught me if you are scared of an alliance because of their names then you will never win. That advice was ftw.

[Changer]

Im not saying powerblocks are good for the game. Far from it. But because some reasonable players, maybe not great but reasonable players spend their entire time getting bashed around without the opportunity to prove themselves is the reason why such a block has been formed. If the players that fight out the majority of rounds cant see this then I don't know how else to put it. Some of the more recent suggestions to lower activity needed by Polo would go far to seeing that this game is more competitive in my opinion. They would create more targets and larger players all around, giving better wars and battles.

What a load of bull... this powerblock leaders are far from newbs. They are extremely skilled and experienced (not so extreme in JJ's case). If it wasn't for SG, JJ and mostly Twigley, this powerblock would have never existed. And since none of the really skilled players would ever agree to play in a winged alliance, they had to recruit some not so skilles and new players.

I've had enough of the "newbs got tired of being bashed and formed a powerblock" excuse. *IF* this powerblock had for leaders players which weren't playing since before round 10, then yes, the powerblock would have been a little big justified I guess. The fact is though, that few experienced players wanted to have an easy victory and since they knew they couldn't beat us alone and since they were to lazy to try it the fun way - with politics - they decided to side with each other and create a winged alliance of not two, but THREE alliances.

Now DA will come and point that this discussion is not about TBA but for future rounds and how much he wants to prevent powerblocking in the rounds to come while thinking it is OK if he is part of one at the moment.

Then Twigley will come and bring thousand of suggestions on how to bring new players to the game because he "likes" bush so much.

Then Steve will come and say how much he doesn't care about winning...

I am getting sick of all the hypocricy...

Who cares about the leaders? They are only 3 out of the 80 or so that must have been with them this round. Theres no point arguing this point. No one wants to, cause they just get told they are wrong. Clearly my and anyone who thinks this way opinions don't have any sway on the game. Only those that finish top 100 or so every round.......

[f0xx]

Who cares about the leaders?

I heard that Stalin said something similar about Hitler.

I hope you get my point, it is ALL about the leaders.

[Rama]

IceOfFire
Head Gardener

IceOfFire's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 267
IceOfFire is an unknown quantity at this point

Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twigley View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nagash View Post
I think what the game needs is a clear divide in groups of players. For example a number of rounds ago you had a clear divide in player groups.
R25 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew / Podunk and co.
R26 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew (rama leading).
R27 - Twigleys crew and Iofs merged into a 2 wing all SA piss about.
R28 - Podunks crew / Bit of random / Lukeys crew
R29 - Twigleys crew / Iofs crew / Ogluks crew (Which had a fair few of iofs old crew fighting v Twigleys crew)
R30 - "Twigleys group" (Even though its not just mine its always said to be / Iofs group / Ogluks group.

(24 - Ramas crew which had lots of "Iofs crew")
(23 - Iofs crew / Lukeys crew)
(22 - Ramas crew)


So ...
Clear divide?
Just took at the last 6 or more rounds there is a clear divide in players and there is alot of "hate" or to word it better rivalry that has been created by past rounds.
Beat me to it dam u!

I apologise if there has been two groups fighting it out but i havent particually played recently, i havent played in a long long time and have only recently returned, not really posted on forums previously either. However i dont think your rivalry and Ramas/IoF stands that true and bloodthirsty as the old rivalries, From what i gather Rama (i have no idea who Rama is btw) is with JJ? in that case your "snapped" to him. Hardly a rivalry if thats the case no?


Since round 25 its happening :P, you need to think in round 26 I created Jizz and in order to avoid Twigley wining again I teamed up with redemption(JJs ally) and killed them. Then on round 27 we decided to have a break of making wining allys and make a full SO allys wich was a complete failure, then on round 28 Lukey created an ally wich was kinda the same crew as twigley and twigley played for another ally wich was also FTW and then you had podunk Crew where I played. And on Round 29 Twigley made another FTW ally and iof and I helped making khaos a FTW ally recruiting same people as on round 23-24-25-26. And this round you have This :P.

[Rama]

Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

Hit the nail on the head in my opinion.

Nothing like giving up 20 days before even sign up starts for next round lol




If I have learned something from the past its that there is anything that a good resistance cant kill. You can have the best 20 players at least starters, but vs a good resistance they can fall, might not be easy but meh thats ws make it fun :P. For example I remember 3 rounds, r 26 resistance killing twigley ally, round 28 resistance killing lukeys ally,roun 29 resistance killing Twigley ally, They had awesome line ups, and awesome starters so they on the start took huge advantages, I even I remember on round 26 twigley allys saying best line up ever , etc and still died. Just to prove you they could have names but as I say and repeat there is anything a good resistance cant kill.


:P

[Ahead]

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.

I reckon Chance would have given WH a run for their money, and Inimical would have challenged for third with TDT. It would have been a fun round. The alliances weren't stacked that much, and it would have been a good round of wars had the powerblock not been made. Just look at the start of the round - WH/Chance/Inim all battling for rank 1 in the first day, all pretty close. That's how the round should have been!

Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

Rofl, your memory is very poor. I said I've seen several very good lineups, which are capable of beating TBA/TBA's best 20. And I didn't show you any of the lineups cos I don't even know them fully seeing as I might not even be playing.. :? "Several" also implies wars between the very good allies, which = fun. Stop lying and spouting BS Mateen.

[Steve_God]

The fact is though, that few experienced players wanted to have an easy victory and since they knew they couldn't beat us alone and since they were to lazy to try it the fun way - with politics
I'd tried a few times to win as a leader using politics, and it failed. Mainly as being a leader of a 'lower top 10' ally, no-one takes you seriously when it comes to organising attacks, and if those higher up allies loose the motivation, then the round gets stagnant, the winner gets decided, and there is no-chance to win the round.

Then Steve will come and say how much he doesn't care about winning...
I have NEVER said that I don't care about winning. Not this round anyway.

[Edliuen]

If I have learned something from the past its that there is anything that a good resistance cant kill.... Just to prove you they could have names but as I say and repeat there is anything a good resistance cant kill.



Once again, I will repeat myself. This round could have been drastically changed. SG was this close to being killed off. Even with the member swapping. We actually made a huge mistake on the member swapping, left SG without any organizers. They could have been killed off so easily if you continued the resistance, but it just stopped coming.

War? Huh? should have EASILY won this round without the powerblocking. They are by far the most experienced players and great contactability and organizers. So Ahead, please, I'm tired of your ego, Chance and Inimical both stand no chance against War. Even if Chance and Inimical teamed up, I seriously doubt we could have won. The only reason why War was killed because they got tired of getting woken up at 4 am and made the stupid mistake of retalling on a mass, where they got killed.

Powerblocks, aren't the problem. You'll always have them in the future Azzer. Say 5, 10 rounds down the road, another powerblock will happen. You need a way of encouraging the resistance, to keep it coming.

[Ahead]

So Ahead, please, I'm tired of your ego

By saying that Chance would have given WH a run for their money, that shows I have a big ego? Ok.

blablabla

Stop trying to justify the powerblock and make it seem like its the rest of the playerbase's fault. The bottom line is, there shouldn't have been a powerblock. Alliances have 20 members for a reason. Even if a resistance had happened, who says the powerblock wouldn't have grown back up and taken rank 1 spot again with sheer numbers again?

[Rosa]

Now DA will come and point that this discussion is not about TBA but for future rounds and how much he wants to prevent powerblocking in the rounds to come while thinking it is OK if he is part of one at the moment.

Then Twigley will come and bring thousand of suggestions on how to bring new players to the game because he "likes" bush so much.

Then Steve will come and say how much he doesn't care about winning...

I am getting sick of all the hypocricy...

Quoted this because it was too good of a post.

But yeah, I hope more people power block in the up coming rounds. I hope people can use the example TBA set this round and realize that skill, honor, dignity... they mean nothing if you want to win. Just mass noobs and you win. Was proven in round 14, was proven this round~

[vannila]

i find it humorous that most of the people saying they will not powerblock next round are the same ones that have claimed they were quitting bush forever. they are still here...

[fred]

/Following the offtopicness:

Line ups with "big names" are often over rated.
There are plenty of players that dont get a chance out there and i try recruit 4/5 every round.

And a wise leading mentor once taught me if you are scared of an alliance because of their names then you will never win. That advice was ftw.

what a load of BS ...

[torell]

Firstly: theres no skill in massing noobs.

now;

i havnt read the whole thread for obvious reasons. and if your wondering, ive played about 7 rounds.

how about changing peoples attack range? instead of 33%, maybe 45%, MAYBE 65%.
i think this will allow smaller alliances to grow strong.

or even let the number of members in the alliance affect attack range.
eg: 40% for solo. 45% for 2-5 members. 50% for 5-10 members, 60% for 10+ members.

thats all my input anyway :) hate to see bush losing so many veteran players and friends of mine.

[f0xx]

Fred, not one, not two, but whole three posts (in a row too!) made out of straight flames and absolutely no arguments behind them is too much even for me.

