Jump to content

Congrats, Leprechaun!


Schad

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Schad' timestamp='1308534794' post='2735289']
Heh, that attack probably cost him $30-50m, and the flag; we saw him on the verge of anarchy, and finished off the job. That's one hell of a decoy attack. :P
[/quote]

That's what makes it such a brilliant strategy. No one would possibly expect it, but the paranoid :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1: I DID NOT slot fill...
I gave 2 defeat alerts with a full spread of naval, CM and bombing attacks (if this is the opponent I'm thinking of)
2: I went fishing with my family for Fathers Day and wasn't home to Nuke ...
(I believe there was an opportunity to nuke that was missed on one of my opponents)
however, as I said, I did 2 DA's.. I had no impression that the resulting anarchy would leave doubt of my intentions...

3: I resent being called a slot filler!!!
I have never done so for anyone nor had it done for me!

4: I caught 4 Lake Trout... :):):)
5: I had a great Fathers Day!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='arcticllama' timestamp='1308546313' post='2735553']
1: I DID NOT slot fill...
I gave 2 defeat alerts with a full spread of naval, CM and bombing attacks (if this is the opponent I'm thinking of)
2: I went fishing with my family for Fathers Day and wasn't home to Nuke ...
(I believe there was an opportunity to nuke that was missed on one of my opponents)
however, as I said, I did 2 DA's.. I had no impression that the resulting anarchy would leave doubt of my intentions...

3: I resent being called a slot filler!!!
I have never done so for anyone nor had it done for me!

4: I caught 4 Lake Trout... :):):)
5: I had a great Fathers Day!
[/quote]

As far as I can tell, no one said that you did, sillypants. I think that you might have misread something. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Schad' timestamp='1308547002' post='2735562']
As far as I can tell, no one said that you did, sillypants. I think that you might have misread something. :P
[/quote]

Maybe he read 'RD' and thought they meant him :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Confusion' timestamp='1308516401' post='2734948']
Rohirrim/CRABS are working together, it was pretty obvious from one look at French Licks War Slots. Anyways, it's a done deal- All of us will believe what we want to believe and what not.


Confusion.
[/quote]

As a member of CRABS i can say that CRABS was a completely sovereign alliance, we didn't work with any other AA. the 6 of us were on our own trying to fly under the radar.


[quote name='Schad' timestamp='1308518790' post='2734972']
Heh, one of PS' nations (David Wingate) anarchied French Lick, who was on a 17-day back-collect...that cost him the flag. If PS = Roh, and Roh = CRABS, why would we have done that?
[/quote]

Yeah it did cost him the flag you should have seen his post on our forums for that. Not to mention one of the CRABS guy also attacked some Rohirrim and nicely did his job on you guys too.


[quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1308533840' post='2735269']
Miscommunication? Failing to pull a punch properly before the KO?

Or more likely, not pulling the punch at all? There's nothing wrong with organizing a decoy war to mislead people from seeing you flag run, confuse people on what sides they're on, or discourage non-flag chasers from attacking an alliance recently at war. But it is wrong to not do full damage if you're occupying a war slot, and I'm guessing PS would be the type to do full damage even with a decoy attack.

Not saying that this is what happened, just that it's a weak argument :P
[/quote]

It was a full out war and Larry Bird was re-anarchied , they also spied his IRS profeciency lowering it about 2% so he missed out on a lot of money. If he had been able to collect 18 days when out of anarchy he would have easily passed Leprechaun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1309139478' post='2742346']
This thread just reinforces my dislike for flag winning in TE. :mad:

But that said, congrats Leprechaun. :)
[/quote]

Flag running doesn't need to be done with rogues, friends, slot filling, excessive hours spent planning or any such things, and I can prove that to you if you're dying to see someone other than Confusion hold the top 50 places for the highest ranked nations.

Perhaps it will often be contraversial to some at times, but that's how it always seems to work at the start of new rounds with topics like these.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='dealmaster13' timestamp='1309155010' post='2742551']
Flag running doesn't need to be done with rogues, friends, slot filling, excessive hours spent planning or any such things, and I can prove that to you if you're dying to see someone other than Confusion hold the top 50 places for the highest ranked nations.

Perhaps it will often be contraversial to some at times, but that's how it always seems to work at the start of new rounds with topics like these.
[/quote]
It just seems odd, and I know this is not the correct forum, that for a team based game only one individual can win. Maybe interest would be sparked in SE if the flag were to be won by an AA as a whole. Just my early thoughts on the subject as I am still looking at details.

