Portal

[timtadams]

OK, this aint the most pressing issue, but i was checking out the portal from last round cause im bored, and noticed there are only 12 top 15 alliances.

I am detecting some sort of fail....

Is it because there were some alliances with only one member?

 

[atsanjose]

OK, this aint the most pressing issue, but i was checking out the portal from last round cause im bored, and noticed there are only 12 top 15 alliances.

I am detecting some sort of fail....

Is it because there were some alliances with only one member?

yes, or better 4 or less

i think.

 

[pinpower]

I think alliances have to have more than 5 members to portal and there were only 12 that did...

I hope I'm wrong as it's bad times if that few allies actually were about.

 

[timtadams]

lame

would it really hurt to include them?

 

[Gooner]

I feel bad for DS

 

[Ogluk]

its because the rank 13 and 14 alliances
Darksider and enzzo respectively
were just 1 man allies rank 15 was 15 members atleast yet gets denied portal because of the acts of those 2

sucks for rank 15 eh the alliance forgotten to the realms of nowhere

 

[timtadams]

its because the rank 13 and 14 alliances
Darksider and enzzo respectively
were just 1 man allies rank 15 was 15 members atleast yet gets denied portal because of the acts of those 2

sucks for rank 15 eh the alliance forgotten to the realms of nowhere

not really. I mean, it just basically means anyone in an alliance can portal. For example, currently rank 15 alliance has 4 members. So they only need one more person and they will portal. Their ranks will be around 350 to 400. Hardly a portal effort.

 

[TaO]

its because the rank 13 and 14 alliances
Darksider and enzzo respectively
were just 1 man allies rank 15 was 15 members atleast yet gets denied portal because of the acts of those 2

sucks for rank 15 eh the alliance forgotten to the realms of nowhere

not really. I mean, it just basically means anyone in an alliance can portal. For example, currently rank 15 alliance has 4 members. So they only need one more person and they will portal. Their ranks will be around 350 to 400. Hardly a portal effort.

And that's why i want a back to top 5 ally portal \o/

 

[CrimsonFury88]

its because the rank 13 and 14 alliances
Darksider and enzzo respectively
were just 1 man allies rank 15 was 15 members atleast yet gets denied portal because of the acts of those 2

sucks for rank 15 eh the alliance forgotten to the realms of nowhere

not really. I mean, it just basically means anyone in an alliance can portal. For example, currently rank 15 alliance has 4 members. So they only need one more person and they will portal. Their ranks will be around 350 to 400. Hardly a portal effort.

And that's why i want a back to top 5 ally portal \o/

But it's just like saying "You dont deserve to be listed as a finisher in the 800m's because you finished 8th out of 8".

Portal is just a snapshot of the round, history, something to look back on. Should the bottom half of the premier league be wiped from the books because the teams in the bottom half didn't perform to "premiership" standard?

Seriously.

Sort your lives out. If it's some ego trip about "being active enough to make the top 15", and being "included on the same page as mid-rank dross" then you have issues.

 

[tobapopalos]

The portal isn't just a snapshot of the round history. For a lot of people it is something to aim for...or at least it used to be. The rankings on portal are one of the things players compete for, and finishing rank 15 out of 15 alliances and only having 5 members is not something I consider an achievement. By reducing the amount of alliances on portal hopefully it will increase competition between the alliances challenging for the lower positions.

At the end of the day this is a war game. If you're so scornful of competition why the **** are you wasting your time here?

 

[damfrankie]

its not realy a war game is it ??? i consider it a farming game !

 

[CrimsonFury88]

The portal isn't just a snapshot of the round history. For a lot of people it is something to aim for...or at least it used to be. The rankings on portal are one of the things players compete for, and finishing rank 15 out of 15 alliances and only having 5 members is not something I consider an achievement. By reducing the amount of alliances on portal hopefully it will increase competition between the alliances challenging for the lower positions.

At the end of the day this is a war game. If you're so scornful of competition why the **** are you wasting your time here?

One man's trash, another's treasure.

You're basically saying, that five people holding their own in an alliance (without protection of Govt defence) is not an achievement. So you're discrediting their round.