Now, I don't know who you are and I've never heard anything about you before yesterday, but you have a mouth too big for your own good.

Remember that everyone can be an arrogant bad ass in the forums, few can back it up in-game though.

[Commy 64]

You'll always have them (powerblocks) in the future Azzer. Say 5, 10 rounds down the road, another powerblock will happen. You need a way of encouraging the resistance, to keep it coming.

I agree with this.

[Matthew]

Matthew, Fred.

It is a narrowminded argument that ALL of bushtarions problems are down to TBA.

Azzer has already pointed out that any round in which a powerblock of two or more alliances win, there is a severe impact on the quality of gameplay and therefore the business itself.

There have been a number of rounds in the last 6 years where large powerblocks have dominated (be it 2 or 3 allies), and those rounds the playerbase dwindles more than any other round, people that stay playing don't want to buy game-cash/p-units as much (it's not "worth it" or they have to keep their scores low to stay out of range of the powerblock who are now just "bottomfeeding" off anyone that hops into range), and business itself takes a temporary but always dangerous plunge. Past powerblocks have damaged Bushtarion. The current powerblock is damaging Bushtarion.

I'm not saying TBA hasn't damaged the quality of gameplay. We all know it has. But to say:

LOL well thats because this issue is more or less 90% TBA's fault.

Is inaccurate to say the least.

If everyone wants to kid themselves that TBA are the only powerblock that has ever existed (and damaged the quality of gameplay) go ahead and use this thread to flame away.

Its that kind of nonsense that more than likely meant last time this happened (perhaps not on this scale, but not all that far off) nobody learnt their lesson.

So I'll repeat myself. If you want to target just one small part of the powerblock "issue" - keep flaming TBA. Whilst they are in a large way responsible this round they have not been the culprits in the past, nor will they be in the future. You are not addressing the issue of powerblocking by merely targetting one formation of alliances that have existed in one round of 30. IMO.

I've nothing else to add here. I have already agreed not to take part in future winged' alliances :)

I didn't say all of bushtarions problems come from TBA I say 90% do. After all you ARE the reason this topic has been made. If TBA were not formed this thread would not be here today, FACT. I would like you to consider this round as a whole, look at it now and think to yourself "what else has mitigated the quality of this rounds gameplay?" which is outside of the actualy game mechanics as thats all open to opinion. You will very quickly come to the conclusion that there is pretty much nothing other than the blatent idiocy of 20% of the active playerbase powerblocking.

You keep talking about this future and that you will not be part of any future winged alliances. Tomorrow is the future, 17/18 days left? Make a name for yourself, fight it out and see who is the best.

You keep claiming we are not adressing the impact of powerblocking on the future? Well I don't think it takes a brain surgeon to realise the initiatives and purpose of this alliance was nothing short of retarded. Now, the future of the players in the powerblock, this is the thing that makes me laugh the most. What sort of position do you think these "noobs" you have taken on will have in future rounds? Because the players who previously hadn't developed a positive rapport with the playerbase are in some serious ****. I for one would NEVER recruit some of your "n00bs" purely because of their idiocy shown throughout bushtarion.

Noone cares how much you stress you will not be part of a future wing. If Hitler were to say he wouldn't be part of the next holocaust do you think he would be forgiven if he said "OK, OK now lets consider the future of holocausts not just the small one i did".

Yes, thats right, i compared TBA to the holocaust.

[Silence]

If I have learned something from the past its that there is anything that a good resistance cant kill.... Just to prove you they could have names but as I say and repeat there is anything a good resistance cant kill.




War? Huh? should have EASILY won this round without the powerblocking. They are by far the most experienced players and great contactability and organizers. So Ahead, please, I'm tired of your ego, Chance and Inimical both stand no chance against War. Even if Chance and Inimical teamed up, I seriously doubt we could have won. The only reason why War was killed because they got tired of getting woken up at 4 am and made the stupid mistake of retalling on a mass, where they got killed.



Inimical are that bad?! They are so terrible they would make chance worse off than on their own? rofl
Chance active were the *****, and it is not wrong to say that they would have given War? a run for their money. Although this is merely speculation. But it would be wrong to write off Chance as a group as they were very good. I find it ludicrous that you can judge an alliance without participating within it. You are the definition of fail.
So Edliuen you should really just go away and shush. Noone cares what you think by speculating without fact. k? thanks.

[Edliuen]

If I have learned something from the past its that there is anything that a good resistance cant kill.... Just to prove you they could have names but as I say and repeat there is anything a good resistance cant kill.




War? Huh? should have EASILY won this round without the powerblocking. They are by far the most experienced players and great contactability and organizers. So Ahead, please, I'm tired of your ego, Chance and Inimical both stand no chance against War. Even if Chance and Inimical teamed up, I seriously doubt we could have won. The only reason why War was killed because they got tired of getting woken up at 4 am and made the stupid mistake of retalling on a mass, where they got killed.



Inimical are that bad?! They are so terrible they would make chance worse off than on their own? rofl
Chance active were the *****, and it is not wrong to say that they would have given War? a run for their money. Although this is merely speculation. But it would be wrong to write off Chance as a group as they were very good. I find it ludicrous that you can judge an alliance without participating within it. You are the definition of fail.
So Edliuen you should really just go away and shush. Noone cares what you think by speculating without fact. k? thanks.

Oh, I'm merely referring to the fact that your entire alliance crumpled so fast under a bit of incoming. At least war resisted for days, your alliance took just one wave to crumple. So from what I've seen, no, not really... Even some of your members agree that your alliance is not as good as what it was made up to be.

Sigh, and Ahead, I wasn't just talking about that one post... More so other conversations. That obviously isn't enough proof to say something about your ego.

Either way, we should stop the direction that this thread is turning into and focus on the problem. As I said, a powerblock will happen down the road again, unless it's written into the EULA. Other than that, any one else with suggestions? I'm not exactly sure how it's to be done, but there has to be more incentive for continuing a resistance. More bounty? For resistance's to be successful, there has to be multiple people on a tick which therefore greatly reduces bounty. Thus, there must be a way to still give a lot of bounty, despite the "bashing" on a larger player.

[Jerrysminion]

How about "Big" Bots to take down the higher players. Let them go crazy on the higher players, Id be interesting to have bots within not only the bottom 800, but throughout the entire ranks, even within the top 25

[Ahead]

Oh, I'm merely referring to the fact that your entire alliance crumpled so fast under a bit of incoming. At least war resisted for days, your alliance took just one wave to crumple.

Sorry when was this one wave that absolutely zeroed us? I must have missed that.. strange.

So from what I've seen, no, not really... Even some of your members agree that your alliance is not as good as what it was made up to be.

Not as good as we were at the start of the round. Or as good as we could have been had we stayed active. But it's hard convincing people to put time into playing against 60 noobs, it's extremely time consuming, and I for one have become less active than I would have been had there not been a powerblock. I probably have the time to fight 20 people, but not 60.

Sigh, and Ahead, I wasn't just talking about that one post... More so other conversations. That obviously isn't enough proof to say something about your ego.

Good for you. I'm glad you admire my ego with your imaginary evidence. THNX

Either way, we should stop the direction that this thread is turning into and focus on the problem. As I said, a powerblock will happen down the road again, unless it's written into the EULA. Other than that, any one else with suggestions? I'm not exactly sure how it's to be done, but there has to be more incentive for continuing a resistance. More bounty? For resistance's to be successful, there has to be multiple people on a tick which therefore greatly reduces bounty. Thus, there must be a way to still give a lot of bounty, despite the "bashing" on a larger player.

But who will form one? Everyone in the playerbase who would have joined a powerblock was in TBA. The rest would not form a powerblock. Seeing as most of TBA have come on here claiming they are "never playing in a powerblock again! ZOMG it's so bad and awful and I'm in one now and it's horrible but I'm doing nothing about it but DW PEOPLE I WON'T PLAY IN ONE AGAIN", does that mean we should take that with a pinch of salt? Do you have inside information that shows that all these people are lying?

You are merely trying to change the topic of the thread - which is predominantly ABOUT TBA, to try and stop people from tarnishing your (albeit already poor) reputation?

[Silence]

If I have learned something from the past its that there is anything that a good resistance cant kill.... Just to prove you they could have names but as I say and repeat there is anything a good resistance cant kill.




War? Huh? should have EASILY won this round without the powerblocking. They are by far the most experienced players and great contactability and organizers. So Ahead, please, I'm tired of your ego, Chance and Inimical both stand no chance against War. Even if Chance and Inimical teamed up, I seriously doubt we could have won. The only reason why War was killed because they got tired of getting woken up at 4 am and made the stupid mistake of retalling on a mass, where they got killed.



Inimical are that bad?! They are so terrible they would make chance worse off than on their own? rofl
Chance active were the *****, and it is not wrong to say that they would have given War? a run for their money. Although this is merely speculation. But it would be wrong to write off Chance as a group as they were very good. I find it ludicrous that you can judge an alliance without participating within it. You are the definition of fail.
So Edliuen you should really just go away and shush. Noone cares what you think by speculating without fact. k? thanks.

