The Syndicate wants challenge!

[DeletedUser37948]

Ahh ok Zero, what you say may be true.
Records show that Zero Point is captain rainbow dash.
But if records are wrong, you should really be more careful before giving up your accounts.

well to be fare id defo have to agree with that

unfortunatly with real life constraints you can only do your best

i remember once i gave an awsome account away and within 3 days it was ruined sometimes even with the best intentions things go horribly wrong

 

[DeletedUser42857]

HERT and EN have similar methods of attack Dim, as a lot of EN is in HERT. Especially the leadership.

On that basis, i would say Syndi is more organised (And spend less gold )

 

[DeletedUser47499]

mungus!!! Its me Chief!!

 

[DeletedUser42857]

Leadership?Mate we have currently 12 founders if you want to know and everyone in TS have access to hidden forums.

I was referring to people who read externals view that you and billy are ego driven. Think most in en65 know how you work "inside". Its pretty easy to tell from how many people leave an alliance to spot work out the real story.

Also if everyone has access to hidden forum why would you even have hidden forums?

Lots of alliances do that. Theres two ways of using hidden forums

1) hidden council tab that only the select few access and the rest dont access

or

2) virtually the whole forum is "hidden" and all long term members have access, but new members initially only have access to a couple of tabs to prevent spies, passers through etc. Being promoted to "hidden access" is kinda "youve been accepted as a full alliance member" approach.

Theres loads of alliances where 95% of the members have internal access

Theres also the bit of both approach, my alliance in en70 was kept to about 20-25 members and about 20 of those had access to "hidden".. we always knew we were going to merge so the internal access acted as a sort of "your'e in" promotion wheres those "in" would discuss the prospects of those not yet "in"

 

[DeletedUser33530]

I feel like that fundamentally wouldn't work as the new members wouldnt be able to work with the old members at first so wouldn't know how good they really are. Also as they only have access to a few tabs with no sensitive information, they can't be an activity participant in the alliance since basically all information involving attacking and defending can be seen as sensitive. In addition, if they were spies you wouldn't know cause they would have nothing to report.

The context that I original questioned that method was one were he claimed that everyone in his alliance was so close (so no new members as they all have known each other for a while) that they all had internal access. This would make the internals have no point.

 

[DeletedUser22517]

Bottom line...We can fight any alliance in grepolis.We only played speed 1 so far, ok we will change to speed 2 soon.I am sure this is gonna be just another walk in the park for mighty TS!Is speed 2 good enough for those so called "great" alliances ?

 

[DeletedUser42486]

Nah, not even close mate

http://www.grepostats.com/world/en60/index

yea mate.. more than close..

you pulled stats from what is current.. World ended a long time ago, and people is leaving left and right

 

[DeletedUser]

look I understand that you view yourself as God but you came here, to externals, to all of us to get recognization for your achievements.....

but that is what you do CoD - every day.... very defintley fishing...
...and off topic.

 

[DeletedUser33530]

Bottom line...We can fight any alliance in grepolis.We only played speed 1 so far, ok we will change to speed 2 soon.I am sure this is gonna be just another walk in the park for mighty TS!Is speed 2 good enough for those so called "great" alliances ?

To start you ignoring my post again proves the coward thing. But to your newest claim. Then go fight any alliance in grepolis because you saying that you can beat any alliance means nothing. Also if your bottom line was to come here just to say you are the best, you first off have huge self-esteem issues as you needed us to approve of this. Second off, you have just wasted a hell of a lot of time. Finally, you will never prove that your alliance is the best. They are probably one of the best but you can never say as a fact that they are the best.

 

[DeletedUser42857]

I feel like that fundamentally wouldn't work as the new members wouldnt be able to work with the old members at first so wouldn't know how good they really are. Also as they only have access to a few tabs with no sensitive information, they can't be an activity participant in the alliance since basically all information involving attacking and defending can be seen as sensitive. In addition, if they were spies you wouldn't know cause they would have nothing to report.

Well you dont have to use that format if it doesnt work for you, but it does work for others.

