Moridin Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1304132592' post='2702322'] I don't recall what I gave Polar but I don't think it was extremely unfavorable. Just because they did a few questionable political moves, have members that openly don't like us, and royally screwed up, doesn't mean I think they're an objectively terrible alliance. [/quote] There's nothing in the ratings thread indicating that we should be attempting any sort of objective measurement and not simply offering our personal opinion. There is not, at any rate, any metric by which an objective measurement could be made, so all the ratings are subjective anyway, and some are merely masquerading as being based in something other than personal opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mergerberger II Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='goldielax25' timestamp='1304085792' post='2701919'] I find it funny seeing the butthurt from some members of Polar tossing 0's and 1's our way [/quote] The Viridian Entente declared war on the New Polar Order in January. Currently, it is April. I would be stunned if any dislike for an alliance that started a war on grounds considered questionable by the vast majority of Polar members had subsided within the one and a half months since the conclusion of the war. Incidentally, most of the hatred and low ratings for us stem from political decisions made around the Bipolar War. I would not consider any opinion that stems from the Bipolar era to be out of date, nor would I consider a rating based on opinions of our actions during that time to be invalid simply because they didn't like what we did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironfist Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 Doing these lists, if anything, is a good way to find out how I feel about alliances. It's sort of hidden away for the most part, but when you begin to rate them all, it's laid out on paper and you realise what you, yourself, think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 Prettymuch every single alliance has uncharismatic leaders, terrible posters, inflated sense of self-worth and a total lack of vision. You all get 1s except a select few. Polar and FAN get high marks for sheer survivability, especially considering how intact their respective cultures remain. They stick to their guns and that's a hell of a lot more than the rest of you wishy-washy panderers can say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archon Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='Doitzel' timestamp='1304149202' post='2702429'] Prettymuch every single alliance has uncharismatic leaders, terrible posters, inflated sense of self-worth and a total lack of vision. You all get 1s except a select few. Polar and FAN get high marks for sheer survivability, especially considering how intact their respective cultures remain. They stick to their guns and that's a hell of a lot more than the rest of you wishy-washy panderers can say. [/quote] More or less accurate, though I'd probably disagree with you on some of the finer details of your distribution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HellAngel Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='Doitzel' timestamp='1304149202' post='2702429'] Prettymuch every single alliance has uncharismatic leaders, terrible posters, inflated sense of self-worth and a total lack of vision. You all get 1s except a select few. Polar and FAN get high marks for sheer survivability, especially considering how intact their respective cultures remain. They stick to their guns and that's a hell of a lot more than the rest of you wishy-washy panderers can say. [/quote] As much as i'd like to agree cause its funny, you're actually wrong. A lot of alliances are like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMuz Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 A lot of people seem to take these ratings seriously. They're kinda worthless, only good as an exercise in contemplating how you feel about the other alliances out there and seeing what other people (esp. leaders and general membership) think. If you're rating low on someone for the sake of bringing them down, that's butthurt. If you're rating low on someone just because you don't like their political goals, etc, that's fine. I avoided rating alliances I'm actually closely familiar with, because it'd be tainted by personal perspective, and pointless as an exercise anyway. On another note, it is interesting how just one person can drastically change a lot of people's perspectives on the entire alliance more easily than NS strength or political moves. CN has its celebrities. Oh, and I find it amusing that INT is left out, while Gotham is in there XD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaghul Posted April 30, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 The funniest part is seeing people rate MK low for the preemptive strike, and then rate Umbrella high despite the fact that they played at least as much of a role as MK in organizing the preemptive strike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrcalkin Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1304185469' post='2702595'] The funniest part is seeing people rate MK low for the preemptive strike, and then rate Umbrella high despite the fact that they played at least as much of a role as MK in organizing the preemptive strike. [/quote] yeah its pretty !@#$@#$ hilarious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potato Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='Azaghul' timestamp='1304185469' post='2702595'] The funniest part is seeing people rate MK low for the preemptive strike, and then rate Umbrella high despite the fact that they played at least as much of a role as MK in organizing the preemptive strike. [/quote] No no no. Umbrella, GOONS, NPO, Legion, whoever... are but puppets in our hands. ~The People~ know who the true evil mastermind behind this most recent preempt is. You cannot fool ~The People~ and its collective knowledge and wisdom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='NoFish' timestamp='1304061943' post='2701840'] New Sith Order - 5 - You should have won WAE except you'd have liked it too much. You are literally the worst alliance in the game economically, politically and militarily. That said, your members seem to really enjoy being there no matter how much of a craphole it is so I suppose that means you serve a function even if I don't understand it. [/quote] [color="#0000FF"]I won't argue economically. We're terrible at growing nations. And politically I suppose you can make an argument there. But militarily? I'm not saying we're a powerhouse or even good, but really, there are several alliances much worse than us in that regard.[/color] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1304189166' post='2702627'] [color="#0000FF"]I won't argue economically. We're terrible at growing nations. And politically I suppose you can make an argument there. But militarily? I'm not saying we're a powerhouse or even good, but really, there are several alliances much worse than us in that regard.