Oh, I'm merely referring to the fact that your entire alliance crumpled so fast under a bit of incoming. At least war resisted for days, your alliance took just one wave to crumple. So from what I've seen, no, not really... Even some of your members agree that your alliance is not as good as what it was made up to be.




Rofl! You are basing the skill of both alliances on how fast YOU SAW each alliance get killed. Hahahaha. One alliance may have received more incoming, perhaps one may have been caught off guard. The point is that it is impossible to know which is the better alliance at the beginning of the round.

Edliuen, you're a idiot. You don't know the difference between a subjective viewpoint based upon speculation and fact. Its impossible to know now. Both alliances are good and could have gone either way.

[Dimitar]

tbh JJ ruined the round :( stupid noob with his stupid powerblock

[darkmane]

The short of this 13 page post:

QQ. A whole bunch of people crying and few people actually coming up with ideas to improve anything.

The few positive contributions are as follows:

1. Write something in the EULA prohibiting wings.
2. Change the minimum attack range to something higher.
3. Provide some incentive to attacking the top alliance. Make bounty equal to total value of troops killed if the top alliance is >X% higher than rank 2? That'd keep things pretty active.

[Dimitar]

what's your point

[TeaL]

Its obvious people who are not in the power block are going to say anything they can against it. Honestly the issue stands: no rules were broken, stop harassing TBA. Its not like its the first powerblock and probably wont be the last. The only way to break this up, is to have Azzer personally monitor and break up PBs. You simply cant stop people from attacking each other. There are several players in game i wont attack that arnt even in TBA. Is this just as bad as power blocking?

[Dimitar]

no cause noone cares -_-

[Edliuen]

Seriously Ahead and Silence? Seriously?

I'm trying to pull this thread away from a "Let's bash TBA some more thread" to a "Let's actually keep this on topic about avoding future powerblocks"

I'm sorry that I, along with 59 other noobs, ruined your fun. I'm sorry that 40 pros couldn't take 60 noobs, or should I say "40 pros couldn't be bothered to take on 60 noobs". And well, actually, I'm not really sorry. But yes Azzer, I am sincerely sorry that we did ruin this round for you, this new age, your buisiness. But to be fair, it's not just TBA's fault. What I am saying is that people are forgetful, yes, we all vowed to not make a powerblock next round, but 5, 10 rounds down the road, people forget speeches like these.

There's 20 days left, we all know that the pros can't be bothered with a resistance. The powerblock won't turn on each other. What can you do?

Chance weren't in the picture at round start, never were in the picture the entire round. The first few days in the round, we never even hit you. It was pretty much Inimical and War swapping acres with SG and Lude hitting War as well. All you guys ever were and are is a land farm for TBA. (Oh save for the two days you guys actually mounted a resistance.) From day 7 of the round and on, when we first started organizing attacks on you, you crumbled so easily to any wave. Everytime we were planning an attack: "Oh we don't have enough on for War... let's hit Chance instead".

So maybe you guys could have given a run against War, maybe if you guys could have been bothered to. If you didn't give up and become inactive. War didn't give up. They kept coming back and back. That's why, hands down, war is the best alliance this round. No doubt about it.

[Koeniej]

If I have learned something from the past its that there is anything that a good resistance cant kill.... Just to prove you they could have names but as I say and repeat there is anything a good resistance cant kill.




War? Huh? should have EASILY won this round without the powerblocking. They are by far the most experienced players and great contactability and organizers. So Ahead, please, I'm tired of your ego, Chance and Inimical both stand no chance against War. Even if Chance and Inimical teamed up, I seriously doubt we could have won. The only reason why War was killed because they got tired of getting woken up at 4 am and made the stupid mistake of retalling on a mass, where they got killed.



Inimical are that bad?! They are so terrible they would make chance worse off than on their own? rofl
Chance active were the *****, and it is not wrong to say that they would have given War? a run for their money. Although this is merely speculation. But it would be wrong to write off Chance as a group as they were very good. I find it ludicrous that you can judge an alliance without participating within it. You are the definition of fail.
So Edliuen you should really just go away and shush. Noone cares what you think by speculating without fact. k? thanks.

Oh, I'm merely referring to the fact that your entire alliance crumpled so fast under a bit of incoming. At least war resisted for days, your alliance took just one wave to crumple. So from what I've seen, no, not really... Even some of your members agree that your alliance is not as good as what it was made up to be.




Rofl! You are basing the skill of both alliances on how fast YOU SAW each alliance get killed. Hahahaha. One alliance may have received more incoming, perhaps one may have been caught off guard. The point is that it is impossible to know which is the better alliance at the beginning of the round.

Edliuen, you're a idiot. You don't know the difference between a subjective viewpoint based upon speculation and fact. Its impossible to know now. Both alliances are good and could have gone either way.

srsly.. you are totally wrong, i mean.. wtf

[Jubjub]

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.

*I reckon Chance would have given WH a run for their money* LOL Are you kidding me? Not with defence like earlier. Something like 35bill damage taken and 4trill damage done? About 4 members of TBA have done over 15trill damage to chance in the last 2 days taking like 3strill losses , and *Inimical would have challenged for third with TDT* Lol, yet more **** from you Ahead. Moar trolling plx . It would have been a fun round. The alliances weren't stacked that much, and it would have been a good round of wars had the powerblock not been made. Just look at the start of the round - WH/Chance/Inim all battling for rank 1 in the first day, all pretty close. That's how the round should have been!

Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

Rofl, your memory is very poor. I said I've seen several very good lineups, which are capable of beating TBA/TBA's best 20. And I didn't show you any of the lineups cos I don't even know them fully seeing as I might not even be playing.. :? "Several" also implies wars between the very good allies, which = fun. Stop lying and spouting BS Mateen.
Mateen speaks the truth Ahead. Take your head out of your ass and stop talking bollocks. Thats all i ever see you say tbh, pure bollocks.
Seriously Ahead and Silence? Seriously?

I'm trying to pull this thread away from a "Let's bash TBA some more thread" to a "Let's actually keep this on topic about avoding future powerblocks"

I'm sorry that I, along with 59 other noobs, ruined your fun. I'm sorry that 40 pros couldn't take 60 noobs, or should I say "40 pros couldn't be bothered to take on 60 noobs". And well, actually, I'm not really sorry. But yes Azzer, I am sincerely sorry that we did ruin this round for you, this new age, your buisiness. But to be fair, it's not just TBA's fault. What I am saying is that people are forgetful, yes, we all vowed to not make a powerblock next round, but 5, 10 rounds down the road, people forget speeches like these.

There's 20 days left, we all know that the pros can't be bothered with a resistance. The powerblock won't turn on each other. What can you do?

Chance weren't in the picture at round start, never were in the picture the entire round. From day 1, we never even hit you. It was pretty much Inimical and War swapping acres with SG and Lude hitting War as well. All you guys ever were and are is a land farm for TBA. (Oh save for the two days you guys actually mounted a resistance.) From day 7 of the round, when we first started organizing attacks on you, you crumbled so easily to any wave. Everytime we were planning an attack: "Oh we don't have enough on for War... let's hit Chance instead".

So maybe you guys could have given a run against War, maybe if you guys could have been bothered to. If you didn't give up and become inactive. War didn't give up. They kept coming back and back. That's why, hands down, war is the best alliance this round. No doubt about it.

Well said. WH are a group of people who know how to play and actually tried to mount a comeback. Chance just tried to hide behind WH and wait for WH to take the losses then deciding to jump onto the attacks when they were going well. WH made this round slightly difficult for us guys, where as Chance just made it easier by feeding us land. Thanks Chance, you really helped us :)
Yay Ahead, more bollocks from you!

[Tombi]

Its obvious people who are not in the power block are going to say anything they can against it. Honestly the issue stands: no rules were broken, stop harassing TBA. Its not like its the first powerblock and probably wont be the last. The only way to break this up, is to have Azzer personally monitor and break up PBs. You simply cant stop people from attacking each other. There are several players in game i wont attack that arnt even in TBA. Is this just as bad as power blocking?

Best post award to you!

[Dimitar]

I thought I had that award in the bag :(

[Jubjub]

Its obvious people who are not in the power block are going to say anything they can against it. Honestly the issue stands: no rules were broken, stop harassing TBA. Its not like its the first powerblock and probably wont be the last. The only way to break this up, is to have Azzer personally monitor and break up PBs. You simply cant stop people from attacking each other. There are several players in game i wont attack that arnt even in TBA. Is this just as bad as power blocking?

Best post award to you!
Another person who sees the truth. Seriously Chance, stop flooding the forums with how unfair it is that you didn't win and how TBA suck. Take a leaf out of WH's book and just try and finish the round with some dignity by atleast making us take some losses instead of just crying about how we won.

