29 posts
|
Post by obongothemighty on Jan 29, 2015 2:46:09 GMT
I remember when I ran an alliance web for WaW. Hated that web. Godspeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by taikuh on Jan 31, 2015 19:19:53 GMT
Oh new suggestion: date-stamped webs so we can look back to see the evolving meta
|
|
67 posts
|
Post by whiskertoes on Jan 31, 2015 19:29:39 GMT
NAP with UAL
|
|
|
|
Post by stalkerton on Feb 1, 2015 0:06:09 GMT
Oh new suggestion: date-stamped webs so we can look back to see the evolving meta That would be great. The web looks good and has been pretty useful for me to see all the relationships between alliances at a glance. Thanks for doing it, it's much appreciated. |
|
95 posts
|
Post by andyrewwer on Feb 1, 2015 1:02:02 GMT
AA, NAPA with NAM + UAL
MDP - INNAWDS
|
|
67 posts
|
Post by whiskertoes on Feb 1, 2015 1:50:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by linksith on Feb 2, 2015 18:45:53 GMT
Oh new suggestion: date-stamped webs so we can look back to see the evolving meta Love the idea but I just gotta figure out how I'm gonna do it..... EDIT: I think I found the solution. Revision history can be found below the image in the main post UPDATED
as of February 2, 2015 |
|
|
|
Post by taikuh on Feb 2, 2015 20:22:45 GMT
Cool! BLOC 3.8 history has officially begun! (We're not on 4.0?)
|
|
|
|
Post by linksith on Feb 2, 2015 21:21:41 GMT
People have been calling it 3.8 since it wasn't a full reset. People wanted to get a different region but instead got the same thing
|
|
67 posts
|
Post by whiskertoes on Feb 3, 2015 13:17:00 GMT
I request that our circle be purple, because it is obvious that our alliance is the best, and purple is a very royal and powerful color. Thanks
|
|
|
|
Post by linksith on Feb 3, 2015 18:06:55 GMT
1 wish granted to the brony of EUN. Purple border tho because I'm thinking about using the inner circle color for super alliances (if and when they happen that is)
On a side note, I don't think ODP's alone are important to recognize. Does anyone have a different opinion?
|
|
55 posts
|
Post by edr on Feb 3, 2015 23:34:19 GMT
ODPs are essentially MDPs that don't have the restriction to have to go help defend. It just adds unnecessary work for people to try to spot the ODPs an alliance has with another if a graph doesn't show it, and it's relevant when the ODP-linked alliances turn into Power Rangers against the offender.
However, I'd think NAPs aren't important to recognize. Every alliance unofficially follows the rule, which is why you don't see inter-alliance raiding turning into WWB, but into a mild case where the few rogues are punished.
|
|
|
|
Post by taikuh on Feb 4, 2015 9:08:44 GMT
I call dibs on Zordon.
But yeah I agree with edr. If there is one type of pact to remove from the web in the future, it's the NAP, though it pains me to say as NAM is all about that NAP, bout that NAP
|
|
|
|
Post by linksith on Feb 4, 2015 15:32:13 GMT
Alright then. Next time I'm on a computer I will fix things up accordingly. Maybe make a separate chart for NAPs?
|
|
234 posts
|
Post by sirscarf on Feb 4, 2015 23:30:13 GMT
Alright then. Next time I'm on a computer I will fix things up accordingly. Maybe make a separate chart for NAPs? It almost seems like it would be prudent to call out which alliances specifically don't have NAPs with each other. Basically, assume NAP unless otherwise noted? I don't know what it would be called.... It's hardly an "aggression pact", since that sounds like a state of fully declared war. But it's worth considering. |
|