It may only be 1 hidden tab that just has general discussions on long term aims and plans, op planning, and discussion of members for internal that arent active etc, that 90-95% of the alliance have access to, but you dont initially let new members have access to the "long term plans" section of the internals in case they are just passing through, they would still have access to ops tabs etc, just not the long term plans side of things.

the system does work very well for some. depends on the alliance and the people.

 

[DeletedUser42857]

yea mate.. more than close..

you pulled stats from what is current.. World ended a long time ago, and people is leaving left and right

but GS helpfully shows highest ever points totals, highest position etc. They only hit 72,772,222 which is 13m short of Fight Clubs 85m

 

[DeletedUser37948]

but GS helpfully shows highest ever points totals, highest position etc. They only hit 72,772,222 which is 13m short of Fight Clubs 85m

well it seems this is a pointless argument because in one hand we have people saying that size means nothing as a good team can beat any size oposition
then you got people saying were better because we beat a bigger team
each server is an individual and as such analizing one against another is only going to be about stats and as any politician will tell you stats are easily miss reprisented or twisted to suit needs

 

[DeletedUser42857]

well it seems this is a pointless argument because in one hand we have people saying that size means nothing as a good team can beat any size oposition
then you got people saying were better because we beat a bigger team
each server is an individual and as such analizing one against another is only going to be about stats and as any politician will tell you stats are easily miss reprisented or twisted to suit needs

Well they can, to an extent, we all know one of the big flaws in WW, or why a lot of people dont like WW is because it is simply about resources, producing resources, moving resources, and ultimately all things being equal (as in similar levels of leadership, organisation), on most occasions an alliance that is significantly bigger, (like double the size of its nearest opponent or more), should win the world.

But i think most would agree that Phoenix (72 million peak) losing En60, and Fight Club (85 million peak) losing En65 are both pretty high up there on the "things that really shouldnt happen" list.

Both Phoenix and FC had a number of crown winners on their side, and some experienced players, so its hard to see just where it went wrong without the leaders of those two alliances telling us. Im sure theres a lot of head scratching going on in both of those alliances. Whats sad to see in en65 is players quitting the #1 alliance rather than sticking it out and trying to prevent the 7/7

I suppose there is then the argument of is winning a server that is closely fought, by equally matched teams more of an achievement than winning a server where one side clearly dropped the ball.

 

[DeletedUser42857]

Well you dont have to use that format if it doesnt work for you, but it does work for others.

It may only be 1 hidden tab that just has general discussions on long term aims and plans, op planning, and discussion of members for internal that arent active etc, that 90-95% of the alliance have access to, but you dont initially let new members have access to the "long term plans" section of the internals in case they are just passing through, they would still have access to ops tabs etc, just not the long term plans side of things.

the system does work very well for some. depends on the alliance and the people.

To elaborate a bit, i think this only really works on small(ish) alliances where the players involve are either reasonably experienced, or have good thoughts and plans

The way we worked it in en70 was one hidden tab, and it wasnt really used for heavy council discussions as we were only a small alliance, we kept our numbers deliberately sub 30 members at all times, and we always knew we were merging with maybe 20 people going into the merge.

So the hidden tab was initially accessible by EVERYONE we had brought from our previous world so they all had a say in the direction of the alliance. Then as each newly recruited member proved their worth, commitment etc, discussion took place on the "hidden tab" to move them to full access and they were moved to full access. By the end pretty much everyone had access to it. And its primary function was only general plans, long term aims, and discussion of members to either move to full access or internalise (that was the only two real options )

So for instance, in my guys next world, EVERY player that has played with us before in the previous world will automatically get internal access, will only be new recruits that wont, but gradualy they will be granted access as the world progresses

I can see how it might have worked somewhere like Syndi which stayed around the 70 member mark. Maybe their "council" initialy was 10 players that had played together before, who discussed the goals and aims and general tactics, then as each player proves their worth they get added, and before you know it, your entire alliance has internal access

But it wouldnt really work in a huge MRA as it would just lead to chaos. A smaller alliance where they understood what that extra access was about it worked fine.

 

[DeletedUser37948]

Well they can, to an extent, we all know one of the big flaws in WW, or why a lot of people dont like WW is because it is simply about resources, producing resources, moving resources, and ultimately all things being equal (as in similar levels of leadership, organisation), on most occasions an alliance that is significantly bigger, (like double the size of its nearest opponent or more), should win the world.