[marvin]

I like to call this part of the thread 'Ahead bashing'. A little different to the conventional 'TBA bashing' but mostly the same solid foundations.

Ahead, I really don't know if you mean to sound arrogant but you always seem to manage it. Most of your posts ooze of e-peen. Thinking you're better than other people. I miss our R16 (?) arguements/rivalry or whenever it was you were in one of Fubu's allies with me. Don't get me wrong, you're a nice guy (from what I can rememberr) but when you've got your arrogant hat on you're not.

I'm sorry that I, along with 59 other noobs, ruined your fun. I'm sorry that 40 pros couldn't take 60 noobs, or should I say "40 pros couldn't be bothered to take on 60 noobs". And well, actually, I'm not really sorry. But yes Azzer, I am sincerely sorry that we did ruin this round for you, this new age, your buisiness. But to be fair, it's not just TBA's fault. What I am saying is that people are forgetful, yes, we all vowed to not make a powerblock next round, but 5, 10 rounds down the road, people forget speeches like these.

QFT!

Also: We, TBA, apologize for NubNub.

[JJbrosandjl]

I have refrained from posting on the forums until now. But I think it's time that "my version" should be publicized.

First off, the power block was indeed planned many weeks in advance. Me, Twigley, and Steve_god had been making preparations even before last round ended. Finding players wasn't tough, in fact, we could have easily had four wings. The only reason we did not establish four wings was because we could not find a suitable leader. Let me make this clear: we did *not* expect to win. Sure, I told my players that we were going to win, but everyone knew deep down we didn't have that much of a chance. The original plan was to stay around ranks 3-5, and just mass players on the top, making their lives miserable. The crucial piece of information here is that, the establishment of a powerblock was known well before the round began. Yet no one chose to do anything to stop it. Ahead, I talked to you about a week before the round and told you practically all our plans. I can understand for not doing anything that instant to prevent it, but surely you guys should have been on your toes throughout the entire round.

We sent at War with 4 other alliances on day 2. Chance pretended to send but they did not actually send. This was to see whether TBA was still intact. It was confirmed that we were still a powerblock, and yet, why did they do nothing to stop us?

I am going to admit that the leaders of TBA did bend the truth a couple of times on the forums. (I'm sorry DS :P) But that's all a part of the game. Leaders lie every round to put themselves in a better position. Now I say "bent the truth" because we did not outright lie. Sure, everything that was said on Darksider's reports were planned beforehand, but it did have an element of ruth in it. The powerblock was falling apart on day two, Twigley was away for 2 days, and we were considering not keeping the NAP for the entire round. These plans were dropped however, because we were scared of being taken down. There was a week or so when the leaders did not know what to do. If any of the enemies attacked us at the right moment, we would have been knocked out, but guess what, nothing happened...
War?Huh? practically handed the round to us by asking Twigley to hit us and us to hit Twigley. Him and I were discussing in PM about what to do. We decided that it would be best to buy us some time until changer and I got CWs. Once we got CWs, the round was pretty much handed to us.

So why did I say all of that? It's to show that the powerblock was *not* unstoppable. You guys had plenty of chances, but decided to just slack off. Now I know this might not represent the views of everyone, but I am *guessing* that it went something like this. "We don't have to try as hard, because even if we lose, we can always fall back on the fact that we lost to three alliances, so it's not really a loss in our eyes."


Now, Ahead, I still like you even after our convos on msn. I won't let some stupid round stand in the way of our friendship, but if that's your choice, then that's fine. But I would just like to point our one thing. You said that the "proof of your ego is imaginary". I'm sure there are pages upon pages of proof on these forums that demonstrate your huge ego. Everyone has an ego online, but yours, particularly this round, has gone through the roof. For one player to guarantee that no TBA player can win in the next 5 rounds is preposterous. I respect Polo and others' decisions to not accept any TBA players in their alliances. But can you *really* guarantee that *none* of our players will ever win? Simply put, no.

Silence, I am not going to lie that Chance is a good alliance, but we both know that Chance < War? Huh?. Sure motivation is an issue, etc. But just by our attacks, it is pretty obvious which alliance is better. I agree with what you said that it is impossible to tell, but that's just my opinion.

After Azzer's post, I have thought about it long and hard, and discussed it with Twigley. You can ask around, I was prepared to break the NAP as long as it was mutual. I am not willing to backstab at this stage, but if the other alliances agree, then Inimical will go to war. Simple as. I apologize for ruining the round Azzer, but it's too far to turn back now. Every round this happens, the players who don't win complain, (although this round's situation is a bit different).

[Dimitar]

Can I get the short version ? please :(

[Davis]

Its pretty well known all throughout TBA that if we want to fight for land, we attack W?H? but if we just want to get some land we attack Chance. W?H? will *always* give at least one BR/Good fight, but most of the time chance will fake and run. Sure there have been a few times where chance have fought, but the majority of the time Chance = Easy/free land

W?H? >>>>>> Chance

[Dimitar]

Chance got demotivated really easy.. That's just sad.. I mean (from what I've seen) they decided that the round is over just 5 days into the round

[f0xx]

6 post so far from you, Shadowbane, and not a single one is on the subject.

DA keeps saying how this thread is not about TBA yet TBA members keep bringing it into the subject.

14 pages of spam, flames and trolling when all can be said within one sentance:


1. Write something in the EULA prohibiting wings.

[Dimitar]

and where's the fun about that

[marvin]

6 post so far from you, Shadowbane, and not a single one is on the subject.

DA keeps saying how this thread is not about TBA yet TBA members keep bringing it into the subject.

14 pages of spam, flames and trolling when all can be said within one sentance:


1. Write something in the EULA prohibiting wings.



QFT.

F0xx for moderator!

Although didn't Eden try and steer this back on topic before Ahead and Silence bashed him?

k.

Edit: And stop spamming Protec...Shadowbane!

[Davis]

0mg f0xx playing favorites, me and martin both said that too :( i thought you loved me :(

[Edliuen]

DA keeps saying how this thread is not about TBA yet TBA members keep bringing it into the subject.



k.

Enough said.

[tobapopalos]

1. Write something in the EULA prohibiting wings.



Simple, and hopefully effective.

[Dimitar]

"something" isn't the best idea I've heard

[Edliuen]

Alright, let's stop trolling and flaming here. And redirect back to the real actual problem. If you feel like trolling and flaming TBA, here, I made a thread for you: http://bushtarion.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2295

Otherwise let's keep this thread about future powerblocks. My suggestion is somehow make bounty better for attacking top ranking alliances in bashes. Because, apparenlty, you still get no bounty if you have 20 or so people on the same tick, even if you're attacking someone in the top 10. So perhaps make the base bounty higher for attacking someone in the top 20-50 or so?

And what constitutes a wing?

[tobapopalos]

That "something" is pretty well explained with the rest of the sentence. Ie. "No wings allowed". Not exactly difficult to comprehend.

[Eff Bee]

I think the important thing this thread is trying to achieve is to PREVENT powerblocks from occuring in the future, not looking for some form of punishment for those that do powerblock.

Therefore, no set procedure need be defined for those that do powerblock, it just needs to be made clear that it will not be tolerated, in fact the more ambigious the statement in the EULA, the better as this allows admin to step in when required.

Just my 2 cents!

[DaN]

this is a sensitive matter, what to do to prevent such situations in the future...

in my opinion its also unfair when a alliance is on top and because 2 or 3 alliances of not so active players decide they wanna bring them down, they are able to, that can justify the making of a powerblock right there, because the so called ressistance ends up beeing what? a temporary powerblock? of not so big players, but still... makes it unfair when 40, 60 players can attack u, and u only got the staff of 20 to work with in defending. What is the powerblock? imo multiple guilds attacking together permanently, if its only temporary isnt it wrong too? not imba? should there even be cooperation between allies if the defending is limited?

maybe a solution could come from generally liberating the game more? maybe change the only ally def restrictions a bit? keeping it makes a game mechanics rule harder... well something like if a alliance is under attack by at least 6 players of a alliance, they cant be attacked by any other alliances.

Personally i think that when 20 players can have more than 20 attacking them, and cant count on anything else than themselves, is unfair.

anyway, the playerbase can help, doing some brainstorming about this, imo its not about TBA, its about powerblocks, that goes down to different alliances working together, when that shouldnt happen.

[Alcibiades]

A powerblock, by definition, is 2 or more alliances ON TOP working together to keep the rest down, and the win to themselves. Thus a resistance does not qualify as a powerblock in my eyes. Powerblocks are the top stopping the rest from growing. Your comparison of powerblocks and resistances and lower ranked alliances working together is invalid. Lower allies working together you could call an SNAP; and whilst i don't approve of those either (for a variety of reasons i shan't get into here) it's not the same as a powerblock; not quite. And resistances are temporary truces between multiple alliances with the explicit goal of killing whoever is rank 1, then going back to the normal competition. The problem with a powerblock (especially this round) is that this was a definite plan to work together all the way to the end; there was no amicable splitting up into individual allies and battling it out. Resistances are temporary, Powerblocks are permanent and therein lies the difference and the danger. One crushes and stagnates the game, while the other temporarily reopens the battlefield for whoever wishes to claim the top spot. Resistances even the playing field; Powerblocks do quite the opposite.