So what if they form in the last minutes before the alliance lock - they may have just worked their P-Naps well. I know plenty of people that worked as solo-alliances back in the old rounds of Bush, and then formed alliances. Was that frowned upon then? No.

People just take scores too seriously now because they play a ridiculous amount of hours.

What's the greater achievement?

Playing 10 hours a day and finishing Rank 1.

Or playing for 1 hour a day and finishing Rank 100?

It's all down to the players game plan and what they put in versus what they put out.

 

[tobapopalos]

It is hardly holding your own when you're the lowest ranked alliance and you're only portalling because there aren't enough proper allies to fill the portal.

It doesn't take any skill, any work, any effort in any sense to just sit there with 5 members and portal.

In the old days there were more alliances and if you could get into the portal positions by forming an alliance that was an achievement because there was competition for those portal places. Now you are guaranteed portal as long as you have 5 members, because there are so few alliances.

Dutch Angels are currently in a portal position with 6 members because all the allies below them are on 1 member. Does that mean DA are an amazing alliance who are "holding their own" with less members than the allies above? No. They are last place, and will portal purely by default.

I'd say finishing rank 1 will always be a greater achievement than finishing rank 100, no matter what the activity. It's easy to portal with low activity. That's what the bunker route is for. The more active you play, the more intense the competition. You might as well ask "what's a greater achievement; training hours every day at the 100m and winning a gold at the Olympics, or training every now and again and winning a race for your local school?"

 

[CrimsonFury88]

You might as well ask "what's a greater achievement; training hours every day at the 100m and winning a gold at the Olympics, or training every now and again and winning a race for your local school?"

Back to my original point of one mans trash and anothers treasure.

TO YOU, it might be amazing to finish rank 1.

TO SOMEBODY ELSE, it might be amazing to finish rank 100.

TO YOU, your girlfriend (if you have one) may be hot.

TO SOMEBODY ELSE, she might not be.

So you wish to deny people that on the grounds that it puts a dampener on your ego trip?

If you have such an issue with it, just put a piece of A4 over the bottom half of your monitor and ignore it.

Get over it, seriously.

Online web game.

 

[tobapopalos]

But at the moment finishing in the top 100 isn't much of an achievement because of the lack of competition, so to increase competition the portal should be reduced. That way it will only show the players and alliances who have put in the work.

It isn't anything to do with egos. I just want the portal page to be a bit better. Why bother having a portal for the top 15 alliances when we only have 10 alliances?

 

[Alcibiades]

Toby is 100% right.

 

[CrimsonFury88]

But at the moment finishing in the top 100 isn't much of an achievement because of the lack of competition, so to increase competition the portal should be reduced. That way it will only show the players and alliances who have put in the work.

It isn't anything to do with egos. I just want the portal page to be a bit better. Why bother having a portal for the top 15 alliances when we only have 10 alliances?

Or perhaps more the game needs more work on fronts that will:

a) make it more competitive.

and

b) stop people from quitting.

 

[Alcibiades]

But at the moment finishing in the top 100 isn't much of an achievement because of the lack of competition, so to increase competition the portal should be reduced. That way it will only show the players and alliances who have put in the work.

It isn't anything to do with egos. I just want the portal page to be a bit better. Why bother having a portal for the top 15 alliances when we only have 10 alliances?

Or perhaps more the game needs more work on fronts that will:

a) make it more competitive.

and

b) stop people from quitting.

Correct.

Just because someone thinks finishing top 100 is awesome, does not mean they deserve a portal rank.

Your post that i'm quoting agrees with toby completely. 'Making the game more competitive' would require making less portal spots so people have to try harder to portal. See where he's going with that?

 

[tobapopalos]

It isn't the game which is competitive or otherwise, it is the playerbase.

By all means try and think of something which will stop people from quitting, but until you manage that I suggest we reduce the portal size. The amount of players in portal should be relative to the size of the active playerbase. If we stop players leaving and manage to somehow start increasing the playerbase then we may need a bigger portal. But that is purely hypothetical. Right now we don't need the top 15 alliances or top 100 players listed.

I suggest that portal shows the top 10 alliances and the top 50 players.

 

[CrimsonFury88]

Well, as much as the game could be improved, every problem will come back to the player-base and the things it does.

Namely the activity this forum.