But i think most would agree that Phoenix (72 million peak) losing En60, and Fight Club (85 million peak) losing En65 are both pretty high up there on the "things that really shouldnt happen" list.

Both Phoenix and FC had a number of crown winners on their side, and some experienced players, so its hard to see just where it went wrong without the leaders of those two alliances telling us. Im sure theres a lot of head scratching going on in both of those alliances. Whats sad to see in en65 is players quitting the #1 alliance rather than sticking it out and trying to prevent the 7/7

I suppose there is then the argument of is winning a server that is closely fought, by equally matched teams more of an achievement than winning a server where one side clearly dropped the ball.

yep id agree with you on that

all sounds increadibly boring to me ww and having to co ordinate all those cities more of a job for a super accountant but each to there own i suppose

 

[DeletedUser42486]

but GS helpfully shows highest ever points totals, highest position etc. They only hit 72,772,222 which is 13m short of Fight Clubs 85m

yes, that is very true DIM,
but if your looking at it ratio wise, player numbers, cities, and point difference which were the things that was pointed out.

then oropos has the biggest loser..

looking only at the highest number of points, true.. they only reached 72 mil in oropos

 

[DeletedUser42857]

yes, that is very true DIM,
but if your looking at it ratio wise, player numbers, cities, and point difference which were the things that was pointed out.

then oropos has the biggest loser..

looking only at the highest number of points, true.. they only reached 72 mil in oropos

I think, while debating which was the biggest loser, and the intricacies of points ratios and all that jazz, i think we can probably just all agree it was a pretty massive fail on both their parts, its really hard to work out which failed the most.

 

[DeletedUser]

To start you ignoring my post again proves the coward thing. But to your newest claim. Then go fight any alliance in grepolis because you saying that you can beat any alliance means nothing. Also if your bottom line was to come here just to say you are the best, you first off have huge self-esteem issues as you needed us to approve of this. Second off, you have just wasted a hell of a lot of time. Finally, you will never prove that your alliance is the best. They are probably one of the best but you can never say as a fact that they are the best.

CoD. a quick comparison of your player record compared with mungus1974 shows that you are not placed to make any accusation of cowardice against him. Looking at his player record he is entitled to feel believe that his alliance is the best. You also make a personal attack on him saying that he has huge "self esteem issues". It is so easy to use the external forums make personal slurs these days. Mungus1974 though has used the forum openly , honestly and bravely. He has said that Syndicate are the best and he has "challenged" others to prove him wrong not in these forums but out on the worlds "where the game really matters"!

 

[DeletedUser22517]

CoD. a quick comparison of your player record compared with mungus1974 shows that you are not placed to make any accusation of cowardice against him. Looking at his player record he is entitled to feel believe that his alliance is the best. You also make a personal attack on him saying that he has huge "self esteem issues". It is so easy to use the external forums make personal slurs these days. Mungus1974 though has used the forum openly , honestly and bravely. He has said that Syndicate are the best and he has "challenged" others to prove him wrong not in these forums but out on the worlds "where the game really matters"!

I totally understand him.He is poor player who can`t get enough attention in the game so he goes and reply to whoever posted on external forums just to get that attention.It would be nice for him to work on his game skills but who am i to judge him.Next world i`ll send you invitation to be on my island and we will see how long you gonna last...that sound good for you?

 

[DeletedUser]

I like the spirit here, I think we need more activity like it! Experienced alliances with strong bonds, being vets from previous worlds, putting themselves out there challenging other like-alliances to step up & accept challenge. How awesome to start a pre-existing war? What typically happens when a new world opens? Time & time again experienced players forge mighty alliances, pact with other equally mighty alliances & then proceed to target incompetent inexperienced noobs until none remain & then the real wars begin, which in my opinion is pathetic. I wish my old friends still played to accept the challenge but unfortunately I am the only one who keeps coming back for more lol. I love these settings btw. I like your confidence too & its great to think your alliance is best ever made, but I believe some of the best alliances came from Beta & Gamma & some of those original worlds. This post isnt about settings, its about a challenge, so if you are not bringing competition to the table then just move on.

Anyways 9 pages, has any alliance accepted proposal?