That's why we separate them with two different names, one is called a 'Resistance' and the other is called a 'Powerblock'. Especially in a resistance situation when *usually* those top 20 players you're talking about have a large score/unit advantage over the 40-60 attacking. Not necessarily true in early game resistances (but in that case they're usually teched further) but still relevant.

As to loosening defense restrictions, i don't think i can approve. I believe there used to be a time when anyone could defend anyone; but i can't see that being applied here. It would completely demolish any ability to attack, since then the players under attack would scream out to anyone within range to help, and that would either stagnate attacking; or force players to bash harder and harder to get more and more overwhelming force to counter the random defence.

[DaN]

i still think that whats imba is multiple alliances beein able to gang up on one, see this round for example, if Chance/WH werent able to be attacked by the 3 alliances, we would have landed... what? very few times. player quality over quantity should prevail.

as i said this requires some brainstorming, and i think doing it as a game mechanics change would be the best.

[Alcibiades]

i still think that whats imba is multiple alliances beein able to gang up on one, see this round for example, if Chance/WH werent able to be attacked by the 3 alliances, we would have landed... what? very few times. player quality over quantity should prevail.

as i said this requires some brainstorming, and i think doing it as a game mechanics change would be the best.

http://bushtarion.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2264

That's the thread you're looking for then.

[Martin]

i still think that whats imba is multiple alliances beein able to gang up on one, see this round for example, if Chance/WH werent able to be attacked by the 3 alliances, we would have landed... what? very few times. player quality over quantity should prevail.

as i said this requires some brainstorming, and i think doing it as a game mechanics change would be the best.


The issue is that you guys wouldn't drop the sNAP between yourselves even when you have already won. I don't think anyone in Chance or War? Huh? (unless they are idiots) can argue the reasons and benefits for us being hit by multiple alliances at a time.

The difference between a powerblock and anything else is that a 'powerblock' is more than one 'group/alliance' working together WHEN they have ALREADY won. You no longer need to work together to hold your ranks (granted if you fought some would lose out). The issue if you guys not wanting to fight is what is stagnating the game.

I will just say again for the point of getting it accross, for everyone, not just TBA. There's nothing wrong with temp-ceasefiring to take out a common enemy to get ahead;
IT'S WRONG AND CRAPPY WHEN SUCH SNAPS AND CEASEFIRES CONTINUE WHEN THEY ARE UNECESSARY!

[Alcibiades]

i still think that whats imba is multiple alliances beein able to gang up on one, see this round for example, if Chance/WH werent able to be attacked by the 3 alliances, we would have landed... what? very few times. player quality over quantity should prevail.

as i said this requires some brainstorming, and i think doing it as a game mechanics change would be the best.


The issue is that you guys wouldn't drop the sNAP between yourselves even when you have already won. I don't think anyone in Chance or War? Huh? (unless they are idiots) can argue the reasons and benefits for us being hit by multiple alliances at a time.

The difference between a powerblock and anything else is that a 'powerblock' is more than one 'group/alliance' working together WHEN they have ALREADY won. You no longer need to work together to hold your ranks (granted if you fought some would lose out). The issue if you guys not wanting to fight is what is stagnating the game.

I will just say again for the point of getting it accross, for everyone, not just TBA. There's nothing wrong with temp-ceasefiring to take out a common enemy to get ahead;
IT'S WRONG AND CRAPPY WHEN SUCH SNAPS AND CEASEFIRES CONTINUE WHEN THEY ARE UNECESSARY!


Absolutely, perfectly, 100% true. Once you'd won, dropping the SNAP should've been the first thing to happen, and then a proper war could've gone on, and then a real winner would be declared, and the rest of the round could've continued on. Instead we were stuck in a limbo which generated this mass of frustration you see here.

[DaN]

After some thinking about it my pick would be a Alliance fixed AR, something like 100% of the alliance score, that would be fair and wouldnt make the game fail.

[harriergirl]

mod delete fail!!!!!

we apparently aren't allowed to show love on the forums. but f0xx and garrett love me , and no amount of deleting my posts will change it..

OH and Powerblocks suck... make azzer rich.. go team

[ViVi]

I would like to extend my thanks to all of those players that have expressed surprise over their ignorance. I confess that I cannot fathom for even a moment how they were naive enough to not realise the impact powerblocking had on the game. In fact, I go so far as to call you liars and just hope that now you've got your ego fix for the year, you'll do the better thing.

[Steve_God]

Two Words:
Creators Hour!


Topic 1: How to prevent Powerblocks from forming/existing in the game.
(i) In-game mechanic options.
(ii) EULA modifications / admin intervention options.

[Garrett]

ugh in game mechanics = no.

no need to rewrite the whole eula. just add an addendum to mutual attacking.

continue to chase your own tails in this thread though. it's both funny and sad. a real internet tragedy.

[vannila]

i thought the point was to not just make a rule against it because it is so hard to enforce. you can't just say "oh, well he hasn't attacked this random guy all round so they must be PB'ing." and where do you draw the line of "enough" attacks on them?

[Garrett]

that's just it. how could you enforce any such rule period?

in game mechanics - everyone would be forced to hit someone else, and waves would be banned too? how to tell the difference in game from powerblock and a resistance?

this thread is silly. tis my point. politics and working together are part of the game. sometimes powerblocks happen. changing the mechanics would force behavior and probably drastically change how everyone plays.

any sort of effective in game mechanic would cause everyone to be solos. any rule to be enforced would make sure that you needed to attack everyone in range or you could be accused of working together.

this thread was started over sand in the vagina and it's how this thread will end. with more sand and misery. however, common sense will not be found in this thread. not in regards to a solution anyway.

[Enrico]

i thought the point was to not just make a rule against it because it is so hard to enforce. you can't just say "oh, well he hasn't attacked this random guy all round so they must be PB'ing." and where do you draw the line of "enough" attacks on them?

Nah.

Rank 1 ally hasnt attacke ally X all round, ally X never participate in the attacks on rank 1 ally = possible PB.

Same as the above, but ally X is rank 2... = probable PB.

Same as above, but ally X counters the attacks the resistance does on rank 1 ally = PB (Or rank 2 is incredibly stupid.) Azzer can release his monsters on the two...

[willymchilybily]

What i think is the problem is that the most ACTIVE, CONTACTABLE, and experienced (not in caps because 'experience' comes really easily in bush) players of bush ALWAYS make ONE stacked ally. This round, if the power blocked wasnt formed, WH would have won the round in less than 10 days, and it would've been the same old same old for me and many other players who would steal, get owned, steal, get owned.
Also, from Ahead i have learned that next round there is an ally with the best line up hes ever seen, i saw some of the line up, and if hes serious, the next round will be just as boring as this round. i might as well quit now, because those guys are all contactable, all active for more than 12 hours a day, and have all the necessary "experience", yes, they will win the round in less than a week and then we will have the same old thing seed whoring to bottomfeed going on

Hit the nail on the head in my opinion.

shame this quote got requoted so much as now it feels like were just going in circles. but although the points made were good. they ignore the fact that 60 members (3 winged allies) have 3:1 on any alliance they chose to rape.
and being the at the top doesnt necesserily mean that rank 1-60 are taken. they may spread a bit lower.(1-100) this means that there are far more targets as a whole that can be bashed and destroyed. where as if it was just one allie 20 members. odds would be 1:1 attacking 30% score 3:1 which can be handled with good organisation and the fact attacking at 30% means its unlikely the whole of an enemies allie can attack due to range. but all the defence can defend. but with 60members attacking at 30% means even if they cant all reach a target or its allie members there will still easily be enough members on the attack to fully over power the allie.

hence there is a power block. not just blocking people reaching the top 20 but reaching top 50 or further down. the effect is much larger, yet the player base much smaller(as previously mentioned). and the effect much more catastrophic. and not only that once you have been bashed. you may be out of the top allies range. but there is another 2 allies that can hit you. in effect you have absoloutly no hope without a force of equal size and activity. (aka a resistance) and when it is so extreme that there is nothing you can do it becomes frustrating. and people quit. if there was a way you could defend your self or have a chance. then it would be fair. this is why so many people play solo and i have done before. and why so many liked bunkers. because it gives you an advantage of being able to challenge any incoming if you balanced your military right. but it hindered landing ability. so slow growing. but least you had a chance. people like to think if they work hard they can do something. but with the situation thats form they still cant do anything. not alone.