[/color] [/quote] Okay, that's fair. I think I'd temporarily managed to forget just how bad some alliances are at fighting. Damn you for reminding me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurion Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 Far be it from me to actually compliment NSO, but at least they show up. More than can be said for...some parties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In Spades Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 Personal opinion aside, I found that alliances that tend to start conflicts either get the highest or lowest of ratings based off of the rater's moral disposition to the conflict. Imo, any alliance that starts a war regardless of the reason gets a 10 (MK, VE) if for any reasons, because the political atmosphere is less stale and wars are awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cataduanes Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1304158738' post='2702465'] Oh, and I find it amusing that INT is left out, while Gotham is in there XD [/quote] heh I am not sure whether to laugh or cry, obviously we so irrelevant that we hardly register on anybodies radar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mirreille Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='Zoomzoomzoom' timestamp='1303965988' post='2700888'] I think the general consensus is that TDO should disband and refer most of its members to GPA. The more active ones willing to experience a real alliance should be referred elsewhere. [/quote] I disagree, TDO is the only truly neutral AA out there, all of the other so-called neutrals either favor one color, or hate them all(Grey Council). If I were ever to go neutral it would be TDO all the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='Mirreille' timestamp='1304192177' post='2702667'] I disagree, TDO is the only truly neutral AA out there, all of the other so-called neutrals either favor one color, or hate them all(Grey Council). If I were ever to go neutral it would be TDO all the way. [/quote] Isn't TDO Aqua and WTF multicolor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flak attack Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='NoFish' timestamp='1304192757' post='2702674'] Isn't TDO Aqua and WTF multicolor? [/quote] Yes. TDO runs a senator on Aqua. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='NoFish' timestamp='1304189471' post='2702631'] Okay, that's fair. I think I'd temporarily managed to forget just how bad some alliances are at fighting. Damn you for reminding me. [/quote] [color="#0000FF"]Actually, and I know I may be biased, NSO may have been one of the better performing alliances of our side this war. Granted, that may not be a reflection of the NSO's ability as much as it is the terribleness of its side. But we were pretty good at cycling in and out of peace mode and coordinating. Had we not run out of money we probably could have fought longer.[/color] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doitzel Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='HellAngel' timestamp='1304155385' post='2702452'] As much as i'd like to agree cause its funny, you're actually wrong. A lot of alliances are like that. [/quote] I'm sure there are other alliances like that, but those that might be considered for their persistence I have an unfathomable loathing for for other reasons; cast and point, TOP. Of course, it's difficult to draw comparisons, because nobody has been knocked down as hard and as often as Polar and FAN. GATO would qualify but the nature of their alliance keeps the inner-workings and outward image fluid with the people elected. Polar has changed very little in the demeanour of its membership and its internal structure over the past 3 or 4 years. Few alliances can boast existing that long, let alone staying true to themselves that long. Anyway. It still stands to point that the vast majority of alliances on that list are terrible and should be ashamed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Believland Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 [quote name='potato' timestamp='1303983967' post='2701025'] I deducted points from TOP because of Blue. [/quote] As did I. [quote name='Doitzel' timestamp='1304197021' post='2702703'] I'm sure there are other alliances like that, but those that might be considered for their persistence I have an unfathomable loathing for for other reasons; cast and point, TOP. Of course, it's difficult to draw comparisons, because nobody has been knocked down as hard and as often as Polar and FAN. GATO would qualify but the nature of their alliance keeps the inner-workings and outward image fluid with the people elected. Polar has changed very little in the demeanour of its membership and its internal structure over the past 3 or 4 years. Few alliances can boast existing that long, let alone staying true to themselves that long. Anyway. It still stands to point that the vast majority of alliances on that list are terrible and should be ashamed. [/quote] You're correct. Polar has been a terrible alliance for most of their existence. At least ES was actually threatening. Grub is like a chihuahua barking at random people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMuz Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 On neutrals, I think GPA is the only neutral that actually actively works with people. You see GPA-ers writing blogs, sending out diplomats, making hippy propaganda, playing in TE, hanging actively around the temptrade channel. There are a lot of other neutrals around, but I don't see their presence anywhere. [quote name='Rebel Virginia' timestamp='1304189166' post='2702627'] [color="#0000FF"]I won't argue economically. We're terrible at growing nations. And politically I suppose you can make an argument there. But militarily? I'm not saying we're a powerhouse or even good, but really, there are several alliances much worse than us in that regard.[/color] [/quote] Well, most of NSO did do horribly during the 6 Million Dollar war, and someone in GOD would look down on you based on that. Still, anyone would be demoralized under those numbers. And the whining at the end of that war didn't help. But I think NSO redeemed itself during the most recent war. Now that I think of it, I think NEW deserves a few bonus points for being one of the few alliances to take a curbstomp so cheerfully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoFish Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 This man is correct, I was basing my judgment off of bipolar and and the Rok-NSO conflict. It's entirely possible you've improved since then but combined with me not being in an alliance fighting you and my retirement from active duty milcom I wouldn't really know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebel Virginia Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 (edited) [quote name='NoFish' timestamp='1304198738' post='2702713'] This man is correct, I was basing my judgment off of bipolar and and the Rok-NSO conflict. It's entirely possible you've improved since then but combined with me not being in an alliance fighting you and my retirement from active duty milcom I wouldn't really know. [/quote] [color="#0000FF"]I'd like you to name one alliance that has performed well while it was being beaten down. We were up against four larger alliances, and attacked at a time when most of our members were not around. Yes, FAN did well, but it had time to recover from the initial blitz and waged a long term conflict. Plus, it knew it was coming days ahead. The NSO didn't find out until only a few hours before the attack. That's hardly enough time for any alliance to prepare.[/color] Edited April 30, 2011 by Rebel Virginia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Boris Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 Seeing so many people rate so many alliances and blocs with "who?" when I know who they are just tells me that I spent entirely too much time dealing with you people on Bob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.