Jump to content

Diplomatic Positions Of The Free World's League:


114 replies to this topic

#101 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 08 February 2016 - 08:20 AM

View PostMonkey Lover, on 06 February 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

Friendly games are good we have always done these but if you start capping planets to 42% you will see issue with mercs pushing it over.

Then all we do is lay off that planet and move to another, or we trade a couple of planets here and there. That's a lot different than getting multiple planets rolled up due to not being able to defend because of NAPs and such.

#102 Monkey Lover

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 7,918 posts
  • LocationWazan

Posted 08 February 2016 - 08:57 AM

View PostSandpit, on 08 February 2016 - 08:20 AM, said:

Then all we do is lay off that planet and move to another, or we trade a couple of planets here and there. That's a lot different than getting multiple planets rolled up due to not being able to defend because of NAPs and such.


When you get used to trading planet soon you will see people wanting more. Our pugs and mercs will keep attacking when we could really use them on other fronts. Really i dont care , i would have gave liao all the planets they wanted as they don't matter right now. In a few months i dont think people are going to be willing to trade :)

If both sides what battles it would be much better off setting up private matches and having an event.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 08 February 2016 - 08:58 AM.


#103 Karl Marlow

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,277 posts

Posted 08 February 2016 - 06:29 PM

Seems to me planets matter quite a bit already. It seems like Liao wants the planet Liao plenty bad enough already. It seems like we wanted our 8 planets back. Those seemed to have mattered. I bet if we go up north clan wolf and Jase Falcon aren't happy having no planets.

In fact having no planets is a sure way to be abandoned as a faction. Pushing borders is what the game mode is about. If you stop pushing borders you will start to lose people. Why bother with a faction that does not care when there are plenty of factions that do.

In CW we take planets. if all you are wanting is arranged fights why are you here in CW? That sounds like private matches to me.




#104 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 09 February 2016 - 11:36 AM

View PostThomasMarik, on 08 February 2016 - 06:29 PM, said:

Seems to me planets matter quite a bit already. It seems like Liao wants the planet Liao plenty bad enough already. It seems like we wanted our 8 planets back. Those seemed to have mattered. I bet if we go up north clan wolf and Jase Falcon aren't happy having no planets.

In fact having no planets is a sure way to be abandoned as a faction. Pushing borders is what the game mode is about. If you stop pushing borders you will start to lose people. Why bother with a faction that does not care when there are plenty of factions that do.

In CW we take planets. if all you are wanting is arranged fights why are you here in CW? That sounds like private matches to me.

that's because it was just the easiest to ***** live fight for the most part honestly. Players get tired of ghost dropping. That's the single most common reason our players continuously lose interest in CW

#105 Karl Marlow

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 2,277 posts

Posted 09 February 2016 - 01:56 PM

Interest dropped because we stopped fighting. There was a lot of energy both in and out of the game during the Liao fight. We had mercs coming in to fight aparantly on both sides. It was becoming a hot spot. Then we just decided to stop and replaced it with nothing.

Ghost drops aren't the problem. We were already a dressing that by alternating drops on the clan border.



#106 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 10 February 2016 - 10:41 AM

View PostThomasMarik, on 09 February 2016 - 01:56 PM, said:

Interest dropped because we stopped fighting. There was a lot of energy both in and out of the game during the Liao fight. We had mercs coming in to fight aparantly on both sides. It was becoming a hot spot. Then we just decided to stop and replaced it with nothing.

Ghost drops aren't the problem. We were already a dressing that by alternating drops on the clan border.

Ghost drops are what create the boredom and people jumping back to quickplay. I've lost more players in our CW groups to those exact words more than any other reason.

Wins and losses don't even impact it as greatly as ghost drops. Players want to play, not watch netflix while doing ghost drops. That's where the whole "do away with NAPs, borders, etc. for now" idea come from. Players are tired of ghost drops and want to actually play the game.

:)

#107 Duncan1dah0

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Crusader
  • The Crusader
  • 375 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 12 February 2016 - 10:52 AM

I'm just a soldier. Just show me the direction to point my guns and stay out of the way. All this drama and politics gets tiring.

#108 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 12 February 2016 - 11:07 AM

View PostDuncan1dah0, on 12 February 2016 - 10:52 AM, said:

I'm just a soldier. Just show me the direction to point my guns and stay out of the way. All this drama and politics gets tiring.

all the drama and politics is all we have sadly lol

Don't take these threads to seriously bud, most of us are simply using this to add a little fluff to the game for those who do enjoy the politics and such :D

#109 Duncan1dah0

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Crusader
  • The Crusader
  • 375 posts
  • LocationWazan, Zion Cluster

Posted 13 February 2016 - 08:18 AM

View PostSandpit, on 12 February 2016 - 11:07 AM, said:

all the drama and politics is all we have sadly lol

Don't take these threads to seriously bud, most of us are simply using this to add a little fluff to the game for those who do enjoy the politics and such Posted Image


I know. And it is sad. Hopefully phase 3 will put the Loyalist in charge.

I don't. I'm playing along also. I have enough politics in real life for it to be much fun in here.

That being said, perhaps we need a regular update post on what fronts are open and what are closed. One without all the debate and comment. Like what I am doing now. Posted Image

#110 S T I N G S

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 425 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 13 February 2016 - 10:07 AM

I suggest one of the members of the War Council do like what Steiner is doing in the threads and edit the thread when we change fronts or something

#111 Nicc Hunter

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 63 posts
  • LocationNuevo León

Posted 15 February 2016 - 06:52 AM

So… what if we just take all the planets in all the fronts so we can get some “responds” from another faction, and we can have some good fights and take so much more planets?

#112 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 15 February 2016 - 12:35 PM

View PostNicc Hunter, on 15 February 2016 - 06:52 AM, said:

So… what if we just take all the planets in all the fronts so we can get some “responds” from another faction, and we can have some good fights and take so much more planets?

we simply don't have the number of active players needed for that.

We can handle a one front war, and possibly even 2 fronts depending on the opposition of those fronts, but that would be really stretching it. It's not a matter of being "good", it's a matter of having enough active players to fend off ghost drops.

#113 Imigo Montoya

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Partisan
  • The Partisan
  • 297 posts

Posted 11 March 2016 - 12:40 AM

What about Marik taking Altair to get a Smoke Jaguar front, if Marik waits where it is now the Smoke Jags would not be in range in about a week, but if you take Altair and they take Imbros III and then the next planet Asta or Yori you would be in range on the weekend.

I am speaking as a merc not as a Smoke Jag and i know, if Marik has a border to the clans the Black outlaws will probably come to you and fight the clans with you.

Andthink about the PHL - Phoenix Legion, they will probably stay to fight the clans.

#114 HelloKittyWarfare

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • IS Exemplar
  • IS Exemplar
  • 122 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 11 March 2016 - 02:07 AM

bad idea.
marik can't handle a own border right now. too less active players. your outlaws can't fill the gab and PHL will leave this sunday. we'll come back when any clan reach marik space in a natural way.
marik can do much more in supporting other borders in defence. it has to be done, too. if they want to help defending terra, attacking Is-factions to get a passage is...unwise resourcemenagement.

and, yeah, "good" advice from a jag-account is some kind of funny. again.

#115 Lightning0861

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 60 posts
  • LocationBerenson, Free Worlds League

Posted 11 March 2016 - 06:47 AM

I agree with kitty. While we have some really good groups that we hash together and can contend with the likes of HHOD (not always win but compete) and -MS-R (Reserve not actually Merc Star) because of our numbers we are best used as a Defending augment. If natural border pops up then we will have to deal with it.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users