The game should be like poker. you place your bet confident based on what you know about what you have. and u can even predict what your enemy has. you see what happens when your attacking see what comes up (defence/incoming) act accordingly (run away to fight another day, ralley the troops and bluff it) pick and chose your fights. at the moment the game gives you this ability to a limited degree. but in effect with a power block or current situation the odds are against you from the styart and you cant even take out one allie without being bashed by another 1 or two. whilst being defended against. the problem with top allies uniting is it normally takes 3 allies to take down the top one. but to take down the top three. with such a giant giant gap in scores. i imagine it will take every other allie in the game. or more.


my crap 2 suggestions

Allie AR (only stun/disable the over powered incoming) been mentioned. not really ideal. but a possability.

the "HARDCORE" war decleration. at the moment you can declare war on any one. and this allows you to actually kill them. actually give them a good thrashing and they stay dead. perfect. i say keep this system but adap it. if you declare war on someone in an allie bigger than you or > 75-80% your size. Then the same rules apply. but 2 differences the war decleration is quicker (by a moderate amount) and any one not in either allie not a part of the war that attacks a target who is in this "hardcore" war mode will recieve a significantly increased land cap (to the point of making the steal useless) and the party at war will recieve an increase in injuries and insurance (making it harder to cost effectively kill the target. thus not only does declaring war allow you to kill your target. but it stops other people coming along and backstabbing/helping either side during the war.

why do this? you can send an attack without fear of any third parties countering because they will make so little on any steals. and any offliners will get a semi/relatively substantial insurance/injury (in comparison of the base line)

also if there is a power block. your allie is getting bashed by napped allies. you can declare war on one of them. then only that allie will be in a position to inflict noticable damge on you. thus reducing the incoming you have to face.

there is also the potential for it to be one sided hardcore war mode. for example you declare war on some one 130% of you, you being 76% of them. both allie enter H.C. war mode (assuming allie 2 declare war back ofc) now the rules above apply. but once the smaller allie drops to below 70-75% range the bigger allie no longer gets that bonus of being in HC war mode. but the smaller alliance does. this means the smaller alliance can only be effectively raped by the bigger enemy. until the war is called off. but the bigger allie can now be attacked by the war party and another without the benfit of hardcore war mode. thus allowing resistances to still function.

PROBLEMs:
neutral waring. if you declare war on another allie similar range to stop your self taking such heavy casualties from another force. using the system to gain an edge against a larger agressor. this leaves room for abuse. my suggestion is a status telling you if you are in hardcore war mode or not. and this should be based on range of allie/targets. and damage done/recieved from the waring party. if hardcore war mode clicks on just after the first battle tick. and then stays on whilsty damage done/recieved by/to targets in question maintains at a certain level. 2-3 days with no fighting. good bye hardcore war mode until you attack again.

the other problem. you will need your allie itself to be notified of your war status. your'll need to notify incoming hostiles that they will get heavily capped for attacking the target as they are at war. and they may even need to tell you what incoming you are at war with by some sort of marker on incoming mob to tell the difference between incoming that is not a part of the war effort. etc.


summation:
in short this will have little effect on the game in general. but should stop multiple allies bashing smaller ones. or stop two/three allies ganging up on one of a similar size. hindering them working together. or reducing the benfits if they do. would you really risk your men to help some one else kill an allie if it meant they got all the land and you got none. if your attacks gave the targets good insurance and that the target takes minimal losses from you in the long run.
would you really weaken yourself and trust that the person reaping the rewards wont just turn on you when you are weaker than them?

this idea doesnt stop a play style as you can still bash low down if you like. you can still gang bang if you like. its just to try and level the playing field. stopping collusion and powerblocks being as effective if the allie is willing to declare war on the agressors.

[Matthew]

Two Words:
Creators Hour!


Topic 1: How to prevent Powerblocks from forming/existing in the game.
(i) In-game mechanic options.
(ii) EULA modifications / admin intervention options.

I don't think we quite need to go to the extent of a creators hour. I just think this thread needs to act as a realisation that powerblocks do actually have a negative impact for business, gameplay and the actual validity of alliance rankings.

To make it official in the EULA to have no winged alliances imo is slightly over the top. This is purely because it becomes difficult to distinguish between which alliances are winging and would this affect resistances? As it shouldn't be deemed fair for lower players and alliances to be able to have wings and the top ones not be allowed. Just take the context of this round, TDL/TDT and Eth/RF got no attention in this thread and really they should have. They were both winged alliances and are equally as guilty as TBA. Although I can confirm that both of these previously winged alliances have split.

Ultimately we just now need to move on from this lunacy and a lot of people have said they will no longer be involved in a powerblock. I just hope that all these claims and promises made are truthful.

[Garrett]

Ultimately we just now need to move on from this lunacy and a lot of people have said they will no longer be involved in a powerblock. I just hope that all these claims and promises made are truthful.

a glimmer and hope of common sense. all i can do is plant this in the ground, water it, and hopefully watch it grow.

[Younge]

Why do you need a creators hour?

You have a very simple solution! Come on... Guess it!
Yes that's right! You drop this friendship bullshit and start playing the game!

Before you all pick at me saying you would say this and that!
Lets just point out something, In round 13 i was in Virus, i was in the winning alliance and my alliance friends decided to attack my pnap... i was not happy about this and i defended her... i killed three of my fellow friends. Yes they was pissed! But i have the best memory of this game! The morel is simple.

"You came in this game without friends... you make some very good friends... if your worried about loosing those friends due to having a bit of fun killing each other then where they really your friends in the first place?"

Look, i am not asking you to dig at me as a person, but respect my opinion as a game!

If i was in TBA i would love to take on another alliance the same size!

It be awesome! Tactics would win it! Leadership would show and most of all the overall winner would be the one which kills the other two!

Just think about it guys!
We don't need no bullshit hour!
We need WAR!

[Enrico]

Younge has a important point: friendships are not something to drag into the game.

When you play, any and all can be a target, or an ally, depending on what you need or feel like.

I don't buy the silly "oh, safelist him, he's a nice guy"-crap som allys tend to encourage!

[Jerrysminion]

Along with just playing the game,

Why dont we introduce bots through out the entire ranks, including the top 50?

[tobapopalos]

Along with just playing the game,

Why dont we introduce bots through out the entire ranks, including the top 50?

Because that would be ****.

[Matthew]

Along with just playing the game,

Why dont we introduce bots through out the entire ranks, including the top 50?

Because that would be ****.

And we already have Evo.

[CFalcon]

An important point has been missed here. People say that WH/Chance/TDL could, if they put their minds to it, take on TBA one wing at a time and maybe win.

Now firstly, I'd like to know if any of the people making these statements have ever been actively involved in a successful resistance? Thought not. Resistances with far more motivated players have failed against alliances far less ahead on score than TBA.

Secondly, the ability to swap members makes it almost impossible. The difference in score between WH/Chance/TDL and SG or Overlude, while admittedly now quite daunting, until very recently at least was surmountable and comparable to differences in score in previous rounds with successful resistances (or at least good attempts). However, the main way resistances gain their initial foothold is by repeated rush attacks to weaken 20 members with large troop counts down to 10-15 before the more serious land runs start. This round this hasn't been possible.

I've seen many successful rushes, and indeed at one point SG seemed to be on the ropes, but some tactical moving of dead players and replacement with large defenders means that for all the resistances' hard work, nothing is gained. Rushes alone cannot make a successful resistance if they cannot be capitalised upon and converted to proper land runs. THIS is the difference between a single alliance running away and a block of 60.

A single alliance can counter attack in much the same way as a PB, but they are only 20 people and can be worn down with determination. As has been said elsewhere, the incoming from TBA is quite often manageable, and where it isn't a landloss isn't too much to worry about. But it is the inability to make any lasting impression when hitting back that has made any real resistance this round give up. The swapping of players means the resistance can't work on one wing at a time, it's all 60 or nothing. And 60 players means 3x the work for the resistance. Resistances often fail with a regular work load, 3x is too much to ask, especially when a large proportion of the active player base is unavailable to resist due to actually being in the PB.

I'd agree that prevention of powerblocks is more of a community issue than a game mechanical one, but I think this is one area that could make them more susceptible to a successful resistance. Sorting member swapping should be fairly easy to do without infringing too much on the rest of the game.


I did my on topic part, I kinda feel justified in indulging in this bit. The above stuff is what I'm really posting.
I apologise now for backtracking and going slightly off topic, but I had to make these last 2 points after reading through, really got me angry. Aimed mainly at JubJub, antinoobkiller, Eden and Davis:

1. I've been here for more than 20 rounds and have only been in a winning alliance once, and that was kind of by accident. I don't really care if I win, if I did I'd probably try more. I even quit the winning alliance this round. To say that I'm annoyed at a powerblock because I'm not winning is absurd, and the same applies to anyone else.

2. To say that Chance are a crappy land farm that always fake and fell at the first sign of a real wave is, either unknowingly or deliberately, ignorant. For weeks we have been giving as much as WH, been making just as successful defences, and no-one has ever backed out of a dangerous defence through personal score queening. Admittedly our determination has been flagging lately while WHs still seems to be strong, so well done to them, and I have no shame in admitting that WH are better than Chance for it. But to say we couldn't have had a damn good go at them when we were still active is insulting beyond belief. Remember that quite often the 'best' alliance doesn't end up winning.