Edited by paul711
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1309185541' post='2742686']
It just seems odd, and I know this is not the correct forum, that for a team based game only one individual can win. Maybe interest would be sparked in SE if the flag were to be won by an AA as a whole. Just my early thoughts on the subject as I am still looking at details.
[/quote]

Yeah, KJ made that suggestion privately a while back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The team base thing, or rather it being Alliance base, when then only cause further political clutterness. It would pretty much result in de facto blocs in TE and end up like SE. However, the argument could be made that there are de facto blocs in TE now, but the alliance combinations could be result in more of a mess then perviously/currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='SoADarthCyfe6' timestamp='1309196814' post='2742767']
The team base thing, or rather it being Alliance base, when then only cause further political clutterness. It would pretty much result in de facto blocs in TE and end up like SE. However, the argument could be made that there are de facto blocs in TE now, but the alliance combinations could be result in more of a mess then perviously/currently.
[/quote]
Very true, details would still have to be worked out on how it could work but the thinking would be that more AAs from SE would field TE AAs and create more variety than we currently have. That could spice up the politics of TE. The last couple of rounds have saw TE degenerate into a bipolar political situation and has led to the same wars over and over what is needed is new blood and outside the box thinking to attract it.

Disclaimer: This was originally KingJames idea and he will definately be able to explain it better than I.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1309202821' post='2742850']
Very true, details would still have to be worked out on how it could work but the thinking would be that more AAs from SE would field TE AAs and create more variety than we currently have. That could spice up the politics of TE. The last couple of rounds have saw TE degenerate into a bipolar political situation and has led to the same wars over and over what is needed is new blood and outside the box thinking to attract it.

Disclaimer: This was originally KingJames idea and he will definately be able to explain it better than I.
[/quote]

If we are willing to take a risk and try to change the current battlefield, then so be it, I do like mix ups and I implore the challenge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='paul711' timestamp='1309185541' post='2742686']
It just seems odd, and I know this is not the correct forum, that for a team based game only one individual can win. Maybe interest would be sparked in SE if the flag were to be won by an AA as a whole. Just my early thoughts on the subject as I am still looking at details.
[/quote]

It's still mostly teamwork. Several team members clear the way, a few individuals go for the win, supporting them with nukes and trades. I rather like it that way. TE flag runs require much more teamwork, stealth, and politics than many other games. Victory based on AA would just end up with ghosts manipulating victory. Even if it were enforced alliances (like setting one permanent AA for the whole round), it's easy to make decoy/puppet alliances pre-round.

Slot filling runners is a rather serious problem, but it can be approached with a few dedicated referees. Unfortunately, while referees can detect slot filling, it's still a very complicated issue. If I saw an undefeatable runner, I could, for example, just send 3 guys to ghost Rodentia and fill his slots to frame the winner. I could ask two friends to spy intel to fill spy slots; the friend may have no intention of slot filling but the coordinator would.

I could convince a non-nuclear friend (or one without spies/HNMS) to ghost an enemy AA and rogue a friendly runner. This friend would do minimal damage, and have no patterns of slot filling even though he was sent with full intentions of slot filling.

I could expand that to puppet alliances; have a weak puppet hit a strong allied running AA (or one where the top runner tier is barely within their range). I might hide a mid tier runner in an enemy AA, have my alliance hit that AA, and assign my AA's active members to hit everyone except the runner. The inactives who were late for the blitz might hit him (hopefully forgetting GCs), but he'll take minimal damage. Mid round it's effective camouflage, late round, it's slot filling.

There's just so many ways to cheat creatively, and you can't catch them without being paranoid. Maybe it's just best to not limit defensive slots or something so it's impossible to slot fill.

Edited by MrMuz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='MrMuz' timestamp='1309387174' post='2744437']
Maybe it's just best to not limit defensive slots or something so it's impossible to slot fill.
[/quote]

I fear for anyone in the top 50 the last week of the round; they'll have at least 16 defensive wars each

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the possible answer is to change the formula for "winning".

Right now it is only NS. That totally excludes warring.

Maybe a new formula that takes into account the combination of NS and Casualties.

Like.... Rank is NS Rank X Rank in Casualties.

Or: #2 NS X #50 Casualties = Score Rank #100

Or: #5 NS X #10 Casualties = Score Rank #50


And the same concept could be applied to an AA Score.

Bottom line, we need a new scoring method for TE. Using the SE scoring does not make sense in TE since it is a 60 period.

Edited by Thomasj_tx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Thomasj_tx' timestamp='1309408080' post='2744787']
I think that the possible answer is to change the formula for "winning".

Right now it is only NS. That totally excludes warring.

Maybe a new formula that takes into account the combination of NS and Casualties.

Like.... Rank is NS Rank X Rank in Casualties.

Or: #2 NS X #50 Casualties = Score Rank #100

Or: #5 NS X #10 Casualties = Score Rank #50


And the same concept could be applied to an AA Score.

Bottom line, we need a new scoring method for TE. Using the SE scoring does not make sense in TE since it is a 60 period.
[/quote]


Or: #400 NS X #8 Casualties = Score Rank # 3200. (There are not even 1400 nations in TE.) :smug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...