Also, don't go giving yourselves smug pats on the back because you managed to win a couple of BRs recently. We've been on call to defend constantly for the last 6 weeks, we are getting tired, occasionally an attack will get through. Congrats. It happens. Being the only player this round in both Chance and the 'pro' TBA wing, I'm in a far better position than you to judge, so don't try and talk down to me. I know who I'd bet on in a head to head.
Edit:
[16:39] <@Ahead> ROFL
[16:39] <@Ahead> MEGA ROFLS
[16:39] <@Ahead> CFalcons post was immense
[16:39] <@Ahead> and williamxnoob
[16:39] <@Ahead> just rofl'd it
[16:39] <@Ahead> READ IT!
[16:40] <@Beej> ok!
[16:40] <@Beej> all of it?
[16:40] <@Ahead> yes!
[16:40] <@Ahead> its lol's
[16:40] <@Ahead> you will read CFalcon's and think yes he is so right
[16:40] <@CFalcon> omfgroflbbq
[16:40] <@Ahead> and you will read antinoobnoobs reply
[16:40] <@Ahead> and be like
[16:40] <@Ahead> LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
[16:42] <@CFalcon> i don't even know where to begin
[16:44] <@Ahead> yeh im not even gonna attempt to reply

[Younge]

Why do you need a creators hour?

You have a very simple solution! Come on... Guess it!
Yes that's right! You drop this friendship bullshit and start playing the game!

Before you all pick at me saying you would say this and that!
Lets just point out something, In round 13 i was in Virus, i was in the winning alliance and my alliance friends decided to attack my pnap... i was not happy about this and i defended her... i killed three of my fellow friends. Yes they was pissed! But i have the best memory of this game! The morel is simple.

"You came in this game without friends... you make some very good friends... if your worried about loosing those friends due to having a bit of fun killing each other then where they really your friends in the first place?"

Look, i am not asking you to dig at me as a person, but respect my opinion as a game!

If i was in TBA i would love to take on another alliance the same size!

It be awesome! Tactics would win it! Leadership would show and most of all the overall winner would be the one which kills the other two!

Just think about it guys!
We don't need no bullshit hour!
We need WAR!

So out of 60 odd members in TBA noone had any comments?
Really?
Seriously?
Ok

[Antinoobkiller]

An important point has been missed here. People say that WH/Chance/TDL could, if they put their minds to it, take on TBA one wing at a time and maybe win.

Now firstly, I'd like to know if any of the people making these statements have ever been actively involved in a successful resistance? Thought not. Resistances with far more motivated players have failed against alliances far less ahead on score than TBA.

Secondly, the ability to swap members makes it almost impossible. The difference in score between WH/Chance/TDL and SG or Overlude, while admittedly now quite daunting, until very recently at least was surmountable and comparable to differences in score in previous rounds with successful resistances (or at least good attempts). However, the main way resistances gain their initial foothold is by repeated rush attacks to weaken 20 members with large troop counts down to 10-15 before the more serious land runs start. This round this hasn't been possible.

I've seen many successful rushes, and indeed at one point SG seemed to be on the ropes, but some tactical moving of dead players and replacement with large defenders means that for all the resistances' hard work, nothing is gained. Rushes alone cannot make a successful resistance if they cannot be capitalised upon and converted to proper land runs. THIS is the difference between a single alliance running away and a block of 60.

A single alliance can counter attack in much the same way as a PB, but they are only 20 people and can be worn down with determination. As has been said elsewhere, the incoming from TBA is quite often manageable, and where it isn't a landloss isn't too much to worry about. But it is the inability to make any lasting impression when hitting back that has made any real resistance this round give up. The swapping of players means the resistance can't work on one wing at a time, it's all 60 or nothing. And 60 players means 3x the work for the resistance. Resistances often fail with a regular work load, 3x is too much to ask, especially when a large proportion of the active player base is unavailable to resist due to actually being in the PB.

I'd agree that prevention of powerblocks is more of a community issue than a game mechanical one, but I think this is one area that could make them more susceptible to a successful resistance. Sorting member swapping should be fairly easy to do without infringing too much on the rest of the game.


I did my on topic part, I kinda feel justified in indulging in this bit. The above stuff is what I'm really posting.
I apologise now for backtracking and going slightly off topic, but I had to make these last 2 points after reading through, really got me angry. Aimed mainly at JubJub, antinoobkiller, Eden and Davis:

1. I've been here for more than 20 rounds and have only been in a winning alliance once, and that was kind of by accident. I don't really care if I win, if I did I'd probably try more. I even quit the winning alliance this round. To say that I'm annoyed at a powerblock because I'm not winning is absurd, and the same applies to anyone else.

2. To say that Chance are a crappy land farm that always fake and fell at the first sign of a real wave is, either unknowingly or deliberately, ignorant. For weeks we have been giving as much as WH, been making just as successful defences, and no-one has ever backed out of a dangerous defence through personal score queening. Admittedly our determination has been flagging lately while WHs still seems to be strong, so well done to them, and I have no shame in admitting that WH are better than Chance for it. But to say we couldn't have had a damn good go at them when we were still active is insulting beyond belief. Remember that quite often the 'best' alliance doesn't end up winning.

Also, don't go giving yourselves smug pats on the back because you managed to win a couple of BRs recently. We've been on call to defend constantly for the last 6 weeks, we are getting tired, occasionally an attack will get through. Congrats. It happens. Being the only player this round in both Chance and the 'pro' TBA wing, I'm in a far better position than you to judge, so don't try and talk down to me. I know who I'd bet on in a head to head.

Dude im sorry but you cant argue against the fact that Inimical, SG and Overlude are the best,biggest,smartest Alliances this round. If you say anything else then thats jeolusy from you cause its impossible to argue against facts. Sure you can think whatever about them and give me 100 reasons why WH and Chance are fare better alliances but that dosnt count a ****. This was Inimical, SG and Overlude round and you cant argue against that, im sorry, I know ppl are pissed cause they never stood a chance against the overhelming forces and their coorporation and the so called powerblock.

FFS Im sure im the ****in only player in this game that play on my own and understand how ****in much easier it is to be in a top alliance or having naps or even have friends in this game or being on safelists. FFS, dont you think I see how many of you cheat and abuse AR. Really its beyond my understanding how some of you can think you are good when your not even playing against the best but with the best. Its so ****in sad and frustrating for alone solo like me. EVEN THE ppl restarting and boosting themselves up cause they are in a big alliance.

To see your whine about tba is just showing how complete selfish noobs u all are and SORE LOOSERS. EVERYONE WANNA WIN, DONT ****IN TRY TO BELIEAVE IN SOMETHING ELSE. WAR HAVE NEVER BEEN FAIR. IT IS DIRTY AND NASTY, EVEN I UNDERSTAND THAT.

DONT BLAME TBA WHEN YOU HAD ALL THE SAME OPPURTUNIETS AS THEY HAD. DONT COME UP WITH CRAP LIKE IT DESTROY THE GAME because it dont. PLayers come and go, its like that in every game.

Azzer shouldnt focusing on keeping everyone happy in game especially the veterans, he should try think on how to make this game attractive for new players not how to keep the old dogs happy. They stay or find another thing to do. kk

SO PLEASE LET TBA BE.

Btw i hope this game someday become a pure solo game with no alliances and pnaps. Then you can really talk about the wicked sicked players, noobs , leechers etc.

[Jubjub]

An important point has been missed here. People say that WH/Chance/TDL could, if they put their minds to it, take on TBA one wing at a time and maybe win.

Now firstly, I'd like to know if any of the people making these statements have ever been actively involved in a successful resistance? Thought not. Resistances with far more motivated players have failed against alliances far less ahead on score than TBA.

Secondly, the ability to swap members makes it almost impossible. The difference in score between WH/Chance/TDL and SG or Overlude, while admittedly now quite daunting, until very recently at least was surmountable and comparable to differences in score in previous rounds with successful resistances (or at least good attempts). However, the main way resistances gain their initial foothold is by repeated rush attacks to weaken 20 members with large troop counts down to 10-15 before the more serious land runs start. This round this hasn't been possible.

I've seen many successful rushes, and indeed at one point SG seemed to be on the ropes, but some tactical moving of dead players and replacement with large defenders means that for all the resistances' hard work, nothing is gained. Rushes alone cannot make a successful resistance if they cannot be capitalised upon and converted to proper land runs. THIS is the difference between a single alliance running away and a block of 60.

A single alliance can counter attack in much the same way as a PB, but they are only 20 people and can be worn down with determination. As has been said elsewhere, the incoming from TBA is quite often manageable, and where it isn't a landloss isn't too much to worry about. But it is the inability to make any lasting impression when hitting back that has made any real resistance this round give up. The swapping of players means the resistance can't work on one wing at a time, it's all 60 or nothing. And 60 players means 3x the work for the resistance. Resistances often fail with a regular work load, 3x is too much to ask, especially when a large proportion of the active player base is unavailable to resist due to actually being in the PB.

I'd agree that prevention of powerblocks is more of a community issue than a game mechanical one, but I think this is one area that could make them more susceptible to a successful resistance. Sorting member swapping should be fairly easy to do without infringing too much on the rest of the game.


I did my on topic part, I kinda feel justified in indulging in this bit. The above stuff is what I'm really posting.
I apologise now for backtracking and going slightly off topic, but I had to make these last 2 points after reading through, really got me angry. Aimed mainly at JubJub, antinoobkiller, Eden and Davis:

1. I've been here for more than 20 rounds and have only been in a winning alliance once, and that was kind of by accident. I don't really care if I win, if I did I'd probably try more. I even quit the winning alliance this round. To say that I'm annoyed at a powerblock because I'm not winning is absurd, and the same applies to anyone else.

2. To say that Chance are a crappy land farm that always fake and fell at the first sign of a real wave is, either unknowingly or deliberately, ignorant. For weeks we have been giving as much as WH, been making just as successful defences, and no-one has ever backed out of a dangerous defence through personal score queening. Admittedly our determination has been flagging lately while WHs still seems to be strong, so well done to them, and I have no shame in admitting that WH are better than Chance for it. But to say we couldn't have had a damn good go at them when we were still active is insulting beyond belief. Remember that quite often the 'best' alliance doesn't end up winning.

Also, don't go giving yourselves smug pats on the back because you managed to win a couple of BRs recently. We've been on call to defend constantly for the last 6 weeks, we are getting tired, occasionally an attack will get through. Congrats. It happens. Being the only player this round in both Chance and the 'pro' TBA wing, I'm in a far better position than you to judge, so don't try and talk down to me. I know who I'd bet on in a head to head.

Dude im sorry but you cant argue against the fact that Inimical, SG and Overlude are the best,biggest,smartest Alliances this round. If you say anything else then thats jeolusy from you cause its impossible to argue against facts. Sure you can think whatever about them and give me 100 reasons why WH and Chance are fare better alliances but that dosnt count a ****. This was Inimical, SG and Overlude round and you cant argue against that, im sorry, I know ppl are pissed cause they never stood a chance against the overhelming forces and their coorporation and the so called powerblock.

FFS Im sure im the ****in only player in this game that play on my own and understand how ****in much easier it is to be in a top alliance or having naps or even have friends in this game or being on safelists. FFS, dont you think I see how many of you cheat and abuse AR. Really its beyond my understanding how some of you can think you are good when your not even playing against the best but with the best. Its so ****in sad and frustrating for alone solo like me. EVEN THE ppl restarting and boosting themselves up cause they are in a big alliance.

To see your whine about tba is just showing how complete selfish noobs u all are and SORE LOOSERS. EVERYONE WANNA WIN, DONT ****IN TRY TO BELIEAVE IN SOMETHING ELSE. WAR HAVE NEVER BEEN FAIR. IT IS DIRTY AND NASTY, EVEN I UNDERSTAND THAT.

DONT BLAME TBA WHEN YOU HAD ALL THE SAME OPPURTUNIETS AS THEY HAD. DONT COME UP WITH CRAP LIKE IT DESTROY THE GAME because it dont. PLayers come and go, its like that in every game.

Azzer shouldnt focusing on keeping everyone happy in game especially the veterans, he should try think on how to make this game attractive for new players not how to keep the old dogs happy. They stay or find another thing to do. kk

SO PLEASE LET TBA BE.

Btw i hope this game someday become a pure solo game with no alliances and pnaps. Then you can really talk about the wicked sicked players, noobs , leechers etc.

Seriously, i am in TBA and we are by far the WORST, Dumbest and biggest alliance. JJ has even said it himself. We defend well (When we get inc) but we attack and take huge losses. Sorry, but i can't listen to you troll on about how TBA are the best when we openly admit that we suck. Btw no offence to anyone in TBA :) <3
If i was in-range of you, i would kick your ass with my skeelz

[timtadams]

lmfao!

PWND xD

And Grammer = EPIC FAIL

:mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen:

[Koeniej]

Along with just playing the game,

Why dont we introduce bots through out the entire ranks, including the top 50?

Because that would be ****.

lmao

[marvin]

...

...

Seriously, i am in TBA and we are by far the WORST, Dumbest and biggest alliance. JJ has even said it himself. We defend well (When we get inc) but we attack and take huge losses. Sorry, but i can't listen to you troll on about how TBA are the best when we openly admit that we suck.

You sure you're not just describing yourself there Nubnub?

Please. Stop talking.

[Koeniej]

An important point has been missed here. People say that WH/Chance/TDL could, if they put their minds to it, take on TBA one wing at a time and maybe win.

Now firstly, I'd like to know if any of the people making these statements have ever been actively involved in a successful resistance? Thought not. Resistances with far more motivated players have failed against alliances far less ahead on score than TBA.

Secondly, the ability to swap members makes it almost impossible. The difference in score between WH/Chance/TDL and SG or Overlude, while admittedly now quite daunting, until very recently at least was surmountable and comparable to differences in score in previous rounds with successful resistances (or at least good attempts). However, the main way resistances gain their initial foothold is by repeated rush attacks to weaken 20 members with large troop counts down to 10-15 before the more serious land runs start. This round this hasn't been possible.

I've seen many successful rushes, and indeed at one point SG seemed to be on the ropes, but some tactical moving of dead players and replacement with large defenders means that for all the resistances' hard work, nothing is gained. Rushes alone cannot make a successful resistance if they cannot be capitalised upon and converted to proper land runs. THIS is the difference between a single alliance running away and a block of 60.

A single alliance can counter attack in much the same way as a PB, but they are only 20 people and can be worn down with determination. As has been said elsewhere, the incoming from TBA is quite often manageable, and where it isn't a landloss isn't too much to worry about. But it is the inability to make any lasting impression when hitting back that has made any real resistance this round give up. The swapping of players means the resistance can't work on one wing at a time, it's all 60 or nothing. And 60 players means 3x the work for the resistance. Resistances often fail with a regular work load, 3x is too much to ask, especially when a large proportion of the active player base is unavailable to resist due to actually being in the PB.

I'd agree that prevention of powerblocks is more of a community issue than a game mechanical one, but I think this is one area that could make them more susceptible to a successful resistance. Sorting member swapping should be fairly easy to do without infringing too much on the rest of the game.


I did my on topic part, I kinda feel justified in indulging in this bit. The above stuff is what I'm really posting.
I apologise now for backtracking and going slightly off topic, but I had to make these last 2 points after reading through, really got me angry. Aimed mainly at JubJub, antinoobkiller, Eden and Davis:

1. I've been here for more than 20 rounds and have only been in a winning alliance once, and that was kind of by accident. I don't really care if I win, if I did I'd probably try more. I even quit the winning alliance this round. To say that I'm annoyed at a powerblock because I'm not winning is absurd, and the same applies to anyone else.

2. To say that Chance are a crappy land farm that always fake and fell at the first sign of a real wave is, either unknowingly or deliberately, ignorant. For weeks we have been giving as much as WH, been making just as successful defences, and no-one has ever backed out of a dangerous defence through personal score queening. Admittedly our determination has been flagging lately while WHs still seems to be strong, so well done to them, and I have no shame in admitting that WH are better than Chance for it. But to say we couldn't have had a damn good go at them when we were still active is insulting beyond belief. Remember that quite often the 'best' alliance doesn't end up winning.

Also, don't go giving yourselves smug pats on the back because you managed to win a couple of BRs recently. We've been on call to defend constantly for the last 6 weeks, we are getting tired, occasionally an attack will get through. Congrats. It happens. Being the only player this round in both Chance and the 'pro' TBA wing, I'm in a far better position than you to judge, so don't try and talk down to me. I know who I'd bet on in a head to head.
Edit:
[16:39] <@Ahead> ROFL
[16:39] <@Ahead> MEGA ROFLS
[16:39] <@Ahead> CFalcons post was immense
[16:39] <@Ahead> and williamxnoob
[16:39] <@Ahead> just rofl'd it
[16:39] <@Ahead> READ IT!
[16:40] <@Beej> ok!
[16:40] <@Beej> all of it?
[16:40] <@Ahead> yes!
[16:40] <@Ahead> its lol's
[16:40] <@Ahead> you will read CFalcon's and think yes he is so right
[16:40] <@CFalcon> omfgroflbbq
[16:40] <@Ahead> and you will read antinoobnoobs reply
[16:40] <@Ahead> and be like
[16:40] <@Ahead> LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
[16:42] <@CFalcon> i don't even know where to begin
[16:44] <@Ahead> yeh im not even gonna attempt to reply

I agree with most but the member swapping thing was sorted aaages ago

[CFalcon]

No, the ability to swap rapidly to deal with current incoming was sorted. Swapping members to spread attrition was not.